GTX 480 Video Card Drivers - Then vs Now

[gluconolactone]

You obviously haven't looked at the youtube/vessel comments then, omg they're awful. 

 

I try as hard as I can not to look at video comments. They're all dreadful.

[PlayStation 2]

Only at LTT can a retrospect of the GTX 480 turn into a bitching contest about Linus not supporting AMD enough.

[Biggerisbetter]

I'm unhappy to see the way linus YouTube has evolved. I'm very disappointed and regardless of "current" market share. Equal discovery on amd cards is warranted. Providing incomplete data is not fair to the consumer or are you not consumer friendly anymore. The whole point behind your channel was to help techies or has that changed as well.    

 

thx to linus, I have downvote my first video on youtube

[PlayStation 2]

I'm unhappy to see the way linus YouTube has evolved. I'm very disappointed and regardless of "current" market share. Equal discovery on amd cards is warranted. Providing incomplete data is not fair to the consumer or are you not consumer friendly anymore. The whole point behind your channel was to help techies or has that changed as well.    

Watch his R7 240 review. It's a load of bullshit.

[TheConverter]

Watch his R7 240 review. It's a load of bullshit.

 

No it's not. He is kinda right. Integrated graphics is better then that.

We have a saying in the Netherlands here "Goedkoop= Duurkoop" meaning "Cheapness = Expensiveness"

 

Talking about GTX 480, anybody remember this dank video:

 

[PlayStation 2]

No it's not. He is kinda right. Integrated graphics is better then that.

 

We have a saying in the Netherlands here "Goedkoop= Duurkoop" meaning "Cheapness = Expensiveness"

I understand the need to test a bunch of games and EVEN IF integrated graphics are faster than that. But I don't understand why he felt it was a necessity to test games at ultra, a possibility which 0.1% of the customers would actually be playing at with that.

[boboman342]

@antoainb Don't even try with these people. There is so much cancer in this thread I would try to get out now...

[TheConverter]

I understand the need to test a bunch of games and EVEN IF integrated graphics are faster than that. But I don't understand why he felt it was a necessity to test games at ultra, a possibility which 0.1% of the customers would actually be playing at with that.

 

It's to compare it with other graphics card, it's kinda logical right? What's the point in testing at LOW settings if you don't have other cards to compare it.

 

That card is only usefull for people that don't have integrated graphics like me, once I move my 980Ti out of this system, I need a low-end graphics card to be able to use this system for other stuff.

 

NOBODY SHOULD BUY IT FOR GAMING. That's what Linus tried to say.

[TheConverter]

Disappointing and even unprofessional video, especially for someone of your magnitude, guys.

 

1. The card you used is way too old, something more relevant like the gtx780 or 780ti would be better. I mean who cares how optimized your drivers would be after 5 years(seriously, 5 fucking years?), drivers are optimized withing weeks/month not years and when people say mature they usually mean that period of few weeks/month. Test of drivers up to 2 year after a card is released is more than enough, hence why you should used a newer card(and would allowed you to use AMD card if that's your excuse, *point 3 below). 

 

2. One month after a card is released drivers are already too old. As I said drivers are optimized withing weeks if not days after/during release so what you ended up testing(by starting with  1 month old drivers) is a bunch of already optimized drivers. You should have started with the first released drivers that adds support for the card you're testing(even if the driver come out before the card was released for sale).

 

3.  No AMD? I don't care how much % of people use AMD/Nvidia. AMD cards have enough people using them that they deserve testing just as much as Nvidia cards. If you really care about percentage and appealing to the "majority" of your userbase you should've made a strawpoll and ask you audience to vote(just because statistics or whenever you pulled that 80% from show that 80% of the general users use Nvidia, doesn't that it's the same percentage for your specific type of users that watch you). Also why cover only "80%" of users when you could easily covered all of them(use newer nvidia cards, or if you really don't want to then use old nvidia and newer amd cards, there is no excuse not to use amd considering your fanbase and the hardware resources your company has).

 

4. Put you tinfoil hats gentlemen. Now something else that would have been interesting to see is: does Nvidia/AMD cripple their drivers when a newer generation of cards is released, for example are 780/ti drivers crippled after 970/980/ti were released or the same with radeon 280/290/x and 390/Fury/whatever.

