Nvidia fanboys bad for the GPU market?

[EpicAdom]

This is just a theory, and I'd like to hear what you guys think.  AMD has been struggling to keep up on the CPU and GPU markets.  Developing a new GPU can cost upwards of $1 BILLION, which is an insane amount of money.  If AMD falls too far behind, they will not have the capital to invest in R&D to stay competitive and may go bankrupt or restructure to no longer compete in the GPU market.  If this happens, there will be no real competition for Nvidia.  Lack of competition means we all get mediocre upgrades, higher prices, and the industry stalls until another competitor enters the game (which could take a long time, given the cost of R&D)

 

I am not saying anybody should go buy AMD for this reason alone, but perhaps it should be a small factor (maybe 10% of the decision).  I think it is a mistake to go full on Nvidia fanboy and ignore AMD because they run a little hotter.  AMD still makes good cards, and we should all avoid being a fanboy of either team.  I think it is worthwhile to give a bit of thought to the industry in general when making a purchase decision. 

 

The new AMD cards seem like they are good, so for the sake of future competition, lets give AMD cards the proper consideration they deserve.

I've thought about this as well.

 

HOWEVER, if AMD went bankrupt, Nvidia would have a monopoly on the x86 graphics market. The FTC (United States Federal Trade Commission) would not let that happen. Nvidia would get split up into multiple companies in that situation, which would screw over everyone, including the consumer (due to intellectual property and how that would get distributed). Nvidia and Intel are holding back new tech on purpose, to keep AMD afloat. This is why upgrading from a 2500k/2600k CPU is pointless, even though it is many years old.

[iludez]

You cant go blaming amds demise on nvidia customers lol.

That logic

[Casperian]

Maybe if they whole r9 wasn't rebrands.....

I want to like AMD but especially for CPU's, it makes no sense for me to buy them. I find the current situation they are in is a little sad.

And before someone points out that NV rebrands stuff; Yeah, I know but they don't do it to an entire generation of GPU's barre one.

 

 

And;

 x86 graphics market. 

Just wanted to point out, x86 is a 32bit CPU instruction set. And IIRC, NV and AMD use different instruction sets. NVidia uses PTX - Parallel Thread 

Execution.

[Swndlr]

First of all, this thread is bullshit.

Secondly, ANY fanboy is bad for the computer parts market.

[sgloux3470]

AMD could release a cheaper, faster, quieter, lower power consumption and sexier GPU line up than Nvidia and still be the underdog because it's impossible to shake off 20 years of "The way it is meant to be played" branding.

 

One thing I think they really need to do is WHQL cert all their drivers rather than continue to let retards think they haven't released new drivers in however many months simply because all their new drivers are labeled as "beta". (Shame on reviewers for perpetuating this bullshit too.  They should be telling people to download the beta drivers instead.)

 

They also need to make a show off releasing day one drivers for games, even if they don't really do much. Kind of like Nvidia does with game ready drivers, that usually add a SLI profile/disable SLI entirely and add geforce experience graphics preset and offer zero benefit for single GPU users, but it gives the perception to people that they are getting the sick performance boosts they are going to need to play whatever new big AAA title that is coming out.

 

 

I want to like AMD but especially for CPU's, it makes no sense for me to buy them. I find the current situation they are in is a little sad.

And before someone points out that NV rebrands stuff; Yeah, I know but they don't do it to an entire generation of GPU's barre one.

 

 

If the performance is still competitive with Nvidia's offerings, what's the problem?  The 290 and 290x are still very awesome GPU's worthy of being high end cards.  Rebadging them will drive sales from people who think "Oh man those cards came out in 2013, they must be worse than 2015 cards!".

 

If they didn't go with HBM, they could have cut down Fiji more to flesh out the line up.  But it's too expensive and yields aren't good enough to launch a whole lineup with it.

[Casperian]

 

AMD could release a cheaper, faster, quieter, lower power consumption and sexier GPU line up than Nvidia and still be the underdog because it's impossible to shake off 20 years of "The way it is meant to be played" branding.

 

One thing I think they really need to do is WHQL cert all their drivers rather than continue to let retards think they haven't released new drivers in however many months simply because all their new drivers are labeled as "beta". (Shame on reviewers for perpetuating this bullshit too.  They should be telling people to download the beta drivers instead.)

