Question Why does the overall gaming GPU market treat AMD like they have AIDS?

[VirtualLarry]

I guess I get the (sub-liminal) "The way it's meant to be played" ads from NVidia, along with the recurring FUD tropes about "AMD drivers", but I honestly don't get the sales disparity, especially for the price.

I've owned both NVidia-powered as well as AMD powered GPUs, and IMHO, AMD is (generally) just as good. Maybe 99% as good.

Edit: And I think that there's something to be said about the viability of AMD technologies, when they're in both major console brands.

 

[DarthKyrie]

The market enjoys being fleeced because they are sheep. They also don't care about how ethical the company they are doing business with is.

 

[biostud]

For roughly the the same price and performance nvidia has given dlss, better raytracing performance and nvenc.

AMD has the advantage in memory capacity, but it has yet to show much benefit from it. And with FSR2.0 DLSS might not be that important.

 

[In2Photos]

We have 3 nVidia cards in use at our house, all purchased pre-pandemic. I never considered AMD at the time and honestly I'm not sure why. But after the latest stunts nVidia has pulled I believe my next card will be AMD. I'm not a "cancel culture" type of person, but nVidia lately (I didn't pay much attention to them before 2019) has really done some things that make me question if I want to be a customer of theirs.

I mentioned this in another thread and I still think it holds true even without EVGA in the mix. The nVidia AIB cards have more to choose from and I think also look better aesthetically than the AMD counterparts. With todays cases showing off the insides this is a big deal to a lot of people. The AMD cards tend to look very similar from brand to brand.

 

[Leeea]

For roughly the the same price and performance nvidia has given dlss, better raytracing performance and nvenc.

AMD has the advantage in memory capacity, but it has yet to show much benefit from it. And with FSR2.0 DLSS might not be that important.

That has not been true for quite some time.

example:
rx6600 gets 29%* more performance then a rtx3050
rx6600 new is $250
rtx3050 new is $300


Raytracing on the 3050 is a bad joke. Most people are playing games that do not work with DLSS.


*https://www.techspot.com/review/2505-geforce-rtx-3050-vs-radeon-6600/

Clearly you would be mad not to buy the Radeon RX 6600 in this comparison. It's over 20% faster while costing at least 15% less, so there's basically no angle we could take where the RTX 3050 is worth even considering.

In this segment, ray tracing performance isn't worth discussing and even DLSS is a bit of a tough sell because it generally doesn't work that well at 1080p

Steam Hardware & Software Survey

store.steampowered.com

AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT
0.37%

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050
2.05%

Looks like 5.24 rtx3050s were sold for every rx6600.

Not even close.

 

[biostud]

That has not been true for quite some time.

example:
rx6600 gets 29%* more performance then a rtx3050
rx6600 new is $250
rtx3050 new is $300


Raytracing on the 3050 is a bad joke. Most people are playing games that do not work with DLSS.


*https://www.techspot.com/review/2505-geforce-rtx-3050-vs-radeon-6600/

Steam Hardware & Software Survey

store.steampowered.com

Looks like 5.24 rtx3050s were sold for every rx6600.

Not even close.

Those peasant cards are not on my radar, I’m only referring to RTX 3080/90 and RX6800/900 tier cards.

also are 3050 in laptops included?

 

[Insert_Nickname]

I guess I get the (sub-liminal) "The way it's meant to be played" ads from NVidia, along with the recurring FUD tropes about "AMD drivers", but I honestly don't get the sales disparity, especially for the price.

You're quoting wrong. It's "The way you're meant to be played".

That said, I've owned both AMD and Nvidia cards over the years. Have had issues with both, and not had issues with both. So IMHO, both are pretty equal. I go where I get the most value for the money.

 

[biostud]

Personally I have no brand preference. For me it was ATi 980 pro,8800GT, GTX 670, AMD 7990, GTX 1070.

I just buy whatever gives most performance/$

 

[fleshconsumed]

Reasons are many
- Halo effect, nvidia often has performance crown at the top end which translates to sales at the bottom
- Exclusive features, G-Sync, DLSS, RTX, NVENC, CUDA
- Great marketing campaigns
- Past AMD driver issues that have been resolved for many years now, but fear of AMD drivers still persist

Most of those are non issues for the majority of the buyers, but most buyers also aren't knowledgeable enough to make an informed decision. AMD cards also typically age a lot better than nVidia because AMD supports older cards with driver updates and because AMD typically puts more VRAM on their cards, but those benefits do not become apparent until 1-3 years after the purchase so once again, so again, buyers don't think about it on day 1 purchase.

