K.I.L.E.R said:
Not in the U.S. About even actually, tit for tat.
Anyhow, I have owned cards from both and I pretty much buy/suggest whatever is best in that price range. e.g. I bought a 6800GT last summer, yet last week I suggested to my friend, who had a $300 budget, to get an X800XL because he wanted VIVO and simply because IQ and current game support was more important to him. We discussed SM 3.0 and how it likely will be the minimum standard sooner or later, but the X800XL fit his needs well and he loves the cards.
The last 3 gens I went NV, ATI, NV. Next time I will probably go with ATI for a couple reasons--some being related to the last two gens. First reason is that I am not impressed with NV's AA, especially the hit the hit the 6800 series takes compared to the X800 series (recent BF2 benchmarks demonstrate this yet again). Not only is ATI's AA of higher quality IMO, but the cards perform better with AA overall. So even more AA can be applied. So unless this changes in the future, if ATI is performance competitive at the price range I am looking at (and the card is fast enough to do AA) that will be a major influence.
Another reason, like others, that I may be leaning toward ATI on my next purchase is the entire NV30 deal. Meh. No use getting into it, but it left a sour taste. Not saying ATI is perfect, buit I must say I like their attitude. Now that did not prevent me from buying the NV40 because I felt it was the best option at the time of purchase for me (guaranteed Ultra speeds at GT cost, SM 3.0) but it did cross my mind. I was not too impressed when Jen Hsun was slamming the R420 for having old technology in it before the launch either. I did not find that very professional, and in the end it seems ATI's chips once again have performs admirably... and about those advanced features...
...I also have gotten the impression that NV's SM 3.0 may not be quite as good as it should be. We will have to wait and see, so far it is not impressive. Also my 6800GT (basically OCed to an Ultra... SM 3.0, performance, and OCing where the top 3 reasons I got the card) cannot perform certain features, like HDR, at good framerates. Basically I get the feeling the NV40 is a typical NV release: 1st release is feature rich but performance poor in those areas, 2nd release performs well with the feartures enabled. I would love to be proven wrong, but SM 3.0 in FarCry and SC:CT did not impress me much. Neither has the HDR implimentations we have seen.
But I expect NV to continue to turn out great products. And, if like the NV40, they have the best card at the time in my price range (and the 6800GT was a better buy imo than the X800Pro) I will recommend that.
I don't reall lean much toward one or the other, but if I had to go on a gut feeling I say ATI. Mainly because I am REALLY impressed with Xenos/R500. I think ATI is finally taking some steps toward a share in feature leadership and I like seeing that there are two viable competitors who have an equal influence on a market. NV is very close with developers/publishers (a good reason to buy their stuff), but it seems over the last 3 years ATI has really made the GPU market an even 2 car race. And looking forward I think Unified Shaders is just a great idea, so I tip my hate to ATI.
