Business wise I don't see the problem.
Worse performing in numbers? Sure but their more optimized run better on nearly every single game out there. AMD Cards fluctuate a lot.
Worse performing in numbers? Sure but their more optimized run better on nearly every single game out there. AMD Cards fluctuate a lot.
Poor alternative? AMD is absolutely competitive in the low to mid-range GPU market and they're decimating the competition when it comes to processors and have driven down Intel's pricing fairly significantly. Despite this, unfortunately AMD lacks the marketshare in both CPUs and GPUs due to brand appeal. Hopefully that changes because we've seen what happens when companies like Nvidia have the marketshare, they abuse it.Shameful business, but AMD is sadly a poor alternative to nvidia and intel and they know it.
Poor alternative? AMD is absolutely competitive in the low to mid-range GPU market and they're decimating the competition when it comes to processors and have driven down Intel's pricing fairly significantly. Despite this, unfortunately AMD lacks the marketshare in both CPUs and GPUs due to brand appeal. Hopefully that changes because we've seen what happens when companies like Nvidia have the marketshare, they abuse it.
Vega was a misfire but recent driver benchmarks are closing the gap between Vega 64 and the 1080Ti and Navi hopefully will put AMD back on the map for enthusiast level users. At this point, I'm so disgusted with Nvidia's business practices and the shitty driver experience that I'm switching over from a 1080Ti to Vega and shrugging at the performance loss.
Those AMD cards were just plainly better all around. The 5870 was 30% faster than the 285 and it was faster for 6 months till the 480 came out. The 5870 was also the first card to have angle independent AF.
The 7970 was faster than the 580 by 40% and was ahead for several months till the 680 launched. The 7970 was also an overclocking monster capable of 30%+ OCs and extending its advantage over the 580 (even OCD versions) to in excess of 60%.
The R9 290X was a Titan killer offering the same performance for about half the cost. It was matched by the 780Ti but that launched after the 290X and was more expensive.
It has only really been the 9xx and 10xx series that has pulled a gap on AMD. The last time this happened was the 2900 and 3870 series.by AMD who followed it up with the amazing 4870 series. Even though that had bargain pricing, NV still outsold AMD.
Even when NV had an objectively worse product they were out selling AMD because of the brand. That is the power of branding and that is why this is a big deal.
DirectX 10.1 on an NVIDIA GPU?
Easily the most interesting thing about the GT 220 and G 210 is that they mark the introduction of DirectX 10.1 functionality on an NVIDIA GPU. It’s no secret that NVIDIA does not take a particular interest in DX10.1, and in fact even with this they still don’t. But for these new low-end parts, NVIDIA had some special problems: OEMs.
OEMs like spec sheets. They want parts that conform to certain features so that they can in turn use those features to sell the product to consumers. OEMs don’t want to sell a product with “only” DX10.0 support if their rivals are using DX10.1 parts. Which in turn means that at some point NVIDIA would need to add DX10.1 functionality, or risk losing out on lucrative OEM contracts.
This is compounded by the fact that while Fermi has bypassed DX10.1 entirely for the high-end, Fermi’s low-end offspring are still some time away. Meanwhile AMD will be shipping their low-end DX11 parts in the first half of next year.
So why do GT 220 and G 210 have DX10.1 functionality? To satisfy the OEMs, and that’s about it. NVIDIA’s focus is still on DX10 and DX11. DX10.1 functionality was easy to add to the GT200-derrived architecture (bear in mind that GT200 already had some DX10.1 functionality), and so it was done for the OEMs. We would also add that NVIDIA has also mentioned the desire to not be dinged by reviewers and forum-goers for lacking this feature, but we’re having a hard time buying the idea that NVIDIA cares about either of those nearly as much as they care about what the OEMs think when it comes to this class of parts.
At any rate, while we don’t normally benchmark with DX10.1 functionality enabled, we did so today to make sure DX10.1 was working as it should be. Below are our Battleforge results, using DX10 and DX10.1 with Very High SSAO enabled.
The ultimate proof that DX10.1 is a checkbox feature here is performance. Certainly DX10.1 is a faster way to implement certain effects, but running them in the first place still comes at a significant performance penalty. Hardware of this class is simply too slow to make meaningful use of the DX10.1 content that’s out there at this point.
The thing I don't get is timing of all this. Nvidia has to know that, due to mining, there's nothing they can do to stop AMD cards from selling out and retailing for hundreds of dollars above MSRP. All of these efforts have no benefit to them in the current market. The only thing I could think of is if they're so focused on preserving their market share that they're laying the foundation for months or even years down the road for when mining no longer has this effect on consumer GPU pricing.
As bad (and possibly illegal) as this all is, nothing is worse than the trolls who go onto gaming forums to make up Nvidia's advantages over AMD, for free and in their own spare time.
Interesting rumors are now coming out that "Kyle was paid" big bucks for breaking the NVIDIA GPP story. And apparently NVIDIA's disinformation campaign to discredit the story around GPP is rubbing some folks the wrong way. Elric mentions below that "his name is also Brian," so I have to assume that PR at NVIDIA is starting this nastiness. No, I did not get paid for GPP, but I wish I would have. Hell, AMD even gave credit to PCPer for breaking story in its Freedom promo video. Interesting thoughts from Elric below.
Check out the video.
Also worth mentioning is that I can tell you for sure that two of the things that NVIDIA told me about GPP are simply lies. Brian Burke of NVIDIA told me this about GPP before we wrote our initial story:
There is no commitment to make any monetary payments, or discounts for being part of the program.
