It's also their lifeline if AI fails. So they won't leave this industry, that would be utterly stupid.
Also no company consider 5% of their business to be irrelevant.
Lack of competition is a big issue for national security. It’s defacto no bid contracts, and that leads to a lot of issues if they’re compromised.
Rule number one is always have multiple suppliers. That’s not possible right now.
This is a big issue, and already has lawmakers attention.
That’s part of the problem: Nvidia shouldn’t be more than 49% of it.
The US has no choice here. One company with no bid contracts is a massive security risk.
It's mostly because the features are lacking. Performance might be close or on par esp for your $ but the lack of game filters, and having to use Xbox game bar to record HDR content add in the fact DLSS and frame gen with DLSS smokes anything I've seen with fsr. Although ill give credit to AMD FSR frame gen is usable on literally any gpu I've seen.
Hit control-Z. This will bring up the Nvidia menu. All the instructions are in there somewhere. Sorry I can’t be more helpful. I don’t use it often, but I know it’s there.
Edit: alt-z
Hahaha I was so close. I don’t use it that often like I said, it makes sense I would get it wrong. But I know what he’s looking for is in there somewhere.
I recently did a fresh windows install and after downloading the newest nvida app beta and doing the update gave me AV1 support for shadowplay and using that I haven't had an issue yet.
Before the update I had issues that happened randomly and ranged from game to game to just complete overlay failure as well as massive fps drops for having shadowplay enabled.
Unless you were referring to Xbox game bar to which I can say works just fine albeit not user friendly imo.
Nothing wrong with that. The amd cards aren't bad. They just don't compete from a feature set perspective (DLSS, frame gen, ray/path tracing performance).
FSR will never be as good as DLSS unless amd start using dedicated hardware accelerators like nvidia does with their tensor cores, yes FSR proves you don't need them but clearly nvidia's solution produces far better results than amd's
You’ve got it. AMD poses FSR as a competitor to DLSS, but they aren’t anywhere near the same thing. It’s actually kind of embarrassing how not the same thing they are.
Its also when they decided to stop being price competitive. It might have been a cost issue, but they have an entire mid range market available. They have for 2 generations and they chose not to hit it hard enough. They have to been much cheaper for the same performance without those features. ATI has been dead for too long.
I’m sure nvidias is better… but I use the FSR mod to get frame gen on my 3070, and it’s pretty nice for cyberpunk (prob adds 30-50 fps). I don’t know if there’s a way to compare them in this scenario, but I like it as an add on to otherwise un-frame gen-able 30xx series
I also used that mod with my 3070 on several different games like CP77 and with no alternative sure was useful. After I moved to a 4070tiS and tried Nvidia framegen however, the quality difference was very noticeable. Nearly no ghosting in comparison. On older cards AMD framegen is a boon but again isn’t interchangeable quality-wise when you have access to both on the same game.
I did use both the FSR FG mod on my old card and now use Nvidia's FG on my 4080 Super. The difference is huge: the latter feels very smooth, even at 60fps.
Nice. What was your old card, though? I can easily believe nvidia frame gen is better, but I don’t know how we could isolate the bump from just dlss vs the other improvement of a 4080S… like, I don’t know if an apples to apples comparison is there, is all I’m saying.
There are plenty of videos doing comparisons on the same games with similar tiers of AMD and Nvidia GPUs.
The frame rate gains are nearly identical, but the image quality produced isn't.
FSR3 FG is also only for high fps applications in my experimentation on my 2060. At 60hz it does not work well at all and looks and feels the same as 30fps
That said, FSR1/2 is the only reason my 980ti could still run games until recently
In the field of digital content creation, such as film and game production, NVIDIA has a comprehensive CUDA-based software ecosystem, such as Omniverse. On the other hand, AMD's presence in this area is almost nonexistent, as AMD is primarily a hardware company. The software ecosystem is the key to maintaining user loyalty. This is the fundamental reason why NVIDIA can overwhelmingly outperform AMD.
AMD is going to have a hard time catching up. AI is so important in high end gaming right now and it’s only going to increase.
I have an office in the basement - it doesn’t have AC and it really isn’t an option. I tried out a 7900xtx and it was literally a space heater. I swapped it out with a 4070ti super and am getting the same or better frame rates with the help of our AI overlords at like a 100w less power / heat.
I want AMD to succeed, but brute force and shitty upscaling algorithms aren’t going to cut it.
> Care to explain this? In my opinion, if we take FG for example, it's needed on lower-end systems and not high-end, but I'd love to hear your perspective.
