Who makes the best graphics drivers?

[STCNE]

Intel drivers are made to be reliable, usually at the lack of functionality. That's really about it, it's a completely different crowd. They are for businesses that won't put up with the occasional 'display driver has crashed and reset' and other such (usually minor) errors NVIDIA and AMD drivers are prone to.

I voted for AMD though, why? AMD drivers have a track record for being difficult, but I've yet to hear of cards overheating or frying because of them plus when I tried out NVIDIA I got some weird glowing lights in some of my games like a lens flare effect. Could have been the card or the drivers, either way it was enough to send me back.

 

[eidairaman1]

Intel drivers are made to be reliable, usually at the lack of functionality. That's really about it, it's a completely different crowd. They are for businesses that won't put up with the occasional 'display driver has crashed and reset' and other such (usually minor) errors NVIDIA and AMD drivers are prone to.

I voted for AMD though, why? AMD drivers have a track record for being difficult, but I've yet to hear of cards overheating or frying because of them plus when I tried out NVIDIA I got some weird glowing lights in some of my games like a lens flare effect. Could have been the card or the drivers, either way it was enough to send me back.

you know with out amd or nv cps drivers are just drivers

 

[Am*]

So you bought an atom based system to use as a file server? Nice.......

Trolling? I'm not the one raging about installing a 64-bit OS on an Atom based system to use as a file server then bitch about video playback on it? Yeah man, I ain't the troll here. You are either trolling or don't know WTF you are doing.

Thanks for re-affirming the fact that you are clueless. You should really stick to buying your OEM-boxes, since you can't even comprehend the fact that the Atom board in question fully supports 4GB RAM, which would work fine on a 64bit OS. Go wave your self-proclaimed "superior intellect" at someone as ignorant as you.

 

[TheMailMan78]

Thanks for re-affirming the fact that you are clueless. You should really stick to buying your OEM-boxes, since you can't even comprehend the fact that the Atom board in question fully supports 4GB RAM, which would work fine on a 64bit OS. Go wave your self-proclaimed "superior intellect" at someone as ignorant as you.

What I do know is I wouldn't use an Atom CPU for a file server, web browser and to listen to music on a 64-bit OS and bitch about choppy HD playback. I'm curious do you read reviews at all or know about CPU families?

 

[Am*]

What I do know is I wouldn't use an Atom CPU for a file server, web browser and to listen to music on a 64-bit OS and bitch about choppy HD playback. I'm curious do you read reviews at all or know about CPU families?

You don't know jackshit, that's the problem.


Here's an almost exact same Atom setup (only with a higher clocked CPU) running TWO 1080p HD videos simultaneously.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=rdssQs1fQjM

You've failed yet again, thanks for trying...but hey, maybe you need a review to tell you this?

 

[librin.so.1]

Just because he uses an Atom CPU as a file server / web browser / music player, it does not change the fact that intel drivers for it are a TOTAL fail on Win7-64 and WinXP.
(i.e. Stop using ad hominem. That is low, doesn't help the thread, and makes You look less reliable/credible)

 

[TheMailMan78]

Just because he uses an Atom CPU as a file server / web browser / music player, it does not change the fact that intel drivers for it are a TOTAL fail on Win7-64 and WinXP.
(i.e. Stop using ad hominem. That is low, doesn't help the thread, and makes You look less reliable/credible)

They work fine for me. Use them all the time. Honestly if they are not working for him then hes got something screwed with his setup. Thats not the drivers fault. Of course I don't try and steam HD videos, use it as a file server and steam/play music simultaneously. Call me crazy but I don't think the atom was designed for such loads.

Thats like getting mad your Honda Civic can't win the Indy 500.

 

[eidairaman1]

heck Atom is barely able to do Video conferencing. Have one of those netbooks here. A R9700 Pro can handle that just fine in an AMD Athlon Machine

JFC, This thread went to crap. Yall Knock it off.:shadedshu

 

[Am*]

They work fine for me. Use them all the time. Honestly if they are not working for him then hes got something screwed with his setup. Thats not the drivers fault. Of course I don't try and steam HD videos, use it as a file server and steam/play music simultaneously. Call me crazy but I don't think the atom was designed for such loads.

Thats like getting mad your Honda Civic can't win the Indy 500.

Here it is straight from Intel's slides:

And how would using it as a file server or to play music stress the CPU? Can you at least explain this? What would you use exactly, an i7? To even suggest that HD playback, file server duties or music playback is "hardware intensive" is ridiculous. I used to run a 500MHz Pentium III for file server duties and music playback, running 6 different drives without any problems whatsoever -- served me well for over a decade without any hassle. I think you're stuck WAY in the past with the Atom mentality. HD playback is not much to ask for, especially when my £130 tablet can do it on a much smaller form factor.

FYI, these "crazy loads" barely stress my Atom CPU to 15% CPU usage, 40% max when I have Firefox with 20+ tabs open.

Anyways, back on topic, Intel = still the worst for graphics driver support, light years behind Nvidia and AMD.

