AMD or Nvidia?

Fuck off.

>>56064157
why so m8 im trying to spark an interesting discussion about diffrent GPU's

>>56064182
>I have an AMD
> im quite happy with
>me confidence in

>>56064182
Because we are tired. Anyways Nvidia is now a monopoly so bought amd if you are a poofag.

>>56064182
>>56064212
>Because we are tired

Pretty much this. We can't take this anymore.

We're all sick of such discussions, you missed the party by a mile.

>>56064141
>3.5GB VRAM fiasco didnt bring me confidence in nvidia
Pajeet detected.

>>56064295
god i can't even take you seriously anymore.

>>56064141
I had a 780 and just recently bought a fury, I'm gonna stay red a few years. My nvidia card was performing worse every month.

File: 1419517632216.jpg (29KB, 500x333px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 500x333px

>>56064141
1080<1070<390X<480

File: perfdollar_1920_1080.png (36KB, 500x810px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 500x810px

Basically it boils down to anything below a 1070 is AMD territory unless you dramatically care about power draw.

File: Passmark.png (73KB, 595x639px) Image search: [Google]

73KB, 595x639px

Passmark confuses me. In benchmarks I've seen posted here on /g/, AMD cards fair a bit better than how they are represented in pic related.

Is it because it's a synthetic benchmark?

>>56064311
Gotta admit, OPs grammar was shit tier.

i was planning on getting an XFX R9 390 the price seemed fair and it was overclocked lightly to 1015mhz

>>56064875
Passmark is inaccurate for AMD at this point. The RX480 outperforms the entire 7xx series in almost everything yet it's well below the 780/ti. Don't trust it for anything other than Nvidia cards.

>>56064875
>synthetic benchmark
It's only reliable when comparing 2 things with the same architecture.

>>56064875

Passmark tests very specific things as well as not supporting multi-gpu (which is generally why dual die cards score lower than their single die counterparts due to lower clocks). Even then passmark is a shit gpu test - its far better as a cpu test.

Also >>56064932 is correct. A fury x below a 780ti? Not in 99% of vidya.

>>56064932
>>56064938
>>56064948
Thanks for the responses, I had a feeling that the numbers were a little off.

>>56064990
You should also be wary if you're comparing CPUs that it favours those with a lot of cores.
Which isn't really true for games. Doubt there are more than a dozen games that support more than a quad core.

>>56064948
This. The CPU test is very accurate for real use with the exception of the Opterons and multi-socket.

>>56065030

>Doubt there are more than a dozen games that support more than a quad core.

Your stupidty is why /g/ is a shitshow. Plenty of games address more than 4 threads, its merely a matter of effecient scaling.

I can't wait for Sapphire Nitro RX 480s to restock... I just want the 4GB version since I'm only interested in running 1080p for the foreseeable future

>>56065120

So the rumour goes is the 480 is so popular AMD (and by extension, AIB's) are struggling to meet demand.

>>56065158

don't underestimate thirld-world demand

if every citizen in the world lived like the average american, we would need 5 planet Earths

or we could just have more cores in our crust to emulate them

>>56065214

A few weeks ago the owner of the biggest computer part shop in the UK claimed sapphire alone had 5 thousand back orders for the reference model alone which was a factor into the delay of the nitro. At the very least end of year sales will be very interesting.

>>56065158
AMD is struggling to meet production on it for consoles and the PC market, and it's being produced in very long runs at two different fabs. It's very possible it could end up being the most produced discrete graphics chip of all time.

>>56065120
Personally, I couldn't wait for the 480 restocks, so I just went and got a Sapphire Fury for $310 the other day.

AMD is objectively worse than Nvidia
price
performance
efficiency
drivers
all at least 2 years behind Nvidia

>>56065314

No doubt the upcoming console redux is a factor. While speculation is fun the next earnings report (if AMD actually breaks down who what when where) will be extremnely educational.

One thing is for certain though, on a pure numbers front AMD is gaming in the here and now.

File: 2828467.jpg (55KB, 637x375px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 637x375px

>>56065367

>>56064141
the fact that you even have to ask just shows youre
not worthy of a Nvidia card.

>>56065120
>>56065343
I think I just might go for the Fury X myself. Then again, it's not like I need to upgrade immediately. But all this talk about gpu and pc building just makes me buy up the stuff and make one.

>>56065373
I think people are really underestimating how cheap it is for AMD to pump out the Polaris 10 chips considering the length of the runs they're on. No doubt the market overlap, simpler design, and sheer volume will contribute heavily to their earnings.

I recommend Nvidia to consolefag gaymers because it just werks and they are too dumb to manually tweak things for better performance, so let Geforce Experience and Windows 10 do all the work for you.

I recommend AMD to anyone who knows what they are doing on PC.

File: satensmug2.jpg (157KB, 560x570px) Image search: [Google]

157KB, 560x570px

>>56065514
>I recommend AMD to anyone who knows what they are doing on PC.

>>56065466

Well the absurd voltage curve of the 480 is solely to maximise yields (along with the high clocks and low number of ROPS). Polaris is entirely designed to be as cheap as possible for AMD to build so I would guess the margins are quite high.

I would wager polaris' margins are higher than what Nvidia get on the 1060.

>>56065544
Without a doubt that's going to be the case as far as returns go for AMD. Nvidia yields have been historically laughable because of their design complexity. One thing AMD has more experience with is shitting out cheap graphics chips. Main thing I'm looking for is hints on the China market since Nvidia will be two months late to it and the 300+ USD range is practically nonexistent over there, per statements from Nvidia themselves. They've been trying to capture the USA/Euro market and I think it's going to bite them in the ass.

