9 ms·
Been watching this quite closely. As far as I summarise, the 7900XTX is the first (and only) desktop GPU from AMD that _might_ be worth buying. (They own the co
by DarkmSparks 3y ago
Been watching this quite closely.
As far as I summarise, the 7900XTX is the first (and only) desktop GPU from AMD that _might_ be worth buying. (They own the console gaming space, but thats a different story).
Not Nvidia beating due to the CUDA issue, but a massive leap in the right direction.
Intel is also making _some_ progress with its ARC range.
Its going to be happy days for us users if/when AMD/Intel are competitive, and cut some of that monopoly margin off Nvidias pricing, but a way to go yet.
- EtienneK 3y agoThis is not true at all. AMD GPUs have been constantly delivering better bang-for-buck for a while now. Edit: of course I am talking about gaming here since you mentioned consoles
- Iulioh 3y agoEh. For me the problem is technology and not raw performance DLSS and RT are massive for someone with a 4k screen but now 4k gaming hardware outside league of legends lol
- esperent 3y agoDLSS is only marginally better then FSR 2.0. Sure, you can see the difference if you're carefully looking for it in comparison videos. But when you're actually playing it's usually not noticeable to any meaningful degree. You're gonna get occasional artefacts with both. As for ray tracing - to be honest, playing at 4k with an RTX 3070 there's very few games where I can turn it on without the game running unacceptably slow even with DLSS. Ray traced shadows and AO are nice but hardly a deal breaker. I think it's more the desire to have the latest and greatest tech that makes Nvidia cards desirable, rather than any material difference that you'll actually notice while gaming. Some good comparison shots of DLSS 2 and FSR 2 in this video. https://youtu.be/1WM_w7TBbj0 https://youtu.be/1WM_w7TBbj0
- izacus 3y agoI mean, you talk about "comparison videos", when in reality the issue is that significant amount of games support DLSS and pretty much noone supports FSR 2.0. You can do any comparison you want, but it won't help you when your software won't make use of the library your GPU supports. (Also, we're at DLSS 3.0 now with frame generation which moves the bar higher.)
- ekianjo 3y agoFsr 2 is supported out of tje box on Gamescope in Linux for all games
- BoorishBears 3y agoHardware Unboxed's viewership draw is placating "Team Red", or the the people who treat hardware like a sports competition, so when they say: - the overwhelming conclusion is DLSS is the superior upscaling technology with near universally better results - it was a brutal result for AMD - DLSS gives NVIDIA a clear selling point I'm not sure if it backs your suggestion...
- zirgs 3y agoSeems like it's still better to buy Nvidia then. Nvidia cards support both DLSS and FSR so you can choose the tech that works best with the particular game. Meanwhile AMD only supports FSR and if the game looks better with DLSS then there's nothing you can do. AMD cards also aren't that much cheaper so it doesn't make much sense to buy worse tech that you'll be using for years every day to save a few euros.
- PeterStuer 3y agoFor mid-tier gaming they are very competitive, but for consumer AI they were not even a player until very recently and still marginal at best.
- mjan22640 3y agoWhat is the root cause of AMD not being good for AI?
- arcanemachiner 3y ago“Nvidia's SDK, CUDA, is the industry standard and they have built a huge range of tools on top of that for training large models, inference-serving, optimization, transfer learning, infrastructure management and operations automation, and a lot of vertical-specific applications.” https://www.google.com/search?q=why%20is%20nvidia%20better%20for%20ai https://www.google.com/search?q=why%20is%20nvidia%20better%2...
- mjan22640 3y agoSo its not the hw, but an API issue? Is it not possible to port the tools to the AMD API? Or does the AMD API not allow to properly utilize the compute power of the hw?
- ekianjo 3y agoNo CUDA is heavily integrated with how Nvidia hardware operates
- dagw 3y agoAMDs APIs have historically been way behind CUDA, both in features and ease of use, making it much harder to reach feature and performance parity with CUDA. The second big problem is that AMD has a history of abandoning APIs. While Nvidia has been focusing on CUDA from the start, AMD is on its third or fourth API. A lot of developers got burned early on by putting in a lot of effort into supporting AMD cards, only to have their work become useless as AMD dropped old API. So if you wanted to support AMD today you have to choose between using their latest API which is currently only supported on a handful of their latest top end cards, or using their previous API, which is much worse and may or may not be supported in 2 years time.
