Looking for a new card.. AMD vs Nvidia

[Brisse]

Nope, I got my 970 cheaper than it was not that long ago. The 970 actually increased in price after the first few weeks here. I got a really good deal on the gigabyte G1 gaming version. Just use a good website to compare prices.

 

Got my 290X before the 390X replaced it. It's the same card but with a higher factory clock and twice the memory. The price of the 390X increased with at least the equivalent of 100USD, so I'm really glad I got the 290X when I did.

 

Benchmarks are one thing, real world performance another. If DCS performance is something you feel is very important, go for Nvidia. You will not regret it. (former ATI/AMD user here).

 

This would be good advice if we were still at DCSW 1.2 but since EDGE was released in 1.5, things have become very different. AMD performs just as good as Nvidia in DCS now.

[remon]

From the Steam Hardware & Software Survey

PC Video card usage:

 

Nvidia 54%

ATI 27%

Intel 19%

 

There certainly must be good reasons why Nvidia is preferred by a 2:1 margin.

 

Yes, marketing...

 

Are you using Apple's products because most of the people buy them too?

[Tekkx]

Hello.

Should have red this Thread yesterday.

I ordered yesterday an Asus Geforce GTX 970 Strix DC2OC cause my FPS are less than 20 and some money came in.

 

They (some different testers) say, that is almost as good as the GTX 980 but much less money is called for. :)

 

If they (DHL) bring that thing tomorrow I'll post my experiences over the weekend. (If my wife gives permission to mount it ;)

[Brisse]

I think you will be happy with your 970. The Asus Strix card has a really good heatsink. It is slightly slower than a R9 390, but it has other advantages. If you already bought it, then I'd say stick with it. It's not worth the hassle to return it and get another card. It's not a bad card.

[skinnadoor]

Was with AMD and ATI for years.... last year I went with intel and The GTX-970.... and that card is amazing.

 

Every game I throw at it... runs on max settings with no issues.

[OnlyforDCS]

You will be very happy with the GTX970, I know I was.

[SharpeXB]

Yes, marketing...

Then ATI better do some more marketing. They're getting clobbered.

Hey competition is a good thing in any market. The customer would be better served by a healthy rivalry between Green and Red. But losing by 2:1 isn't healthy competition, it's a beating.

[remon]

Then ATI better do some more marketing. They're getting clobbered.

Hey competition is a good thing in any market. The customer would be better served by a healthy rivalry between Green and Red. But losing by 2:1 isn't healthy competition, it's a beating.

 

That says absolutely nothing about the quality of the cards.

[rrohde]

NVIDIA GPUs + Intel CPUs = win.

[Brisse]

For a long time Nvidia had the performance crown with the ridiculously overpriced Titan cards. AMD didn't have anything in that market segment and I think Nvidia got a lot of attention for this. People come to hasty conclusions and by word of mouth people have gotten it into their heads that Nvidia is just "better", or "faster" while in fact, AMD is a viable competitor in every other market segment except that very small top end segment which almost nobody can afford anyway. Also, the AMD driver has gotten a lot of hate. Maybe it was rightfully so a while back, but the recent two years or so it has improved a lot and for Windows 10 users I would say it has even surpassed the Nvidia driver, but the old opinions still stick into the minds of many people. And what the hell were AMD thinking when they were selling cards with the reference cooler a few years back? That cooler was terrible, and of course people got bad impressions from it. So glad they finally got rid of it. There was always the choice of buying a card with an aftermarket cooler, but it can't be denied how bad first impressions they make when the first reviews come out and there aren't any aftermarket models out yet so the reference version is the one that is reviewed.

 

So yes, AMD has always been a viable alternative, but they have also gotten a shitty reputation, sometimes rightfully so. They are currently improving and has been doing that for a year or two but I fear it might be to late. The damage is already done and they now have a very small market share, probably selling cards with very little profit.

[SharpeXB]

That says absolutely nothing about the quality of the cards.

It indicates which brand consumers prefer.

 

Is there any real point to an "AMD vs Nvidia" thread?

Like any actual performance difference in DCS?

I'm sure with v1.5 they both perform well enough.

And the performance of any of these cards in mainstream games is easy enough to find out.

Edited November 26, 2015 by SharpeXB

[remon]

So yes, AMD has always been a viable alternative, but they have also gotten a shitty reputation, sometimes rightfully so. They are currently improving and has been doing that for a year or two but I fear it might be to late. The damage is already done and they now have a very small market share, probably selling cards with very little profit.

 

The problem is that Nvidia made some shitty moves, but due to good (guerrilla) marketing they've managed to not be hit as much as AMD by them. Everyone's talking about AMD's bad drivers, and everyone forgot Nvidias card destroying drivers, for example.

 

It indicates which brand consumers prefer.

 

And? What does that have to do with the discussion?

[SharpeXB]

More food for thought:

 

"If trends continue, the only acceptable option for gaming on the desktop will be an Intel processor with an Nvidia video card. While such hardware will certainly do the job, the lack of competition won’t help the PC platform’s reputation for excessive expense, and may slow the release of affordable cards that can handle 4K gaming.

Players — even those who prefer Nvidia — should pray the red team gets back in the game"

 

http://www.digitaltrends.com/computing/is-the-eternal-pc-graphics-war-coming-to-an-end/

[Brisse]

Like any actual performance difference in DCS?

I'm sure with v1.5 they both perform well enough.

 

I currently have the 290X and it was a nightmare in old DCS, but since 1.5 and the new graphics engine it seems to be on par with the 970 which I'm really happy about. Before 1.5, it really was unplayable due to low framerate.