>>56065636

>Nvidia yields have been historically laughable because of their design complexity

You sure? A lot of recent AMD chips (certainly hawaii and fiji) are drastically denser than their Nvidia counterparts.

>They've been trying to capture the USA/Euro market and I think it's going to bite them in the ass.

Thats a possibility - I do know AMD has made quite a few china only models of cards (usually through AIB's) but I do not know if Nvidia has done the same.

>>56064875
Passmark is not a very realistic gpu benchmark for modern game workloads.

>>56064141
Currently? 1060 versus 480? 1060.

>>56065397

gpu utilization also 2 years ahead

>>56065705
China market is practically owned by Nvidia.
XP is still the most popular operating system voer there and Nvidia is the only one that still releases drivers for it, excluding Pascal which has no support for it for now.

File: images.png (2KB, 144x144px) Image search: [Google]

2KB, 144x144px

best apps to program in ubuntu?

>>56065397
What is this supposed to signify? That AMDrones don't understand how DX12 and async work? That the dev has to enable it "app-side" in DX12?

File: dx12-support-645x366.jpg (58KB, 645x366px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 645x366px

>>56065835

>>56065705
Density isn't the only part of what makes a chip complex to fabricate. How the individual components are designed matters more. The 16nm process for Pascal was mature long before Nvidia started production on it, and they still had to (fairly certain assumption) retape Pascal. They had some decently long runs before launch, yet as proven by availability, they still haven't met demand. Even with their earnings report, it's doubtful the 600+ USD market expanded so much in a year as to choke out their supply for over two months.

>>56065873
What does that have to do with the question? I see nothing in your image about async, drivers or "app-side."

>>56065810
No, the market has shifted in focus dramatically over the past year. Sub 100 was the biggest market there for a long time, but now mid range cards are becoming the most popular. The 750 and 950 respectively were the big winners in the China market, but now AMD is going to have a two month head start, with a very competitive offering below the 200 line. Judging from Ali Baba's revenue explosion (basically Amazon China) the idea of mid range becoming more viable is certainly more realistic.

>>56065982
Expanding on this, it's well known that AMD has kept specific design patterns for years, and there is nothing really new on Polaris compared to the Fiji arch. Polaris is a culmination of optimizations for yields. Nvidia changes their designs much more drasitcally, and that's probably one of the reasons they tend to have problems with supply.

>>56065214
>average murrican

he lives in his pickup truck or a van and eat shit from garbage bins

>>56064141
Honestly these kind of threads should be banned.

t. gayman crossie

Someone told me "amd for fps and nvidia for beautiful textures".

I went amd and never dissapointed me.

>>56066517

Remember when Nvidia had fucked up colours over hdmi? Fun times.

>>56066549
To be honest, I love AMD but sometimes it still do weird things. Fortunately have a very easy fix.

Also, show me that, it has to be fun to see.

>>56064141
I can be an amd fanboy sometimes because I think they are more ethical and bang for buck, but there is no reasonable upgrade from a 970 from AMD at this time. Just grab a 1070 if you can't wait 4 months or whatever.

>>56064141
>>>/v/

>>56066568

>Also, show me that, it has to be fun to see.

Its an ancient bug where over hdmi by default Nvidia drivers would set their range to limited leading to washed out colours.

>>56066517
Honestly, I'd say it's more like AMD for better textures, aging and perf/price; Nvidia for perf/watts, slightly less microstuttering, and flagship purchases (if that's your overpriced bag).

>>56066610
>they sure stop posting now

>>56066704

At this point /v/ knows more about pc hardware than /g/ does. Think about that for a second.

>>56066748

I thought about it for a second and then I'm now replying to that.

At this point I know more about pc hardware than v does

>>56066636

It still sets limited range by default. You have to manually select full range. Sometimes even over Displayport for whatever fuck reason.

>>56066879

Christ I thought they fixed that years ago.

>Nvidia.
They need to overwrite at driver level every new shader that come with new game because of the fucked up architecture.

>>56066912

http://www.gamedev.net/topic/666419-what-are-your-opinions-on-dx12vulkanmantle/#entry5215019

>>56066879
>>56066892
That is what AMD does too. But with the pixel format. It adds some lumens and colores look a light variation of reals ones.

>>56066892

Yeah, I still had to set full range on my 760 until a couple weeks ago.
Funny enough, now that I have a 280x and the hdmi monitor is connected to the intel igpu, I also had to set full range there.

>>56064823
I love this meme msrp chart

>>56065214
Makes no sense. If anything AMD was always overpriced in third world shitholes and I know it from personal experience.

>>56067057

Especially since w1zzard refuses to include the 4gb 480 which blows the fuck out of everything else on the chart.

Why do you even start thread like this OP when you know for a fact that /g/ is 3rd most AMD shilled website on Internet. Every time somebody posts an Nvidia favouring benchmark Pajeets crave out and start shit flinging. I get it, you're all smart special snowflakes that just know better. Personally I stopped giving two fucks about people's personal purchases years ago.

>>56067100
Performance for a dollar =/= acceptable framerate hardware newfriend

>>56067180

What are the other two? It can't be tom's, anantech or TPU.

File: perfrel_1920_1080.png (41KB, 500x1130px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 500x1130px

>>56067248

That was not the scale upon which that chart is based. If you want relative performance look at pic related. Though this is a tad misleading as the top end gpus suck balls at 1080p due to being cpu limited and (as a rough guide) as resolution increases AMD chips gain on their Nvidia counterpart. IIRC at 4k a fury x is now faster than a titan x (maxwell).

>>56066960
>Nvidia employed
The game sucks, we need to patch it
>Game dev
That driver suck. We need to workaround it.