• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

AMD vs. Nvidia - Prefs & Why

Page 7 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
3DVagabond said:
Nowhere does it say that. They said they locked it out for legal reasons with nVidia's IP. Not for support reasons. (Unless I missed it? If so feel free to correct me.)

Anyone can argue that AMD could have coded their own AA, and didn't. That's a legit point. Albeit one we have no answer to as why they didn't. Whatever the reason to chalk it up to laziness, like some are trying to do, is fantasy.
Click to expand...

You don't think AMD is lazy? When they release a driver that breaks something they fixed before in the last release? When it took months to get Rage to work right and you had to do hacks and crap to play the game? Yeah the game wasn't that great but still...

I was talking about not leaving AA open for AMD cards at all. They locked it out because it didn't work and AMD didn't want to make it work. Better to just prevent it than to try to hack it in and do it wrong.
 
cmdrdredd said:
You don't think AMD is lazy? When they release a driver that breaks something they fixed before in the last release? When it took months to get Rage to work right and you had to do hacks and crap to play the game? Yeah the game wasn't that great but still...

I was talking about not leaving AA open for AMD cards at all. They locked it out because it didn't work and AMD didn't want to make it work. Better to just prevent it than to try to hack it in and do it wrong.
Click to expand...
There's no such thing as "lazy" in this business. If AMD were lazy, or any hardware engineering company, they would seize to exist.
 
cmdrdredd said:
You don't think AMD is lazy? When they release a driver that breaks something they fixed before in the last release? When it took months to get Rage to work right and you had to do hacks and crap to play the game? Yeah the game wasn't that great but still...

I was talking about not leaving AA open for AMD cards at all. They locked it out because it didn't work and AMD didn't want to make it work. Better to just prevent it than to try to hack it in and do it wrong.
Click to expand...
Rage was a flop on nvidia cards and drivers as well man it's the game that's a mess not nvidia or AMD and my gtx 5xx is even more of a mess then my previous 2xx card in Rage with same driver 301.42 for both cards only more texture pop ins and other bugs with the 5xx series card vs the 2xx card from nvidia.
 
I've used both companies products for 15 years or so. I've had plenty of issues with both, and both have done pretty well in recent years. Whichever offers the best bang for buck is the way to go these days. AMD/ATI has had that edge for a couple of generations.
 
hawtdawg said:
I've used both companies products for 15 years or so. I've had plenty of issues with both, and both have done pretty well in recent years. Whichever offers the best bang for buck is the way to go these days. AMD/ATI has had that edge for a couple of generations.
Click to expand...
I would say both camps are and have been dead even for a while it's just coming down to which camp comes to market first with the new toy for example the 7970 was first this time but nvidia was only a few months behind then it became equalized however the 7970 is $100 cheaper but then again nvdia has the best support for Linux so it's tit for tat back and forth.
 
cmdrdredd said:
You don't think AMD is lazy? When they release a driver that breaks something they fixed before in the last release? When it took months to get Rage to work right and you had to do hacks and crap to play the game? Yeah the game wasn't that great but still...

I was talking about not leaving AA open for AMD cards at all. They locked it out because it didn't work and AMD didn't want to make it work. Better to just prevent it than to try to hack it in and do it wrong.
Click to expand...

So, you think they sit there and leave stuff broken when they could fix it if they simply did something more than nothing? I think you have no idea what is required to fix these issues. What you are saying makes no sense. Like they go to work and say, "Let's just drink beer today."

They said they locked it out on the advise of their legal department. Why can't you accept that?
 
3DVagabond said:
So, you think they sit there and leave stuff broken when they could fix it if they simply did something more than nothing? I think you have no idea what is required to fix these issues. What you are saying makes no sense. Like they go to work and say, "Let's just drink beer today."

They said they locked it out on the advise of their legal department. Why can't you accept that?
Click to expand...

Erm,a good policy imo."Let's just drink beer today."😛
 
I have used both and I generally go towards whichever has a better deal for price and performance. Anyone remember back during the break out 8800GTX day? ATI had nothing to compete with it. Good days.
 
I've owned high end cards from both sides. GTX 480, 580, 670, 680, Radeon HD 6950, 7950, 7970.

Without a doubt, I prefer NVidia because AMD's drivers are a major headache to deal with. And don't even get me started on how much of a PITA CrossfireX is to deal with compared to SLI.

One more thing. When overclocking an NVidia card, if it's unstable, chances are that a benchmark like 3Dmark11 will simply quit out to Windows desktop (and the Nvidia driver will be reloaded). However, in my experience with overclocking my 7970, the card would hard crash whenever it got even slightly unstable during a benchmark, requiring a full reboot each time. And I was using the latest Catalyst 12.6 Beta with my 7970.
 
Last edited:
dahhbears! said:
I have used both and I generally go towards whichever has a better deal for price and performance. Anyone remember back during the break out 8800GTX day? ATI had nothing to compete with it. Good days.
Click to expand...
nvidia were first to market with a DX10 card and AMD then Ati was first to market with a DX11 SKU like I say tit for tat they are both the same shxx different pile and I agree get what you can afford at the time or whom ever is offering the better deal to you.
 
