Originally Posted by Zoolook
I do know a lot about graphics cards, and what you just said is unlikely.
Obviously you don't know how to make an argument. I said:
Originally Posted by HKZ
Obviously you know nothing about graphics cards, drivers, or the difference between AMD and nVidia. It makes a HUGE difference what brand it is. Not all pixels rendered are equally good or reliable and brand difference is a massive part of that.
Then you said:
Originally Posted by Zoolook
Most of the image quality and performance is determined by the quality of drivers, and nVidia have had better OpenGL drivers than ATI for the better part of a decade.
So which is it? I'm right or I'm wrong that not every pixel is rendered as equally good between them? You tell me I'm wrong and then tell me I'm right? Did I not mention drivers? Can you read? I'll give you the correct answer: I'm right and so are you. You basically repeated what I said but with more detail.
Originally Posted by benanderson89
Apple write the drivers for the mac so that point is void. The difference between the two in terms of display quality has been rendered pretty much moot since digital video interfaces were introduced like DVI and mini display, especially at the high end. Plus, the vast majority of the display quality is determined by the actual display.
You two sound like those nerds on overclocking forms complaining about the difference and AMD and Intel out of sheer brand loyalty.
You sound like someone that's ignorant about video cards on the whole, and their manufacturers driver support and hardware reliability. There most definitely is a difference there and Apple switched from nVidia to AMD for hardware reliability once already, then had to switch again because of Intel squeezing nVidia out and they couldn't make graphics or chipsets Apple could legally use. No one really seriously games on a Mac anyway, the performance is so laughably awful there's no reason to punish yourself. Most people who game on a Mac play games that either don't use the discrete graphics, or utilize them very little. Anyone who does play games on a Mac uses Bootcamp, like I do, and the difference between the two can be as small as 2% or night and day. Could be so kind as to point out where I was talking about one being better than the other? I wasn't arguing for or against either, I was just pointing out that you made a statement and it's obvious that you know absolutely nothing about graphics cards, their manufacturers, or their capabilities.
DVI, MiniDP, HDMI and so on have absolutely nothing to do with how a video card renders the effects that you see with your eyes. CRT monitors had the same effects quality and better image quality (black levels and other things) that modern LDCs do and it made no difference there either. You truly are ignorant about 3d video rendering, and I don't mean that as an insult. 3d rendering depends solely on the game engine, the graphics hardware and the video drivers to render visuals, it has absolutely nothing to do with what screen it shows up on.
Originally Posted by Hudson1
If the difference is "huge" as you state, then it implies that if you put two iMacs next to each other -- one with ATi and the other with Nvidia -- everyone would instantly notice the difference. There just doesn't seem to be much anecdotal evidence to support this.
In the context of what he said and how it was said, there is a huge difference between nVidia and AMD. What you're suggesting doesn't use the discrete graphics anyway, it would use the intel chip. If you were to play a game, say Diablo 3, on both cards you would most definitely see a difference right away. But if you knew what you were talking about or the context of the discussion you would see it. I'm not going to hold your hand, or his, and tell you why that statement is wrong. The internet is full of threads asking why nVidia cards can do one thing and AMD cards can't and vice versa. For rendering the desktop, no there really isn't a difference and that's simply because neither would be doing anything. When it comes to 3d gaming, and the context that he was talking about, there most certainly is a difference and I've no interest in proving it because I don't have to. Look on google for game launch graphics drivers problems and you'll have more than enough evidence to see the difference between the two, and when you get done with that saunter over to anadtech.com and read some of his reviews on graphics cards there. Just because neither you or him know anything about them doesn't mean there isn't any difference because you don't use them.