Personally, I'm a "value" buyer and I was a long time nvidia buyer when I was younger. Partly because of all the prior driver issues that AMD/ATI used to have in the past and partly because back in the day nvidia cards were at least somewhat competitively priced. Things are different now, AMD drivers are on par with nVidia if not better and nVidia premium is just too high. I switched to AMD around 7950 (Tahiti) time and stayed with them through R9-290/RX480. I did get 3060ti/3070fe during the great GPU shortage of 2021, but only because I was due for an upgrade, because those cards were the only cards that I could get, and because they were competitively priced to AMD competition. Going forward, in light of 40 series release, I'm going with the value for the buck card again which most likely is going to be AMD.

Worth reposting
YouTube link removed.

Profanity (even being displayed in an attached video link) is not allowed in the tech forums.

AT Mod Usandthem

 

[biostud]

If I had to buy a card right now it would be the RX6900, because it is ~$100 cheaper than a RTX 3080 12GB. At the same price I would probably go with the 3080.

 

[VirtualLarry]

I will say this, I built a couple of rigs for gamer friends of mine this past May, and for one, he mostly plays a lot of Blizzard games, and newer games. I put an RTX 3050 in his ($329), due to perceived better compatibility between Blizzard games and Nvidia/Intel combos. The rest of his rig was a 12100F and 16GB DDR4, 1TB NVMe, etc.

The other friend, he wants to do some streaming, but doesn't have a huge library of PC games already, so I got him a brand-new RX 6600 from XFX for $300. Rest of his rig is like a Ryzen 4500 (I know, I should have gotten him a 5600, but the 5600 wasn't cheap or out then, and the 4500 was like $113, for a 6C/12T Zen2-arch CPU.) 16GB RAM / 1TB NVMe.

I don't think that my choices were egregiously bad, and I was building on a budget for each of them, but I just felt a little safer going with the 3050 for the friend that played a lot of Diablo-series games. Just so there wouldn't be any "glitches".

Edit: The 12100F rig got a Z690 mATX board, and the 4500 rig got a B550 (and yes, I know the 4500 doesn't support PCI-E 4.0. I wanted both rigs to be drop-in upgradable in the CPU dept.)

 

[Insert_Nickname]

The other friend, he wants to do some streaming, but doesn't have a huge library of PC games already, so I got him a brand-new RX 6600 from XFX for $300. Rest of his rig is like a Ryzen 4500 (I know, I should have gotten him a 5600, but the 5600 wasn't cheap or out then, and the 4500 was like $113, for a 6C/12T Zen2-arch CPU.) 16GB RAM / 1TB NVMe.

I don't think the 4500 a bad choice. The main drawback is lack of L3 cache, it only has 4MB per CCX. Lack of PCIe 4.0 is likely unimportant for the moment, and you can always drop in a 5000-series later if required.

On the positive side, it's a monolithic chip, so you get all the un-core at 7nm. Which uses less power compared to Matisse.

 

[rommelrommel]

I would have bought RDNA 2 if it was available, ended up with Ryzen and a 3080 due to package deals (at retail at least.)

I'm ready to buy RDNA 3. Most people I know also are. Nvidia just has mindshare with gamers at large.

 

[DooKey]

I buy halo cards. NV comes out with the halo first usually and is the best halo card usually.

 

[amenx]

I would not have considered AMD prior to RDNA 2, but I think they are now worthy of consideration. If RDNA 3 delivers better bang for the buck, I'll go for it.

 

[desrever]

Because Nvidia offers "incentives" to keep the media in line and they all stay in line like good little minions.

Even outlets like gamersnexus, which has a reputation of not holding back and tell it how it is will hardly ever blame nvidia for anything and instead pick fights with board partners instead.

You can easily tell how much reviewers are just regurgitating Nvidia marketing in their reviews.

Things like the Geforce Partner Program should be a talking points on every video about Nvidia but is never mentioned again.

 

[amenx]

Because Nvidia offers "incentives" to keep the media in line and they all stay in line like good little minions.

Even outlets like gamersnexus, which has a reputation of not holding back and tell it how it is will hardly ever blame nvidia for anything and instead pick fights with board partners instead.

You can easily tell how much reviewers are just regurgitating Nvidia marketing in their reviews.

Things like the Geforce Partner Program should be a talking points on every video about Nvidia but is never mentioned again.

Disagree. Ppl buy cards according to performance benchmarks. That is the main criteria in my view and Nv usually ruled the roost in that area. Although AMD would knock prices down in the mid-range to lower tiers to offer better bang for the buck.

