Which is better for GPUs? Nvidia or AMD?

Which is better for GPUs? Nvidia or AMD?

Nvidia. Don't listen to pajeets.

y'all mofokin britbongs n' slopes get on my level.

Intel HD graphics FTW

it depends on what you are looking for, if you want budget but still fast AMD takes it while if you want expencive but high power stuff with a lot of oc capability go with Nvidia. i am an r9 390 user myself and i cant say i made the wrong decision on buying it

repping the integrated graphics on my 6700k. its enough to play counter strike source aka best counter strike

Thoughts on the "budget" line Nvidia is releasing?

Nah man. Counter Strike 1.6 is best counter strike

The 1050? Only get it if your power supply is shit

Other wise get a 470

>HD
>not Iris

Please

Right now it's AMD. Nvidia gimping their products. Even 1060 already gimped to 470 level, while right after the launsh it was even better than 480.

Proof?

Shadowplay alone makes Nvidia worth buying.

Nvidia for high end, AMD for low end, Nvidia for linux

Performance wise, Nvidia has the strongest GPU out right now, for many months now.

Price/performance depends on your local sellers/vendors.

Tier wise, AMD only has mid-low end right now, nvidia dominates top end and still competes on mid/low end as well.

Desktop discreet GPU share wise, Nvidia dominates.

on the current generation, Nvidia
on the last 3 ones it was AMD

never be a brand loyalist you dumb fuck

Here's all the proof anybody needs.
Proof that he's talking out of his ass.

It depends on a lot of factors though

Yeah I just want to know if he's just talking out of his ass or if there's any proof and what driver I should be using.

For instance, 780Ti owners got a lot of performance back by simply by using 347.88.

Is that pic suppose to represent AMD and Nvidia fighting?
Or is it a pic of them bro fisting?

Can't stress the Linux support enough. Nvidia is as easy as installing linux headers and then install nvidia-current. Googled AMD out of curiosity and got fatqued by the wall of text.

THIS. Giving a company immediate backlash for bad products is absolutely necessary if you don't want to have shit options in the future

Nice exel.

...

if you're a cheap skate, AMD
if you want out-right better performance, Nvidia
if it's winter, AMD
if you're a faggot, hybrid both or some shit

So how did they gimp it? Driver?
If I go back to a launch driver version I'll be fine?

>If I go back to a launch driver version I'll be fine?
Nope. You'll get nothing in new and upcoming games with novidia.

Just throwing in some facts.

Gameworks is the problem more than drivers, just like they don't like AMD GPUs they don't like older gen cards.

>Biggest game of 2016
Top kek
Anyway,has better vulkan and dx12 support but if you want Linux support nVidia is the way to go.

It really depends on what you do with your GPU/computer. Nvidia is the safer bet that works in all kinds of situations (emulators, Linux, OpenGL), but AMD is the cheaper one.

>variable frame rate recording
>gross

Literally would use Intel graphics but the drivers fuck my eyes up. Intel fuck up the PWM or some shit and it rapes me.

If your eyes are sensitive it's a bitch. Fucking intel.

Next time I buy a CPU I will buy AMD just to circumvent this issue. Having onboard as back up is useful.

nvidia proprietary is crap and restricts my kernel version choice, no high-res tty
nouveau is slow
fglrx is just superlative bullshit
radeon just werks
don't know about amdgpu

Nice benchmarks, goy.

Do you want proper OGL support and need CUDA? If yes get nvidia.
Are you poorfag winbaby gaymur? If yes get amd.

Nvidia, AMD is pretty good but Nvidia beats them on software by a mile and half the games that come out these days are bought by Nvidia and made to only run well on Nvidia GPUs.

Nvidia is a shit company with good products, AMD is a good company with shit products.

In the end all that matters to you is the end product.

>AMD is a good company
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA
You can only say they're less jewish. They have terrible legacy support and spent millions on CEO bonuses while firing workers.

lmao who plays that shit in the current year

stop being autistic and move to csgo already

>AMD vs Nvidia thread
>Nvidiots dont have to say shit because the performance speaks for itself, while AMDrones have to desperately cherry pick games where their Indian turds manage to come within half the performance of a GTX 1070 or 1080

this pretty much answers all

More consumer friendly, I mean. They don't go out of their way to sabotage and hold back progress in order to push their products.

there's nothing to sabotage when their products are already shit

/thread

>cs source
>any good

1.6 is the best cs, go it's good too

case closed folks

>>Nvidiots dont have to say shit because the performance speaks for itself,
you mean performance is shitty?

GET REKT

As much as I hate Nvidia for shitting up the market with proprietary anti-consumer garbage, this is sadly the correct answer.

Nvidia users are still unquestionably cucks.

just wew lad. hold your horses. cool your clit. suck on shit :^)

...

...

Both are competent at this point. Personally I think that the 470 at its new pricing is the best value.

1050Ti is the most performance you can get on a prebuilt without PCIe power connectors from your PSU.

1070 is the only decent high end card out right now.

Is AMD best for compute?

>кpя
Яcнo.

CSGO is for kids

This
logically, AMDrones cant even argue that AMD is a better choice because Nvidia kills them on every front. Performance? Nvidia. Efficiency? Nvidia. Price? Nvidia. Drivers? Nvidia

all AMDrones can do is justify why AMD is better in very specific and obscure situations, like buttcoin mining or Ashes of Singularity. Or just make up bullshit like "Jewvidia gimpz cards!"

Gimped how, via drivers?

