People buy AMD GPUs for budget builds usually because they're supposed to be better value

>people buy AMD GPUs for budget builds usually because they're supposed to be better value
>reviewers test the cards with the most powerful cpu available to regular consumers like the 5960x or 6700k
>people buy the budget AMD card with a budget cpu
>people suffer horribly from AMD driver overhead

What's the point of AMD? They're no good in the budget end because of the driver overhead, and they're no good in the enthusiast tier because Nvidia flagships usually perform better.

When will they fix their drivers? Or will they just force dx12 down our throats instead?

If they fix their drivers, both on windows and Linux, they will be a viable option for many people who understand the issue and go with nvidia because of it.

Other urls found in this thread:

twitter.com/repi/statuses/383174148572196865
m.pclab.pl/art60000-21.html
twitter.com/AnonBabble

When will intel make a CPU fast enough that AMD's driver overhead isn't a big deal?

>Why do people buy AMD?
Tinfoil hats, autismos, hipsters, and fanboys.

There really is no logical reason to buy AMD, most people do it out of something stupid like "muh nvidia gimping meme"

>using GameWorks game to conclude AMD sucks

The RX 480

lol is Sup Forums really nvidia shilling now? times change huh

Here's an AMD sponsored title.

>actually expecting the same performance as benchmarks when it's a known issue that you won't

>AMD makes absolute shit so everyone buys Nvidia instead
>Somehow Nvidia is the shill company

O am I laffin
you nignogs are the ones posting your Rx 480 viral marketing threads and raiding every discussion related to the gtx 1080/1070

we're on a forum full of linux and gnu memes and nvidia isn't the shill company? 3.5 etc

you must be new here

>hirr durr 0.5gb of my ram is slower
Buy a 390 or 980 if vram is that important to you.

There is nothing wrong with the 970, it performs exactly as it should at that price point.

Even if youre a freedomfag its absolutely retarded to buy AMD
especially if you use Linux

Except that 0,5gb of slower vram will prevent games from using their vram management stuff properly resulting in poor performance. Fast 3,5gb > fast 3,5gb+slow 0,5gb

Is that the mantle version?

>Even if youre a freedomfag its absolutely retarded to buy AMD
especially if you use Linux
Lubuntu user with an AMD laptop here. It's a pain in the ass to get some games working. Had no issues with Windows 8.1 installed, but for some reason Linux doesn't work well with my integrated graphics. Windows was way too slow though, so I guess that's the price to pay.

Nvidia cards don't support mantle, so it's a dx11 benchmark to make it fair.

8370 @ 4.6ghz
290x TRI-X 8gb
3200x1800, all settings max. 60+ FPS

???

Benchmark accuracy when?

itt polack ""benchmarks""

TurionX2 with HD3200m here, open source drivers are actually decent.

And yet it's still manging to outperform the 290x/390 with its non gimped vram with ease.

That's how bad AMD drivers are.

This uses nvapi, so its unfair to AMD isn't it?

Source?

twitter.com/repi/statuses/383174148572196865

Specific nvidia only optimizations have been used without being officially announced in many games.

I know that's BS because my 380X + 8350 gets over 50fps

>unreal engine
>2k
Literally nvidia partnered game.

If you are ignorant, I'll remind you that they're withholding async shader on PC because of their nvidia partnership. They have it enabled on consoles due to AMD contracts.

They will not enable async shaders until Volta arrives or they will enable async shader that nvidia wants, aka one that benefits no one and decreases performance for all GPU on dx12.

Source? This is actually interesting.

Source is Gameworks games.

Anything with nvidia partnership means some sort of gameworks code or nvidia specific optimization running.

When gameworks games run on nvidia cards, their GPU can run the computations, freeing up the CPU for normal rendering. Because most games hardly max out GPU load 100%, this will mean nvidia GPU run better than AMD on same system. AMD GPU meanwhile won't be able to run proprietary gameworks code, so the game runs the code on CPU, which slows down the render time, thus lowers fps. This gives the perception that AMD drivers suck.