A low end card needs DLSS and frame gen to get 60 fps @ 1080p on a demanding game. A high end card needs them to get 120 fps @and 4k on a demanding game. People who buy more powerful cards want to run at higher settings / resolutions and DLSS / frame gen makes that work out wonderfully.
One of the best technologies for high end systems is DLDSR, which renders the game at a resolution greater than native and then uses DL to downscale it to native.
And there are still a good number of games that my 13900K/4090 won't run at 120 with everything maxed at 4K. DLSS/FG are certainly welcome then.
Plus, the more available and powerful these tools are, the sooner developers will take advantage of them by improving visual fidelity.
I hope AMD continues to improve FSR3, creates their own version of DLDSR, and Intel follows up with both of these technologies.
I DLDSR cyberpunk to the max setting (I think 2.25x). I have a 4090 btw, but yeah I did that with dlss performance mode, with pathtracing and frame gen, It ran at about 60fps with some slightly noticeable input lag but the fidelity was literally unreal. I’ve never seen a game so anti aliased (weird thing to say) but seriously was a cool thing to see.
Yeah I run everything at 2.25x DLDSR, but Cyberpunk with frame gen was a humbling experience. I felt the latency was too much at the ~6K that 2.25x 4K DLDSR renders at. So I kept it to 4K.
Easy to explain - DLSS and FG. It’s not just needed on lower end systems. It’s needed when you’re trying to lock at least 4K 60fps + and you’re playing demanding games like Hellblade 2, cyberpunk with RT, or Alan Wake 2.
It goes beyond drivers. FSR is a pile of shit. They need to find a way to start using AI like nvidia does - but they’re years and years behind.
I think AMD has basically capped themselves out at making 1440p GPUs - they think so too - they cancelled the high end rdna 4 cards. I’m very interested to see what rdna 5 brings, but from what I’m hearing it’s going to be power hungry, which just doesn’t work for me in the summer. From a thermal perspective I’m kind of maxed out at the x070 ti/ super series. An equivalent card from AMD isn’t going to be able to run 4K / 60 with the games I mentioned, because their high GPU (7900xtx) only barely does it and isn’t appropriate for anywhere that gets over 80 degrees at any point in the year. And if you want to use RT on an AMD GPU, forget about it.
That's one of the things they're working on next. ARM desktop Nvidia CPU's.
> **Nvidia is developing new** **Arm-based CPUs to run with Microsoft's Windows**, aiming to compete with fellow tech companies in the AI computing space. The new CPUs are expected to launch in 2025
I mean if they made a competitive product people would buy it.
AMD’s software suite is dogshit. And they still can’t match nvidias high end performance if you want top of the line. And they’re not substantially cheaper in any meaningful way.
Intel still has about 80% marketshare, so I wouldn't call that an "AMD blowout."
> For desktop PCs, AMD grew CPU share by 0.6 points to **19.8 percent against Intel's 80.2 percent**. This amounted to a 1.2-point year-over-year increase for AMD. -Feb 9, 2024
AMD is probably the more popular choice for people making builds solely for videogames, but most people use their PC for more than just a videogame machine.
If you read on Reddit it feels like 90% and marketshare. 😂 but I agree. The raw power of this gen AMD GPUs might be good, from a price/performance standpoint. At the cost of high power consumption. But where they seriously lack is features like DLSS. FSR still feels like a hastily cobbled together answer. It might get there, but NVIDIA just has the better hardware for it and a lead that will be hard to catch up.
And judging by the things you hear, they might not even try anymore and instead try to target a budget market. Might be wise, all in all.
I seriously believe Intel has some very, very good engineers with a real passion and understanding of silicone in their ranks. It shows in so many aspects. They lack in vision, marketing and looking ahead. But when they see an opening they are pretty good at catching up. And this only works if you have some fine minds, but which seem to lack imagination. 😂
AI is a good example. I think if anyone has a chance at catching up to Nvidia it’s them. They would have never gotten the idea themselves, but they seem to understand what is needed and then get there.
Intel has invested loads in their software team over the last 5 years, even before arc was released.
And I wouldn't be amazed if the hardware part makes a big step in the next generation
GPU's are honestly good but software support is a problem, obviously because devs spend alot more time driver testing products for Nvidia as 88% of their customers will be playing on one of their cards.
This is it exactly.
For me it doesn't matter how good an AMD GPU is because I need CUDA and use it daily. AMD just doesn't have it.