 

[badb0y]

They weren't competitive at the high end for a long time and when they became competitive in rasterization performance things like ray tracing and DLSS became big factors. If they would make an alternative for the halo parts I would love to go AMD. I actually hate nVidia.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

As I’ve said here before and be warned I haven’t had great experiences with amd cards.
I’ve had two video cards crap out on me and both were ATI/AMD. Technically a third however that one was my fault and yes it was an AMD card.
Problem with AMD is they continually play in the value position as in they give a little less performance for less cost than nvidia at least in the mid range and that simply is not a product people get excited for.
Going off to prepare for the barrage that will soon follow.

 

[DasFox]

I personally jumped onboard Nvidia a very very long time ago, because of Linux, because eons ago, AMD drivers and support in Linux were extremely bad.

So, I’ve just been chugging along buying Nvidia, because I still continue to use Linux.

Now times have changed, AMD Linux support has come a long way, and with EVGA jumping ship, maybe my next card will be AMD.

But, I’m so use to using Nvidia drivers, then there’s Raytracing, and if I go AMD, hmm, who am I going buy from is a really big question, AMD reference cards, or Sapphire, is all I can think of for now. hmm 🤔

P.S. I won’t be touching XFT, with their little Customs stunt. 👎

 

[DeathReborn]

I personally jumped onboard Nvidia a very very long time ago, because of Linux, because eons ago, AMD drivers and support in Linux were extremely bad.

So, I’ve just been chugging along buying Nvidia, because I still continue to use Linux.

Now times have changed, AMD Linux support has come a long way, and with EVGA jumping ship, maybe my next card will be AMD.

But, I’m so use to using Nvidia drivers, then there’s Raytracing, and if I go AMD, hmm, who am I going buy from is a really big question, AMD reference cards, or Sapphire, is all I can think of for now. hmm 🤔

P.S. I won’t be touching XFT, with their little Customs stunt. 👎

I quite like PowerColor on the AMD side, had R9 290 PCS+ cards from therm, grerat things they were. Had a bad experience with Sapphire on a 5700 that meant I just bought a couple of PowerColor Hellhound 6700XT's to give as Xmas presents to my nephews. To date they have received my old cards, this time brand new.

As far as the OP goes, It's easier to sell current performance (Nvidia) and harder to sell "fine wine" (AMD), the driver thing... it's nowhere near as bad as it was when the AMD drives suck thing started, they did SUCK!!! then. It is also easier to find Nvidia in stock post GPUpocalypse at least in the UK and the prices are more stable for Nvidia, AMD cards drop one day and climb the next... it's just plain odd at times.

 

[Shmee]

Yeah Powercolor cards can be pretty nice. Up there with Sapphire I think, but depends on the model. I have had 3 powercolor cards I believe, a reference 290 at launch, which I later water cooled, a Red Devil RX 580 and a Red Devil 5700XT. The Red Devil cards are generally top notch. I still have the 5700XT.

I am hoping EVGA could make AMD cards soon. Would help keep them around, and would add additional choice and competition for GPUs.

 

[Shamrock]

Every Nvidiot's argument

 

[tajoh111]

AMD's biggest problem is they overestimate their brand and they launch their prices at just competitive pricing. Their typically inferior feature set alone typically cause the public to not care about 5 to 6% savings AMD gives them which is initially present in reviews. And recently aside from their flagships, AMD has launched their cards at basically equal price to performance as Nvidia and at times worse.

6800 xt vs rtx 3080 similar price to performance
6800 vs rtx 3070 similar price to performance

RTX 3060 and 3060 ti on the other hand launched with better price to performance than AMD's RX 6600 and 6700 xt. Same with the RTX 3050 vs 6500xt.

Of course mining screwed pricing up for all these products. But the high initial pricing of the 6500xt, 6600, 6600xt and 6700 xt kind of destroyed AMD's goodwill with gamers because the high initial asking price was blamed on AMD and not miners as the high initial price was set by AMD. Nvidia high street pricing can be blamed on demand, but AMD high initial pricing which they are officially setting is being blamed on them.

The only card to launch with significantly better price to performance was AMD halo cards. 6900xt vs RTX 3090 or RTX 6950xt vs RTX 3090 ti. But with Halo cards, customers typically want the best and care little about price to performance.

If AMD wants marketshare they need significantly lower prices which they can actually afford. AMD's R and D burn rate for graphics card is vastly lower than Nvidia.

If people are questioning right now why cards like the RX 6600, 6600xt and 6700xt are not selling(shown by below MSRP street pricing) and cards like the rtx 3050, rtx 3060 and rtx 3060 ti still have high MSRP's. It's is likely due to Nvidia unwilling to give sellers rebates to move those cards while AMD on the other hand is. While Nvidia can afford to do this, but the multi billions dollars in inventory for RTX 3xxx means a very expensive loss.

 

[biostud]

Also in laptops NVIDIA RTX 3050/60 is far more prevalent than the AMD counterpart.