- anshukg 3y agoI don't know , I think it is still plenty of time before nvidia could have a serious competitor for value : https://medium.com/@1kg/nvidias-cuda-monopoly-6446f4ef7375 https://medium.com/@1kg/nvidias-cuda-monopoly-6446f4ef7375
- ekianjo 3y agoGaming is only a very small part of what you expect from GPUs these days
- sva_ 3y agoI wouldn't be so sure about that. There are hundreds of millions, if not billions of gamers, many of which use GPUs.
- ekianjo 3y agoIts a stable market. Its not growing like the AI market is and Nvidia makes much higher margins by selling GPUs to the enterprise market. Gaming is bound to become a tiny piece of the pie.
- NBJack 3y agoFor a time, so was bitcoin mining. ML hardware sales are being driven by a 'Renaissance' of rapid model development and commercial offerings, primarily by the FAANG, but several others too. This is neat, but beyond the initial waves, OpenGPT isn't exactly the digital messiah many suggested it was, and running these models is expensive (both in HW and power for it). Time will tell, but I am skeptical this will be more than a craze for most applications (except digital art, which is awesome and has already been proven effective; just not maybe as marketable to the masses).
- xiphias2 3y agoAI market just caught up with gaming this year. But aa it's growing faster than gaming, in a few years GPUs have to improve more in AI performance (matmul ops and interconnect) than gaming.
- WanderPanda 3y agoFor us users it has always been relatively fine, datacenters are the ones that are really milked by nvidia
- throwaway2990 3y ago> the 7900XTX is the first (and only) desktop GPU from AMD that _might_ be worth buying. Unless you need RT for gaming then most of AMDs cards are better value.
- dralley 3y agoAnd if you use Linux and don't need CUDA, it's really no contest. The AMD experience on Linux is vastly better than the Nvidia one.
- cout 3y agoCan you give a specific example of what's better about the AMD experience on Linux?
- neurostimulant 3y agoWayland is less buggy on AMD and Intel.
- throwaway2990 3y agoThis^ and also there’s always some driver issue on linux for Nvidia cards. It’s one of those things you set it up and then never want to touch it because if you update it. It’s flipping a coin on if you will spend the next few hours trying to figure out what’s wrong.
- adrian_b 3y agoI keep hearing complaints about NVIDIA driver issues under Linux, so they must be real. Nevertheless, I have used for twenty years many different NVIDIA cards under Linux, both GeForce and Quadro models, on many different desktop and laptop computers. I have never seen any problem with the NVIDIA drivers and libraries, everything has worked fine after installation, without needing any special action beyond choosing to install the NVIDIA software. The same was also true under FreeBSD. The only exception to this was some years ago, on a laptop with NVIDIA Optimus switchable GPUs, where I have lost a couple of days until succeeding to configure how to select between the Intel GPU and the NVIDIA GPU. I also have some AMD GPUs, older models which still had great FP64 performance, so they are used for computational applications, but with those I had greater problems under Linux, when used with many monitors. Therefore whether problems with the Linux NVIDIA drivers are encountered must be dependent on complex combinations of hardware and software, so it is impossible to predict whether they will be encountered or not. Unexpected problems may always happen with any piece of hardware under an open-source operating system, because the manufacturers typically do not provide technical documentation like they did before 1995 and most of them test their hardware only with Windows. NVIDIA certainly provides much better software support for Linux and FreeBSD than the majority of the hardware vendors. So my point is that it is incorrect to attempt to discourage the Linux users to use NVIDIA due to supposed driver problems, because many of them, perhaps most of them will never encounter any problem. Only the Intel GPUs can be said to have better Linux support, and they also have the best GPU technical documentation, much better than that of AMD. While NVIDIA has the worst documentation for their hardware, they have excellent documentation for the huge amount of software that they provide freely for their GPUs under Linux. What is wrong with NVIDIA is neither their software support for Linux nor the documentation for that software, but their pricing policy that always seems based on a greediness that is excessive even for a profit-oriented company.
- zouhair 3y agoI have a 6700 XT and I have extremely good times with it. I'm not gonna spend $1300 CAD on a card, that's insane.