How Is it Switching from Nvidia to AMD?

[Al Bundy]

7 minutes ago, ivan134 said:

How is Nvidia better here? They didn't make PhysX. They bought it so AMD cards couldn't use it anymore and now no one uses it.

AMD actually wanted to buy it.  Unfortunately they were too broke.

http://www.bit-tech.net/news/hardware/2007/11/22/amd_has_considered_buying_ageia/1

 

[Al Bundy]

My experience:

Clarity, sharpness and color reproduction - ATI

Up to date drivers, smoothness, overclockability - Nvidia

[Jon Jon]

10 minutes ago, Al Bundy said:

My experience:

Clarity, sharpness and color reproduction - ATI

Up to date drivers, smoothness, overclockability - Nvidia

This is old school logic, especially since you just referenced ATI and not AMD.

 

These disparities just do not exist anymore, outside of overclockability, and that varies generation to generation.

 

ATI was king when it came to picture/image accuracy however, 10+ years ago.

 

Also, for everyone talking about PhysX, that just isn't even a selling point unless you actually play those games and care about it.

 

I personally couldn't justify buying an nvidia card for Physx, unless I played a ton of Borderlands and Batman.

[App4that]

22 minutes ago, Al Bundy said:

My experience:

Clarity, sharpness and color reproduction - ATI

Up to date drivers, smoothness, overclockability - Nvidia

Yeah I have to agree with brother Jon here, this is outdated. I see no difference between my Radeon R9 390 and my GTX 980ti in how they display, none. And no difference between them for driver support. Both have good drivers and shit drivers. 

 

Radeon.

Better multi screen.

Freesync

price to performance.

 

Nvidia.

Better overclocking

graphics settings not available to Radeon

Top high end cards

 

 

Nether is better and going from one to the other is seamless. No worries. 

 

[FatalityDiablo]

For some reason I managed to switch in an altering manner every gpu upgrade since my first computer: x600 -> 8600gts -> gtx 280 -> 5870m CF -> gtx 660 sli -> r9 280x -> gtx 970 -> r7 360. It doesn'T really matter nowaday, just get whatevr has the best perf/price ratio in your region and you are set. Personally I find the radeon crimson to be more user friendly and overall better solution than gf experience.

[Coaxialgamer]

Both sides are pretty similar IMO.  it all comes down to the individual product otherwise. 

 

Of course some cards support some features or don't ( cuda,  shadowplay,  physx on Nvidia,  mantle, gpuopen, freesync and eyefinity on amd) 

[grayperview]

Coming for my GTX560 to hd7970 i did notice a difference in overall picture and colour quality, it was definitely sharper and more vibrant on AMD, I always found textures on AMD look better too, Might be different now, but when i changed over it was noticeable

 

On AMD features, you can use the Rptr app to do something similar to shadow play, Never used it myself, i have used OBS to record gameplay and it works very well, obviously you can use it to stream at 60fps if you have the bandwidth.

 

Overall Crimson is good, lacks a few video features in the new UI, that they have spaghettied in using the old catalyst UI, other than that it works fine...The actual AMD drivers are very good, they stable 99.9% of the time...They bring improvements in performance over time as a bonus....

 

The AMD eco system is pretty good, they just need some super-duper 2016 style graphics card to go with it.

[RyGuy99]

Also Nvidia has Gamestream and AMD doesn't have a competing product. Steam streaming can fix that though. 

[The Elder Smurf]

8 hours ago, Jon Jon said:

This is old school logic, especially since you just referenced ATI and not AMD.

 

These disparities just do not exist anymore, outside of overclockability, and that varies generation to generation.

 

ATI was king when it came to picture/image accuracy however, 10+ years ago.

 

Also, for everyone talking about PhysX, that just isn't even a selling point unless you actually play those games and care about it.

 

I personally couldn't justify buying an nvidia card for Physx, unless I played a ton of Borderlands and Batman.

Physx was actually extremely popular back in the day before nvidia bought it. Once nvidia bought it, developers stopped using it as nvidia only makes about 22% of the gpu market, with amd having 18% and intel having 60%. Most graphics standards you will see will be the once supported by Intel igpu's and whichever dgpu company follows them will have the better turnout.

