Why is it that Nvidia holds value more over AMD?

[Schmide]

Even Carmack prefers Nvidia due to their better driver support.

I believe the correct reason given was developer relations?

 

[cmdrdredd]

I believe the correct reason given was developer relations?

Something like that. When they (id software) were working on RAGE and the new engine they wanted a way to stream textures very quickly with decompression algorithms and Nvidia helped them get it working with CUDA. They made sure the game ran well on their hardware and drivers and had good communication. I remember that, but nothing about hardware specifically.

 

[blackened23]

Okay, I can appreciate nvidia with regard to working closely with developers. To be fair, however, AMD has really stepped up in this respect - AMD has done great work especially with Square Enix who have delivered some outstanding games such as DE:HR, Sleeping Dogs, among others.

That being said, let's talk about ID software. That's a name I used to care about during Quake's heyday, but after Rage, screw those guys. Rage honestly was a huge joke IMHO. The textures up close looked like something belonging on a Nintendo 64.

It's just time they give it up and call it a day before they tarnish their legacy even further. I can't believe the same studio which created classics like Doom II, Quake, Quake II gave us Rage. I honestly give no EFFS about ID software anymore - everything that created ID software in the early days (cutting edge graphics, best multiplayer gameplay, cutting edge multiplayer features) they have since abandoned. Again, screw those guys. Carmack is a genius that needs to find a home elsewhere, because ID isn't delivering the quality that they did in the past.

 

[DominionSeraph]

AMD had to drop their prices because the GTX 760 came out at $250 just as the AMD cards lost their game bundle. $280 7950 with no games looks pretty bad against a $250 GTX 760 with a free one.
And neither side discounts their old cards much. They seem to eventually sell out even at bad price/performance ratios.

 

[blackened23]

The 7950 has actually been selling around 200$ on sale recently, with the 7970 being around 300$.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

I keep thinking I should pick up a 7950 but I really want a GTX760, I don't think the 7950 is a bad card and currently its a great value. I guess I'm simply not excited to have a 7950.

 

[HeXen]

I believe the correct reason given was developer relations?

I'm going based off this but whatever. I too love NV's drivers, rarely an issue even with the beta's.

Carmack also revealed that he prefers Intel’s CPUs and Nvidia’s GPUs. Carmack believes that AMD is catching up and that its GPU hardware is really fast, but lacks when it comes to its drivers software. At least when that is compared to Nvidia’s.[/QUOT

That being said, let's talk about ID software. That's a name I used to care about during Quake's heyday, but after Rage, screw those guys. Rage honestly was a huge joke IMHO. The textures up close looked like something belonging on a Nintendo 64..

Blame the new generation of gamers or the likes of COD. Carmack mentioned that "they" tell him the old twitch shooters just aren't what many are wanting to play these days. If you look at similar style games that have come out more recently like Serious Sam 3 or Hard Reset, it certainly seems to be the case and you don't see much of such on consoles anymore.
Kids want to play through a movie, not run around in clusterfcked maps with a thousand doors apparently. I do miss Unreal and Hexen as well but they are kinda boring to play today. I think Doom 3 was as old school as it got but with jump scares and less Serious Sam approach, they just aren't a great team for making modern games imo but I don't think a trip back to Quake 2 days will help either.

 

[rgallant]

"but I really want a GTX760"
not much faster then a 2010 gtx 580 imo

 

[rgallant]

Since launch the HD 7xxx series have been halved in price, this hasn't happened to the GTX 6xx even though there is the GTX 7xx. Is it just that Nvidia don't drop prices quite so often?

-I suck at searches looked for amd threads about them going bankrupt and search gave me the options[ amd goes Bankrupt can I rma ]but showed no threads found.
-but in the 2012 time frame lots of threads about amd going bankrupt on the net so any wonder they had to drop prices along with the frame times ,pacing ,runt frames. sub nv IQ and funny these only came out when amd had a faster card after all these years so marketing \or mud slinging?

 

[cmdrdredd]

-I suck at searches looked for amd threads about them going bankrupt and search gave me the options[ amd goes Bankrupt can I rma ]but showed no threads found.
-but in the 2012 time frame lots of threads about amd going bankrupt on the net so any wonder they had to drop prices along with the frame times ,pacing ,runt frames. sub nv IQ and funny these only came out when amd had a faster card after all these years so marketing \or mud slinging?

Well, I'll just say one thing. When the GTX680 released it was $50 cheaper and faster. It took 6 months for drivers to catch up.