That is a lie. I have it in writing that is not true. NVIDIA is withholding MDF monies as well as rebates and discounts if you don't go GPP. I have had conversations with people that have confirmed exactly what I have in writing.
NVIDIA is quickly painting itself into a corner, and I can say is that the silence from NVIDIA is deafening, and the rest of us know that too. If GPP was so great for the consumer as NVIDIA states, it would have already put hundreds of thousands of dollars into a PR campaign instead of going silent and telling the tech world it has "moved on" from the GPP story. They want this to just die and go away. Telling fellow journalists in the community that I am a paid mouthpiece of AMD is not below NVIDIA, and that is just a shame. And apparently some other folks don't like the way they are handling all of this either.
But at the end of the day, if the worst thing NVIDIA can say about me is that I get paid to tell the truth, I guess I can live with that.
Those AMD cards were just plainly better all around. The 5870 was 30% faster than the 285 and it was faster for 6 months till the 480 came out. The 5870 was also the first card to have angle independent AF.
The 7970 was faster than the 580 by 40% and was ahead for several months till the 680 launched. The 7970 was also an overclocking monster capable of 30%+ OCs and extending its advantage over the 580 (even OCD versions) to in excess of 60%.
The R9 290X was a Titan killer offering the same performance for about half the cost. It was matched by the 780Ti but that launched after the 290X and was more expensive.
It has only really been the 9xx and 10xx series that has pulled a gap on AMD. The last time this happened was the 2900 and 3870 series.by AMD who followed it up with the amazing 4870 series. Even though that had bargain pricing, NV still outsold AMD.
Even when NV had an objectively worse product they were out selling AMD because of the brand. That is the power of branding and that is why this is a big deal.
Knowing all this... I would still go Nvidia. Had 2 amd's before, and close friend's experiences...and amd's cards just stop working, are hot and unreliable. Last time I had a amd card was like 3 years ago and it wasn't a good experience. From reviews, they are getting better, but nvidia still is the winner.
I base my decision on my experience more than marketing. I had two ati radeons major malfunctions, and a couple of friends with very glitchy/full of artifacts cards. My last 2 cards have been nvidia and no problems.quod erat demonstrandum
I base my decision on my experience more than marketing. I had two ati radeons major malfunctions, and a couple of friends with very glitchy/full of artifacts cards. My last 2 cards have been nvidia and no problems.
I love nVidia and Intel products but their business practices are awful.
I had like 3 580 replacements.I base my decision on my experience more than marketing. I had two ati radeons major malfunctions, and a couple of friends with very glitchy/full of artifacts cards. My last 2 cards have been nvidia and no problems.
Random nVIDIA vs random AMD? Same supplier?I base my decision on my experience more than marketing. I had two ati radeons major malfunctions, and a couple of friends with very glitchy/full of artifacts cards. My last 2 cards have been nvidia and no problems.
Except when AMD have faster cards like the 5870, 7970 or the R9 290X people find other excuses not to buy AMD and Nvidia still sells better despite having a worse performing product.
The cards underperform and/or very bad drivers are no bad excuse.
Is the same letters, but different words I thoughtdidn't nvidia buy 3dfx? they bought the rights to use "SLI" at least
Not at all true anymore. In fact, I switched from the 1080Ti to the Vega 64 and bit the bullet on a little performance loss because I was sick of them pushing G-Sync along with their drivers being unstable and lacking in features. AMD Crimson drivers in my experience have been fantastic and it's great not being locked into Nvidia's "ecosystem". AMD is pushing and contributing to open standards and it's just a shame that Nvidia is abusing their market position.I felt this was appropriate considering the discussions in the thread. But I've always gone with nVidia, because of the general perception of better in terms of drivers. Is that still the case or has AMD done better there now, especially with AMD being used in the consoles? One of my reasons for choosing nVidia was because I prefer stability in terms of drivers and avoiding issues with certain games because of bad drivers.
I'm looking for a GPU after my GTX780 died (might try to heat treat it, to see if it's just something minor in terms of connections) and was wondering what the recommendations are.
I think there will be stronger competition with 7nm Vega and Navi following. Let's be honest, if it wasn't for the price hikes due to mining and memory, we would have a very competitive $399.99 RX Vega 56 and a 499.99 Vega 64 on the market in both price and perf.......Yet, the market is just not the same right now. Vega 56 beats the 1070 hands down and the 1070ti in quite a few titles, especially the AIB ones. Sapphire Vega 64 not only beats GTX 1080, but it gets close to the 1080ti in some titles and even beats it in some titles. So if AIB Vega's could be found for MSRP, I think the gamer's view of the market would be a bit different.nVidia has never been a nice company since their early days in the 90'...they're really greedy and unfriendly towards other companies.
The fact they have cancelled their GPP program is a move to try to avoid legal issues since their bad pratices got exposed.
Still they have great engineers making great GPUs so it's hard as a consumer to try to avoid their products. Competition needs to be stronger.
Not at all true anymore. In fact, I switched from the 1080Ti to the Vega 64 and bit the bullet on a little performance loss because I was sick of them pushing G-Sync along with their drivers being unstable and lacking in features.
...
As for a suggestion, I'd shop around for an RX480/580 8GB variant. Great cards that seem to get better and better performance as time goes on. Fans lovingly call it "AMD FineWine technology".
They don't care what do you think. They have you and 70% of pc gamers locked to their hardware. Nvidia brand loyalty is very strong and no amount of bad press can change it.
This is why I prefer console gaming. From crazy increase in gpu price coz of mining to shitty practices by Nvidia is the reason I prefer console gaming. I started hating Nvidia after they did that ram fraud with 970 range graphics cards.