Because everytime Nvidia fixes something, they break something else on my 2080ti.I don't know why you guys complain about drivers.
Yes, this can be really irritating. It's another reason I avoid buying games immediately on release. I don't want to deal with these game-ready drivers.Because everytime Nvidia fixes something, they break something else on my 2080ti.
Its like they only care about improvements on 0 day games, and completely ditch the fact those quick fixes break older games. (rant)
But the new drivers do optimize the hell out of new games, and Nvidia to my knowledge is always extremely quick about new drivers.
I still have the lazy card syndrome on 1080p for some older dx9 games.the only major issue i had with the 5700xt drivers was the random screen blanking issue that took them a bit to figure out earlier this year. I been good since and not really have had any issues to complain about since.
I haven't fully decided yet to what exactly upgrade to, but right now I'm waiting for N22, hopefully it performs at 2080 Super or a little faster.. But the questions remain:In my opinion AMD has made a great comeback and hopefully their cheaper RDNA 2 cards are also great.
The last time I had driver issue was with my 6800GTS. That's ancient.I don't know why you guys complain about drivers. I haven't had a problem with either camp and I've been gaming on 2080 Ti and Radeon VII exclusively since they came out with ZERO issues on a multi-monitor setup.
In hindsight, all in all it was a good business decision for NV to go with Samsung so far.Availability update. TLDW; it's not good. Seems like AMD borrowed Nvidia's gun and are now shooting themselves in the foot as well.
I still can't get overclocking to work on Radeon VII with current drivers. Every time I think I have it working, it breaks. 100% "fan" (using a waterblock) etc. doesn't fix anything. I've given up.I don't know why you guys complain about drivers. I haven't had a problem with either camp and I've been gaming on 2080 Ti and Radeon VII exclusively since they came out with ZERO issues on a multi-monitor setup.
That's almost entirely nonsense. Nvidia is simply limited by Samsung's output, which is apparently absolutely abysmal. AMD likely greatly values Zen production and I have a hunch had some fairly rigid contracts with regards to console chip production that would limit these for this year. Has nothing to do with them expecting low sales because of Nvidia. They also likely are waiting for 7nm capacity to be less constrained (seriously almost the entire industry seems to be trying to use TSMC 7nm - I'm guessing because Samsung's 8 and 7 nm production is awful and doesn't seem to produce terribly great quality chips).AMD were not expecting to sell too many of these to begin with because they genuinely thought nvidia would have come out a bit better than they did. Nvidia themselves would have known the competition was coming much stronger than before. I'm guessing both IHVs didn't commit as many wafers to production as they now wish they did. So even if AMD learnt from nvidias' mistake two months ago now and decided to ramp production up, the problem is, it still takes 4-5 months to go from wafer to graphics card. So yeah, early next year is when supply will settle to more stable. The human malware vaccines should also help neuter demand as more folk get back into the swing of things.
This 'apparently abysmal' bit is a bit hard to sustain when NV are reporting a near 40% increase for gaming GPU revenue this quarter (both QoQ & YoY) and projecting similar revenue next quarter.That's almost entirely nonsense. Nvidia is simply limited by Samsung's output, which is apparently absolutely abysmal.
Yeah! I see what you mean.
Without diving into the actual details of the accounting involved, I'd be careful drawing a 1 to 1 line between revenue numbers and product sales/production despite NVidia's comments on the subject. I'm not entirely sure how silicon manufacturing works but I know plenty of other supply chain businesses where a tweak here and there can shift losses and hide underperforming parts of the business. For example, when offering a discount to move crap product, you can "sell" the product at full price thus keeping revenues high in that area and then the discount comes out of the marketing bucket. So high revenues in the interesting category ("See it's not junk after all") and write downs and losses in a different area. I'm not saying/accusing NVidia of doing that, but, these types of things are why analyzing financial statements can get tricky.This 'apparently abysmal' bit is a bit hard to sustain when NV are reporting a near 40% increase for gaming GPU revenue this quarter (both QoQ & YoY) and projecting similar revenue next quarter.
No doubt a lot of that's Covid driven, but they also simply couldn't do it if Ampere production was genuinely terrible - there's product out there somewhere.
Does that matter with AMD these days? Not being purposely obtuse, I'm genuinely asking because back a few years ago Nvidia had the much larger game dev relation budget to be able to send engineers to work directly with the programmers or incentivize them to use Nvidia-exclusive features. It seemed like with AMD sponsored games, it didn't make that much if any impact (I remember some AMD-sponsored games even ran better on Nvidia cards at launch). Haven't been keeping up with how the whole sponsorship efforts have panned out though.Not really since all three are AMD sponsored titles.
|Thread starter||Similar threads||Forum||Replies||Date|
|nVidia 3090Ti reviews thread||Graphics Cards||111|
|I||Article Changes Coming in the Video Card Reviewer Industry — HardOCP||Graphics Cards||44|
|J||Question 3050 Reviews||Graphics Cards||147|
|nVidia restricts 3080 12GB reviews||Graphics Cards||75|
|T||Question Trustworthy GPU reviews (until AT resumes)?||Graphics Cards||6|