AMD vs nVidia

[destroyer8769]

So... I want to know, what are the features of each, pros and cons. Now, I have heard a lot of good things about nVidiam, and not so much for amd, but I feel that may just be the nVidia fanboys I talk to. So I am wondering, what are + and - of each. ATM the only thing I know is that amd is usually more power hungry, yet nVidia is less performance for value (these are things I've heard, i want to know if they are true).

 

I hope someone who has experienced each can tell me the pros and cons of both.

 

Thanks, Destroyer8769

 

P.S. 

Please don't make this a flamewar, if you have an idea, share it, but don't fight.

 

P.P.S.

I am asking this to see about amd because I really don't know a lot about them and I would like to compare the two brands side by side to see what I should use in my next gpu upgrade.

[79wjd]

The two are far more similar than they are different... 

 

Nvidia: More efficient, shadowplay, gsync, PhysX, GameWorks, Nvidia streaming (to a shield)

AMD: GameDVR (shadowplay-equivalent), Freesync (Gsync), TressFX, Mantle

[VioDuskar]

Nvidia has features that AMD doesnt, such as G-sync, PhysX, SLI

 

while AMD offers crossfire (similar to SLI), they also have more RAW performance than Nvidia cards. AMD also has Mantle going for it.

 

in general Nvidia has better performance in an elegant way, whereas AMD/radeon has more brute force performance to match Nvidia, but for less cash monies.

overall they are very similar.

[destroyer8769]

Nvidia has features that AMD doesnt, such as G-sync, PhysX, SLI

 

while AMD offers crossfire (similar to SLI), they also have more RAW performance than Nvidia cards. AMD also has Mantle going for it.

 

in general Nvidia has better performance in an elegant way, whereas AMD/radeon has more brute force performance to match Nvidia, but for less cash monies.

overall they are very similar.

Are they both of the same build quality? How are the drivers?

[TheSLSAMG]

NVIDIA's performance/dollar in the US is so close to AMD's that price is not really a valid argument anymore. Used cards don't count either due to AMD's inherent lack of resale value.

 

AMD GPUs tend to perform better in high resolution scenarios as opposed to their NVIDIA bretheren due to the larger memory buses. NVIDIA GPUs tend to have far better performance/watt (for this generation anyways, it hasn't always been like this), leading to lower power consumption across the board. This saves on heat output, something users don't want in the first place but have to live with. NVIDIA's features tend to be more polished and rounded, while AMD's more of a brute force company who ignores driver features for performance.

[79wjd]

Are they both of the same build quality? How are the drivers?

It depends what board partner you end up getting -- but pretty much any AMD R9 200 series or GTX 900 series are equally good (excluding the Asus DCU2 R9 290/x) -- athough some do have better coolers than others. 

 

Drivers are pretty much the same for both. 

[TheSLSAMG]

Are they both of the same build quality? How are the drivers?

Given you buy a card from a good board partner (NVIDIA's got ASUS, EVGA, Gigabyte, MSI and Zotac (as of late) while AMD have Sapphire, PowerColor, Gigabyte, MSI, ASUS except for 290/290X and XFX), you'll be fine either way. As for drivers, I've experienced far less issues with NVIDIA's drivers, but other users will of course say the opposite. NVIDIA's drivers are generally regarded as being better, but AMD's are nothing to throw in the corner.

[VioDuskar]

Are they both of the same build quality? How are the drivers?

they are generally of the same quality, but it varies a bit based on the board partner. AKA EVGA vs PNY.

 

they both have similar driver suites AMD has catalyst control center, Nvidia has the Nvidia controlpanel & Geforce experience.

[GloriousPain]

The two companies go about things entirely different ways to reach similar results if you benefit from one method of one of these things drastically go with that vendor otherwise go for which ever gives the best performance for the best price you can afford.

 

Nvidia has features that AMD doesnt, such as G-sync, PhysX, SLI

 

while AMD offers crossfire (similar to SLI), they also have more RAW performance than Nvidia cards. AMD also has Mantle going for it.

 

in general Nvidia has better performance in an elegant way, whereas AMD/radeon has more brute force performance to match Nvidia, but for less cash monies.

overall they are very similar.

Odd things to choose to compare, also imho Crossfire is better than SLI and Mantles kind of dead

The two are far more similar than they are different... 