 

[Nordic]

I thought this was a gpu driver thread...

 

[eidairaman1]

Yall Call it quits you both are making this website look bad

 

[erocker]

Yall Call it quits you both are making this website look bad

Naw, just themselves. Especially TheMailMan.

Everyone stay on topic. This will be my only warning.

Thanks.

 

[kokoy]

12+ years experience of servicing PC's...

i've had more problems with ATi/AMD drivers than with nvidia...

 

[Widjaja]

Ultimately it comes down to personal experience with the drivers and the hardware we purchased during that time.

I don't know why my XFX 8800GT non ref caused me so much grief when my Gigabyte silent 7600GS was rock solid.

I had tremendous stutters with my X1950pro 512mb AGP but no driver crashes.
With the 4850 it ran and is still running smooth.

 

[eidairaman1]

Ultimately it comes down to personal experience with the drivers and the hardware we purchased during that time.

I don't know why my XFX 8800GT non ref caused me so much grief when my Gigabyte silent 7600GS was rock solid.

I had tremendous stutters with my X1950pro 512mb AGP but no driver crashes.
With the 4850 it ran and is still running smooth.

http://www.ultimatehardware.net/319.htm

 

[D007]

Nvidia tends to be more compatible with things like autocad and 3-d software.
Also I have had less issues with nvidia. I have used both ATI and Nvidia and I feel nvidia has offered me more reliability/compatibility, across a diverse platform, of software/hardware combinations. Ati is sure stepping it up though in this regard lately and I hope to see them continue to do so. They both make excellent products and failed products.. Such is the nature of the beast.. Nvidia doesn't get my vote hands down... Just barely..

 

[erixx]

Today I took my 470 out and clicked a 670 in. I uninstalled the drivers before that, rebooted and installed the latest geforce from daddy nvidia. Games running ultrafine... each of them. ARMA2 is amazing with this with every single advanced setting at max... What are driver issues anyways?
Just to add to... add to ... just ADD

 

[eidairaman1]

12+ years experience of servicing PC's...

i've had more problems with ATi/AMD drivers than with nvidia...

its been vice versa for me, even on clean installs where there hasnt been any drivers put in yet.

 

[dj-electric]

Between AMD an NVIDIA, working with dozens of GPUs the past 2 years or so, i'd say statistics work against AMD

 

[Bundy]

I vote nvidia. Less issues with driver updates, better interface and more reliable for me in general. That being said, my main rigs run AMD at present and works ok.

 

[treehouse]

S3

 

[Super XP]

My first graphics card was an NVIDIA back in the days of the Athlon XP. It's drivers were a fail for me, just unstable with games. Removed any other factors such as OC'ing from the equation. I concluded it was the NV drivers. After a few updates, it did get better, but not enough, so I ended up selling it and got a used ATI RADEON 9700 PRO. That card alone completely converted me not to mention rock stable graphics.

Over the years NV gotten much better with driver stability with ATI having some issues here and there. Today I don't recall having any issues with AMD drivers.

I also like AMD's interface better. My bro has NVIDIA and it's interface is OK, just not as good as AMD in my opinion.

 

[the54thvoid]

Have to say, I installed the Catalysts 12.8's a while back (just downloaded and installed - didn't remove old ones) and they're running perfectly. I had occasional zero power system hangs if i'd been away from the pc for a few hours but that seems to be fixed.

I'm very happy with the AMD drivers of late but it's specific to me and I appreciate others have conflicts and problems.

 

[Horrux]

I have owned several video cards from either company, starting with the Ati Rage Pro Turbo in, was it 1998? Followed by an nVidia Riva in 1999... And so on. Over the years, I have developed a strong preference for Ati/AMD hardware over the nVidian kind, specifically because of driver issues, although of late, nVidia hardware has also disappointed me strongly.

Yes, the CCC is bloated and slow, while the nVidia CP feels much lighter and is easier to use.

nVidia drivers are the only brand that require constant updating. Got a new game? A driver update is REQUIRED. On the AMD card? Nope. It might not run 100% as fast as with the latest drivers, but it will run fine. I had two 4870s in separate gaming systems, for which I installed the drivers ONCE and I had no issues whatsoever for at least 18 months when both cards were put into the same system and I made the mistake of buying a GTX 460.

Overall, for "install and forget" goodness, it's no contest, AMD wins.
However, if you are a techie tinker who spends more time tweaking his machine than using it, then you might prefer nVidia, coz you get to download and install a new driver seemingly every week.

 

[Fluffmeister]

One mans perfect experience is another mans nightmare.

AMD drivers have been nothing short of terrible for me. The reliance of .NET is horrible, the interface is clunky and gimmicky compared to nV's no-nonsense streamlined integration.

The need for hot fixes drove me mad, the Rage saga being and particularly funny joke.

Crossfire support was also a major disappointment for me, after reading the Powercolor HD 7990 review I see things still remain flaky, it's not like a lot of those games haven't been around awhile after all.

So yeah, Nv gets my vote for better drivers.