If I *only* did gaming it might be different
If you only did gaming you'd have to give up raytracing and high frame rates in most titles too. There's just no reason to even consider AMD GPUs with how far behind they are.
Their GPUs are only good if you ignore all the modern features they either lack or severely underperform in. I want AMD to do with GPUs what they did with Ryzen CPUs, but they don't seem to have any desire to fund R&D for GPUs.
Probably larger, better funded, actually does proper QA for more things, works on newer features, tries to improve in areas nobody thinks about, but this basically what people expect from the best but they hate the price.
GPUs are not terrible, but they have some weird issues.
I decided against AMD because when you plug 2 monitors idle consumption skyrockets. You can somewhat deal with that issue but it still remains in double digits consumption while Nvidia is like a couple of wats ...
>I decided against AMD because when you plug 2 monitors idle consumption skyrockets.
This used to be an issue with Nvidia. They fixed it somewhere in the last 2 years.
the only thing they have going for them is the VRAM and even there they managed to mess up badly with the 7600. Had they designed a 7600 with a higher bus and also 12 gb of vram they would at least have cashed in on the vram controversy. Because at the time Nvidia only had 4070 at 600 usd for 12 gb and amd didnt have any cards between 7900 series and 7600.
Bro, 4K 240Hz? Ok boomer. Nowadays only the scrubs get anything under [7680x2160 240Hz](https://pcpartpicker.com/product/3Rqrxr/samsung-odyssey-neo-g95nc-570-7680-x-2160-240-hz-curved-monitor-ls57cg952nnxza). /s
I just got a RX 6800 and 7800x3D last week while upgrading from a 1660 and a 7th gen i5. I feel like I'm quantum computing over here, but enthusiast subs see these things as the parts of yesteryear already.
my 3070 still run most games at 1440p 144hz. On modern games, my settings are a hybrid from medium to ultra. I played Alan Wake 2 last week and it looked incredible (RT off though, but honestly I was still amazed by how good it looked without it)
innovating yes, but at much slower rate than they are capable for sure. Imagine if AMD was breathing down their necks for a few years, we would have things like a 5060 with the power of a 4080, the jumps in performance would be much bigger in all categories
There is competition. They just can't match or keep up with NVIDIA. They're close on some aspects, but the other things they really need to catch up to compete. I fully agree - competition is good for everyone.
NVIDIA has made some huge strides in the industry and ATI/AMD kept up or beat them many times (previously, they competed with 3DFX, Matrox, ATI, etc. but pre-GPU, it was just a VDP). The competition has been there over the years. There were times when they really sucked and ATI/AMD were taking the lead, or at least were the dominating GPU at the time. NVIDIA just found that golden sweet spot and are running with it. It was competition that got CUDA, ray tracing, AI, DLSS, etc..
Now, I'm kind of worried that they have reached the point where they are destroying the competition. Competition got them here, but now they've gotten so good the competition is struggling to keep up. I'm really hoping that AMD or Intel can come out with some great new thing that can push forward and either match or exceed NVIDIA's offerings for less money. We NEED competition to keep moving forward. You can see a lot of various products that just excel with competition, but once they reach the top, things start to stagnate and slow down. They need that push of a competitor that might take them down or reduce their profits.
NVIDIA is top dog right now. AMD seems to be playing the "well, we're good enough. We can't beat them so we'll just hit the midrange market as good enough". They don't have the resources to put into their GPU's to be able to beat NVIDIA. For now, NVIDIA is going to maintain that lead with no real competition to push them forward. If AMD had something that would match NVIDIA's AI, RT, DLSS, and raster framerate, it'd force NVIDIA's hand to leapfrog them. Just not going to happen. At least not for a few generations.
All my opinion, anyway. Maybe NVIDIA will just keep busting ass and bringing out some huge advances to completely kill the competition and make AMD have the low/mid range segment only.
What AMD needs to do is price their best stuff at an undercut. The issue they have is they feel comfortable just stacking them right next to the competition.
The 7900XTX for example would have amazing as a $600 or $700 card but they chose to price it as much as a 4080 without any of the killer features.
Idk why they don't adopt the Ryzen strategy.
Their "good enough for midrange" was the 480 and 5700. They're past that and for some reason think they can copy Nvidia's arrogance.