 

Now, with all that it would've been an interesting, objective video looking critically at all aspects of your topic(Then vs Now Video Card Drivers).

Sorry guys, but the weird way you did the tests and the video, it looks as if Nvidia threw  a bunch of cash at you and told you to make an ad for them(I know it sounds ridiculous and blaming but that's how it looks).

 

Calm down, as Linus stated it is the first video in a series. Other cards from AMD and Nvidia might come later.

 

Myself, I still remember that the OMEGA drivers back in December 2014 made a 5-10% difference on my R9 290.

[Vipre]

This....is a really good idea! 

You are just pure evil

[Progressor]

That would be a cool video, but it wasn't the purpose of the video, this was to see how much performance had changed not to see which manufacturer had better support.

 

 

Why on Earth should their videos be balancing market shares? That's AMD's job to make better cards and market them, not Linus'. Besides, then he'd be biased towards AMD.

 

 

If you were running a BUSINESS, and had to make a video that was going to be a HUGE amount of work what would you do? Would you:

1. Test the product most relevant to your viewers and release the video since the results for other products are going to be very similar.
2. Run it on 2 products and find there is no real difference worth noting and have just wasted resources that could have been put towards another video, maybe of higher importance?

 

 

1. The 7xx series is still very much heavily supported hence it wouldn't make much sense to test. It makes more sense to test an old card because it's not as heavily supported anymore and you can bet the results will be true for longer than with a card with a lot of support right now, which might change performance quite quickly.
2. That has nothing to do with the video other than the topic of drivers.
3. You might not care that more people use nvidia but they do and they should make their videos efficiently and in a way they are relevant to the maximum amount of people. Yes, covering AMD would have been inefficient since the results probably wouldn't have been interesting and it would have been a waste of time for the benchmarking team which is probably hard at work with Skylake already.
4. That has nothing to do with the video other than the topic of GPUs.

This video was objective since they did objective testing, it would have been subjective if they showed us the numbers and proceeded to make conclusions that didn't come from the numbers but from personal beliefs, much like how you want AMD coverage not because it makes sense but because.

This wasn't and ad for nvidia, they didn't f**k up drivers so they didn't say anything bad about them, but they didn't say anything that wasn't truth or say at any point that nvidia did something better than AMD.

 

1. Although gtx7xx is still supported, the card he used is too old and 5 years is a lot of time for a company to change it's driver support policy. what I mean is that when gtx480 was released there was/wasn't such thing as "maturing drivers", but there may/not be such thing with next generations. You can't take one 5 years old card and it's drivers and based on it, generalize the state of drivers improvement(or not) for the whole gpu manufacturing industry, that's ridiculous and not objective.

 

2. That has everything to do with the video because he skips testing on the drivers in the first month of release where improvement and optimization is critical, and when drivers improvement is mostly done. Taking only matured drivers into testing defeats the whole purpose of the video in the first place.

 

3. " relevant to the maximum amount of people" They did the complete opposite of that, though they could've made it worse by using only AMD drivers. They should have used multiple cards from both manufacturers. Whether the results are interesting or not that's something for the users to decide. Idk what their benchmarking team is up to but if you're going to make a video and care about quality not just quantity, either make it right or don't bother/leave it for another time, release date for a video doesn't matter when it's about old hardware.

 

4. The video is about  "Video Card Drivers - Then vs Now", I'd say it's pretty relevant since they're making tests anyway so they only need to pay attention if there is performance decrease of drivers and if there is, does it match a release of next generation gpu's.

 

I don't think you understand what objective video is, making a half-assed video of a subject(gpu drivers) and testing/showing only one of dozens cards, of only one manufactures is not objective.

[mxas6530]

Wait, this isnt on vessel. Is it a new release?

Yes!

[Guest Philosophy]

A 480 still performs fine in games I play #I'mAnOldMan

[antoainb]

1. Although gtx7xx is still supported, the card he used is too old and 5 years is a lot of time for a company to change it's driver support policy. what I mean is that when gtx480 was released there was/wasn't such thing as "maturing drivers", but there may/not be such thing with next generations. You can't take one 5 years old card and it's drivers and based on it, generalize the state of drivers improvement(or not) for the whole gpu manufacturing industry, that's ridiculous and not objective.

 

2. That has everything to do with the video because he skips testing on the drivers in the first month of release where improvement and optimization is critical, and when drivers improvement is mostly done. Taking only matured drivers into testing defeats the whole purpose of the video in the first place.