Granted AMD CPU are weak compared to Intel CPU, the nvidia gamework games compound this issue and creates a rift. If the same game were to run gameworks code on either CPU or GPU equally, the performance difference would be lot less and the difference between the two would be negligible.

tl;dr nvidia gameworks code reduces CPU's power by x% because nvidia wont allow AMD cards to run gameworks code on GPU.

>gameworks
What does that have to do with driver overhead?

Fuck off with your fanboy nigger shit. I asked for a source so I can make my own judgement and not because I wanted to here your buyers remorse butthurt.

AMD card not running gameworks title = "driver overhead"

So far, the examples posted are purely nvidia partner games or games that use gameworks.

Hear*

Like battlefield 4?

>bf4
>gameworks
>nvidia sponsored

amdrones confirmed for being blind retards

Uses nvapi, nvidia specific optimization api.

AMD optimization is mantle api, but using that is "cheating".

m.pclab.pl/art60000-21.html

>the drivers for graphics cards AMD Radeon more processor-intensive or less managed by its resources, so that the more he is working in a particular place in the game and they is weaker, the worse Radeon falls GeForce terms.Radeon R9 390 OC in conjunction with a very fast processor Core i7-6700K @ 4.7 GHz is able to establish an equal fight with GeForce GTX 970 OC-I.Unfortunately, in tandem with a weaker CPU noticeably losing distance.The problem in this case lies in the fact that it applies even overclocked to 4.5 GHz Core i5-4690K, which after all is still among the leaders in terms of performance.

Not comforting that AMD does not mention that intended to improve CPU utilization by drivers for DirectX 11 games.

Sorry for bad English, using Google Translate because I'm not polish.

I noticed all the games tested have nvidia slant.

>Crysis
Have been accused of crippling AMD cards with excessive tessellation for everything in game.

>Fallout
Gameworks title

>GTA
Gameworks title

>Witcher 3
Another Gameworks title


Not saying conspiracy, but is there a reason why these games are chosen for this "fair" test?

I've always considered AMD to be the poor mans card or for NEETs that had to save up but will end up in the buyers remorse threads and hating on those that were smart and went NVIDIA, NVIDIA is basically the Tesla of cars as to AMD which is like a Reliant Robin.

>graph literally says CPU test
Well what were you expecting?

Also
>using outdated graphs
>2016
I guess if you're going to go retard, go full retard.

Whoops, forgot.

>Crysis
Nvidia physX, aka another gameworks

Jesus Christ, these are all gameworks title.

you are right, all reviewers are shills, they should only test Ashes of Singularity, otherwise it is biased.

We know amd cards struggle with driver overhead. Only brain dead retards would think otherwise. It's a factual statement.

No, you're right DX12 is a meme. Ashes of Singularity is a meme. Async shaders are meme.

There are no DX12 games anyway. Long live nvidia.

Well then good thing I own an nVidia GPU with a 4770k.

>all the games ever are all gameworks & nvidiashilling engines !
>gonna keep buying amd that'll show em !

Short term, its fine. Long term, you have $1000 GPU that should be going for $400 or so. Unfair practice leads to monopoly, which leads to price gouging. If you intend to buy any GPU in the future, you'll be fucked.

Short term vs Long term happiness.

If every game ever is an nVidia optimized title, tell me why I shouldn't buy nVidia?

>Post Overclock vs Non OverClock
>Calls people brain dead retards

Just go to sleep man your night is over.

>Ashes of Singularity is a meme.

It is a meme though. Literally nobody plays it except benchmarkers or people who got it for free with their amd card. At least the people doing these tests are using popular games with hundreds of millions in sales as a reference point. What's the point of testing games nobody plays? All 4 of the games there were/are goty contenders/winners.

Doesn't the 290x outperform the 780 cards as of today due to the massive driver improvements that the GCN cards had? On top of Nvidia gimping 7xx card performance once the 9xx cards were out?

>being this stupid

It's not about the frame rate you dunce. Its about the frame times.

Did you get dropped on your head as a baby by any chance?

Does factory OC count?

Even then, that's a pretty embarrassing delta.

AMD isn't a bad option, but nvidia is definitely better.
I'm pretty satisfied with my i3 2120 and r7 260x, but that's only because it was so cheap. A$220 for the lot early january 2015.

