• 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.

Any legitimate reason to pay premium for nvidia card

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Status
Not open for further replies.
These frame drops:

The AMD Radeon R9 290X and the GeForce GTX TITAN turn in very similar average FPS performances and both could be considered playable at these settings if you have a tolerance for a lower overall frame rate. The TITAN felt a bit less playable at these settings due to the continued drops in frame rate when a lot of action was happening on the screen.
Click to expand...

The AMD Radeon R9 290 and the GeForce GTX 780 squared off as equals from a frames per second perspective, logging 49.3FPS and 49.8FPS respectively at 2X MSAA, therefore, we bumped them down to the low FXAA setting to push their frame rates closer to 60 on average. Much like with TITAN, the GeForce GTX 780 also experienced significant frame rate drops during the run-through, while the R9 290 did not.
Click to expand...

from [H]'s comparison
 
blackened23 said:
Let me rephrase. The main point i'm getting at is some games favor NV and some favor AMD. You're trying way too hard to make an example for NV with one game to which NV was basically locked out from during development; AMD has had similar titles in which the same happened to them. Ubisoft games, for instance, have traditionally always favored nvidia by a large margin. That wouldn't be so bad except it seems like AMD doesn't even try here, they haven't added CF support for most ubi titles such as AC2, ACBro, ACrev, AC3, etc. Also Splinter Cell : Blacklist does not have CF support last I checked.

So here we are with BF4, and unsurprisingly, it favors AMD at release. This should not be surprising since it is an AMD GE title - AMD had exclusive access to BF4 during development. If they weren't ahead, i'd say something was severely wrong. But with the latest drivers, NV is more or less even in BF4 from what i've seen. So I wouldn't read too much into the performance of one single game.
Click to expand...

If OP ask which is better for future prof it is Nvidia.IF someone come and talk about Mantle which is useless and we have not any public benchmark which is useless to discuss.

In 2014 their alot of Nvidia games coming for example
The ellder Srolls online,The Division,Dying Light,Witcher 3,Titanfall,Watch Dog,Evil Within,Wolfenstein: The New Order,Mad Max.
 
blackened23 said:
Let me rephrase. The main point i'm getting at is some games favor NV and some favor AMD. You're trying way too hard to make an example for NV with one game to which NV was basically locked out from during development; AMD has had similar titles in which the same happened to them. Ubisoft games, for instance, have traditionally always favored nvidia by a large margin. That wouldn't be so bad except it seems like AMD doesn't even try here, they haven't added CF support for most ubi titles such as AC2, ACBro, ACrev, AC3, etc. Also Splinter Cell : Blacklist does not have CF support last I checked.

So here we are with BF4, and unsurprisingly, it favors AMD at release. This should not be surprising since it is an AMD GE title - AMD had exclusive access to BF4 during development. If they weren't ahead, i'd say something was severely wrong. But with the latest drivers, NV is more or less even in BF4 from what i've seen. So I wouldn't read too much into the performance of one single game. Fact of the matter is when ignoring non performance related metrics, the 280X and 770 are mostly equal in terms of performance when averaged out among many games...
Click to expand...

OP is mainly interested in BF4 though :|

Speaking to you folks confuses me sometimes.
 
blackened23 said:
330$ for a 4gb 770? That's a pretty good price to be honest. And you can get the MSI gamer GTX 780 for 420$ shipped with the masterpass discount. That MSI aftermarket GTX 780 is about on par with 280X pricing currently.
Click to expand...

The 10% masterpass discount applies to everything, doesn't look on par.
to me even with inflated 280x prices.


490 plus tax less a $20 rebate vs $420 plus tax sans rebate. The rebate hassle never figured as a straight trade off in $$$ to me either. I always figure it as worth half it's value given the time/hassle of redemption.


That being said given the gap in AMD's lineup do to mining, the arena around the 280x/770gtx favors pretty clearly the 770gtx for gaming value. Problem is all those cards are way to expensive now that the $300 price point has been blown apart.
 
Last edited:
Gloomy said:
OP is mainly interested in BF4 though :|

Speaking to you folks confuses me sometimes.
Click to expand...

Confuses you? It isn't confusing. The game was AMD GE. Nvidia was locked out, but has released drivers that fix the issue:

With latest drivers, both the 280X and GTX 770 are even in terms of frametimes. The 780ti actually has better frametime variance than does the 290X , per guru3d:

index.php


index.php


So I guess the issue that HardOCP encountered is resolved. NV is either on par or better in terms of frametime variance and smoothness. Like I said earlier, when a problem exists with nvidia software it is generally fixed post haste, as witnessed here with BF4.
 
Last edited:
blackened23 said:
With latest drivers, both the 280X and GTX 770 are even in terms of frametimes. The 780ti has significantly better frametime variance than does the 290X , per guru3d:

index.php


index.php


So I guess the issue that HardOCP is resolved.
Click to expand...


