Nvidia or AMD

[minibois]

I like the Intel R9 980K Fury Titan X.

I bet you use an i9 A10 4650K CPU too

[Cyrus49]

http://i.imgur.com/2rdJzD5.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/efXRmu1.jpg

[minibois]

http://i.imgur.com/efXRmu1.jpg

[Tacitus]

I like both a lot, and when it comes to choosing I'll go for whatever gives best value for money. Right now I'm enjoying my AMD cards, and I think they're doing more innovative stuff than Nvidia is right now.

 

When HBM is perfected it'll surely have some significant benefits; bridgeless crossfire scales better; mantle may not have been greatly adopted, but it's pretty good, and it completely eliminates crossfire stuttering. And including an AIO watercooler in the high-end GPUs will help get the clock speeds up and noise levels down, eliminating the ignorant segments of the community who think AMD cards are inherently hot and loud.

[Nena Trinity]

I like AMD GPUs but their drivers never work for what I need it to work in!

[Statecat]

I like Nvidia's drivers better. Personal preference. Plus I do have a g-sync monitor.

[Picky Peep]

I bet you use an i9 A10 4650K CPU too

 

Yes, I was also able to overclock it to 5.3THz  :lol:

[VagabondWraith]

I'm with the Intel Larrabee Revived Edition.

[maizenblue]

AMD. Better price to performance ratio without Nvidia's shady monopolistic business practices, misleading, price gouging, and annoying fanboys.

 

I used to be a brainwashed Nvidia fan until I found a good deal on an MSI R9 280X and decided to give it shot. I was amazed at how well it performed for the price. It beat a GTX 770 that cost 150 dollars more at the time and had 1gb less VRAM.

 

I bought the 280x to be able to play BF4 at 1080p on ultra and high settings and it did not disappoint. It was then that I began to realize almost all the crap I read about AMD was total BS. The 280X is still holding its own at 1080p while the GTX 770 has faded into oblivion.

 

Still, im not above buying an Nvidia card if it suits my needs, but I've had problems with them and found Nvidia to be mainly overpriced hype.

[TheCaptain53]

I've only been building for 5 months-ish, but I've only built with Nvidia Maxwell. I currently own a GTX 750 Ti, GTX 960 (first card) and a GTX 970 (current card).

[Dabombinable]

None of the ones that still exist. And I go by performance and features not brand.

[Prysin]

AMD because they usually give you what it says on the box and not something "almost" like on the box

[Dabombinable]

AMD because they usually give you what it says on the box and not something "almost" like on the box

Right....you do realise that AMD is doing that right now with the rebrands.

[Prysin]

what they say on the box is what it gives. Not like the say.... 970 which has only 3.5GB DDR5 and 0.5 something else....

[maizenblue]

Right....you do realise that AMD is doing that right now with the rebrands.

What about the 390/x series is misleading? It has the VRAM, clock speed and specs listed. It has a different bios, improved memory bandwidth and higher clock speeds than the 290/x series and benchmarks show it performs better across the board. There is nothing misleading, and someone still has the option of going for a 290/X for the lower price if they feel there is no difference between the two.

 

That is totally different than what Nvidia did/is doing with the 970, where it clearly still states 4 gb gddr5, when in fact over half a gig of that VRAM is effectively useless for gaming. Not to mention some of the specs listed of the card were blatantly false at launch, which Nvidia was forced to partially admit.

[Dabombinable]

What about the 390/x series is misleading? It has the VRAM, clock speed and specs listed. It has a different bios, improved memory bandwidth and higher clock speeds than the 290/x series and benchmarks show it performs better across the board. There is nothing misleading, and someone still has the option of going for a 290/X for the lower price if they feel there is no difference between the two.

 

That is totally different than what Nvidia did/is doing with the 970, where it clearly still states 4 gb gddr5, when in fact over half a gig of that VRAM is effectively useless for gaming. Not to mention some of the specs listed of the card were blatantly false at launch, which Nvidia was forced to partially admit.

Its not new, all that's been changed is the vRAM chips and the core clock. What your getting isn't an R9 390X for example but a slightly improved R9 290X that can make full use of the better drivers.

[Cyrus49]

AMD. Better price to performance ratio without Nvidia's shady monopolistic business practices, misleading, price gouging, and annoying fanboys.

 

I used to be a brainwashed Nvidia fan until I found a good deal on an MSI R9 280X and decided to give it shot. I was amazed at how well it performed for the price. It beat a GTX 770 that cost 150 dollars more at the time and had 1gb less VRAM.

 

I bought the 280x to be able to play BF4 at 1080p on ultra and high settings and it did not disappoint. It was then that I began to realize almost all the crap I read about AMD was total BS. The 280X is still holding its own at 1080p while the GTX 770 has faded into oblivion.

 

Still, im not above buying an Nvidia card if it suits my needs, but I've had problems with them and found Nvidia to be mainly overpriced hype.

Because a complete rebrand isn't misleading. 

[IateMApoo]

I got Nvidia, but also respect for AMD trying to compete.