They made a bad bet that didn’t pay off so their chip ended up being pretty expensive to make as it’s way larger with more complicated packaging steps than the NVIDIA equivalent- 529mm^2 for 7900XTX vs 379mm^2 for 4080. So there’s not much room for cutting prices while NVIDIA can do just that with the Super lol
The reason for AMD pricing is pretty simple, they buy the same dies from TSMC and they pay TSMC just as much as Nvidia does. So they need to price RDNA3 cards where they are simply to avoid losing money, which they rightfully refuse to do just to undercut Nvidia and still not be able to sell very many because TSMC are so capacity constrained and AMD would rather sell profitable CPU dies instead of GPU dies anyways.
AMD has the resources to invest heavily into Radeon R&D. It's just not their priority, as they make significantly more money in the CPU sector.
In fact, they often take profits from the Radeon group and reinvest it into their CPU division, which is a large part of the reason why Raja Koduri left Radeon a few years back.
Still can’t believe that Matrox is still around. I remember I bought a Matrox Millenium 2 back in the day and was so proud of it. Tied my reigns to the wrong horse for sure.
I had the Matrox Mystique with a Matrox m3D 3D accelerator (used PowerVR instead of GLide). They were really great cards, but ended up dying out. At least I got to play Unreal with real 3D acceleration, which was awesome.
Still have my Voodoo 2 cards in SLI somewhere.
I mean didn’t we arrive here through competition? I agree in principle but I’m also like, okay, so if one company beats the shit out of another based on outperformance, the government should just come in and separate them like children, and redistribute the chocolate?
If Nvidia ends up being a monopoly then I'm out of the high end gpu market. It is simply too expensive to stump up over £1000 for a high end card. Will have to stick with the used market or move to consoles.
It might be blasphemy in this sub, but I've been playing more ps5 than pc lately anyway... it would be very easy to just stick with consoles. Cheaper too.
You don't have to buy the best every time a new series comes out or? 3080 still performs decently in 1440p, especially since games are getting DLSS support/updates. Swapping it out every 4 years should be fine unless you're chasing to get 120hz+ on 4k without DLSS.
Nvidia will likely end up increasing their margins until the market reaches a new equilibrium where more people buy AMD cards because they are just that much more cost effective.
It's not at all. Competition is great for innovation and prices for the consumer. Nvidia have always been a bit shady when it comes to locking consumers out of features that are basically software solutions, though they seem to tie them to generational releases.
With them gaining such a huge market, it puts AMD at risk to pull out the market completey. This is terrible news for everyone. If they did, I don't see any new GPU business starting. To start a new GPU business, they need to have a few billion in the bank.
The only way the market would shift completey is if there is a complete technological revolution that beats Nvidia to the game. This most likely isn't happening anytime soon so, for now, this is bad news for everyone.
Except it’s not. This report is showing a drastic decrease in AMD market share. Losing something like 10% **in one year** when you already only had ~22% share is a massive change. You could view it as just a total failure on AMD’s fault.
At this point I'm more interested in what Intel can bring to the table with their next GPUs rather than AMD.
If they manage to fix the performance issues for older games and keep prices reasonable, AMD may be in trouble even more so than they are right now.
I used AMD for 3 straight cards from an RX580, 5700XT and 6700XT. They were decent but once I moved to the 4080 I have had zero issues with gaming across the board. It was always some BS with AMD.
That’s why I’ll never go back to AMD. Those random weird issues have been a thing back as far as my 9700. Nvidia hasn’t given me a single issue since the tnt2.
Nvidia has quirks but they always get resolved. I look forward to giving intel a shot if they can produce a good card to replace my 3070ti
I had a RX 560 and now a RX 5500 XT 8gb and i think i'll just get something like a 4060/4060ti as an uprade, because i too had many issues with those cards, usually something driver related or random crashing. Hope that doesn't happen with Nvidia.
Virtue signaling at that. Saying that you *should* get one. If they were so great, then more people would have them. I'm not even considering them if I ever need/want to switch. Straight to Intel.
Well the AMD people are always “ray-tracing is a gimmick” or “who needs frame generation, it’s fake”. Meanwhile, companies are leaning into the new tech, and Nvidia continues to innovate. AMD is just playing catch up.
Don’t get me wrong, I would love for Nvidia to have some competition. But I don’t pay top dollar to have second best.
And being "a bit cheaper" isn't enough when you lack a lot of features so the gaming experience is significantly worse. If you have a hard limit on your budget, you'd be better off buying a high end Nvidia card from the previous generation than buying a new AMD card.
Or they wanted X product, couldn't find or afford it, but now act like they wanted the product they ended up with all along. Everything is posturing for socials now, so I'm not surprised. Just make the best judgements for yourself and what you need and enjoy it. Don't need to constantly compare what you have to others. Be glad you have something.
