Are You Jumping Ship?

Are you switching GPU brands?

  • Yes, AMD to NVIDIA

    Votes: 41 18.6%

  • Yes, NVIDIA to AMD

    Votes: 20 9.1%

  • No, sticking with AMD.

    Votes: 27 12.3%

  • No, sticking with NVIDIA.

    Votes: 132 60.0%
  • Total voters
    220
At the moment, I'll be sticking with nvidia, simply because going from what I have now to an RX480 would be a downgrade, and only the GTX1080 I would consider an upgrade. But if AMD releases their flagship that blows the GTX1080 away for GTX1070 price, I'll be all over that.
 
Isn't gsync controlled monitor side and free sync gpu side? I wonder if there's an easier load on the gpu nvidia side because of this.
 
TFchris said:
But if AMD releases their flagship that blows the GTX1080 away for GTX1070 price, I'll be all over that.
Click to expand...

This is what's killing AMD. People expect them to release a card faster than NV's top tier, but price it at or below NV's 2nd tier. That is absurd. When AMD released the R9 380/390, they were priced the same as the GTX 960/970, were faster on average, and the 390 even had double the VRAM of the 970. It wasn't good enough.

This would be like me saying, "Not buying the GTX 1060 unless it blows the RX 480 out of the water, but doesn't cost more than $150." If one is faster at the same price, you get the faster card unless there's a logical exception (IE, your monitor has FreeSync/G-Sync, you have a Shield for Gamestream, etc.).

Pillars said:
Isn't gsync controlled monitor side and free sync gpu side? I wonder if there's an easier load on the gpu nvidia side because of this.
Click to expand...

Overhead is the same based on multiple tests. They're both controlled monitor-side. The only difference is that Gsync requires a proprietary scalar from Nvidia, whereas Freesync can be implemented via most commons scalars.
 
Really good to know thank you, Ill keep an eye on the AMD side.. if they ever come out with the goods.
 
I am on board with both AMD and NVIDIA (although deep down inside I prefer AMD) . I just tend to buy what makes sense at the time or if it they have a product that interests me that I want to mess with. Just in the most recent generations, I've had/have R9 290's, 290X, 390, GTX 950, 970's, 980, 980ti and most recently a GTX 1070. I was considering the RX 480 to mess with crossfire again, but in the end decided to just do the 1070 until Vega/1080ti come out.
 
Neither big pascal nor vega is out...still waiting for the high end GPU replacement.
 
MangoSeed said:
I think nVidia has proven over and over that a wide memory bus or big peak bandwidth numbers aren't necessary for great performance. It's all about how you use what you've got.
Click to expand...

Not just Nvidia. AMD proved themselves capable of building a more efficient memory architecture plus faster cache system with the HD 4850, which versus the 2900XT had 30% higher performance with half the memory bandwidth

They fixed inefficiencies in their memory controller to make that happen.

AMD's Radeon HD 4870 graphics processor

The 4870 had the overkill GDDR5, but that was mostly to make room in the future for the 4890. From tests at the time, a 4850 clocked to the same core speed as the 4870 got within 5-10% of the same performance :D
 
Last edited:
Daniel_Chang said:
This is what's killing AMD. People expect them to release a card faster than NV's top tier, but price it at or below NV's 2nd tier. That is absurd. When AMD released the R9 380/390, they were priced the same as the GTX 960/970, were faster on average, and the 390 even had double the VRAM of the 970. It wasn't good enough.

This would be like me saying, "Not buying the GTX 1060 unless it blows the RX 480 out of the water, but doesn't cost more than $150." If one is faster at the same price, you get the faster card unless there's a logical exception (IE, your monitor has FreeSync/G-Sync, you have a Shield for Gamestream, etc.).
Click to expand...


Wasn't that what AMD/ATI known for? O__o?

But aside from that, I pay premium for NV for things other than just fps. I make good use of shadowplay, which I find to be very handy. So unless AMD can make up for the lack of feature in game recording (FOR ME), I won't consider it, unless it's cheaper and/or better performing overall.
 
TFchris said:
But aside from that, I pay premium for NV for things other than just fps. I make good use of shadowplay, which I find to be very handy. So unless AMD can make up for the lack of feature in game recording (FOR ME), I won't consider it, unless it's cheaper and/or better performing overall.
Click to expand...

