How do you choose between AMD And Nvidia Cards

[Elevon]

One of the key differences for me over the years is that when there have been issues with nVidia drivers there is almost always a close driver version that works fine - with ATI and AMD pre 2009 that was often not the case at all especially with their release schedules. People either seem very quick to forget that and/or don't have as broad experience with both sides as they think or try to portray.

These days it is a much less remarked story - infact last few months nVidia drivers have demanded more of my time support wise. To really compare driver quality you have to look a lot deeper than just the fact that both have issues with factors like how many people out of the entire user base are effected, how long issues take to be sorted, playability of new release games, availability of relevant drivers to rollback to, etc. i.e. its no good if a game release driver degrades your experience and no older driver supports the game and you are waiting a month or more for a fix and so on.

Regardless Nvidia has given me issues over the decades, besides I don't like their business practice in general, I always support the underdog which has a better business practice where I can .

I do miss the old days where we had Nvidia, ATi, Matrox, 3DFX, how times have changed.

 

[Kirby Wurm]

The sensible way is to choose the fastest card within your budget, that's it.

Yep! I've been with Nvidia since the 570 but regretted buying a 780 over the 290X, the only reason I did so was the lack of availability of 3rd party examples of the latter at the time. Since buying G-sync I've been tied to them but I have had numerous issues over there years. I've had DVI/HDMI ports fail on a 560 Ti, 570 and 680, and then two 780's I've ended up having to return for different issues.

More recently I've had to juggle drivers to get BF1 working nicely. I still prefer AMD in many ways and had fewer problems while using their cards (a broken X1950 Pro aside) but they haven't had the performance edge at the time I've been buying. I'm hoping Vega is great as I'd like to swap back over eventually (when my monitor dies, which won't be for a while I pray).

 

[Nasher]

Yeah not a fan of the changes in approach to GeForce experience especially ShadowPlay which has made it much less useful than it used to be and the telemetry stuff.

The "telemetry" stuff is hidden in the drivers now, not just in GFE like it used to be. They are scumbags :/

 

[lsg1r]

Some of the software I use either purely uses cuda or works better on cuda so nvidia it is..... if my software or alternatives (that were as good) worked as well on ati I'd probably look at switching if they performed better.

As to the telemetry thats all turned off via autoruns

 

[fs123]

The current pricing of 1070/1080 cards should tell you why buying only one vendor (Nvidia) is going to be bad for consumers in the long run.
The 970 was around £250 at launch for a decent AIB card yet we have it's replacement starting at £360 for a bog standard blower version.

 

[DragonQ]

Up until now, the fastest card available in a sensible price bracket. Historically that has meant nVidia more often than not for me, but my current card is AMD since there was a good deal on MM.

Going forward, pretty much AMD until nVidia start supporting FreeSync.

 

[zophiel]

i set a price that i will spend and just buy the best value for money at that point.

 

[Freddie1980]

I generally buy the best card for my budget and that used to mean I would swap between either brand on each upgrade cycle but I've been with Nvidia now since the gtx670 and the last AMD card I bought was a HD5770. I don't play many new games these days but if I did want to upgrade I would look at getting a RX480 (I've always preferred the more vibrant/saturated default colour palette that they've used since the ATI days).

 

[Kei]

Chose 3DFX up to them folding. Moved to ATi from then on up until 2013 where I decided to go for a change and tried a nvidia 780. It's been great up until I upgraded to windows 10, where I have been unable to escape from random TDR hell. When vega comes out, I'm going back as AMD have always been excellent for both performance and value.

 

[D.P.]

Combination of performance, cost, drivers, software support, game support, power, noise, OpenGL performance and drivers stability, Linux support and CUDA.

 

[Nexus18]

- bang per buck
- future proofing (thank god I picked a 290 over a 780/970 in the end...)
- drivers stability

I much prefer free/adaptive sync though (considerably cheaper, lot more choice, not just for manufacturers but also for panel choice) so I will be sticking to AMD for the foreseeable future.

EDIT:

Also, despite hating crimson at first, I actually quite like it now, UI is far nicer than nvidia's + it seems to be snappier/quicker in general I find.

 

[D.P.]

Regardless Nvidia has given me issues over the decades, besides I don't like their business practice in general, I always support the underdog which has a better business practice where I can .

I do miss the old days where we had Nvidia, ATi, Matrox, 3DFX, how times have changed.

Traditionally Nvidia has been the underdog. AMD was a far larger company, they just screwed up.

The business practices line is very misguided. I don't blame you, AMD have very good marketing to try and fool people in to thinking some how they are morally superior and Nvidia kills puppies. Their lies can be hard to see through, constantly blaming Nvidia for X, Y and Z. The truth is both companies are pretty similar, I actually give Nvidia the high ground as they don't pretend to be something they are not and do the throw lies and deciet at the competition to quite the same level.


Just look at all the people.on forums going on about "gimpwoks" or Nvidia sabotaging performance. AMD propaganda machine in full effect, lapped up by fanboys to spread around the internet.

 

[Griffildur]

Just look at all the people.on forums going on about "gimpwoks" or Nvidia sabotaging performance. AMD propaganda machine in full effect.

yeah there are quite a few repeating this over and over, I guess we all know who they are.

 

[Mojo]

I went Nvidia for my most recent upgrade, simply because at the moment AMD have nothing powerful enough and I couldn't really afford to wait for Vega.

I have had problems with both Brands, but currently i favour AMD on the driver front as their Crimson suite is better and less intrusive. NVidia's GeForce "Experience" software has crossed over the line into Bloatware and it offers me nothing beyond quicker driver updates

 

[DarrenM343]

Tin foil hat time .

I think both parties are guilty of various and similar dodgy practices to be honest but we all tend to remember the examples that back up our belief in our favorite.
Many will like some of the benefits data mining will bring but don't want to be part of the mining process, that's funny . But you can choose not to install GFE if you don't want it.
Some of the comments here are just daft IMO although I'm sure I post daft comments sometimes too

Just remember, nobody cares about you as an identifiable individual when it comes to data IMO.

 

[David Bisset]

Performance for the price is my main factor on desktop, if it's close I'll go AMD cause NVIDIA's business practises are horrible. I don't have any love for AMD and their practises are not perfect either but it's not even slightly close to the same level of vileness NVIDIA achieve so less hate works similarly to like when there are only two options.

Edit: Still buy NVIDIA if it's one-sided enough tho

 

[Nasher]

Chose 3DFX up to them folding. Moved to ATi from then on up until 2013 where I decided to go for a change and tried a nvidia 780. It's been great up until I upgraded to windows 10, where I have been unable to escape from random TDR hell. When vega comes out, I'm going back as AMD have always been excellent for both performance and value.

The TDR issue has been around for years now, that is probably the main reason I went AMD. If you look on the official geforce forums theres loads of threads about it and total silence from Nvidia.

 

[~Dockie]

I go where ever I get more for my money, generally it's to AMD, but i'd have no problem going nVidia if they offered the better price/performance in my budget.

 

[beany_bot]

The rig I am about to build picking up temporary case Monday will have Titan Pascal SLI wanted to try 4K and AMD even with the upcoming Vega don't have anything which is the same ballpark.

How odd. How do you know so much about Vega and it's performance. Tell us all about it!

 

[beany_bot]

I go for price / performance. Which. Quite frankly is nearly always AMD.
If they were completely even I would go AMD because I prefer the company and the way they operate.
If Nvidia was slightly better price / performance then I would still go AMD for the reason above.
If Nvidia was considerably better price / performance then I would go Nvidia.