Why did you choose AMD over NVIDIA or Nvidia over AMD?

[feufollets]

I went with my 6950 for price/performance.

[CrackSilber]

I choose whatever is better price/performance without too big tradeoffs... so AMD :D

If I had the money I would get nVidia for smoother frime times

[CrackSilber]

I don't get why people say this? what games do you play that make you feel this way? what happens etc? I've had no issues and It's leading me to believe the people that are complaining have configured something wrong.

Having used both brands I can tell you this:

I never had driver issues with AMD but what I noticed is that nVidias are smoother.

This is this so called frame timing Linus talked about in the last time.

It is very noticeable in heavy games where you go under 30 fps.

15 fps will feel a lot smoother with an nVidia card than an AMD card.

However I play all my games at 60fps and there the difference can sometimes be seen when you know what to look for but it is minor.

[majorawsome]

My first card was a 7770, because I wanted to game a little and have dual monitors. My next setup will be a 780 or 9970. Depends on the price of each card.

[A/C]

Having used both brands I can tell you this:

I never had driver issues with AMD but what I noticed is that nVidias are smoother.

This is this so called frame timing Linus talked about in the last time.

It is very noticeable in heavy games where you go under 30 fps.

15 fps will feel a lot smoother with an nVidia card than an AMD card.

However I play all my games at 60fps and there the difference can sometimes be seen when you know what to look for but it is minor.

 

-this

[luk9400]

I've chosen AMD (HD 7870) becouse in that price level it was better, cheaper and cooler. Also new consoles are made in the same architecture so maybe it will be perform better than Nvidia's equivalent card. But my previous card was GTX 280.

[HaZardousLP]

I bought my GTX 670 because it was a solid performer and I wanted the CUDA enhancements. Even though you have to do the hack to make Adobe work with most CUDA-capable cards - which didn't end up working anyway (made After Effects crash) I don't regret my decision. If I was buying a card a few months ago, I would've gone AMD for Never Settle, now though, I'd go a 770/780.

[Skanic]

I choose amd over nvidia because it was the best performing card for bf3 at the time.

I had an ati all in wonder card, ati x800xt, Nvidia Geforce 6800 LE winfast from leadtek, 7900GTX, HD5770 for bc2, HD7950 for BF3, because around that time the 7000 series came out and all i wanted to play was bf3 and this card was one of the best cards that had good performance in bf3.

I like both brands and i think i might go nvidia when the 900 series or what they will be called come out, i also had the chance to play with the GTX TITAN and it was pretty nice and good performance. The only thing is , i don't care about Eyefinity, SLI Crossfire, 3d surround or 3D gaming, PhysX,  The only thing that might be appealing to me is Shadowplay as it allows you an easier way of making videos.

[Analog]

I have always used AMD graphics gards till now. I used to have a HD 5870 and after that a HD 6970, but now I decided to go towards the "Green team". I bought a MSI GTX 770 Lightning and I have to say that performance is pretty impressive, but the drivers... they are really bad, especially the 320 drivers from nVidia. If the pull themselves together and sort thing out this might just turn out to be the best graphics card I have ever bought.   

[MdX MaxX]

I chose Nvidia because the 560-Ti was THE bang for the buck card to buy. And I was annoyed with Catalyst control center (but that was on a cheapo 4000 series card so maybe it's different now).

I will end up buying the 9970 though if it's as much of a beast as it's rumored to be.

[Master_Mas]

I currently have an 7870, my was mainly price vs performance and Nvidia just couldn't cut the price for the performance compared to the AMD card. By the way in Australia so prices are annoying.

[Dr3nz4r]

i choosed nvidia over AMD because of, i got it got much cheaper then an equal AMD card, and it looks better too ;)

[dylandylandylan]

Having used both brands I can tell you this:

I never had driver issues with AMD but what I noticed is that nVidias are smoother.

This is this so called frame timing Linus talked about in the last time.

It is very noticeable in heavy games where you go under 30 fps.

15 fps will feel a lot smoother with an nVidia card than an AMD card.

However I play all my games at 60fps and there the difference can sometimes be seen when you know what to look for but it is minor.

 

So you actually have to go out of your way to notice these differences? I don't notice it at all between my brothers 670 and my 7950.

[Fetzie]

Having used both brands I can tell you this:

I never had driver issues with AMD but what I noticed is that nVidias are smoother.

This is this so called frame timing Linus talked about in the last time.

It is very noticeable in heavy games where you go under 30 fps.

15 fps will feel a lot smoother with an nVidia card than an AMD card.

However I play all my games at 60fps and there the difference can sometimes be seen when you know what to look for but it is minor.

I have yet to notice this. Of course, a 7950 is good enough to drive anything above 60 FPS except MMOs like WoW (which are CPU dependent anyway)

[mr moose]

AMD cards consistently out-performed their Nvidia counterparts in Linus's Graphics Showdowns. AMD also allows for over-volting, which makes water-cooling actually worth it for the extra over-clocking potential.

