Quote Originally Posted by Manicdan View Post
do you remember how well the 4800s did vs upper 200s. a 260 was able to keep up with all of ati's offerings.

but then we jump a year forward to 5800s vs 480/470s
vantage didnt change at all. and the efficiency of the 4800s was practically just doubled in 5800s. which is why the difference between old and new was also basically just doubled. so i would say that nvidia simply messed up in building a gpu which was not friendly with vantage style graphics. or i would say that games did not push shaders nearly as well as they could have and ati cards have technically been handicapped for a few years on alot of titles. (no vantage is not a game, but does have an engine which seems to push atis 5D well, so why has no other game?)

with vantage being out before fermi, theres really nothing futuremark did wrong, which is why ive just been quite disappointed in nvidia for this architecture, since what they had before was great for gaming, while their new stuff is just great for cuda.
ati was the top for the rv7xx v g200 in vantage, and the 4890 was the top when the refreshes came, it look NV a specialty board and making a card with a huge voltera array, special bios, and 3pci-e power connectors that was not a viable card for non benching to beat the 4890 but that was right before the 5870, then there was the 480 and that was a beast for benching but i dont think that it was usable for home gaming use.


on the vantage v games, ati did rather well overall and beat NV in alot of engines the only problem is that NV has TWIMTBP and they are a partner with epic who makes UT3 and since most games are using that since its easy to make cross platform with it, it not only held gaming back with its garbage graphics, use of physX instead of havoc for physics effects and terrible multithread support, it was something that NV was good at working with.