I was wondering how meag's new renderer behaves with ATI/AMD cards.

(with the older renderer NVIDIA always had an uphand on Windows operating systems because of the opengl drivers).
(meag's new renderer = ezQuake 3.5 download here )

So, I know for a fact that the new renderer does a huge FPS boost in ATI/AMD cards, but how does the performance compare to equivalent NVIDIA cards?

anyone with a ATI/AMD card out there that can do some tests?

It's better than the old renderer on AMD but still not as good as Nvidia in my experience. Kinda hard to make a direct comparison as my NV card is more powerful anyway but I also get artefacts on my AMD machine (black textures sometimes).

I also found the GLSL is faster than STD on Nvidia, but not so on the RX480.

Tried to test it on 5770 and got message that my system doesn't support opengl 3.x. Heck.. i was quiet sure that i tested drivers long ago that even supported OpenGl 4.3.. that ezquake is going hand in hand with progress in a way i didn't ever expect. I would try never drivers for sure in a couple days

a - nah.. enough fps)

AMD and Nvidia both produce and sell a wide range of GPUs from low-power laptop graphics to high-end server and workstation accelerators.

Nvidia’s highest power GPUs are a lot more powerful than AMD’s most powerful GPUs, but are also significantly more expensive.

For the high-end Nvidia are usually more cost effective than AMD, especially if you include their technologies such as RTX and CUDA.

AMD’s low end GPUs tend to be less energy efficient, but cheaper and faster, and have more VRAM (video memory) than the competing low-end GPUs from Nvidia.