[zxarkov]

Another vote of confidence towards a Nvidia 970 video card, especially for DCS/any other game out. Especially for 1080p gaming.

 

As another person mentioned, look for brands with upgraded coolers vs stock design.

 

EVGA would be my recommendation from personal experience. IMHO.

[Tekkx]

Hello. I'm back with my just installed, brandnew GTX 970. (Asus Nvidia GeForce Strix GTX970-DC2OC-4GD5)

 

I am very disappointed.

Framerate is still at around 20. This is 5 more than before. If I look into the sky it increases up to 30.

My bird stood just at the RWY cause she has no clearence for Take Off at the moment (too much instruments under service condition) :)

 

Two (or three) reasons could be responsible:

- I put my GTX580 into the second slot for pluging my third Screen on it (no SLI!)

- I have two USB2VGA-Converters for HELIOS- and CDU-screen.

- My CPU can't deliver enough data to feed the 970

 

HELIOS itself consumes about 2 Frames per sec (difference between started or stopped profile)

 

I have ordered some HDMI2DVI and DP2DVI adapters. Maybe this will improve (by replacing the USB-Adapters and plug the screens direct to the 970) systems performance.

If not, I have no idea whats next.

 

The good thing is, 970s fans don't move. Temperature stay below 60 centigrades. GTX580 went up to 80 (as it has to do the main work before installing GTX970)

Edited November 27, 2015 by Tekkx

[fixen]

Use a good program to uninstall your graphics drivers (like DDU). It should be way faster. I am pushing 90 fps on NTTR. I have heard other people who had issues with installing a new card and getting disappointing frames which were due to scraps of the old driver conflicting with the new card. Best would be a complete reinstall of the computer (which is what I always do) but I understand that might not be a option.

[Gunnergolly]

Possibly thinking about replacing my old EVGA 670 with a R9 390X card, would you guys say that the ASUS and Sapphire brands are the ones to go for then due to their better coolers ?.

 

Have been looking at these cards:-

 

http://www.scan.co.uk/shop/computer-hardware/all/gpu-amd/radeon-r9-390x-pci-e

 

I'm just looking for a quick upgrade at the moment and consider replacing the rest of my i5 2500K/P-67 Pro rig sometime next year.

 

Thanks

Edited December 1, 2015 by Gunnergolly

[*Rage*]

Possibly thinking about replacing my old EVGA 670 with a R9 390X card, would you guys say that the ASUS and Sapphire brands are the ones to go for then due to their better coolers ?.

 

Have been looking at these cards:-

 

http://www.scan.co.uk/shop/computer-hardware/all/gpu-amd/radeon-r9-390x-pci-e

 

I'm just looking for a quick upgrade at the moment and consider replacing the rest of my i5 2500K/P-67 Pro rig sometime next year.

 

Thanks

 

The Asus cooler is truly awful despite its impressive looks. For sure go for the MSI or Sapphire.

[SkateZilla]

MSi Lightnings have a rep of being the best of the best..

 

the build quality on them are insane compared to other overclocked vender cards.

[Brisse]

The Asus cooler is truly awful despite its impressive looks. For sure go for the MSI or Sapphire.

 

It's awful until you realize they don't have enough pressure against the GPU. Many of them suffer from this defect. I had to put some tiny washers under the screws on mine to be able to tighten it. After that, it performs great. I have a 290X by the way, but it could be the same problem on the 300-series.

[Gunnergolly]

Thanks.

 

I'll look at either the MSI's or Sapphires then.

 

I use a program called nvidia inspector in conjunction with my EVGA 670GTX which allows me to use 1/2 refresh rate. When i'm struggling to achieve 60 fps i can switch into 1/2 refresh rate and it can really smooth things out.

 

Is there an equivalent program available for AMD or can the same 1/2 refresh rate be achieved through AMD's driver ?.

 

In theory if the R9 390X is that much faster then the 670 GTX then hopefully i might never have to use it, but it's useful to have.

 

Is it really worth paying the extra for 390X over the 390 ?.

[Brisse]

The 390X is about 10% faster than the 390 on average. Is it worth it? That's up to you.

 

I would choose the Sapphire if I was buying right now. They seem to be the most premium AMD specific vendor, sort of like EVGA is the most premium Nvidia vendor.

 

You won't need to run at half refresh with a card that fast I think, but there is a similar feature in the AMD driver. It's a frame-rate limiter that you can set to anything from 30fps to 200fps in 1fps intervals. That gives you more flexibility than the Nvidia method which is locked to one setting if I understand correctly.

[Gunnergolly]

Thanks Brisse

 

Just so happens that i've just been reading a review about a Sapphire card, seems like a decent card.

 

I'll probably pay the extra for the 390X simply because i tend to keep my hardware for years until there's something out there that's really worth replacing it with.

 

I use a dual monitor setup consisting of a 37" 1920 x 1080 TV screen (DVI-D) and a small 1366 x 768 (HDMI) monitor for my two MFD's, i'd imagine that it's straight forward procedure to set them up with AMD software ??.

 

It's been years since i last had an AMD card so i really don't know that much about them or their drivers at the moment.

 

Cheers.

[Brisse]

Yes, I have two monitors hooked up to my 290X and it's very straight forward. Never had any problems related to that. Primary monitor is a 2560x1440x144hz freesync capable monitor hooked up with DP, and the secondary is an old 1680x1050x60hz monitor hooked up with DVI.

Edited December 2, 2015 by Brisse
Wrong number :)