 

3. " relevant to the maximum amount of people" They did the complete opposite of that, though they could've made it worse by using only AMD drivers. They should have used multiple cards from both manufacturers. Whether the results are interesting or not that's something for the users to decide. Idk what their benchmarking team is up to but if you're going to make a video and care about quality not just quantity, either make it right or don't bother/leave it for another time, release date for a video doesn't matter when it's about old hardware.

 

4. The video is about  "Video Card Drivers - Then vs Now", I'd say it's pretty relevant since they're making tests anyway so they only need to pay attention if there is performance decrease of drivers and if there is, does it match a release of next generation gpu's.

 

I don't think you understand what objective video is, making a half-assed video of a subject(gpu drivers) and testing/showing only one of dozens cards, of only one manufactures is not objective.

 

1. They never said this was going to be the ULTIMATE TEST FOR EVERY SINGLE GPU UNDER THE SUN now did they? Also, for the love of God, objective isn't the same as a good comparison, an objective comparison is one that is unbiased and does not mix in any personal feelings, which this one does not (do not even think about telling me Linus is Nvidia biased, that argument is as strong as a fetus)
2. Are you telling me you have a problem with him not testing launch drivers? That's not the point of the video, of course he's skipping launch drivers, he want's to see how much drivers evolve after they have matured so why bother using launch ones?
3. NO THEY DID NOT, JEEZ! They made the best decision, maybe they did want to test AMD cards but if you take into consideration the CHAOS that LMG must be right now it might have been that they couldn't do it. Think about it, they just moved, they had the meet up which probably killed a work day, so much is going on that it's very plausible that they just weren't able to put more effort into a video idea that, while cool, isn't that relevant to the masses.
4. Still has nothing to do with the quality of the video, there is a line between what is feasible and what is not, making the video they did is and maybe adding a few things to it would also be possible but for some reason they couldn't, making the video you seem to be asking would not be feasible.

See, the problem is that what you described there is an objective video, no where in the description did you mention that it was biased, or that it involved Linus' personal feelings, so it is objective. And again, if you expected ANYONE to make a video about drivers that in depth then you really need to burst out of your bubble.

[DXMember]

Quality over Quantity next time please...

[DXMember]

 

1. They never said this was going to be the ULTIMATE TEST FOR EVERY SINGLE GPU UNDER THE SUN now did they? Also, for the love of God, objective isn't the same as a good comparison, an objective comparison is one that is unbiased and does not mix in any personal feelings, which this one does not (do not even think about telling me Linus is Nvidia biased, that argument is as strong as a fetus)
2. Are you telling me you have a problem with him not testing launch drivers? That's not the point of the video, of course he's skipping launch drivers, he want's to see how much drivers evolve after they have matured so why bother using launch ones?
3. NO THEY DID NOT, JEEZ! They made the best decision, maybe they did want to test AMD cards but if you take into consideration the CHAOS that LMG must be right now it might have been that they couldn't do it. Think about it, they just moved, they had the meet up which probably killed a work day, so much is going on that it's very plausible that they just weren't able to put more effort into a video idea that, while cool, isn't that relevant to the masses.
4. Still has nothing to do with the quality of the video, there is a line between what is feasible and what is not, making the video they did is and maybe adding a few things to it would also be possible but for some reason they couldn't, making the video you seem to be asking would not be feasible.

See, the problem is that what you described there is an objective video, no where in the description did you mention that it was biased, or that it involved Linus' personal feelings, so it is objective. And again, if you expected ANYONE to make a video about drivers that in depth then you really need to burst out of your bubble.

 

1, 2, 3 - we don't try to come up justifications, we listen, accept the critique and take notes

4 - automatization is key for massive data collection,

also many would say this review would not be feasable, it still exsists - http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Systems/Quad-Core-Gaming-Roundup-How-Much-CPU-Do-You-Really-Need

[nopc0de]

Should really have used Frame Time for comparison.

[Paranoid Kami]

I have an old 6950 I could give Linus, but I doubt he would want it. The old AMD drivers were HELL to deal with. I don't mean game performance, but constant blue screening and certain filters causing the game to crash. Would have been interesting to see though.