Jaydip said:
6970 was AMD's top dog and hence it had to compete with 580,though considering the price it should be 570.
Click to expand...

And price IS the defining factor here... Else youd say the FX-8150 should compete with the i7 3770K 😀

Of course, they only priced it that low to begin with because they knew it couldnt compete, but it doesnt change the fact that price is the main factor when comparing cards

Same reason the 4870 was so widely praised, even though it couldnt match the GTX 280
 
Zanovar said:
Erm,a good policy imo."Let's just drink beer today."😛
Click to expand...

images
 
I really wish the "ATI drivers suck" FUD would go away. Nvidia drivers are just as problematic. I'm currently unable to play ANY game smoothly on my new GTX 670 because vsync has been broken on the 600 series since day one. (This issue has been acknowledged by nvidia, and they've promised a fix in the next update.)

Some people might not notice, but I do and it makes me not want to play any games. To me, having non-working vsync is worse than a particular game not working or poor Crossfire support.
 
not another amd v nv thread. well i used both in the past few years, seems both work fine. only problem i have is that for amd hd4xxx series, they will no longer actively make drivers updates for it. so that might be something of a concern for me. but otherwise, i see the cards pretty close to each other.
 
I don't have a strong preference for either on the desktop side of things, but I do prefer nvidia's mobile graphic drivers and automatic switching much more over amd.
 
3DVagabond said:
Nowhere does it say that. They said they locked it out for legal reasons with nVidia's IP. Not for support reasons. (Unless I missed it? If so feel free to correct me.)

Anyone can argue that AMD could have coded their own AA, and didn't. That's a legit point. Albeit one we have no answer to as why they didn't. Whatever the reason to chalk it up to laziness, like some are trying to do, is fantasy.
Click to expand...

It doesn't specifically say -- but the developers asked for robust code from AMD and if not, they had to start from scratch.

Considering there is no native AA for DirectX 9 Unreal -- someone has to code for it. This someone was nVidia, which did write the code -- probably was tested and supported for nVidia products. Developers/company probably felt uncomfortable allowing the code to be used on AMD products. AA wasn't necessarily locked out and could of been added by AMD if they offered robust code of their own. The developers offered the same opportunity as nVidia to AMD.

Sadly, AA was used as some sort of divider for gamers and nVidia may claim that they're not to blame or AMD may claim that they're not to blame but for me, Epic, Eidos, nVidia and AMD all share in the blame pie. It was an unideal situation.
 
^^^
SirPauly said:
It was the developer/company that decided to do the lock out based on it was nVidia's work and was supported by nVidia, imho. AMD was asked by the developer to do the same exact thing as nVidia for their customers to get AA in the earlier version of Batman AA, imho!

What may be a Logical explanation:

Eidos didn't desire to have any liabilities on AMD hardware based on it was nVidia's work and supported for nVidia hardware, imho
Click to expand...

Wrong. The AA code was owned by Nvidia and they licensed it for use to Eidos. The vendor id was placed by Nvidia, and Eidos couldn't remove it without breaking their license agreement.

Because, from my understanding the land masses are built upon water with CryTech - it was there with Crysis as well. How about AMD offering more robust tessellation instead of offering that the 5XXX series was good enough and balanced.
Click to expand...

Many engines have water present in every map, setting it's level beyond the reachable area. It shouldn't get tessellated or even rendered when unseen by the player. What makes your claim about AMD offering lacking tessellation performance even sillier is that I had to disable all the DX11 features so my GTX460 could keep the frame rates playable. If I had been using AMD at that time, I could have just limited the tessellation factor in the drivers.
 
SirPauly said:
Where does it state this?
Click to expand...

Richard Huddy said:
AMD received an email dated Sept 29th at 5:22pm from Mr. Lee Singleton General Manager at Eidos Game Studios who stated that Eidos’ legal department is preventing Eidos from allowing ATI cards to run in-game antialiasing in Batman Arkham Asylum due to NVIDIA IP ownership issues over the antialiasing code, and that they are not permitted to remove the vendor ID filter.
Click to expand...

http://hexus.net/tech/news/graphics/20991-amd-nvidia-batman-arkham-asylum-aa-fiasco-telling-truth/

Emphasis mine.
 
I've had driver problems with both AMD and Nvidia in the past, so I don't have anything to say here

AMD's decision to make their DX10/10.1 GPUs legacy however, that has greatly affected my view on AMD's driver support...Especially when Nvidia's equivalents still continue seeing some new features supported

Then we have things like DX11 multithreaded rendering, that Nvidia has supported on both their DX10/11 GPUs since 1 year back, something AMD still has to do


SirPauly said:
Because, from my understanding the land masses are built upon water with CryTech - it was there with Crysis as well. How about AMD offering more robust tessellation instead of offering that the 5XXX series was good enough and balanced.
Click to expand...

AMD could have offered better tessellation capabilities, but why defend the overexaggerated tessellation in Crysis 2?
It's not as if it only hurts AMD, Nvidia cards had also run it better with less tessellation
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top