AMD has that feature too...
 
already did, sold my Gigabyte GTX 970 G1 and got a XFX RX 480 Black Edition
4fbe817f016a1111712a37acddc79ba933174afaff8f3401030e29247ab285bd.jpg
 
I'm wishy washy right now.

I was going to get a 480, then I decided to wait for the 1060 but now it looks like I may go for a 1070 lol

The sad thing is I'll probably end up with a vega card and the 1070 will go to my other machines like I planned...
 
I voted AMD to NVIDIA considering there is no facts/info about what AMD will have as a flagship card it's specs pricing or anything. NVIDIA has something on the table and it kicks ass. Of course I've been holding out for actual real world info on the Classy (Bench/overclock results, pricing, and EK block availability) along with the same bench, overclock, pricing on the Hydro. Not to mention availability of them. If NVIDIA can't get production in order and AMD flagship drops and is in stock along with EK blocks available and their results are on par or above the 1080 and if pricing is on point or in line with the current pricing structure of the new AMD card then I may be staying. Depending on the info for the Classy/Hydro I may be going with the FTW. I'm seeing so far there isn't a difference in the Classy vs the FTW other then cooler the name and of course price premium for relatively nothing other then power. If the Hydro in fact ends up being produced with the stacked power connectors that are floating around along with the ugly ass Swiftech block that is circulating then that POS is out for me also.
 
Sticking with Nvidia. Have not used an ATI/AMD product since my 9800 SE that I purchased from someone on this forum (y) . Prior to that, it was all Nvidia as well.
 
EuphoricRage470 said:
Nice man, what Freesync monitor do you have? Also, how do you like the Dell G-Sync?
Click to expand...


BenQ XL2730Z.

I absolutely love the picture quality on the Dell, no backlight bleed, bezelless, the antiglare coating can't be seen, and no dead pixels. It has a better display but the freesync display actually feels smoother at higher FPS. I get a little jitter at 80+ whereas the Freesync has a very "fluid" feel. (this was tested in GTA V which I play the most) Other games are probably different. I am sure they both have upsides and downsides. I notice it does take a little longer for the monitor to initialize a resolution or change in game settings due to G-Sync. (Maybe the module pass-through)


Honestly the picture is so good on the Dell, I don't think I can go back to the BenQ. It just doesn't look as good and I might just put it up for sale cheap soon.
 
Last edited:
I haven't bought a video card since 2006. (I wish I was kidding, the 550Ti I have is from a second RMA). So I'm game for either the 1060 or 480 this next go around...I need more data before I can make that call.
 
Rvenger said:
BenQ XL2730Z.

I absolutely love the picture quality on the Dell, no backlight bleed, bezelless, the antiglare coating can't be seen, and no dead pixels. It has a better display but the freesync display actually feels smoother at higher FPS. I get a little jitter at 80+ whereas the Freesync has a very "fluid" feel. (this was tested in GTA V which I play the most) Other games are probably different. I am sure they both have upsides and downsides. I notice it does take a little longer for the monitor to initialize a resolution or change in game settings due to G-Sync. (Maybe the module pass-through)


Honestly the picture is so good on the Dell, I don't think I can go back to the BenQ. It just doesn't look as good and I might just put it up for sale cheap soon.
Click to expand...

Yea I heard nothing but great things about that BenQ monitor. Too bad nvidia is shit deep with gsync. They really are the APPLE of graphics cards. Damn closed standards and stupid premium on monitors and shit. I wish they adapted the standard already so we can all fuckin have standard freesync. I mean keep your G-sync crap for those who want to be in bed, but give people choices.
 
Unless the GTX 1060 absolutely devastates the RX480 I'll be jumping ship.

Going from GT750m to RX480.
 
I have an older nVidia card right now, so I'm just waiting on AIB reviews for the 480 and 1060 to make my decision between the two.
 
Although I've said that I would jump ship to AMD, if the 1060 offers better performance at a similar price, and their aftermarket cards are out before AMD's, I'm going right back to NV. The lack of news on aftermarket availability for the RX 480 is bothersome for me. Rumors peg it anywhere from 7/13 to early August. I am not waiting until early August for a new card. On 7/18, if there are no decent AIB cards for the 480, I'm getting up early the next day to snipe a 1060.
 