[Morgan MLGman]

15 hours ago, NumLock21 said:

Nvidia can do PhysX, AMD cannot. So games that likes PhysX will not be pretty anymore.

PhysX is dead. Don't mention that as an Nvidia-pro argument, because it basically does not exist anymore.

 

15 hours ago, Aytex said:

If your talking about drivers, AMD doesn't have shadowplay nor Ansel

AMD has another video encoder that has just as minimal impact on the CPU as shadowplay, the only difference is the interface.

 

15 hours ago, Squarq said:

What do you mean by feature sets?

Both companies are nearly identical feature-wise with some little differences. I've used Nvidia for many years and bought my first AMD GPU around september last year. No regrets, it's amazing.

[The Elder Smurf]

19 hours ago, Aytex said:

If your talking about drivers, AMD doesn't have shadowplay nor Ansel

AMD has their own version of Shadow play and name 4 popular titles that have ansel

[App4that]

3 minutes ago, The Elder Smurf said:

AMD has their own version of Shadow play and name 4 popular titles that have ansel

You might want to Google things before saying them. But start your search with Witcher. 

[The Elder Smurf]

4 minutes ago, App4that said:

You might want to Google things before saying them. But start your search with Witcher. 

I said 4 popular titles, okay that's one. Name 3 more

[App4that]

Just now, The Elder Smurf said:

I said 4 popular titles, okay that's one. Name 3 more

What do I get for doing Googles job? I mean other than embarrassing you.

[NumLock21]

3 hours ago, Morgan MLGman said:

PhysX is dead. Don't mention that as an Nvidia-pro argument, because it basically does not exist anymore.

And yet the gpu I'm still using, is a AMD. So what pro Nvidia argument are you talking about? I also mentioned about Havok which is supported on AMD gpus. It's sad those who want both physics engines will need a modded driver for it to work, instead of working out of the box with official drivers. I want both physics engine to be available on my rig, so I can enjoy both of them. Not just one over the other.

[Morgan MLGman]

2 minutes ago, NumLock21 said:

And yet the gpu I'm still using, is a AMD. So what pro Nvidia argument are you talking about? I also mentioned about Havok which is supported on AMD gpus. It's sad those who want both physics engines will need a modded driver for it to work, instead of working out of the box with official drivers. I want both physics engine to be available on my rig, so I can enjoy both of them. Not just one over the other.

Nah, I didn't mean that you're fanboying, I meant that PhysX support of Nvidia cards is not an argument for buying them, because PhysX is essentially dead and is not used, therefore it's not worth mentioning imho.

[App4that]

1 minute ago, Morgan MLGman said:

Nah, I didn't mean that you're fanboying, I meant that PhysX support of Nvidia cards is not an argument for buying them, because PhysX is essentially dead and is not used, therefore it's not worth mentioning imho.

There are just as many useless pro AMD arguments used as pro Nvidia. That's how flame wars start. 

[xAcid9]

20 hours ago, Squarq said:

How Is it Switching from Nvidia to AMD?

 

Okay, so I have recently begun thinking of switching from an Nvidia graphics card to an Amd one. I'm wondering if anybody can tell me how it feels changing from Nvidia to Amd, such as certain things not working or working better than before. I'm not talking about specific graphics cards, but the experience of using an Amd gpu in general vs an Nvidia one. Thanks for you replies.

I went the other way around, few things that is better on AMD side for me was: 

1. VSR - DSR look crap, to be fair i've only tested it on 5 games so far but none give the same image quality as VSR.

2. Monitor OC + Custom resolution - I used to OC'ed my monitor to 75hz and have VSR enabled at the same time, can't do that with DSR.

3. Default HDMI output color range - It's on Limited Range by default with Nvidia driver, color/contrast look wash out because of this. I thought they fixed this 2 years ago.. apparently they didn't.

4. FluidMotion with BlueSky - No real replacement except using SVP/Dmitri render which use more power and slightly lower video quality.

5. Eyefinity - I won't be able to play Assetto Corsa with 2 monitors anymore.

 

I probably just haven't found the workaround for those "issues" so take it with grain of salt.