3 ms·

I think for many like me, the small marginal performance increase an AMD card might deliver is not worth the significant disadvantages AMD brings in software, h

I think for many like me, the small marginal performance increase an AMD card might deliver is not worth the significant disadvantages AMD brings in software, heat, and noise.

onli 10y ago
I honestly do not get that perspective. But please note that this is from a (well, former) gamer perspective, how AMD gpus perform in ML and how the software support is there is just not my area of expertise. For games the performance difference is not marginal. The R9 380 and especially the R9 380X is a lot faster than the GTX 960. The R9 390 is on par with the GTX 970, as long as the Vram of the latter does not become an issue or one plays on higher resolutions. For all of them there is DX12 on the horizon, which so far gives a big boost to all AMD cards and none to Nvidia. Software just is no issue. You find that everywhere on the net, but AMDs drivers in practice just are not worse. I used both, I had problems with both and stable systems with both, there is no meaningful difference there. And professional reviews back that up (note: I'm not talking on how they are to program for. That I don't know). AMD driver for windows are not bad since many many years now, and the Crimson driver update also overhauled the UI in a good way. On linux the situation is more complicated: While Nvidia has absolutely the faster driver, it is closed source. The free AMD driver is capable of playing games now, it made enormous progress in the last year and it is a pleasure to see that. Having a free driver is a big advantage. There is a big difference in heat coming from power usage, Nvidia cards are just better there. Noise should be the same, but since both shut their fans down on idle and since the heating systems from Sapphire & Co are quite good, that is not something where AMD cards are really bad. I do not want to sound too pro-AMD – Nvidia makes great cards and they definitely have their place – but I do not get the negative attitude against AMD.

I think for many like me, the small marginal performance increase an AMD card might deliver is not worth the significant disadvantages AMD brings in software, heat, and noise.

onli 10y ago

I honestly do not get that perspective. But please note that this is from a (well, former) gamer perspective, how AMD gpus perform in ML and how the software support is there is just not my area of expertise. For games the performance difference is not marginal. The R9 380 and especially the R9 380X is a lot faster than the GTX 960. The R9 390 is on par with the GTX 970, as long as the Vram of the latter does not become an issue or one plays on higher resolutions. For all of them there is DX12 on the horizon, which so far gives a big boost to all AMD cards and none to Nvidia. Software just is no issue. You find that everywhere on the net, but AMDs drivers in practice just are not worse. I used both, I had problems with both and stable systems with both, there is no meaningful difference there. And professional reviews back that up (note: I'm not talking on how they are to program for. That I don't know). AMD driver for windows are not bad since many many years now, and the Crimson driver update also overhauled the UI in a good way. On linux the situation is more complicated: While Nvidia has absolutely the faster driver, it is closed source. The free AMD driver is capable of playing games now, it made enormous progress in the last year and it is a pleasure to see that. Having a free driver is a big advantage. There is a big difference in heat coming from power usage, Nvidia cards are just better there. Noise should be the same, but since both shut their fans down on idle and since the heating systems from Sapphire & Co are quite good, that is not something where AMD cards are really bad. I do not want to sound too pro-AMD – Nvidia makes great cards and they definitely have their place – but I do not get the negative attitude against AMD.