>i3 2120
>8gb ddr3 1333
>300GB velociraptor
>150GB velociraptor
>asus r7 260x direct cu ii

Gives me 80fps on gta v with low settings, but some things turned up.
55-65 fps high settings battlefield 4.
1080p

Can you find a source that isn't using a 5960x or 6700k?

>game is optimized for Nvidia
>Nvidia card comes OC'd
>it performs significantly better
>pretty embarrassing

Wow you're getting stupider by the minute. You're saying because the Overclock was done at the factory and not by the user at home it should not count? Kid go to sleep.

No one's stopping you from buying either. Company engaging in dishonest tactics vs company investing in strong hardware. Both have advantages and disadvantages. Its up to you on how you decide with your money.

You swam all the way to Poland to cherrypick that graph? im impressed.

www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/gta_v_pc_graphics_performance_review,5.html

>vs company investing in strong hardware
Please don't tell me you're referring to AMD here. The nVidia cards run cooler and have better performance for anything that's not double floating point performance.

If I were looking to build a cheap bitcoin mining machine, or cheap AI system, I'd go with AMD. If I'm looking for performance/watt, I avoid AMD like the plague.

Not to mention LOLAMDDRIVERS.

The particular graph was for testing various CPUs with the same two graphics cards...

>gets btfo so hard that he decides to reply to some random who isn't even the op of the post instead of the actual op
>mfw retard couldn't even understand the difference between frame time and frame rate in the first place

Yeah, your mom clearly dropped you off a balcony when you were a child. Some serious brain damage there.

The graph in the OP was testing CPU performance, you dumb fucking poorfag.

I'm not surprised an AMDrone tries to draw the thread away from the original discussion of driver overhead.

nvidia card runs "cooler" and have "better performance" is due to architecture and software direction of the games industry, which nvidia successfully courted. Not due to inherent stronger hardware. Their hardwares are infact weaker because of lack of certain features compared to AMD. They effectively cornered the gaming market with their partnership with benchmark maker, game engine maker and their acquisition of gameworks system.

You only need a small lead in the game to be considered the "King", then people will follow that regardless of how that title was obtained. Their lead with games industry is due to certain key maneuver, not out of actual performance increase, but through proper PR maneuver and marketing genius.

If you don't remember, nvidia drivers are the ones that have been killing the cards in the past couple of years. You were promised a "async compute" driver a year or so ago by nvidia, but this promise hasn't been materialized. Their Win10 drivers are lacking and you have crashes and unstable driver problems all the time.

Maybe bit more introspective will help you.

"driver overhead" aka gameworks code running on CPU instead of GPU

The proof of driver overhead is literally a nvidia meme

That graph doesn't show what you think it does.

In your graph, difference between 290x and 970 with 4460 is 12FPS/25%; difference between 290x and 970 with 8350 is 9FPS/25%.

Mine shows how poorly AMD CPUs work in GTAV with Nvidia hardware (i.e., removing AMD's GPU drivers from the equation).

Conclusion: No effect

>w10 drivers have been lacking
My gtx 680 performance has been roughly the same as it was on w7.

It should be between 5-10% better because of dx11.1, but it isn't.

That being said, until AMD fixes their overhead issue and stops trying to force dx12 to make up for their incompetence, they're not an option for me when I upgrade.

Got any proof? It's already a known fact that AMD drivers are limited to one thread while nvidia can use multiple threads.

Prove me wrong if you can, but there's plenty proof in my favor ITT, you've done nothing but shitpost in a pathetic attempt to defend AMD.

Your post doesn't even make sense, next time just post feet instead

I can't prove a negative. Its in your interest to show me that AMD has driver overheads. All the "evidence" thus far are purely gameworks title. Which in fact do not run on AMD GPU but rather on CPU.

nVidia can do async compute. It can even do so better than AMD cards for some queue depths.

>Their Win10 drivers are lacking and you have crashes and unstable driver problems all the time.

No they don't. I have owned a 980 since November last year when I upgraded from a 280x and I haven't had a single problem with it. I had more problems with the 280x like the cursor flickering shit than I have ever had with this 980. Now that I think about it, I haven't had a single driver related problem yet my friend who bought a 390 a few months before I bought my 980 is having nothing but driver problems with it. Not like the ones I had on my 280x but new ones like the marquee tool on Maya not working at all. It's a major issue and he was forced to downgrade to 2 year old drivers which obviously causes big problems in games. I don't think anyone I know has had a pleasant experience with amd drivers.