Uhh, that's not even at all. The 770 shows clear spikes upward absent in the Radeons, in both graphs. It would be exactly the same if it weren't for that. Those graphs are proof the issue exists. Okay, so the 780Ti and 760 don't stutter, where every other Nvidia GPU does. That just points to a non-driver (and therefore non-patchable) issue to me, which is even worse.
 
blackened23 said:
Confuses you? It isn't confusing. The game was AMD GE. Nvidia was locked out, but has released drivers that fix the issue:

With latest drivers, both the 280X and GTX 770 are even in terms of frametimes. The 780ti has significantly better frametime variance than does the 290X , per guru3d:

index.php


index.php


So I guess the issue that HardOCP encountered is resolved. NV is either on par or better in terms of frametime variance and smoothness.
Click to expand...
Spot when Hardcrop said sweet thing R9 290X CF and AMD user hyped this site so much and now what when they are showing honest benchmark than it is not good site?wow
 
Gloomy said:
Uhh, that's not even at all. The 770 shows clear spikes upward absent in the Radeons, in both graphs. It would be exactly the same if it weren't for that. Those graphs are proof the issue exists. Okay, so the 780Ti and 760 don't stutter, where every other Nvidia GPU does. That just points to a non-driver (and therefore non-patchable) issue to me, which is even worse.
Click to expand...
Lol every?Wow i played this game on single GTX 780 at 2560 by 1440 Res.If i play at MSAA 4x still it give me around 48-50 Fps.
 
blackened23 said:
I'd be most interested in knowing what the heck you're talking about. The 770 graph in the lower chart does not include a 280X. It won't have the same frametimes as a 780ti, that should be obvious.

But if you want to nitpick between 20-25ms in the first graph with the GTX 770, by all means, go ahead. 20 to 25ms does not make an appreciable difference in smoothness. Like I said, the problem is fixed with the newest nvidia drivers.

Any bets on whether AMD has fixed crossfire for Spliter cell: BL and AC IV? The reason I point this out is that nvidia is fast with software fixes. AMD takes an eternity. I can't think of many ubisoft games which even include CF profiles.
Click to expand...

It jumps 20 > 30 in the first graph, and does so in the second graph too
 
blackened23 said:
I'd be most interested in knowing what the heck you're talking about. The 770 graph in the lower chart does not include a 280X. It won't have the same frametimes as a 780ti, that should be obvious. But if you want to nitpick between 20-25ms in the first graph with the GTX 770, by all means, go ahead. 20 to 25ms does not make an appreciable difference in smoothness. Like I said, the problem is fixed with the newest nvidia drivers. Let's just use your argument for a second, let's say it could be improved. Personally I think you're nitpicking because nobody will notice a spike between 20 and 25ms, which is what the first graph shows. But let's go with your argument. Nvidia will fix it with a future driver post haste. Meanwhile, AMD is still working on outstanding software issues that are two years old. Nvidia has speedy software fixes, AMD not so much. Case in point: Any bets on whether AMD has fixed crossfire for Spliter cell: BL and AC IV? I can't think of many ubisoft games which even include CF profiles. They certainly didn't bother with AC2 - AC Revelations or AC3.
Click to expand...
Best Example is Farcry 3.Even it is an AMD evolved game still SLI beats CF by margin.
 
Gloomy said:
Uhh, that's not even at all. The nvidia GPUs show clear spikes upward absent in the Radeons, in both graphs. It would be exactly the same if it weren't for that. Those graphs are proof the issue exists.
Click to expand...

I'd be most interested in knowing what the heck you're talking about. The 770 graph in the lower chart does not include a 280X. It won't have the same frametimes as a 780ti, that should be obvious. But if you want to nitpick between 20-25ms in the first graph with the GTX 770, by all means, go ahead. 20 to 25ms does not make an appreciable difference in smoothness. Like I said, the problem is fixed with the newest nvidia drivers. Let's just use your argument for a second, let's say it could be improved. Personally I think you're nitpicking because nobody will notice a spike between 20 and 25ms, which is what the first graph shows. But let's go with your argument. Nvidia will fix it with a future driver post haste. Meanwhile, AMD is still working on outstanding software issues that are two years old. Nvidia has speedy software fixes, AMD not so much. Case in point: Any bets on whether AMD has fixed crossfire for Spliter cell: BL and AC IV? I can't think of many ubisoft games which even include CF profiles. They certainly didn't bother with AC2 - AC Revelations or AC3.

Basically, there is a clear and substantial difference between AMD and nvidia in terms of software quality and responsiveness to fixes. If NV can improve BF4, they will. If there are stutter issues in BF4, I personally think they will be fixed quickly. Meanwhile, you have AMD still working on 2 year old issues.
 
