Is Nvidia just better than AMD?

[XamN]

I dont want this to become a fanboy war, so please dont make it one!

 

I saw this guys comment on a youtube video asking was his parts choise good:

And I replied:

Why do people think that AMDs drivers are worse and more games "support" Nvidia cards more.

I think that this is just stupid.

[Phoenix721]

Is this a bait post?
Both companies deliver bad drivers from time to time, it happens (let's not forget that Nvidia released drivers on 2 seperate occasions that blew up your gpu, literally).
This post topic should be locked ASAP.

[Kinda Bottlenecked]

Because marketing :>

[Phoenix721]

Just now, Pohernori said:

Because marketing :>

Yeah, Nvidia's marketing is 1000 times better than AMD. Still doesn't explain any BS choices AMD has made though.

[michaelbelgium]

The only difference I know is that NVIDIA gpu's are more expensive as they have more features, they are more stable and they're using less power than AMD cards. NVIDIA's technology is also maybe more advanced

[Kinda Bottlenecked]

1 minute ago, Phoenix721 said:

Yeah, Nvidia's marketing is 1000 times better than AMD. Still doesn't explain any BS choices AMD has made though.

 

Refresh me on those BS choices. 

[Nacho Marco Segui]

Utter bullshit, both companies have had faulty drivers. Nvidia is better on the high end as of now, hope things change though.

[Phoenix721]

2 minutes ago, michaelbelgium said:

The only difference I know is that NVIDIA gpu's are more expensive as they have more features, they are more stable and they're using less power than AMD cards. NVIDIA's technology is also maybe more advanced

Features are even (at least in my eyes), the whole power thing is about to change and I don't know what you mean about stability. What do you mean about Nvidia's technology being more advanced? Last I checked, Nvidia was rocking 16nm GPUs and AMD 14 nm.

[XamN]

 

3 minutes ago, michaelbelgium said:

The only difference I know is that NVIDIA gpu's are more expensive as they have more features, they are more stable and they're using less power than AMD cards. NVIDIA's technology is also maybe more advanced

This is not true, thats just what nvidia wants you to think

[iiNNeX]

Both companies have had their ups and downs, but at current times nvidia is ahead. That said it is more expensive, so the word "BETTER" depends on what budget you have and what use you want out of the product they sell.

 

Also, can somebody lock this before sh*t kicks off?

[Phoenix721]

1 minute ago, Pohernori said:

 

Refresh me on those BS choices. 

Rebranding the entire 200 series into the 300 series (which was pretty much a rebrand of the 7xxx series), having their top of their line 290 and 290x cards run really, really, really hot and loud (fixed with after market coolers), and under delivering on cards like the 7970 and fury x.

[TheGamingBarrel]

8 minutes ago, Phoenix721 said:

290 and 290x cards run really, really, really hot and loud

You mean like the 1080, 980 Ti and TITAN X?

[manikyath]

from someone that *only* has nvidia cards at the moment (and probably will remain like that for a while):

 

no. dont be dumb. if nvidia was "just better" amd wouldnt even exist. both brands (and matrox on that note) have a specific place in the market they're good at, and they all have their "unique touch" of features people would go for over a bit extra performance, or pay a bit extra for.

 

to move away from the nvidia/amd debate to avoid flame wars: matrox. i'd dare to say most of us here could easily agree that the cards are pieces of junk compared to any of the nvidia/amd offerings. BUT... good luck finding anything outside of matrox that'll happily drive 9 4K panels over HDMI on a single slot card, and has the possibility of slotting as many of those into your system as you have 16x slots, and have those all run happily together.

 

in pretty much the entire computer world, cars, even floor tiles,... there's no "better brand", theres just opinion, price, quality, and feature differences. it goes as far as me saying that in some cases a GT640 would be a better card than a GTX1080, because theres just cases where that GTX1080 doesnt even make sense to start with. same goes between these brands: why would you for example buy a GTX980 if your workload requires a HUGE amount of VRAM and an R9 290 with 8GB vram would be a huge improvement.

[manikyath]

2 minutes ago, TheGamingBarrel said:

You mean like the 1080, 980 Ti and TITAN X?

both you and @Phoenix721 dont even go there...

 

we're having a try at an intelligent conversation for *once*...

[TheGamingBarrel]

3 minutes ago, manikyath said:

to move away from the nvidia/amd debate to avoid flame wars: matrox. i'd dare to say most of us here could easily agree that the cards are pieces of junk compared to any of the nvidia/amd offerings. BUT... good luck finding anything outside of matrox that'll happily drive 9 4K panels over HDMI on a single slot card, and has the possibility of slotting as many of those into your system as you have 16x slots, and have those all run happily together.
 