Many times when people are researching hardware they see the reviews and ignore the date and driver version. They see the original review for the 680 showing it as superior to the 7970 and they go on that assumption. Not everyone buying cards for new games know where to look or even understand drivers. Especially not people buying something like an Alienware and trying to select a video card.

 

[blackened23]

Yeah, pretty much ^

7970 ended up being a much better value than the 680 and pretty much being a wash in terms of performance. But the 680 made the 7970 look bad at launch with the 7970 costing 50$ more, and all of the web reviews made note of this.

Basically, AMD can't repeat the same mistakes with price, drivers, etc this time around. I fully expect they won't.

 

[rgallant]

"They see the original review for the 680 showing it as superior to the 7970"

with nv auto clocking and most reviews on release never recorded the running mhz leaving a lasting impression that nv was faster that's for sure and never doing clock per clock reviews. oh came out of the box that way box said xxxmhz wtf
Thats why I would not buy any nv 6xx or 7xx because of the slimy release reviews .
btw I have only bought nv - like some people like me only buy gm's over fords ,but I don't drink nv kool-aid.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

"but I really want a GTX760"
not much faster then a 2010 gtx 580 imo

I know it's crazy for some reason I'm happier and more excited for NVIDIA

 

[2is]

Because AMD has allowed themselves to be identified as the budget brand. Nothing more and nothing less.

I don't think that's the reason. I think it's because AMD shot them selves in the foot with the launch of the 7900 series with it being over priced and under performing. Sure, that changed later with better drivers and price drops, but the damage was done IMO. A lot of folks had already went with 670/680's (myself included, who was an AMD user prior) the frame pacing issues didn't help matters either.

 

[Rvenger]

I could careless if AMD is considered a budget brand. I am a bargain shopper so it works out great for me. I have a "$225.00" 7970. You can't even get a 2gb 680 for near that.

 

[cmdrdredd]

"They see the original review for the 680 showing it as superior to the 7970"

with nv auto clocking and most reviews on release never recorded the running mhz leaving a lasting impression that nv was faster that's for sure and never doing clock per clock reviews. oh came out of the box that way box said xxxmhz wtf
Thats why I would not buy any nv 6xx or 7xx because of the slimy release reviews .
btw I have only bought nv - like some people like me only buy gm's over fords ,but I don't drink nv kool-aid.

It's not overclocking...try looking up and understanding what GPU Boost is. It's stock configuration. Overclocking is when you raise the boost clock beyond what the card's bios comes with out of the box. It's not all that different than Intel's Turbo mode where the CPU will clock up with increased workload.

 

[escrow4]

My first gaming box was all AMD with a 790GX chipset, 4890 and x2 550 (then a 965), I have now gone back to all AMD. It comes down to price too, AMD really has value on its side. And a Titan, never again, $1K+ for a GPU is obscene. OBSCENE, unless I wiped my ass with hundreds.

 

[3DVagabond]

I don't think that's the reason. I think it's because AMD shot them selves in the foot with the launch of the 7900 series with it being over priced and under performing. Sure, that changed later with better drivers and price drops, but the damage was done IMO. A lot of folks had already went with 670/680's (myself included, who was an AMD user prior) the frame pacing issues didn't help matters either.

Why is this such a big deal 19 some odd months later? Why doesn't anyone say nVidia shot themselves in the foot when they released the Titan for $1000, then released the 780 a couple of months later for $650 and made virtually every Titan sold a bad value? If AMD releases a card that matches Titan, beats the 780, for $550 the headline will be it took them X# of months to do it, of course it's cheaper. Why does nobody remember the shortages of 680s when they were launched?

The reality of it is none of these things from either brand matter today if someone is shopping for a card. It's just that some people, for whatever reason, keep harping on AMD did this and AMD did that 2 years ago and that's why nobody buys their cards today, BS.

I could careless if AMD is considered a budget brand. I am a bargain shopper so it works out great for me. I have a "$225.00" 7970. You can't even get a 2gb 680 for near that.

This^ It should be better than being considered the "You don't get good value for your money brand". To the nVidia faithful though, offering less perf/$ means you're doing something right.

It's not overclocking...try looking up and understanding what GPU Boost is. It's stock configuration. Overclocking is when you raise the boost clock beyond what the card's bios comes with out of the box. It's not all that different than Intel's Turbo mode where the CPU will clock up with increased workload.