 

They also need to make a show off releasing day one drivers for games, even if they don't really do much. Kind of like Nvidia does with game ready drivers, that usually add a SLI profile/disable SLI entirely and add geforce experience graphics preset and offer zero benefit for single GPU users, but it gives the perception to people that they are getting the sick performance boosts they are going to need to play whatever new big AAA title that is coming out.

 

 

 

If the performance is still competitive with Nvidia's offerings, what's the problem?  The 290 and 290x are still very awesome GPU's worthy of being high end cards.  Rebadging them will drive sales from people who think "Oh man those cards came out in 2013, they must be worse than 2015 cards!".

 

If they didn't go with HBM, they could have cut down Fiji more to flesh out the line up.  But it's too expensive and yields aren't good enough to launch a whole lineup with it.

 

My point isn't that relevant for the AMD GPU's, I still recommend them a lot of the time. I don't blame AMD for the rebadging, I just find it sad they have to do it.

 

Truth be told, I swapped to NVidia because a few of the programs I run are CUDA accelerated. My current GPUs are the first NV cards I've owned.

 

EDIT: Reread what you said and you pretty much nailed it in the first paragraph; AMD is perceived as being worse (I've used at least 3 generations of AMD they all ran really well) even though they aren't. I still hold that they need to do something with that CPU lineup but the GPU lineup is sweet and has stayed relevant for far longer than NV's has. 

[EpicAdom]

Just wanted to point out, x86 is a 32bit CPU instruction set. And IIRC, NV and AMD use different instruction sets. NVidia uses PTX - Parallel Thread 

Execution.

You know what I'm talking about...

[Aphala]

HE OWNS A 970 MATE.

 

 

OP, asking for a flame war. dont worry, nvidia will just not innovate to keep amd competitive. 

So like they usually do? lol

[Guest Generallee]

snip

 

no ... no ....

 

You ... what have you done

 

Don't you know nvidia fanbois can't be argued with

 

YOU STARTED THE WAR AGAIN, PREPARE THE 7990'S 

[BestBOTEU]

agree'd, go on any new 300 series or fury video and you will see like 10-20 comments from nvidia fanboys stating facts that arent true

[dougdangger]

Only a fucking moron would put the blame of AMD's failure on the fanboys.

Fanboys do nothing but create noise.

 

The only reason why AMD fails is that they do NOT try hard enough to innovate.  For fuck's sake:  78xx, 79xx, R9 2xx, R9 3xx are all THE SAME SHIT.  They have just been slightly quicker and more memory over the years, THAT'S IT.  Same power hungry toaster they've been foisting on consumers for about 4 years now.

 

Their cpus are complete garbage.  Their 6 core gets its ass handed to it by a dual core from Intel.  They have NOTHING that even touches any of Intel's high end.

 

I spat on Intel when AMD's Athlon chips were raping them for less money.  After that AMD went on stupid mode and fell behind.

 

I would give AMD some credit had the GCN cards slashed their tdp after every rebrand.  But they haven't.  Still the same inefficient shit.

[orcinhell]

I am willing to listen to someone debate why PC users should by a AMD card.

 

But as soon as I read a comment about even though the 300 series is rebranded that dates back to 2012, its performance is still fine as justification, loses all credibility.

 

The 300 series is a rebrand, and if done correctly and fairly would be little reason to debate over... But its not and you fail to see it or justify the whole GPU lineup with this almighty Fury we hear so much about. That is only one card in many.

 

- the 300 series is rebranded and sold at a much higher cost, even though almost all of its tech was present in later releases of the 290X. rebrand aside you think its fine paying an extra 100 dollars for a 390X when its the same freaking card... which die hard fans even openly admit too.

 

- The 300 series performance increase is already being proven to be mostly drivers yet AMD fans are fine with the fact that those benchmark show performance gains in games older 290X series card were struggling on. Those very games that AMD came out and said "its gameworks" and tried to shift blame on poor performing drivers. Instead of giving you the driver update you have to buy a new card to get that performance. People already have the 300 series drivers working on 200 series cards... THAT IS WRONG.

 

- AMD in a single release have given the middle finger to their consumers who only spend 500 (AUD) or less on a GPU by releasing current tech at a higher price with drivers being the main factor behind improved performance... While these fans sit their and defend the company AMD have decided to spent their entire RND budget on the FURY, a card the main group of AMD owners will never own. All because they want to change their company from a budget company to a Performance...

