General Discussions

[pokester]

With so many re-badges, XT's, Supers and numbers that are just so similar to other cards it is often mind boggling for a consumer to understand how their card ranks in comparison to all the available cards on the market.

Granted this list only consists of recent cards but helpful anyway. 

https://www.gpumag.com/gpu-hierarchy/ 

[elstaci]

That article almost seems like Nvidia paid for it .

[black_zion]

Well it's not really right comparing the last TWO generations of cards since both Vega from AMD and the GTX 1000 series from nVidia have been EOLd long ago and disappeared from normal retail channels, so you're left with Turing and Navi, and let's be honest, if you're buying one of those cards you're not limiting yourself to just the last two generations in the used market.

Navi has a very limited range, 4 cards. AMD wanted the 4 year old Polaris cards to fill the low end so they could shift the excess stock, and they needed the EOL'd and no longer available Vega VII to take the spot over the 5700XT, with the price range of $180-$460. They don't compete in the low end (that's Polaris) or the ultra high end, which does limit their position options on charts.

nVidia, on the other hand, has 13 models if you count the RTX Titan, which is a prosumer card like the Radeon VII and not really a gaming card, all of which are based on Turing. Even though some cards have been effectively replaced by the Super variants, they're still out there for purchase, and they encompass the whole range of prices from $140 to $1500.

I disagree with their chart breakdown and rankings, because they're ranked based on performance tiers (1920x1080 60/75/144/240 FPS average, etc) and not just some subjective tiers, but really they're in about the same order I'd put them in.

[pokester]

I didn't think it was pro anyone just the what is out there. I thought the way they listed it would be helpful for a novice to kinda understand what is better or worse. As a computer guy this is the kind of questions family, friends and co-workers ask me all the time. 

Those of us that are computer savvy forget sometimes how confusing this stuff is for most the population. 

I didn't think they were really being pro-nvidia, just showing what was available and what order they think they fall. I know many get bent out of shape over one card being better over another when they are close to the same. Sometimes it just comes down to what game you play as to which is better for you. 

There is no doubt that Nvidia has had good product for a long time now and more importantly solid drivers to go with it. AMD hopefully will have a return to a full competitive product line soon and I hope drivers to match. Time will tell. One thing is for sure is that equality in the competition is a good thing for consumers. We get better tech at better prices that way. 

[bearcat22]

I'll take a C Tier card with solid drivers over a A tier card that is barely usable because of crappy drivers. 

[elstaci]

The reason I made that comment was due to this:

S-TIER - Nvidia (3) GPU listed none for AMD

A-TIER - Nividia (8) and AMD (2). Both of AMD GPUs listed near bottom of list.

B-TIER - AMD (4) and Nvidia (3). This was the only Tier that was Pro-AMD but still almost half the list was Nvidia.

C-TIER - Nvidia (6) and AMD (2). Again both of AMD GPUs were listed near the bottom of the list.

D- TIER- Nvidia (4) GPUs listed and none for AMD.

I would have thought that the list would have been around 40% - 50% AMD & Nvidia. but instead the list is 66.6% Nvidia GPUs listed.-

[pokester]

I get where you are coming from and had no issue at with your opinion. There has been plenty of misrepresentation to flat our falsehoods over the years.

It would be nice if AMD's line up matched the green team, but it doesn't. Those are not omissions or mistruth, AMD just doesn't compete in every area like we would hope they would. I sure didn't see any GPU left out that makes it look like AMD is falsely behind. Honestly in a couple of the areas he gave the preference to AMD, based on my experience I wouldn't have. I kind of thought it was pretty generous. And I am certainly no AMD hater. Again hopefully BigNavi changes that. Base on all reviews I have seen, the order of those cards are what I would put them in too. Of course everyone is entitled to their opinion and as I already said some of those cards are so close to each other, it comes down to opinion more that actual speed. Unfortunately for me the drivers in those cases are the tie breaker. There is no denying that AMD has much larger driver issues than the competition. A few years ago I would have said the reputation is just not true and in my experience I like the AMD drivers better do to the fact they used to do a great job on older game support. Unfortunately this is now in addition to stability complaints one of the biggest issues with Navi is older game support. They run fine on GCN but not Navi. Again I hope they get this ironed out for the future. When you're a fan it is easy to get your feelings hurt by an opinion that is contrary to what you think or wish to be true. In this case, and I have seen plenty of articles that are one sided, I thought the author really told it as it is. 

[elstaci]

Talking about AMD Drivers, The biggest difference I noticed between AMD and Nvdia drivers is that Nvidia Drivers are almost always WHQL and not BETA unlike AMD.

Once in a while Nvidia comes out with Hot Fixes drivers (Beta) but just about all of AMD newest or latest Drivers are basically BETA while AMD does provide a WHQL driver but is older than the latest driver.

I know you didn't have an issue with my answer, but I felt I should explain my bad attempt at humor concerning my original reply.

[pokester]

Now worries. I didn't think you had issue either was just doing the same. The whole reason I posted the link has nothing to do with AMD vs Nvidia anyway. I truly think it is helpful to the less knowledgeable for whom this is confusing stuff.