Also note that I'm speaking from experience and from factual information given from close fiends and not shit I read on WCCFtech like you're obviously quoting.

Test

This shows that the game is CPU limited, not that AMD's drivers are CPU heavy

Why does this "nvidia can do async compute" fail to show on all the DX12 games? Including the nvidia DX12 title, Rise of Tomb Raider.

I own a a GTX 770 on my side machine and the Win10 driver updates have been hit/miss. I always have to check threads on forums to see whether the drivers are safe or not due to how unstable the Win10 drivers are.

fc4

I mean I like feet, but why are you on the hardware board if you don't understand my post?

Gtx680 guy, me amd a friend (he has a 960) have the same problem since upgrading to 10.

Shadowplay will make the display drivers stop responding one in three times we use it.

My friend with a 980 ti, and another friend with a gtx760 don't have the issue we do so it's weird.

Except that it does show that because AMD cards take a bigger hit when the cpu is the bottleneck.

Did you even check what you wrote before posting?

Rise

>that performance gap on AMD
Jesus...

Cod aw

This is another gameworks title, so probable explanation I could give you is the gameworks code running on CPU taxing the system harder than with nvidia GPU.

explain cod and Rise

There may be extra driver overhead, but these graphs sure don't show it

More evidence of the amd driver overhead. Look at those tragic frametimes on the amd cards compared to the nvidia cards. Literally unplayable.

or just explain this one (I've cropped the dx12 mantle results cause we're talking about dx 11 here) the actual results will be a little better on amd with latest drivers (as far as i know they have less overhead now but are far from nvidias level yet)

>Except that it does show that because AMD cards take a bigger hit when the cpu is the bottleneck.
It doesn't, retard. Do you even math?

Ryse is running crytek game engine, heavy nvidia leaning partner. As well as Gameworks title.

CoD AW, not sure. You may have something, but thats still only 1 possible valid instance.

Why would anyone use an AMD cpu anyways?

They're absolute dogshit.

Just get an i5 or i7 and you won't suffer from any driver overhead.

Pretty sure that Rise was a GAMING EVOLVED amd™ tittle still the overhead one here shows some bad numbers for amd on dx11.

Does amd supports dx11 command lists yet?

Could have cherry picked a bit and show how it performs with an amd apu as cpu.

Spoiler -52% perf

Because some people are on a budget, and you still get overhead on an i5, especially a budget i5 like the 6400, or an older one like the 2500.

Can you actually contribute instead of shitposting?

Or do you literally have no way of proving your point so you shitpost instead to try and persuade the weak minded sheep that maybe you have a point?

Fucking degenerate.

I dare you to run the same test with the latest drivers

If you really are on a budget you don't buy a 390/x

>and you still get overhead on an i5, especially a budget i5 like the 6400

Just get a 6600k which is a couple of bucks more and overclock it to heaven.

my shitty gayming laptop with a gtx850m and an i7 runs gta v at 55-60fps with things like textures on very high, only turning down shadows, reflections. i keep lighting at high and post processing on. runs at 70-75 average with spikes to 80

70-75*c ***

I would if I had those parts.

You're right, buy a 380 or 370 instead, where they'll suffer from the same overhead issue but no one will care because it's $10 cheaper than its nvidia counterpart.

Many people simply don't have the budget for a 6600k. I have a friend who went with an i3 6100 and gtx 960 because he didn't want to spend more on his pc.

So far it's working out great for him.

What resolution?

>gta 5
find a game that isnt a shit console port

>"muh nvidia gimping meme"
how many times do we have to prove it before you will stop being a cuck

put your tinfoil hat back on nvidiot shill

GTA v was actually pretty well optimised for a port.

Got any proof for the gimping, or just speculation.
Updated drivers have fixed all issues you AMDrones have pointed out so far.

>gta 5
>shit port

Are you stupid? Gta 5 has been one of the best ports in ages.

Amdrones confirmed for not actually playing games.

Kill yourself