Oh I didn't know that, too bad, on Windows some modded drivers are 
further optimized for speed, besides the optimization ATI does, you can 
find really nice performance, even on old cards. Well you have to use 
what works best, yes looking reviews is always good as a reference.

Post a reply to this message

On Fri, 27 Dec 2013 18:30:21 +0100, Le_Forgeron wrote:

> Le 27/12/2013 18:16, Saul Luizaga nous fit lire :
>> Why so obsessed with Nvidia? B uy the latest ATI graphics cards, great
>> performance, maybe a little better than Nvidia and less expensive.

At least on Linux, nVidia cards can be used for things like GPU rendering 
in Blender.  The ATI cards don't work for that AFAIK.

> with Linux, the ATI cards suck. At least that was my experience with
> them, so I went Nvidia. (with multiscreen on linux, Ati was a PITA)
> The nvidia driver taints the kernel, but at least they works.

The radeon drivers are better now, though Catalyst still seems to have 
problems here and there.

Jim

Post a reply to this message

Orchid Win7 v1 <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:

> yet, it produces 2,200 GFLOPS (and has twice the RAM).

From what I have gathered, right now the GTX 770 is the card that ought
to give you most bang for your buck. It seems to be right in the sweet
spot from a performance/price point of view. It seems to be the most
efficient of the medium-priced cards (at about 300 euros), the next
more efficient GTX card making a very significant jump in price (over
500 euros).

Given that performance charts put it at about exactly twice as efficient
as my own current card (GTX 560), and this one still performs extremely
well even with newest games, the GTX 770 should last for a relatively
long time before it becomes too slow.

If 300 euros is way too much, I haven't investigated what would be the
best performance/price card on the cheaper side (100 euros and under),
so I really can't tell. Personally, I wouldn't consider the 300 euros
a bad investment for the GTX 770. (Actually I would even buy it myself
if the GTX 560 didn't seem to fare so well even with newest games.)

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

On 27/12/2013 05:16 PM, Saul Luizaga wrote:
> Why so obsessed with Nvidia? B uy the latest ATI graphics cards, great
> performance, maybe a little better than Nvidia and less expensive.

Does ATI support CUDA yet?

Post a reply to this message

On 27/12/2013 08:45 PM, Warp wrote:
> Orchid Win7 v1<voi### [at] devnull>  wrote:

>> yet, it produces 2,200 GFLOPS (and has twice the RAM).
>
> From what I have gathered, right now the GTX 770 is the card that ought
> to give you most bang for your buck. It seems to be right in the sweet
> spot from a performance/price point of view.


outrageous. (In fact, roughly what I paid for the card I'm trying to 
replace.)

Again, I guess I'm going to wait for my next bank statement before I 
make a decision. Also, my sister said something about maybe giving me 
some money for Christmas, so...

Post a reply to this message

Le 27/12/2013 21:46, Orchid Win7 v1 nous fit lire :
> On 27/12/2013 05:16 PM, Saul Luizaga wrote:
>> Why so obsessed with Nvidia? B uy the latest ATI graphics cards, great
>> performance, maybe a little better than Nvidia and less expensive.
> 
> Does ATI support CUDA yet?
> 

does not seem so.
Cuda is made by nvidia, Ati had a response with Stream.
Both could provide an interface for openCL. But that would be like
running a JVM on a non-java-native hardware: a bit of loss of
performance is to be expected.

The last move from Ati was Mantle: an alternative to OpenGL & Direct3D.
Not sure Ati is interested in GPGPU.

Post a reply to this message

On Fri, 27 Dec 2013 20:46:23 +0000, Orchid Win7 v1 wrote:

> On 27/12/2013 05:16 PM, Saul Luizaga wrote:
>> Why so obsessed with Nvidia? B uy the latest ATI graphics cards, great
>> performance, maybe a little better than Nvidia and less expensive.
> 
> Does ATI support CUDA yet?

I don't believe so - one of the reasons my next card will probably be an 
nVidia card.

Jim

Post a reply to this message

Am 27.12.2013 18:33, schrieb clipka:
> Am 27.12.2013 16:47, schrieb Francois Labreque:
>
>>> There are two variants in use:
>>>
>>> (A) Each time you submit a transaction via browser, you get a
>>> transaction-specific authorization code via SMS to your mobile phone,
>>> including some essentials of the transaction (like the amount of money
>>> transferred, and the target bank account) to make sure that you and the
>>> bank are talking about the same deal.
>>
>> So I now need to have a separate cell-phone contract just to be allowed
>> to pay my bills online?
>
> No, you can choose the other variant instead. Banks usually offer both.

As an added note, I just learned that variant (A) can't be considered 
safe anymore anyway.

Post a reply to this message

Le_Forgeron wrote:
> The last move from Ati was Mantle: an alternative to OpenGL & Direct3D.
> Not sure Ati is interested in GPGPU.

It is; the original driver for my HD7600 came with software and 
encouragement to participate on Folding@Home GPPU client or something 
like that, to aid research diseases.

Post a reply to this message

> What bank uses fixed passwords (rather than a sheet of single-use codes)
> and thinks that it's safe?

Several banks in the UK use a small battery powered card reader. When 
you make a transaction you need to insert your bank card, type in your 
pin, then enter the numbers from the website (usually the destination 
account number and the amount). The card reader then displays an 8-digit 
code to enter back into the web browser.

Post a reply to this message