Pretty sure Matrox also do a lot of the graphics on Supermicro Servers.

 

2 minutes ago, manikyath said:

both you and @Phoenix721 dont even go there...

 

we're having a try at an intelligent conversation for *once*...

 

Just saying that almost always ref coolers are crap

 

But with AMD They are currently on a roll with nvidia drivers dropping the ball lately (How does a driver that literally crashes on boot become WHQL?)

Meanwhile with AMD You get inferior video recording and weaker tesselation performance.

[XamN]

Fuck it, its a terrible idea to do this topic. It became just a fanboy war

I guess the reason is marketing and many games say "nvidia gameworks" and shit to sell more gpus for nvidia

[XamN]

2 minutes ago, manikyath said:

from someone that *only* has nvidia cards at the moment (and probably will remain like that for a while):

 

no. dont be dumb. if nvidia was "just better" amd wouldnt even exist. both brands (and matrox on that note) have a specific place in the market they're good at, and they all have their "unique touch" of features people would go for over a bit extra performance, or pay a bit extra for.

 

to move away from the nvidia/amd debate to avoid flame wars: matrox. i'd dare to say most of us here could easily agree that the cards are pieces of junk compared to any of the nvidia/amd offerings. BUT... good luck finding anything outside of matrox that'll happily drive 9 4K panels over HDMI on a single slot card, and has the possibility of slotting as many of those into your system as you have 16x slots, and have those all run happily together.

 

in pretty much the entire computer world, cars, even floor tiles,... there's no "better brand", theres just opinion, price, quality, and feature differences. it goes as far as me saying that in some cases a GT640 would be a better card than a GTX1080, because theres just cases where that GTX1080 doesnt even make sense to start with. same goes between these brands: why would you for example buy a GTX980 if your workload requires a HUGE amount of VRAM and an R9 290 with 8GB vram would be a huge improvement.

Nice post, i agree

[Joegeddon]

I have one thing to say. GTX 480.

[manikyath]

Just now, TheGamingBarrel said:

Pretty sure Matrox also do a lot of the graphics on Supermicro Servers.

because matrox cards literally dont do anything but output a display, and usually lots of displays

thats a single slot, and 9 HDMI outputs that support 4K.

 

would i buy this for my system? HELL NO dont be an idiot .

but for things like traffic control HQ or maybe the stock market buildings they're an AMAZING product, as displayed on their website:

[Kinda Bottlenecked]

2 minutes ago, Phoenix721 said:

Rebranding the entire 200 series into the 300 series (which was pretty much a rebrand of the 7xxx series), having their top of their line 290 and 290x cards run really, really, really hot and loud (fixed with after market coolers), and under delivering on cards like the 7970 and fury x.

 

Heh. I wished they rebranded the 7970 but they did not. Sadly they did not rebrand everything. 270/x did not come back. 280/x is also gone. 

 

Titan, 780 Ti, Titan X ref also ran hot and loud, no? Ref GTX 1080 also throttled as badly as the 290x did. 

 

 

Look at how much ahead the 280x is. GTX 770 can't even keep up. I don't think I can call the 7970 disappointing. 

 

Fury X is. And even worse is that there is no custom design for it. The Nitro Fury is doing very well. Hitting 1200mhz on air. Locking the Fury X to reference design is the only BS choice AMD made. 

[TheGamingBarrel]

1 minute ago, manikyath said:

because matrox cards literally dont do anything but output a display, and usually lots of displays

 

thats a single slot, and 9 HDMI outputs that support 4K.

 

would i buy this for my system? HELL NO dont be an idiot .

but for things like traffic control HQ or maybe the stock market buildings they're an AMAZING product, as displayed on their website:

 

Imagine if they were all display port and you daisy chained the connectors

[A Silver]

I prefer NVidia over AMD just because I fully understand NVidia control panel and I'm still getting use to the AMD version.

[manikyath]

1 minute ago, TheGamingBarrel said:

Imagine if they were all display port and you daisy chained the connectors

thats actually the idea: they're not. and thats why you can hook up 9 standard off-the-shelf displays directly

[iiNNeX]

11 minutes ago, TheGamingBarrel said:

You mean like the 1080, 980 Ti and TITAN X?

You high or something?

[manikyath]

Just now, iiNNeX said:

You high or something?

pretty much every stock cooler on both sides of the fence (and most likely matrox as well ) is loud, and hot.

because thats how stock coolers are designed: "how do we keep this card within thermal limits without going totally overkill and spending a butt ton of extra money?"