 

Nvidia: More efficient, shadowplay, gsync, PhysX, GameWorks

AMD: GameDVR (shadowplay-equivalent), Freesync (Gsync), Nvidia streaming (to a shield), TressFX, Mantle

Shouldn't Nvidia streamingbe in the Nvidia list?

[alphaproject]

Nvidia has better drivers in my opinion simply for the fact that they are always on top of new drivers and new games. AMD might have an update every 3 months. The crossfire platform suffers because of this from people that play AAA games.

 

Hardware for the money is usually AMD though.

 

But....IF you buy the right card, it really depends on what you want. Better resale value, or better overall price/performance ratio.

 

For example. Go out and buy a Titan X.  You are loaded with cash and nothing matters to you. Or.... you can't buy just any card and you want the best for your money and don't care if the card is used or not.  Big difference.

 

I bought a used GTX 770 because it had lost almost 50% of it's value from when it was new but the guy just bought it about 4 months ago.

 

Gotta look for good deals.  If you NEED something new with a warranty then used is out unless they have transferable warranties. Truth is...I've only had maybe 3 cards in 15 years need warranties. One was ATI  9800 Pro and one was BFG (Nvidia card...forget which one.) I think it was a 7800 GS... forget. The card I almost forgot about was a brand new 4400 Ti which wouldn't let me OC not even 1 megahertz. It felt like it was sort of slow in games even though it was brand new. I had called the place and told them something isn't right... I know that we aren't supposed to OC cards right, but honestly...this thing would barely run stock speeds so I knew I had a lemon. I got a replacement and the new card I got OCed perfectly and ran great.

 

Most cards I keep until they die or I sell them. I have a 7850 that OCs like a beast just collecting dust right now. Can't decide to sell or keep. If I wait too long it will be pointless to even sell it. I'll be stuck with it as a backup card.

[bossdre]

I've used 2x R9 280x and currently using a GTX 970. 

 

Based on experience, they are definitely similar.

 

I didn't experience any driver issues with my crossfirex setup except to the games that doesn't support dual gpu configuration. I live in a tropical country and the temps are reasonable at full load. It was louder than the GTX 970 because duh, it's a multi gpu configuration, but it was not that loud.

 

I switched to the 970 because I want a single card solution that is more powerful than a single R9 280x and is close to the performance of 2x R9 280x at a reasonable price for ease of use especially on day one game releases. And same goes with Nvidia, no driver issue or whatsoever.

 

Imho, the only thing that gives nvidia advantage over amd is it's efficiency. Because you need atleast a quality 750w PSU for the crossfirex setup. I was forced to upgrade my PSU when I got my second R9 280x for safe measure. Unlike nvidia, afaik, you can do 970 SLI at 650w or even less. So, if you bought a lower wattage quality PSU before and wanted to upgrade to the current high end AMD GPUs (or go multi gpu), you probably need to upgrade your PSU as well.

[Badger906]

nvidia are the super refined sleek cards. amd are balls to the wall power houses regardless of heat and power consumption.

amd tends to give the better price to performance ratio, well other than in America where the cards hold a premium.

you won't go wrong with either brand. I chop and change all the time. I get the best performing card for my budget regardless of who makes it.

never had and bad stories to write home about either.

from the fan boys point of view nvidia fans see amd cards as hot loud and power hungry with dodgy drivers (something of the past)

team red would say nvidia cards are over priced underpowered non limit pushing cards.

these are all opinions well.. yes some amd cards like the stock 290x was a loud card that always ran at 95c but it was a beast that gave it's competition (the 780ti) a spanking at a much lower price point well in some countries. it was over £100 cheaper in the UK at launch.

[chamath]

I have used nvidia 9600GT and GTX 560ti, currently using twin frozr R9 290x. From my experiance,

 

Nvidia - Drivers are excellent (customizations are good, faster response time, Less rendering issues in gaming, low temperature of GPU

 

AMD - Price points are good, it is said radeon is good for high resolution gaming, Drivers are not good enough, high temperatures of GPU, high heat output to the casing

[harrynowl]

Depends when you're shopping from I guess.

 

For my typical price bracket (£150-200) for a GPU AMD generally has the clear winner compared to nvidias alternatives (e.g. 280x vs 760 would've been a no-brainer a year ago).

 

But nvidia offer feature like shadowplay, gsync, gamestream and they do update their drivers more frequently, which might mean they have the edge on new release titles.