 

That is like if Nvidia said hey our new maxwell chip is only available to those willing to spend the money on a 980 or higher... all you guys who buy the lower end cards... you know the majority of our profit.... you guys get the 770 rebranded... Don't worry about performance we tweaked it in a driver so its faster... O btw its 100 bucks more then the 770 was.

 

 

AMD has literally committed one of the biggest f yous to its consumer base in its history and has every AMD fan grinning with shit of there face pretending its chocolate. That is why I will never by AMD again.

[ahhming]

nvidia fanboy be like

 

[dougdangger]

nvidia fanboy be like

 

This Nvidia fanboy doesn't think that is worth this:  

[Elapo]

This is just a theory, and I'd like to hear what you guys think.  AMD has been struggling to keep up on the CPU and GPU markets.  Developing a new GPU can cost upwards of $1 BILLION, which is an insane amount of money.  If AMD falls too far behind, they will not have the capital to invest in R&D to stay competitive and may go bankrupt or restructure to no longer compete in the GPU market.  If this happens, there will be no real competition for Nvidia.  Lack of competition means we all get mediocre upgrades, higher prices, and the industry stalls until another competitor enters the game (which could take a long time, given the cost of R&D)

 

I am not saying anybody should go buy AMD for this reason alone, but perhaps it should be a small factor (maybe 10% of the decision).  I think it is a mistake to go full on Nvidia fanboy and ignore AMD because they run a little hotter.  AMD still makes good cards, and we should all avoid being a fanboy of either team.  I think it is worthwhile to give a bit of thought to the industry in general when making a purchase decision. 

 

The new AMD cards seem like they are good, so for the sake of future competition, lets give AMD cards the proper consideration they deserve.

 

This just in: fanboys are bad. Breaking news! More at 7!

 

But seriously, thanks for stating the obvious. That being said, however, your logic is flawed. Even slightly considering anything because the company is going through a rough period is a stupid idea.

 

You're correct in saying that a monopoly would be bad, but so is weak competition. Let's imagine AMD cards were truly inferior, but we all ganged up and bought them anyway, how's that helping anything? Now everyone is stuck with a lesser product, and the competition won't even try to innovate anymore, because they don't have to to stay relevant.

 

That being said, where I live there is absolutely no compelling reason to buy AMD cards. The 290X costs as much or more than the 970 in most places. That, coupled with the other disadvantages (power consumption + heat output + SLI>CF) makes AMD just not a very good choice. Don't even get me started on the 390X, I've seen those listed for up to €500, for a rebranded 290X...

[vSyNd1c4t3]

This is just a theory, and I'd like to hear what you guys think.  AMD has been struggling to keep up on the CPU and GPU markets.  Developing a new GPU can cost upwards of $1 BILLION, which is an insane amount of money.  If AMD falls too far behind, they will not have the capital to invest in R&D to stay competitive and may go bankrupt or restructure to no longer compete in the GPU market.  If this happens, there will be no real competition for Nvidia.  Lack of competition means we all get mediocre upgrades, higher prices, and the industry stalls until another competitor enters the game (which could take a long time, given the cost of R&D)

 

I am not saying anybody should go buy AMD for this reason alone, but perhaps it should be a small factor (maybe 10% of the decision).  I think it is a mistake to go full on Nvidia fanboy and ignore AMD because they run a little hotter.  AMD still makes good cards, and we should all avoid being a fanboy of either team.  I think it is worthwhile to give a bit of thought to the industry in general when making a purchase decision. 

 

The new AMD cards seem like they are good, so for the sake of future competition, lets give AMD cards the proper consideration they deserve.

I agree, as an Nvidia Fanboy, I hope the AMD Fanboys step it up and start buying Crossfire to make up for the number of Nvidia cards sold.

So if all you AMD Fans can just buy 2 cards, keep yourselves on the market, so us Team Green can keep getting the amazing graphics cards, that would be nice.

[nunya bus]

This is just a theory, and I'd like to hear what you guys think.  AMD has been struggling to keep up on the CPU and GPU markets.  Developing a new GPU can cost upwards of $1 BILLION, which is an insane amount of money.  If AMD falls too far behind, they will not have the capital to invest in R&D to stay competitive and may go bankrupt or restructure to no longer compete in the GPU market.  If this happens, there will be no real competition for Nvidia.  Lack of competition means we all get mediocre upgrades, higher prices, and the industry stalls until another competitor enters the game (which could take a long time, given the cost of R&D)

 

I am not saying anybody should go buy AMD for this reason alone, but perhaps it should be a small factor (maybe 10% of the decision).  I think it is a mistake to go full on Nvidia fanboy and ignore AMD because they run a little hotter.  AMD still makes good cards, and we should all avoid being a fanboy of either team.  I think it is worthwhile to give a bit of thought to the industry in general when making a purchase decision. 