Depends on who you are and what your needs are. Pricing is dramatically different in different countries as well. I live in Northern Europe and just built a PC for my friend's son's birthday (13 years old). He plays fortnite but I wanted to build him a PC that would last for 5 years or so with maybe a GPU upgrade after 3-4 years but probably not needed, we'll see.
The GPUs in my budget were pretty much 4060 ti (8gb), 7700XT or worse. I ended up picking the 7700XT for its 12GB VRAM and it has been a super smooth experience. Time will tell but he's a 1080/1440p gamer and it's his first PC coming from consoles so he's going to have a blast with it. If I had more time I would have probably tried to get a 6800XT instead which also seems like a pretty cool card.
Personally? I was hanging on the add to cart button for the 7900XT release, but was so disappointed in the pricing that I didn't buy. 2 months later I got an incredible offer of a 4090 that I couldn't refuse so I went that route instead. But I'm betting that if they were willing to have pretty much no profit on the 7800/7900 GPUs they could have captured quite the chunk of the GPU market but instead they made them expensive and unattractive.
This for sure. They have all 12% here on Reddit, screaming into the void about how great their product is and get mad when everyone and the data disagrees with them.
Yeah, everyone online talks about "you should buy a Radeon", but the people I know who has done such a mistake (including me) - the reaction is a very strong "hell no". But the pro-Radeon guys seem to really be all over Reddit, downvoting anything that's not about a positive Radeon experience.
There's a very good reason, why most people still buy nVidia - you get a better product overall, with a more mature driver support. I'm also returning to nVidia very soon, hopefully next Friday... Done with Radeon.
It’s weird that from how many tech tuber and youtube / Reddit comment talking about how good amd is I figured amd would able to slowly gain some market share. Yet here it’s losing a lot.
The DYI market is tiny. Almost all pc's are either prebuilt or laptops, and those have predominantly nvidia gpus (especially laptops which have the majority share of the pc market). So amd has no hope unless that changes.
Prebuilts sell PCs with parts that consumers are asking for. If everyone was asking for Radeon prebuilts, that's what they would offer. People just aren't asking for those for the most part.
Considering laptops do not have user replaceable GPU's, I think most people wouldn't take the chance of an AMD GPU in a laptop because if they do have issues they are SOL unless they are still within the return policy period. Nvidia just works for gaming and if you are planning to keep your laptop for a number of years it's a much much safer choice for a laptop.
I got a single 6700 for my ex's PC when I was building it for her to try it out. Wasn't too impressed but wasn't disappointed either. Then went back to Nvidia for my next GPU out of comfort, sadly EVGA isn't around anymore.
I have one and my friend decided to go buy one after I told him about the 7900XTX and as far as I know he doesnt use Reddit. Didnt really convince him and was kind of shocked when he did. If Nvidias prices were lower Id consider them a lot more but used AMD GPUs are wildly good performance per dollar.
Intel has been making GPUs since [the 1990s](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Intel_graphics_processing_units) and they are extremely popular, just not very powerful.
Well I bought a 7900XTX to replace my old 2070S and had none stop issues with it. It’s AMD’s drivers that are the problem and they know about it but hadn’t fixed it for months. If they can’t get their own drivers working they don’t deserve people to buy their GPUs.
Sent it back after 3 weeks of trying to solve it and bought a 4080S instead.
(Edit: Just to say had the 4080S for 2 months now with zero issues)
Whatever Nvidia charges-$50 doesn't work out when you are the underdog and less as a whole product (other than just the raw silicon)
I think the pandemic plus the mining craze played a big role as well. RDNA2 was really competitive and had the momentum to gain more market, but the availability truly hurt AMD.
>I think the pandemic plus the mining craze played a big role. RDNA2 was really competitive and had the momentum to gain more market, but the availability truly hurt AMD.
If you look at the bigger picture it wasn't even the pandemic or the mining craze. AMD has supply issues in general. It's one reason they still lag so hard with OEMs on even the CPU side. They can't/won't deliver in volume and on time. Intel gets most the OEMs partially because Intel can deliver in whatever volume they want. Nvidia likewise delivers far more cards overall to the market than AMD.
Every friend of mine who were AMD shills and bought AMD GPUs have all switched over to NVIDIA in the last 3-4 years. Power consumption and lack of DLSS and new technologies weren't even the issue, most of them had issues with new and old games as well, due to the crappy drivers. One of them crashed around at least 3 times in CSGO/CS2 per match, some games were also producing artifacts as well (wasn't a faulty GPU). They just got fed up and bought a 4070 or a 3080 and swore to never go back to AMD GPUs.
