Next Generation Emulation banner

AMD Radeon or nVidia GeForce?

Status
Not open for further replies.

ATi Vs Nvidia (2020)

78K views 678 replies 53 participants last post by  JohnKlein94 
#1 · (Edited)
So a new generation looms and ATi branding is no more so we can't ask ourselves ATi or nVidia again but yet the question remains the same.
Red or Green?
Where do we stand, nVidia GeForce or AMD Radeon?
Or is there a third contender for the crown?

You guys know where I usually stand but I have to admit the Radeon HD7000 series is looking pretty nifty.
Both are shaping up to be absolute power houses so whichever way one goes power seems assured at least this time around.

FIGHT!
 
  • Like
Reactions: violetpt
#317 · (Edited)
Reviews are out for the 3xx line of cards except the ones everyone is waiting for. AMD's own internal testing slides shows the Fury X is faster than the 980ti with some caveats on settings. :D



It's almost peculiar why they disabled AF on most of their internal testing. But I'm guessing enabling AF isn't something they want to show on marketing materials. I guess we'll know soon.
 
#319 ·
If we are going to use those numbers, AMD better hope the Fury X can overclock like a beast. The 980ti OC models are showing incredible gains and still maintaining good thermals.

If all that water cooling pays off, the card will be amazing, however it'll be the Fury Nano that will be the one to look out for.
 
#321 ·
That's one of the good signs of this card.

The other is how cool it (apparently) runs. According to Gibbo on OCUK the card sits under 40c in any situation. The clocks are locked and he can't do much about it yet, but I'm sure that's a case of NDA keeping his lips tight.

http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showpost.php?p=28207628&postcount=1144

At stock voltages, sub 40c is sick. Even better considering it's virtually silent. Unlocked, this thing really could be...Furious...
 
#323 ·
Hmmm, from what I've gathered about the interposer, it seems the be the weakest link in the design process and one of the biggest contributors to the higher cost of development. I could be wrong. Perhaps that is where the next round of cards will have more R&D time for improvements.

In other news, the R9 Nano has some pictures.

http://imagescdn.tweaktown.com/news...no-tiny-hbm-super-powered-video-card_full.jpg


http://www.tweaktown.com/news/46049/amd-radeon-r9-nano-tiny-hbm-super-powered-video-card/index.html

Look at that little fella! Single 8 pin connector!

 
#324 · (Edited)
REVIEWS ARE OUT!

http://www.overclock3d.net/reviews/gpu_displays/amd_r9_fury_x_review/1
http://www.guru3d.com/articles-pages/amd-radeon-r9-fury-x-review,1.html
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/R9_Fury_X/

Idles at 20w, sits right around the 980ti (non OC) in some games, loses out a bit in others. Overall blitzes 1440p, is crazy cool under load (60c) and displays excellent frame times in The Witcher 3. AMD did pretty well with this card, it's great that you can get a watercooled solution at the same price as the 980ti, but it's a little disappointing that it didn't destroy the 980ti.

Performance per watt has been improved very nicely. Power virus shows very high power usage, but regular usage is pretty good around 280w.

Bombs a lot at 1080p. Downsampling or having a bigger monitor gives you far better value.

The pump and coil whine is more noisy than the fan!

Still, I think this card shows a lot of promise. If AMD can get their drivers under control (nvidia too god damn it) this card could show some growth. Particularly with DX12 around the corner. The overly limited overclocking options are hurting the card at the moment. A 75mhz overclock gave a 6% increase in Firestrike. Not bad for a minor tweak, but users are gonna need better access than that.



I'm kinda okay with this :D Except for the video output selection which is balls.
 
#325 · (Edited)
http://www.hardocp.com/article/2015/06/24/amd_radeon_r9_fury_x_video_card_review/6#.VYrLIfm6eUk

4 GB V-ram limitations showing up on the Fury X. For a flagship card and the hype it got, it's increasingly amusing seeing all the regular fanboys(not anyone here though) showing up with excuses. Here are some I've already read at various forums:

1. Future drivers will increase performance and destroy the 980ti!!
2. It will really shine in Directx12 and then destroy the 980ti!!
3. HBM, HBM, HBM!!!!
4. Runs cooler!!! Yay!!
5. The review cards are damaged, retail cards will be better *tuned*!!

I'm not saying the card is a dud. I think it's great that AMD is releasing something new that at least brings their performance competitiveness up to Nvidia. But it's not anywhere near a Titan X killer. It's performance in most situations in various resolutions(not cherry picked) shows it below the 980ti. They should have priced it a bit lower, but I guess they couldn't afford to this time. The limited overclocking shows that the card is near it's limit on clocks already and why a water cooling solution was needed.
 