/thread

i dont understand why fanboys of each keep circle jerking over it. just quit being little fucking kids and accept the opposite company might have a better product than you

depends on your budget

RX 460, 470 and 480 are just better than any equivalent Nvidia offering and anybody who tells you otherwise is a delusional fanboy

anything more expensive than that and you have no choice to go with Nvidia, which isn't necessarily a bad thing as their higher end chips are very good

I go with AMD because I always get my best bang for buck from them.

I paid $200 for my RX 480 and used the bios hack to unlock it to 8GB, very satisfied with it.

>restricts my kernel version choice
Restricts how?

not gimped at all.

the difference is AMD's drivers tend to improve over time, and therefore so does the value of their GPUs. there are multiple benchmarks of 2-3 years old GPUs that prove this.

Nvidia's products generally perform the same for their entire lifespan. could be that their drivers are just optimal on release, could be that they don't give a fuck about you once they got your money. it's speculation either way.

nvidia's proprietary drivers have to be compiled for every kernel release, which usually means waiting on them.

pic related

>conpiled
>blob
Anyway, on Arch the latest kernel works with latest drivers.

AMD is better in vendor neutral games, Nvidia is better in gameworks games.

AMD is better for DX12/VR else Nvidia is better.

NV are the better all round products. They just work. If there was a straight line of nvidia performance going from left to right, amd would have a fluctuating line going above and below the nvidia line. Sometimes you get way better performance on amd and sometimes it's way worse. I prefer nvidia personally because I know my games will work properly on day one 95% of the time.

No fanboyism here btw

Man you sound like a legit nvidia shill desu senpai.

I'm not tho. I've only ever owned 2 gpu in my life and one was amd and the other was nvidia.

Nvidia sign its someshit to prevent people from using free driver, its the jewest. Never ever buy it.

source was literally an engine upgrade to 1.6, nothing else

ATI Rage 3D, holmes

>Four AMD cards better than the new RX 480
Damn, I thought I bought a good card.

You bought a midrange card

they're more expensive and have like triple the power draw

be glad you didn't buy a 980 ti

Nvidia has more libraries for machine learning, which is lame as hell cuz CUDA is balls desu

shoulda bought a fury desu

>480 beating the 980ti
>390x raping the 980ti
>Fury X LITERALLY MURDER-RAPING THE 980ti
Jesus fuck, that's fucking glorious.

>desu ex
>literally game made for amd that still runs like shit even on their hardware

>Le Nvidia has perfect drivers meme
>Le Nvidia is 100,000% efficient and just werks

>game made with gpuopen and promoted by amd
>barely gets stable 60fps@1080p
AMD is shit. Deal with it.

>Nvidia tells developers to use black box code in their games, specifically targetting their competitors and last generation cards performance, but knowing it'll affect the competitor more
>People across the board complain
"LOL AMDPOORFAGS"
>AMD allows developers to use OPEN SOURCE CODE, designed to utilise the most out of their own hardware, but doesn't attack the competitors
>Nvidia performance tanks
"I-I-ITS AMD'S FAULT. SHITTY AMD. DESIGNED FOR AMD."

The problem is their software is so shit it can't even properly run on their own hardware. Goyworks at least works on nvidia.
AMDrones everyone.

But it does.
480 is midrange.
480 hits 67fps.
Fury X hits 85fps.
What, you want 105fps? Go pay 1.5k for it then.

It's a fucking joke at 1080, you fucking retard. Those are fps for 1440p and above, considering deus ex has mediocre graphics.

Well considering I'm reading it directly from the post which fucking says 1920x1080, I fail to see where you've got that idea from.

Do you fucking lack reading comprehension?
These fps should be normal for 1440p and above, not 1080. It's not even on ultra preset. It's a joke.

I don't fail at comprehension, you just fucking suck at expressing yourself properly.
If you wanted to say that, you would've done much better by saying from the very start "these scores ought to be for 1440p, not 1080."
However, are you forgetting that games are more commonly getting fuck all for optimisations these days? So long as it works at all, most developers throw their hands up and say "well, it works, I'm done."

This isn't AMD or Nvidia at fault, its Edios and everyone else who has that mentality.
So long as it can hit 60fps on midrange cards, they don't care because that's as high as a console will go anyway.
Hell, that's as high as MOST people's monitors go anyway, so they don't bother for those of us like you and me who want to reach 120/144

Would you put any weight on the possibility that after X amount of years with each driver release the older cards become more and more gimped as an added incentive to upgrade? Like how Apple does with older iPhones.

this is fine

My brother was so pissed off at NVidias bf1 drivers that he called me up and asked when I'll upgrade so he can have my 290. Too bad the 290 is still so good that I can wait till I dont have to pay outragious money for a midrange chip with gddr5 in 2016. The 1070 seriously pisses me off.

If I'm spending more than $350 USD and want high end this cycle the 1070/1080 are the only option. Midrange I'd go with the RX480 8GB ($300) or the RX 470 4GB ($200) as the AMD cards mature much better than Nvidia and always have since GCN 1.0. Depending on sales and your region a 1060 6GB is good too. Buy whichever is cheaper at the time. If you're keeping the card for more than a year then get the AMD cards. Low end the RX 460 or 1050 Ti is the best choice. Follow the above advice. If you keep the card for more than a year go AMD.

>2016
>780ti is 30+ fps behind 290x

Fuck you Nvidia.

It's remarkable how well the GCN cards have aged.

>tfw still no reason to upgrade from my 295x2
are we ever going to get something from either nvidia or amd that isn't an overhyped letdown or what

Do you care about adaptive sync at all? If not, Nvidia.

Do you care about adaptive sync but G-Sync costs too much? AMD.

Do you play mostly older games and think most newly announced games are steaming
piles of shit? Nvidia.

Money is no object? Nvidia.

You hate green logos? AMD.