NVIDIA vs. ATI graphics-adapter?
#1
Question 
I know maybe it's a risky question to ask.... many diffrent opinions..but i'm gonna try anyway Big Grin

I read somewhere ATI cards are better decoding HD-Video, and even read that they might even give better results for x264.. (no HW-acceleration ofcourse but the other stuff like deinterlace, etc, etc..)

But i also read here Nvidia cards are better supported under Linux, and that Nvidia would be the way to go..

Well now i'm planning to build and HTPC and my plan was to go for an Nvidia 8500GT or the 8600GT (does it even matter which for video-playback?)

But I was wondering maybe I'm missing something, and the ATI cards do perform better..

I know there are problems now with ATI cards and the Green screen....

So any suggestions for what type of videocard to buy..

NVidia or Ati, and what type.. does a 8500GT perform much worse video wise than a 8600GT, or will evens a 8400GS be sufficient?
Reply
#2
Cannot speak on ATI vs NVIDIA other than to say that NVIDIA can be made to work fairly easily. The 8500GT is sufficient for HD playback on my box - I am using a fanless MSI 8500Gt board from NewEgg that was very reasonably priced and can be made to fit in half height cases - it has an HDMI output.
Reply
#3
Go nvidia, no question. ATI has made significant major commitments to open source drivers, but they have yet to bear fruit. 2008 may be a great year for ATI on linux. Or it may not. Right now, nvidia is the only smart choice.

It doesn't really matter how powerful your card is for XBMC/linux, so long as it supports opengl 2.0. My 630i motherboard with integrated nv7150 video works fine. Shop by price.
Reply

Logout Mark Read Team Forum Stats Members Help
NVIDIA vs. ATI graphics-adapter?0