Posts: 12
Threads: 1
Joined: Jul 2009
Reputation:
0
I've read on some threads on some emu forums that blatenty say that nVidia GPUs work better with PCSX2. Can any one shead some light on that?
The only real reason why I was thinking about is that I know my 8800GTS's will out fold my HD4850's even though the HD4850 is much better at traditional PC gaming. The G92 core just seems to do math faster than the RV770 core. Not really a big secret there.
Think this same quality would help out PCSX2? I know I've already run across people on this forums with 8600GTs that supposedly are having better performance than me in PCSX2. I might try it anyway...but I'd rather not tear my folding farm apart if I am just going to put it back together again if I can help it.
E8500 @ 4.1GHz
4GB memory
HD4850 512MB in crossfire (Crossfire does work with PCSX2)
Running Vista 64
Posts: 7.767
Threads: 81
Joined: Jan 2009
Reputation:
82
Location: Indiana, USA
Nvidia GPU have always worked better on GSdx, gabest doesn't have an ATI (that I know of) to test out the plugins on, so they can't be optimized for ati at all, thus far, nvidia has always been the way to go
Posts: 566
Threads: 24
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation:
0
Location: Germany
in my expirience Nvidia for every emulator Oo dunno why
my bro had always ATI and I had always Nvidia kk except for two cards.. AdrenalineRush(Voodoo) and ATI Rage 3D xD
my bro has more troubles with emulators than I have
Posts: 12
Threads: 1
Joined: Jul 2009
Reputation:
0
hmm...and I am new here so I haven't gotten into all the nuts and bolts, but it seems like the PS2 is a number cruncher. It even has a FPU co-processor. Never really had a reason to wonder how my PS2 worked till started not to.
So if floating point math is what drives it then nVidia will be better even with a lesser GPU. Sorry, I guess I sort of answered my own question, but I guess it is a good toppic.
E8500 @ 4.1GHz
4GB memory
HD4850 512MB in crossfire (Crossfire does work with PCSX2)
Running Vista 64
Posts: 505
Threads: 25
Joined: Jan 2009
Reputation:
2
Location: USA
nVidia has always been better for me IMHO, more stability, faster GPU, RAM, etc and with a nVidia GeForce GTS 250 PCSX2 runs beautifully. I've had bad experiences with ATI, but that's just my opinion.
Posts: 25
Threads: 0
Joined: Jan 2009
Reputation:
0
My HD4850 doesn't seem to GPU bottleneck in any game, many games I can run at 2048x1152 internal resolution (my monitor res) without any GPU related slowdown, I always bottleneck on my 4.1ghz E8400 first
CPU: Core 2 Duo E8400 C0 @ 4.1Ghz
Mobo: ASUS P5Q Pro (2048Mhz FSB)
RAM: 8GB PC2-8500 DDR2
Video: Radeon HD 4850 512MB @ 790/1990mhz
Sound: ASUS Xonar DX, Alessandro MS-1 headphones
Posts: 1.165
Threads: 16
Joined: Mar 2009
Reputation:
0
Location: Alexandria, VA
nVidia has MUCH better driver support overall, I always recommend them.
Posts: 174
Threads: 6
Joined: Jul 2009
Reputation:
0
Agreed, my main gripe with ATI is the crap drivers.
Posts: 344
Threads: 16
Joined: Jan 2009
Reputation:
0
Location: Commonwealth
i have both AMD and ATI and i run all games with "playable" status at full speed ^_^
Check my profile for hardware/software and games i played on PCSX2.
Posts: 20
Threads: 5
Joined: Jul 2009
Reputation:
0
07-16-2009, 12:29 PM
(This post was last modified: 07-16-2009, 12:30 PM by HULK2003.)
i like nvidia more, but i hate nvidia antialiasing, i hear that ATI dont have same problem when it comes to AA
rummor is that Nvidia use fake AA to gain speed on slower hardware