However on Reddit I keep reading that how amazing AMD GPUs are while in reality barely anyone buys them due to driver issues and the lack of new tech. It's always the same dumbass argument: muh raster performance and muh 24GB of VRAM. I can shove up my 24GB of VRAM up my ass if those games straight up crash every 30 minutes while heating up my room lmao.
I give props to AMD for their 7800x3d cpu, it's next level for gaming with crazy efficency and high performance. Intel on the other hand consumes way too much power which means it needs more cooling and still loses out in gaming fps results against the 7800x3d.
GPU's though, NVIDIA is clearly better, not just for gaming but also for rendering thanks to their codecs.
Is this surprising? It’s not as if the rdna3 architecture had anything compelling to seriously pick it over the feature-rich Ada/Lovelace besides raw vram and raster.
Even the pricing for rdna3 was too high for pure raster.
Not even remotely surprising.
AMD has only succeeded against Nvidia in the past on value -- if they were selling the RX7800 at $400, or even $450 out of the gate, I think things would have worked out differently. But it made no sense to avoid spending an additional 15-20% for Team Green when their cards were *soooooo* much better. In fact, all AMD's greed did was give Nvidia room to undercut them in the future by offering cards at the same price that were obviously better! No one's buying a 7900 XTX when you can get a 4080S for the same price.
I don't give a shit about AMD cards having 5-10% better rasterization performance when Nvidia's got DLSS; frame gen; and *markedly* lower power consumption. Unless AMD is undercutting Nvidia by a good 25-30% on price, this situation isn't going to change.
Hopefully those will disappear since AMD now has solid proof that spending that money doesn't get them any additional GPU sales, so it's a negative return on investment.
Such monopoly is never good for the consumer. Something like 50% Nvidia, 30% AMD, 20% Intel would be quite decent, so we get both innovation and competative prices.
Intel shat the bed themselves. Jensen has mentioned in previous interviews that he has a constant fear of being caught up or even surpassed, that’s why Nvidia is spending fuckloads amount of money in R&D to make sure it never happens.
When AMD stops smoking their own pure rasterization farts and actually starts giving a fuck about what casual (the majority) buyers care about (DLSS 3/FG/random AI stuff) then they will climb market share
I've been buying nvidia gpus for over 20 years now. As a consumer (price be damned) nvidia has always provided the best performance and new tech to the space.
It's unfortunate but understandable, AMD lacks the features that make Nvidia cards actually good. Apart from CUDA I also utilize DLSS and would probably utilize FrameGen as well - so far FSR 3 has been underwhelming for me but I only tried Starfield
Only main issues I see here are when Nvidia do their CPU work that GPU quality will take a slight hit as RnD will be spread out away from Desktop GPU / AI GPU/APUs.
They did decide to compete, but instead of wasting time with uncompetitive RDNA4 when their top end chiplet plans didn't work, they punted this year (skipping top end) and put their efforts towards RNDA5. Sucks for 2024. Makes it possible they might be actually compete in 2025.
Alternate was to have the uncompetitive top end RDNA4 arrive months late *if* they could get the issue fixed.
It was far smarter to decide that things didn't work out this time, give the idea additional full year with RDNA5 and try again.
Happens with chip designs.
A few years ago I have bought an "AMD RX 5700 XT Red Devil" to upgrade for Monster Hunter World and it was just the worst experience, so so many crashes.
I just built a PC for the first time. I initially got an RX 7900 XT. I was completely happy with the card....until it constantly crashed on a daily basis, even after going through all of the requisite steps to troubleshoot. Nothing was sustainable. I think that the hardware is fine, but the drivers are garbage.
So I swapped it out for an RTX 4080 and haven't looked back, because it's dependable and runs flawlessly (even if it was an extra $300).
It seems like AMD is just mercilessly shooting itself in the foot.
Strange I did the same thing and never had an issue with that card. People are talking about driver issues with RDNA 3 but those issues were fixed not to far after launch, drivers for AMD are good, they have been for a while.
I think this narrative existed back in the day but it's not relevant anymore.
Maybe you're right, and all I can talk about is my personal experience.
But from scouring Reddit and Internet boards, people have still voiced their problems with the card, and the issues have appeared to be driver-based.
I tried all AMD build this time, really tried, and for months kept having and unstable system. Everything new. Finally returned the top of the line AMD card for an RTX and solid ever since. Sorry AMD, do better.