 

The new AMD cards seem like they are good, so for the sake of future competition, lets give AMD cards the proper consideration they deserve.

 

because AMD are the little guys shouldnt even lend 1% of credence to your decision in buying a GFX or CPU! EVER!

whoever has the best tech, and best value and best drivers at that point in time. should get your money. This is the only way to treat both companies the same and to hold them accountable for any bad or good actions the company takes. 

AMD has been non existent for a year or so now, and GFX share dropped under 20%. we still got the Titan X and the 980ti. and AMD now has the Fury. as long as they make good products ppl will pay for them 

[Rydalia]

Not Just fanboys, In my country Most retailers sells and show only Nvidia cards on the display shelf. Have to ask them personally for Amd cards D:

[CostcoSamples]

This just in: fanboys are bad. Breaking news! More at 7!

 

But seriously, thanks for stating the obvious. That being said, however, your logic is flawed. Even slightly considering anything because the company is going through a rough period is a stupid idea.

 

You're correct in saying that a monopoly would be bad, but so is weak competition. Let's imagine AMD cards were truly inferior, but we all ganged up and bought them anyway, how's that helping anything? Now everyone is stuck with a lesser product, and the competition won't even try to innovate anymore, because they don't have to to stay relevant.

 

That being said, where I live there is absolutely no compelling reason to buy AMD cards. The 290X costs as much or more than the 970 in most places. That, coupled with the other disadvantages (power consumption + heat output + SLI>CF) makes AMD just not a very good choice. Don't even get me started on the 390X, I've seen those listed for up to €500, for a rebranded 290X...

 

Thank you for the comment.  

 

If the reviews show the 390x as being a poor value (especially if your local prices are way too high) then by all means, don't buy it.  But lets say for example the 390 and 390x are right in the performance range of the 970 and 980 (+ or - a few percentage points, depending which review site you read, and depending on factory OC etc), and your local prices are also comparable, why not give the AMD cards some consideration?  

 

You (and others) have pointed out allowing market share influence your personal buying decision is a bad idea.  That is a valid point, I agree, rewarding mediocrity will get you more mediocrity.  Thank you for pointing that out.

 

But lets pretend for a moment the Fury x comes out as being identical in performance to a 980 ti, and the price was the same, and assuming drivers were equivalent, would you buy AMD or Nvidia?  In that case, would you factor into your decision the overall GPU market?

 

 

And on the other side of things, if AMD goes bankrupt (or more likely they would get bought by the likes of Samsung or others) that would give room for market share to be scooped up by a more suitable competitor.  Perhaps we'd see stagnant innovation for a couple of years, but once the new player entered the market innovation would likely explode.  I guess that is the beauty of capitalism and free markets - resources are constantly being transferred from the lazy to the innovative.

 

Companies love brand loyalty because it gives them room to relax a little.  Everybody tries to do it, some brands are really good at it.  Apple, Nvidia, even Asus with their ROG series.  It is not wrong or evil, but I wonder how it affects innovation.

[CostcoSamples]

I've thought about this as well.

 

HOWEVER, if AMD went bankrupt, Nvidia would have a monopoly on the x86 graphics market. The FTC (United States Federal Trade Commission) would not let that happen. Nvidia would get split up into multiple companies in that situation, which would screw over everyone, including the consumer (due to intellectual property and how that would get distributed). Nvidia and Intel are holding back new tech on purpose, to keep AMD afloat. This is why upgrading from a 2500k/2600k CPU is pointless, even though it is many years old.

 

I'm not an expert on US anti-trust laws, but don't they have the option of paying fines?  Like back in the 1990s Microsoft paid Apple to stay afloat to avoid having a monopoly.  But also, being a global market, things outside the US would be handled differently.  Anyway, the absolute worst thing that could happen would be for the government to get involved in any of this.  They would ruin things for everyone (as they always do).