[Nacimota]

Wow, the reaction to this video was almost worse than the FinalMouse one. I should really stop reading YouTube comments.

 

I think a lot of AMD fans think of themselves/AMD as the underdogs in this whole "AMD vs Nvidia war" and get personally offended and very defensive whenever Nvidia gets put in the spotlight. I've been an AMD user for well over 10 years (since the 9800pro, basically) and I see no problem with how this video was presented. The topic is about whether driver updates can deliver performance benefits over time, which is proven true with an Nvidia test machine. There's not really any value in going to the trouble of performing all the same tests again on a Radeon machine when your hypothesis has already been confirmed. Remember, the video is not about Nvidia or AMD specifically; it only seeks to answer the general question of whether the performance of a graphics card can be significantly improved over time through the use of updated drivers.

 

If I was to take any issue with this video at all, it might be that I kind of thought the conclusion/results were somewhat obvious. I certainly don't think there's an issue of pro-Nvidia/anti-AMD bias.

 

Off-topic: I'd just like to say that I love that the reply form saves a draft of my message; I accidentally closed the browser and was able to come back without having to retype anything \o/

[DXMember]

I think a lot of AMD fans think of themselves/AMD as the underdogs in this whole "AMD vs Nvidia war"

How is this about amd - nvidia?

he used just 480, should try out more controversial titles like Project Cars where GTX 960 performs on par with GTX Titan

[Nacimota]

How is this about amd - nvidia?

 

It isn't. That's the point I was making.

[Kinda Bottlenecked]

Not sure why peeps demand a AMD video when its quite evident that AMD cards also do receive quite alot of performance increase with newer drivers. And sometimes they receive quite alot of performance optimization in newer games, this for example.

 

 

 

Wow look at that 280x! To think it could ever beat draw with a 780? Of course higher resolutions gives AMD the edge here and the 280x doesn't consistently draw with the 780. It does however, beat its competition, the 770, more often now than 2 years ago. 2 years ago no one thought a 280x could ever come close to a 780.

 

I don't think Mr Linus deserves to receive half the flak here. Although I do think Mr Linus should see some flak for only looking at a GTX 480. And the reason being "NVIDIA owns 80 percent of the discrete graphics card market. This video addresses 80% of our audience..." 80% Market share != 80% audience. Mr Linus should know that his audience on average is more tech savy than the average PC user. Then what about the 20%? Isn't it always better to reach out to the 100% of the audience?

 

Although ultimately, Mr Linus didn't have an old AMD card and I'm sure he would've used one for testing if he had one. I only do not agree with the above reasoning. 

 

  

[StrangeOne]

I really didn't think Nvidia made improvements with their cards over time, thought that was really an AMD thing. Interesting video but of course I would have liked to see AMD cards.

[michaelocarroll007]

I'm unhappy to see the way linus YouTube has evolved. I'm very disappointed and regardless of "current" market share. Equal discovery on amd cards is warranted. Providing incomplete data is not fair to the consumer or are you not consumer friendly anymore. The whole point behind your channel was to help techies or has that changed as well.    

 

thx to linus, I have downvote my first video on youtube

He Did exactly that Helped us know that hey Newer drivers actually matter and even older cards seem to get some love. He was fair and never praised Nivida for having Better drivers or anything like that, But on the other hand This is a sore subject and a Huge debate that always gets Fanboys up and fighting when Red vs Green is in the conversation so maybe even having both in the Video would of caused a fight also of everyone arguing about who has better drivers and if the nividia had a better improvement and linus said the nividia drivers were better Improved everyone would Fight and still call him a nividia fanboy for it.  The video Showed exactly what the Purpose of the video was for im sure this varys Card to card Generation to Generation and obviously Company to company but The End result is that yeah they do get better after you buy them. @LinusTech @Nick_lmg 

[Ekpyrosis]

My problem with this video is not that they only tested a Nvidia card, it's more the wording of the intro. While the purpose of the video -from my understanding at least- is to prove a general statement using the example of one card (which so happens to be one from Nvidia), that is not what the video presents as its intention, which according to Linus's words is "to quantify [...] just how well Nvidia supports its products and therefore its customers in the long term."

I'm sorry, but this sentence sounds like it came straight from Nvidia's PR department. And as it is the self-description of the video, it makes the whole video appear biased, which wouldn't be the case, given a different introduction.

@LinusTech