 

Whereas AMD offer really good value (at most price points/locations) for someone who just wants to play a game and save a few pennies.

 

In terms of heat output AMD does output more heat but unless you're on a crappy reference cooler or are living in a very hot environment this can be a non-issue.

 

AMD do offer some features like Game DVR and the upcoming freesync, however Game DVR isn't as refined as shadowplay.

 

When you're looking at compute/GPU assisted processing nvidia encourage use of their proprietary CUDA API which limits your choice of programs and plugins, whereas AMD push for OpenCL which currently works better on AMD cards but does work on nvidia as well.

[othertomperson]

while AMD offers crossfire (similar to SLI), they also have more RAW performance than Nvidia cards. AMD also has Mantle going for it.

 

That's not true. The 290X, AMD's most powerful GPU, is about equivalent to the 970. It's slightly less powerful than the 970, actually. Above this Nvidia has the 980 and Titan X. This may undoubtedly change when AMD release a new range of products, but we can't be certain.

 

Even last generation, though, Nvidia had the 780 Ti and the Titan Black running rings around the 290X.

 

As it stands right now, whichever is best for you depends on how much you want to spend. At the low end the 260X and 270X make the most sense. At the mid-range the 280X makes more sense than the 960 for the same cost unless you absolutely need something with low power consumption and low TDP and silent running when idle. At the higher end, personally I think the 970 and 290X are about equal. They perform similarly, they cost about the same, I would just get whichever is cheaper. And above that never makes sense to anyone. I'd sooner get two 970s or 290Xs instead of a 980 or Titan branded product. A generation ago when the 290X cost the same as what a 980 costs now, my advice would have been to CF 290s instead.

[VioDuskar]

That's not true. The 290X, AMD's most powerful GPU, is about equivalent to the 970. It's slightly less powerful than the 970, actually. Above this Nvidia has the 980 and Titan X. This may undoubtedly change when AMD release a new range of products, but we can't be certain.

 

Even last generation, though, Nvidia had the 780 Ti and the Titan Black running rings around the 290X.

that's because Nvidia does a much better job at efficiency and management. gen for gen AMD has more cores/ processing units than the Nvidia counterparts.

 

the 290x has more shaders, more ROPs, and a wider bandwidth than the 970. more raw power. doesn't mean more performance.

 

it's like a car. a v6 can beat a v8 if the v8 weighs a significant amount more then the v6 car. the v6 can have less horsepower, and still win.

the V8 or in this case, most radeon cards, have more "cylinders" (shaders/ROPs/ etc) than an Nvidia card of the same gen.

[othertomperson]

that's because Nvidia does a much better job at efficiency and management. gen for gen AMD has more cores/ processing units than the Nvidia counterparts.

 

the 290x has more shaders, more ROPs, and a wider bandwidth than the 970. more raw power. doesn't mean more performance.

 

it's like a car. a v6 can beat a v8 if the v8 weighs a significant amount more then the v6 car. the v6 can have less horsepower, and still win.

the V8 or in this case, most radeon cards, have more "cylinders" (shaders/ROPs/ etc) than an Nvidia card of the same gen.

 

Unless that translates into a real-world performance benefit, I wouldn't bother to mention it. It just comes down to architecture differences rather than more performance.

[VioDuskar]

Unless that translates into a real-world performance benefit, I wouldn't bother to mention it. It just comes down to architecture differences rather than more performance.

then i guess i wouldn't mention G-sync either.

[othertomperson]

then i guess i wouldn't mention G-sync either.

 

Except that Free Sync and G-Sync are tangible features that affect the usability of the products. Esoteric architectural differences don't.

[VioDuskar]

Except that Free Sync and G-Sync are tangible features that affect the usability of the products. Esoteric architectural differences don't.

how many people have G-sync monitors? it's not a regular real-world performance benefit if G-sync is as rare as a unicorn riding a leprechaun.

[othertomperson]

how many people have G-sync monitors? it's not a regular real-world performance benefit if G-sync is as rare as a unicorn riding a leprechaun.

 

Maybe for now, but that's because both are extremely new. The fact that they exist is is probably going to affect my next monitor purchase, which in turn will probably affect my next GPU purchase.

[VioDuskar]

Maybe for now, but that's because both are extremely new. The fact that they exist is is probably going to affect my next monitor purchase, which in turn will probably affect my next GPU purchase.

fair enough.

 

OP, i hope this banter has been educational.