 

Do you really think Intel and Nvidia are holding back new tech to avoid a monopoly?  I've never read anything suggesting that to be the case.

[Nena Trinity]

Well I feel like all 3 major part manufacturers are screwing us one way or another so loyal to one? NEVER! But I most say 300 series looks awesome!

[Agent181]

I'm not happy with any of them, have seen how long it takes to bring a new product and then it's just a slight difference between the last where the hell has innovation gone and the big leaps

[EpicAdom]

I'm not an expert on US anti-trust laws, but don't they have the option of paying fines?  Like back in the 1990s Microsoft paid Apple to stay afloat to avoid having a monopoly.  But also, being a global market, things outside the US would be handled differently.  Anyway, the absolute worst thing that could happen would be for the government to get involved in any of this.  They would ruin things for everyone (as they always do).

 

Do you really think Intel and Nvidia are holding back new tech to avoid a monopoly?  I've never read anything suggesting that to be the case.

Well, I'm not sure about Nvidia. Intel, on the other hand, is almost definitely holding back. Intel hasn't actually tried to increase performance on the desktop in quite a while. It's just been then same 10% increase in IPC every time a new CPU is released.

[Elapo]

Thank you for the comment.  

 

If the reviews show the 390x as being a poor value (especially if your local prices are way too high) then by all means, don't buy it.  But lets say for example the 390 and 390x are right in the performance range of the 970 and 980 (+ or - a few percentage points, depending which review site you read, and depending on factory OC etc), and your local prices are also comparable, why not give the AMD cards some consideration?  

 

You (and others) have pointed out allowing market share influence your personal buying decision is a bad idea.  That is a valid point, I agree, rewarding mediocrity will get you more mediocrity.  Thank you for pointing that out.

 

But lets pretend for a moment the Fury x comes out as being identical in performance to a 980 ti, and the price was the same, and assuming drivers were equivalent, would you buy AMD or Nvidia?  In that case, would you factor into your decision the overall GPU market?

 

 

And on the other side of things, if AMD goes bankrupt (or more likely they would get bought by the likes of Samsung or others) that would give room for market share to be scooped up by a more suitable competitor.  Perhaps we'd see stagnant innovation for a couple of years, but once the new player entered the market innovation would likely explode.  I guess that is the beauty of capitalism and free markets - resources are constantly being transferred from the lazy to the innovative.

 

Companies love brand loyalty because it gives them room to relax a little.  Everybody tries to do it, some brands are really good at it.  Apple, Nvidia, even Asus with their ROG series.  It is not wrong or evil, but I wonder how it affects innovation.

 

Would I buy Fury X or 980Ti?

 

Very good question. Now, we can't assume any feature of either card is identical, because that would be unrealistic, but if drivers, price and performance were VERY similar, I'd still prefer the 980Ti. I'm a big fan of Nvidia's control panel (and I'm more experienced with it), as long as AMD does not provide a clearly better experience. I also like the complementary software better. Geforce Experience, for example, is still superior to gaming evolved in my opinion. I would NEVER let market share be a factor in my decision. Why should I have to give up on certain features I want/I am used to to "help out" a company? Every consumer should base their decisions on their own experience, not to accommodate a company.

 

If everything's equal, I'd prefer Nvidia, based on previous experiences, but I wouldn't stay with them if the AMD equivalent is just better in general. I regularly have someone come to me to ask to pick components for a build. I've recommended a lot of AMD cards in those builds, because they just used to provide a better value at lower price points.

 

Don't get me started on Apple though. Their story just shows how brainwashed people can get by fancy marketing words like "retina". I can't remember how many times I've told an iPhone user that their "retina" screen is actually lower resolution than other flagship phones. (mostly with the iPhone 5, which wasn't even HD). Obviously you won't catch tech savvy people with stuff like this, but many people seem to like the buzz words. Steve Jobs wasn't an innovator, he was good at acting. I own an iPod Touch 3G. Fantastic device, no doubt, but just not worth the price premium.

[maizenblue]

I remember all these Nvidia fanboys a year ago insisting the gtx 770 was better than the r9 290/x, or saying the gtx 760 was better than the 280xeven when it cost MORE. This is the kind of fanboy BS that gives then a bad name.

 

The 290x is still going strong and its "rebadge" the 390x is even beating the 980 in pretty much all 4k benchmarks and some 1440p ones. Meanwhile I wonder how that gtx 770 or 760 is working out for em.