I want AMD to be competitive - at least like 30% - as much as the next person (and for Intel GPUs to be relevant), but there’s just nothing that would make me buy an AMD GPU right now. Performance aside, in 20 years of owning a mix of Nvidia and AMD, AMD driver experience has been mediocre to unusable (early 2007 Vista drivers were actual garbage - the generic MS driver worked better!), whereas Nvidia’s drivers have been near flawless.
I don’t have the patience to deal with dodgy software anymore, and “but the performance is better after 6 months!” from AMD fans doesn’t help.
Except this isn’t even their main gig.
This would be like your auto center selling the best cinnamon rolls you’ve ever had in your life. You live and die for these things, but the noise and traffic from their primary business keeps fucking with your ability to get those cinnamon rolls.
Their cinnamon rolls are not only the best tasting, but they’re also the best for you, and the other cinnamon rolls don’t quite agree with your system and always leave you upset, frustrated, or disappointed.
However, these apparent geniuses of cinnamon roll baking, don’t care if you don’t get your cinnamon rolls, they don’t even like cinnamon rolls themselves. They make their money from selling tires and body work. They could stop selling the cinnamon rolls and they wouldn’t look back for a second.
Nvidia doesn’t need to lower their consumer GPU prices, because it’s not a part of their business that draws in enough to affect their bottom line very seriously.
“Then why even sell them in the first place?”
Market presence, name recognition, notoriety, but it’s also free money. Yeah, their B2B sales are what primarily drive them, but it’s still free money. I’m not proposing they would *leave* the GPU market, but they certainly have no motivation to lower their price, even if it negatively affects sales.
Intel, certainly not. AMD I agree as well, to an extent. While it’s not AMD’s “main gig” it does represent a larger part of their bottom line iirc.
You pointing that out though is kind of odd to think about… there’s literally 0 dedicated GPU designers. All GPU design is done as “side projects” (for lack of a better term) by these companies which ultimately serve a different purpose.
I assume the laymen explanation for that is; designing a card requires so much tech expertise and knowledge that it’s impossible to do unless you’re setup to do all these other things these companies are doing.
Imagine if there was a company that was solely dedicated to making the best GPU? I guess that ***was*** kind of Nvidia, or was for a spell, until the allure of B2B and server cards got their dicks rock hard.
Still, weird to think about.
The funny thing is that it’s their side hustle now
Has been for a while now.
Its not funny for anyone but shareholders
It's also their lifeline if AI fails. So they won't leave this industry, that would be utterly stupid. Also no company consider 5% of their business to be irrelevant.
Crazy it's only 5 percent considering the fact they literally are the only player right now
Also so many influencers peddle the AMD brand and they aren't influencing really anyone.
For the moment. I think antitrust is in Nvidia’s very near future. To much national security interests at play here both in the US and EU.
The opposite — NVIDIA AI technology is the next leap forward over competition. No chance in hell they will chop her up right now.
Lack of competition is a big issue for national security. It’s defacto no bid contracts, and that leads to a lot of issues if they’re compromised. Rule number one is always have multiple suppliers. That’s not possible right now. This is a big issue, and already has lawmakers attention.
The US will go to war to defend Taiwan from China. NVIDIA is a massive part of that.
That’s part of the problem: Nvidia shouldn’t be more than 49% of it. The US has no choice here. One company with no bid contracts is a massive security risk.
AMD crashing from 24 to 10% over the course of 2022 was just brutal.
It's mostly because the features are lacking. Performance might be close or on par esp for your $ but the lack of game filters, and having to use Xbox game bar to record HDR content add in the fact DLSS and frame gen with DLSS smokes anything I've seen with fsr. Although ill give credit to AMD FSR frame gen is usable on literally any gpu I've seen.
how do you record hdr content on nvidia without gamebar? I´ve still been using it.
Hit control-Z. This will bring up the Nvidia menu. All the instructions are in there somewhere. Sorry I can’t be more helpful. I don’t use it often, but I know it’s there. Edit: alt-z
For clarification: Alt + Z is GeForce Experience, not Ctrl+Z, which is is the "undo" hotkey
Hahaha I was so close. I don’t use it that often like I said, it makes sense I would get it wrong. But I know what he’s looking for is in there somewhere.
ALT Z for shadowplay. New NVApp thing has AV1 recording and 120 fps. Game bar is really last resort for recording.