I think he was referring to stuff like this with the release cards and slimy reviews

This means the GPU clock speed could increase from 1006MHz to 1.1GHz or 1.2GHz or potentially even higher. (Kyle saw a GTX 680 sample card reach over 1300MHz running live demos but it could not sustain this clock.)

At least [H] saw fit to actually publish the numbers that his review sample attained. I wonder how many, if any, retail cards hit 1300MHz boost out of the box?

 

[skipsneeky2]

Amd as a whole is something people just love to hate,can't please anyone who is anti Amd and good luck trying.

 

[2is]

Why is this such a big deal 19 some odd months later? Why doesn't anyone say nVidia shot themselves in the foot when they released the Titan for $1000, then released the 780 a couple of months later for $650 and made virtually every Titan sold a bad value? If AMD releases a card that matches Titan, beats the 780, for $550 the headline will be it took them X# of months to do it, of course it's cheaper. Why does nobody remember the shortages of 680s when they were launched?

Hardly the same thing. 7900 was OVERpriced AND UNDERperforming. Titan on the other hand is overpriced but was by far the fastest GPU you could buy. 780 brought the price down to a reasonable level and was faster than any GPU except for the Titan, which also translates to better than anything AMD has.

Being overpriced is one thing. Being underperforming is another thing. Neither are good, but the 7900 series was BOTH. There was never a card that was cheaper AND faster than a Titan OR a 780. The same cannot be said for 79xx.

And it's a big deal for the reasons I already mentioned. People bought the 680 which was cheaper and faster at the time. When those people want upgrade, what are they going to upgrade to? 7900 is a side grade so the only option is a 780 or Titan. It was simply poor strategy on AMD's part. nVidia knew it's product and it's competitions product better

 

[3DVagabond]

Hardly the same thing. 7900 was OVERpriced AND UNDERperforming. Titan on the other hand is overpriced but was by far the fastest GPU you could buy. 780 brought the price down to a reasonable level and was faster than any GPU except for the Titan, which also translates to better than anything AMD has.

Being overpriced is one thing. Being underperforming is another thing. Neither are good, but the 7900 series was BOTH. There was never a card that was cheaper AND faster than a Titan OR a 780. The same cannot be said for 79xx.

And it's a big deal for the reasons I already mentioned. People bought the 680 which was cheaper and faster at the time. When those people want upgrade, what are they going to upgrade to? 7900 is a side grade so the only option is a 780 or Titan. It was simply poor strategy on AMD's part. nVidia knew it's product and it's competitions product better

The 7970 was the fastest thing when it was released as well. Didn't matter. The 680 was cheaper and faster for a short time and during most of that time availability sucked. Strange how you can't recall that, for most of the time the 7970(GHz) was faster and cheaper.

 

[philipma1957]

not a single person mentions that amd was great for bitcoins.

so many people like myself owned 20 of them.

I made decent money on them and when I switched to asics I dumped them on ebay. multiply this by 20,000 cards or 60,000 cards no longer working on btc mining they glutted the used market and dropped the price.

 

[2is]

The 7970 was the fastest thing when it was released as well. Didn't matter. The 680 was cheaper and faster for a short time and during most of that time availability sucked. Strange how you can't recall that, for most of the time the 7970(GHz) was faster and cheaper.

Sounds like you're trying to make excuses for AMD, but that's all they are, excuses. I guess people are willing to wait for availability for a product that's faster and cheaper. I know I am. I'm not going to pay more for less just because I have to shop for stock. I also have the benefit of not having my judgement clouded by brand loyalty. Also, I didn't have a problem getting my 680 a few days after launch when I walked into Frys and they had several in stock.

 

[philipma1957]

Sounds like you're trying to make excuses for AMD, but that's all they are, excuses. I guess people are willing to wait for availability for a product that's faster and cheaper. I know I am. I'm not going to pay more for less just because I have to shop for stock. I also have the benefit of not having my judgement clouded by brand loyalty. Also, I didn't have a problem getting my 680 a few days after launch when I walked into Frys and they had several in stock.

for me I hardly gamed and nvidia were terrible for btc mining. so I used amd. but just make nvidia good for btc i would have used them..

and they would have had a bigger then normal price hit instead of amd.

 

[2is]

for me I hardly gamed and nvidia were terrible for btc mining. so I used amd. but just make nvidia good for btc i would have used them..

and they would have had a bigger then normal price hit instead of amd.

That's great, and if people are mining AMD is certainly the way to go. No one cares about mining though. That's why no one mentions it.