I nearly lost faith in AMD but Nvidia might be cheating again:
The guy on the right noticed worse image quality compared to the RX480 running Doom. 1:01:00
 
Last edited:
Probably sticking with NVIDIA unless Vega is very close to GP100 performance. I want the fastest possible GPU performance and I don't really care about price. AMD tends to offer slower solutions at better prices with some exceptions, and based on Polaris, I am somewhat doubtful that Vega will beat big-die Pascal. I could see myself switching if Vega beats GP100 to market (unlikely) or is faster.

I also have GSYNC which I love, but I'd consider upgrading monitors too if the GPU solution was that much better.
 
Im sticking with amd, better roi plus my gaming needs are very light duty that a single 7970 has zero issues handling. I am watching the 1070 with some interest, but it would have to be $279ish for me to consider.
 
I just ordered a MSI GeForce GTX 1080 Sea Hawk X to replace my XFX Radeon 295x2. I've been running Radeon video cards since 2003 in my desktop systems and Matrox cards prior to that.

The GeForce GTX 960M in my Dell Laptop really won me over to how well it performed and how much nicer the Nvidia software is.
 
The 1070 or the 1060 is next on my hit spot. I still want a G-sync monitor but i'm in no hurry to pick one up. I keep hoping async frame rates become a mainstream thing.
 
viscountalpha said:
The 1070 or the 1060 is next on my hit spot. I still want a G-sync monitor but i'm in no hurry to pick one up. I keep hoping async frame rates become a mainstream thing.
Click to expand...

If the GTX 1060 is on your list, find a GSYNC monitor that you like. Then find the closest Freesync equivalent (many times they're exactly the same). Then compare the cost of the monitor + GPU. See if that makes the RX 480 more worthwhile.

This is, of course, moot if you want the 1070. AMD has no real performance equivalent right now.
 
Sticking with my 290X, only real upgrades are WAY too expensive at the moment in my opinion. I'll wait for VEGA and 1080 Ti to drop, then maybe pick up a 1070 or AMD equivalent. I grabbed my 290x for $250 two years ago, and it is still fine at 1440/60 (I don't care about maxing all the settings). Bring on the holiday deals.
 
The Dell S2716DGR goes on sale for under $500 quite often. It is an excellent display.
 
Brand loyalty doesn't mean a thing to me. I buy the best equipment for the price I can afford regardless of color or brand.
 
To soon to tell. I was tempted with the 980 vs 390 last year but held on longer. My 7970 is a fantastic card but if I want to keep going and pushing three screens I need more power. I dont mind medium settings if they dont look like crap but if I have to go lower for reasonable frame rates I wont play the game yet.

Holding out on Tomb Raider and GTA V for that reason. Wolfenstein was similar.

Depending on how the 490 and 1080Ti perform in their price brackets that will dictate my decision.
 
I was almost on the cusp on purchasing the 480 until I saw the pcie issues and when I heard about the 1060 releasing soon it makes the decision a little bit harder. I'll most likely drop my 2x 7950 CF for a single 1060 soon.
 
I haven't, and probably won't for several reasons, but one of them I find no explanation (or more important, the culprit) for:

1. AMD 'tax': all the talk about nVidia tax, the one thing I have completely failed to understand is the AMD tax we have here. The tax makes most AMD cards priced a tier higher than what they were supposed to be. Biggest example being Rx 480. It's currently priced similarly to GTX 970, not GTX 960 level in the US. Taxes completely failed to explain it because it doesn't explain why AMD cards would get taxed heavier, nor would scalping explain it, because there are bigger fish for scalping (EG rare brand nVidia, like EVGA, Galax, etc, not Gigabyte's Rx 480). Whatever the reason may be, loses one of its biggest selling point here.

2. Hardware: none of the AMD cards offer the performances I am looking for. Fury X didn't appeal to me because of the watercooler, the 4GB VRAM and performance just didn't cut it either, neither 390x nor 480 has the performances I am looking for (ideally TW3 on max settings at 60fps min on 1440p, currently not even nVidia hardware can do that, 1080 can only do 60fps average).

Both of these factors makes AMD currently a non-choice for me, the only issue I have is, thus, choice of 1070, 1080 or wait until big Pascal.
 
Last AMD card I had was the 7970. Doesn't seem like it will change anytime soon. I am skipping the 1080 but will most likely stick with NVidia for the Ti version of 1080. My 980 Tis are running quite well so no need to jump ship or even buy the 1080s about now.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top