#327 · (Edited)
Anandtech's review article for the FuryX isn't out yet because of health issues with the reviewer, but their performance comparison charts tell us something.

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/1496?vs=1513

AMD needs to seriously throw more resources at their hardware driver department. It's a bit ridiculous at this point. Some of the 1080p performance is laughable in comparison to the 980ti on that chart.

Grid Autosport at 1080p Ultra settings in that chart is :eek:.
 
#332 ·
If I had to upgrade right now, I'd probably still go for the normal Fury, not the Fury X.
Performance is what you'd expect based on the price, which isn't bad. And it has support for technologies that will be useful in the future.
...I DO need a better monitor tho. I'm only upgrading if my current card dies. (Which it might, since I've allowed it to overheat for 2-3 minutes while playing Witcher 3, I'm still keeping an eye on it. Warning: Witcher 3 runs hot)
 
#334 ·
I didn't have to choose between AMD and nvidia, AMD have poor 4k support. They push living room gaming with a furyx2 concept system that can only connect to the tv at 30hz 4k.
The lack of HDMI 2 is a big deal, their official response is to use displayport, yeah televisions and displayport are not a thing. Most of the TV user base will not have dp at all.

Also, fury nano must be 16nm. The power draw, the cooler size, the perf/watt increase over fury with the same chip design and enabled units.
Looking at the long delay before release, you're looking at a product to clean on the new process.
 
#335 ·
Those choices for display ports really are atrocious. I swear AMD are the GRRM of the videocard world.

"Don't worry....it's coming....."

Then it comes and there's no release for blue balls, so we have to wait again to be disappointed. At this stage I wonder if Nano is just a heap of Samsung SOC's taped together under a cooler.
 
#339 ·
Those choices for display ports really are atrocious. I swear AMD are the GRRM of the videocard world.

"Don't worry....it's coming....."

Then it comes and there's no release for blue balls, so we have to wait again to be disappointed. At this stage I wonder if Nano is just a heap of Samsung SOC's taped together under a cooler.
I wanted to buy a fury, if the displayport -> HDMI 2 was a thing, I would pay more for the fury than a 980ti to have the AMD card, I believe they will have a faster card after some driver work and it's a cool concept card.
Huddy's response was not satisfactory and it was also not true:



Those adapters are not coming in summer, they makers of them say they "might" be ready for the end of 2015.

I don't like a graphics card that lights up green, nobody has a green system, it's always red and black. I need to mod the nvidia logo with some red sharpies.
 
#336 ·
I would never buy an AMD GPU, but I would not want to see them bankrupt either as competition keeps prices down and keeps Nvidia on there toes.
 
#337 ·
Sadly it's not looking good for AMD right now which is why i hope MS buy them and not Samsung or Qualcomm. In the hands of the later ones i believe they will stop competing with Nvidia. MS is at least a PC focused company due to there OS and products so there's a big chance they can stay as competitors.
 
#341 · (Edited)
AMD released a new driver, bringing a few features:
VSR support has now been extended to the following products:
AMD Radeon™ R9 Fury Series
AMD Radeon™ R9 390 Series
AMD Radeon™ R7 370 Series
AMD Radeon™ R7 360 Series
AMD Radeon™ R9 295X2 Series
AMD Radeon™ R9 290 Series
AMD Radeon™ R9 280 Series
AMD Radeon™ R9 270 Series
AMD Radeon™ R7 260 Series
AMD Radeon™ R9 380 Series
AMD Radeon™ HD 7900 Series
AMD Radeon™ HD 7800 Series
AMD Radeon™ HD 7790 Series
Desktop A-Series 7400K APUs and above
Frame Rate Target Control (FRTC):

FRTC allows the user to set a maximum frame rate when playing an application in full screen exclusive mode.

AMD FreeSync and AMD CrossFire™ Support:
AMD FreeSync and AMD CrossFire™ can now be used together in applications using DirectX® 10 or higher.

This driver provides full WDDM 2.0 support for Windows® 10 Technical Preview and DirectX® 12 on all Graphics Core Next (GCN) supported products - AMD Radeon HD 7000 and newer graphics products.


Now I don't need to use a regedit fix to add VSR to my 7950.
 
#342 · (Edited)
Apparently TressFX performance is up quite a bit. I'm unsure of how they achieved it, but some folks are mentioning 60fps where before they were getting 40 in Tomb Raider.

It could be they just reduced the level of tessellation like they did in Witcher 3, but if not good work AMD.

Also lol at Sapphire



It looks like they've taken the Tri-X cooler and slapped it on the Fury. Goes to show how tiny that PCB is.

















































































































SHOW NANO NOW YOU FUCKS!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
You have insufficient privileges to reply here.
Top