On the AMD side you also get significantly better Anti Aliasing performance as compared to Nvidia & you get more memory as standard on the high-end.

 

snip...

 

 

Whilst I understand this and the results, I would hardly say they "consistently outperform".  I say this because when I compare cards I compare cards of equal value (at least here in Australia were it might be different) And for the most part the results are neck and neck.  For example a 7970 averages $545 were as a GTX 770 is $470. so comparing these to and the 7950 wins out by a few frames on average but not always. And that card is A$70 more. So in my opinion dollar/performance is equal. 

 

Your thoughts?

[A/C]

I don't give a jack rabbit about benchmarks. They are the worst way to measure a card.

 

Here's a real world example I've experienced myself:

 

Some 5 years ago I've decided to buy a new GPU, so I've researched in my price range and discovered that the ATI HD 4850 was the card for me based on reviews and benchmarks. It was consistently better than its nvidia counterpart - the 9800.

So I went on and bought a 4850, and I was impressed by it's performance, it worked great and I couldn't be happier, and I had the benchmarks to prove mi choice right. A couple of years later, a 9800 GT came into my hands so I decided to compare it in real world since I had both of the cards side by side.

And guess what - the 9800 killed the poor old 4850, it had nothing on the 9800 GT, at this point even the old 8800 GTX had caught up with the 4850 512 mb.

 

The moral of the story kids is: Screw benchmarks, they don't mean rat's arse if you're going to play games, each game performs differently on a different card. In my rather limited experience (less than 20 gpu's personally tested), nvidia's card consistently performs better for a longer time, meaning it has a longer lifespan that ati's counterpart.

[MPX309]

I chose AMD over Nvidia because I heard BF4 was going to be optimised for AMD, but now I can't play SimCity 4

[AK0490]

I first chose AMD due to the better value at the time, and the amazing game bundles. That led to starting litecoin mining and I now own 10 AMD cards which are mining in my basement.

[FeltyKat]

i use 2 seperate system with nvdia and amd in each because i usa a lot of cuda and opengl

[qwertywarrior]

i used Nvidia over AMD because in 2007 - 2008   (8800GTX)

Nvidia was KING

 

and i stuck with them ever since

[Strom73]

I chose nVidia because AMD doesn't really think about the European customers. We don't have the never settle bundle. AMD's HD 8000 takes so long to launch, that I got myself an GTX 760.

 

Basically, they delay their new lineup of cards, by just adding more games to the Never Settle bundle... which I can't have.

[IronSoldier]

AMD 7970 since it has a better price/performance than the 680 did at the time.

[qwertywarrior]

 

I don't give a jack rabbit about benchmarks. They are the worst way to measure a card.

 

Here's a real world example I've experienced myself:

 

Some 5 years ago I've decided to buy a new GPU, so I've researched in my price range and discovered that the ATI HD 4850 was the card for me based on reviews and benchmarks. It was consistently better than its nvidia counterpart - the 9800.

So I went on and bought a 4850, and I was impressed by it's performance, it worked great and I couldn't be happier, and I had the benchmarks to prove mi choice right. A couple of years later, a 9800 GT came into my hands so I decided to compare it in real world since I had both of the cards side by side.

And guess what - the 9800 killed the poor old 4850, it had nothing on the 9800 GT, at this point even the old 8800 GTX had caught up with the 4850 512 mb.

 

The moral of the story kids is: Screw benchmarks, they don't mean rat's arse if you're going to play games, each game performs differently on a different card. In my rather limited experience (less than 20 gpu's personally tested), nvidia's card consistently performs better for a longer time, meaning it has a longer lifespan that ati's counterpart.

 

well ur a bit wrong here

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/graphics/2008/09/23/powercolor-radeon-hd-4850-pcs/4

 

 

it all depends in what game ur running it on

using GRID for example a 4850 it faster than a GTX 280

but in crysis  9800GTX is faster

it all has to do with optimizations

[A/C]

yeah yeah, I had all 3 of the cards (GTX+ to be honest, gt, and 4850) so those benchmarks don't mean a thing to me.

 

People can trust whatever they want, but I'm not looking at benchmarks anymore.

 

EDIT: What i meant to say is that these bencharks are always made on cards when they are no more than 2 years old, where most of us don't upgrade on a generation-basis, meaning when I buy a hi end card like 780 in 2013 i expect it to be able to run all games (not at max settings, but just run them) till at least into 2016, and how they perform in 2016 is more important to us then how they perform when they're new. And generally, nvidia does a better job at that. That's what I meant when i said the 8800 GTX caught up with the 4850 which at the time of release was a superior card. Still, both of them at the time could play all of the games maxed out, 4 years later, the 8800gtx performes juust a bit better, and to be honest even if it identically, it would be a win for the older 8800.

 

Today, things like that don't concern me, as I have a job and an income, but when i was at school, living off my parents, and buying components when I could save up from my allowance that factor was very important, as I imagine is to most gamers, as most are students.

[pwest15]

I chose Nvidia over AMD because I've heard quite often that SLI is much more reliable than crossfire is