Last edited:
blackened23 said:
I'd be most interested in knowing what the heck you're talking about. The 770 graph in the lower chart does not include a 280X. It won't have the same frametimes as a 780ti, that should be obvious. But if you want to nitpick between 20-25ms in the first graph with the GTX 770, by all means, go ahead. 20 to 25ms does not make an appreciable difference in smoothness. Like I said, the problem is fixed with the newest nvidia drivers. Let's just use your argument for a second, let's say it could be improved. Personally I think you're nitpicking because nobody will notice a spike between 20 and 25ms, which is what the first graph shows. But let's go with your argument. Nvidia will fix it with a future driver post haste. Meanwhile, AMD is still working on outstanding software issues that are two years old. Nvidia has speedy software fixes, AMD not so much. Case in point: Any bets on whether AMD has fixed crossfire for Spliter cell: BL and AC IV? I can't think of many ubisoft games which even include CF profiles. They certainly didn't bother with AC2 - AC Revelations or AC3.

Basically, there is a clear and substantial difference between AMD and nvidia in terms of software quality and responsiveness to fixes. If NV can improve BF4, they will. Meanwhile, you have AMD still working on 2 year old issues.
Click to expand...


It jumps from 20 to 30 very clearly in both graphs though... am I... am I speaking to a blind person, maybe? :|
 
blackened23 said:
It is still relevant. AMD has set a precedent of refusing to admit to software issues, and when forced to acknowledge problems through the persistence of various tech websites, they take an excessive amount of time in issuing a fix. Like I said, relevant. Does the 290 have mysterious issues yet to be uncovered? I don't know. But we do know that the Tahiti has yet to have crossfire + eyefinity stutter fixed, although AMD has promised a fix in January 2014. They originally promised this fall. This is after websites uncovered the issue in late 2012. When was Tahiti released again? Q4 2011 right? So a fix in Q1 2014. Is that reasonable? More than 2 years to fix their software? Also, there is no scheduled DX9 crossfire fix scheduled whatsoever. So DX9 games, I guess you're accepting microstutter as par for the course.

This is relevant because generally speaking, when nvidia has a software issue they will fix it post haste. My rough math indicates that it is taking AMD several years to fix some of these issues with Tahiti though, I mean, I don't feel entirely confident in a company that treats their customers like that. It is not reasonable to take more than a year in correcting a software issue, but AMD has done just that several times.

With that being the case, I can see why some folks would prefer an nvidia solution despite a slightly higher cost. Like I said, nvidia may have issues now and then but I certainly don't remember nvidia taking 2 years to issue a fix for such issues. They fix it post haste and you get better software (in terms of features) from the get-go. Heck, right now there ISNT a higher cost for nvidia. Thanks to mining, PC gamers can generally get the nvidia solution at a lesser cost compared to the AMD solution. So there really isn't any tax whatsoever in the current etail market.

I've said many times...good hardware is nothing without a good software ecosystem to back it up. Taking more than a year to issue a fix for your customers? I wouldn't call that good software support. Now, AMD has improved a lot as compared to 2012 in terms of software, but they are not on nvidia's level in terms of software IMO. Not yet. Nvidia simply outclasses AMD in this respect, and I do think people are willing to pay more because of that fact.
Click to expand...

As far as admitting issues the same could be said about NV, i see users who have been having freezing issues for over 8 months so a matter of opinion of who admits and who does not as they both try to brush things under the carpet.
We could call out issues of each brand all day and go look hey look this is why XYZ is better than the other and viceversa, there are some fundamental choices that NV has made which means that NV cards would be more hassle for me, the only thing that NV has that is compelling for me is SLI works in windowed mode.

And when it comes to software its all a matter of opinion because personally i have had little issue with AMD, the psychedelic episode http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yhe3_ItgstA that NV drivers were having with BF3 would of made me chuck the cards out of the window (hey but at least there is less multi gpu micro stuttering than if played on AMD) which was my main game 600 hours and seeing as i like dual GPU cards instead of the 5970s that you see in my sig if i were using NV they would 2 590s and we know what happened to some of them on the release drivers when overclocking http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sRo-1VFMcbc so as i said its a matter of opinion based on ones needs.

At the end of the day the focus should be on features that may interest the OP, Cuda, shadowplay, Physx, features that come in the CP...ect.. because they are more guaranteed than forcing on issues that the OP may or may not experience.
 
Last edited:
Carfax83 said:
If there were zero players on the map, then one can only wonder who or what was shooting at him. Invisible ghosts perhaps? 😀
Click to expand...

View the video of their test run, driving an APC shooting at the ground, empty server 800/800 tickets.

In case you cannot find it since its Russian:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oCrjWuNJl94

1/4 players even, small conquest map.. ughh.. even more unreliable than singleplayer in terms of GPU load.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top