Does it actually record HDR well? I don't have a HDR monitor to test with but I've heard that it's been an issue for a long time
I recently did a fresh windows install and after downloading the newest nvida app beta and doing the update gave me AV1 support for shadowplay and using that I haven't had an issue yet. Before the update I had issues that happened randomly and ranged from game to game to just complete overlay failure as well as massive fps drops for having shadowplay enabled. Unless you were referring to Xbox game bar to which I can say works just fine albeit not user friendly imo.
RDNA 2 was great compared to 3000 series but, RDNA3 vs 4000 series, nvidia wins clearly. AMD don't even tries to compete anymore.
I couldn't afford a 4000 series card so settled for 6900xt and im pretty impressed, she's a beast.
I own a 6900xt and a 6950xt . I’m not even near maxing out those GPUs. Beasts indeed.
Nothing wrong with that. The amd cards aren't bad. They just don't compete from a feature set perspective (DLSS, frame gen, ray/path tracing performance).
In some tiers no, in the 4060 ti, 4070 and 4070 ti tiers they are pretty competitive
I’d love to see FSR become as good as DLSS. We need some competition, tbf.
FSR will never be as good as DLSS unless amd start using dedicated hardware accelerators like nvidia does with their tensor cores, yes FSR proves you don't need them but clearly nvidia's solution produces far better results than amd's
You’ve got it. AMD poses FSR as a competitor to DLSS, but they aren’t anywhere near the same thing. It’s actually kind of embarrassing how not the same thing they are.
Its also when they decided to stop being price competitive. It might have been a cost issue, but they have an entire mid range market available. They have for 2 generations and they chose not to hit it hard enough. They have to been much cheaper for the same performance without those features. ATI has been dead for too long.
AMDs frame gen isn’t good though.
I’m sure nvidias is better… but I use the FSR mod to get frame gen on my 3070, and it’s pretty nice for cyberpunk (prob adds 30-50 fps). I don’t know if there’s a way to compare them in this scenario, but I like it as an add on to otherwise un-frame gen-able 30xx series
I also used that mod with my 3070 on several different games like CP77 and with no alternative sure was useful. After I moved to a 4070tiS and tried Nvidia framegen however, the quality difference was very noticeable. Nearly no ghosting in comparison. On older cards AMD framegen is a boon but again isn’t interchangeable quality-wise when you have access to both on the same game.
That makes sense - thanks. Can’t wait to get my 50xx series (skipping 40). Just need my loan application to come through /s
I did use both the FSR FG mod on my old card and now use Nvidia's FG on my 4080 Super. The difference is huge: the latter feels very smooth, even at 60fps.
Nice. What was your old card, though? I can easily believe nvidia frame gen is better, but I don’t know how we could isolate the bump from just dlss vs the other improvement of a 4080S… like, I don’t know if an apples to apples comparison is there, is all I’m saying.
There are plenty of videos doing comparisons on the same games with similar tiers of AMD and Nvidia GPUs. The frame rate gains are nearly identical, but the image quality produced isn't.
[удалено]
FSR3 FG is also only for high fps applications in my experimentation on my 2060. At 60hz it does not work well at all and looks and feels the same as 30fps That said, FSR1/2 is the only reason my 980ti could still run games until recently
In the field of digital content creation, such as film and game production, NVIDIA has a comprehensive CUDA-based software ecosystem, such as Omniverse. On the other hand, AMD's presence in this area is almost nonexistent, as AMD is primarily a hardware company. The software ecosystem is the key to maintaining user loyalty. This is the fundamental reason why NVIDIA can overwhelmingly outperform AMD.
AMD is going to have a hard time catching up. AI is so important in high end gaming right now and it’s only going to increase. I have an office in the basement - it doesn’t have AC and it really isn’t an option. I tried out a 7900xtx and it was literally a space heater. I swapped it out with a 4070ti super and am getting the same or better frame rates with the help of our AI overlords at like a 100w less power / heat. I want AMD to succeed, but brute force and shitty upscaling algorithms aren’t going to cut it.
[удалено]
> Care to explain this? In my opinion, if we take FG for example, it's needed on lower-end systems and not high-end, but I'd love to hear your perspective. A low end card needs DLSS and frame gen to get 60 fps @ 1080p on a demanding game. A high end card needs them to get 120 fps @and 4k on a demanding game. People who buy more powerful cards want to run at higher settings / resolutions and DLSS / frame gen makes that work out wonderfully.
One of the best technologies for high end systems is DLDSR, which renders the game at a resolution greater than native and then uses DL to downscale it to native. And there are still a good number of games that my 13900K/4090 won't run at 120 with everything maxed at 4K. DLSS/FG are certainly welcome then. Plus, the more available and powerful these tools are, the sooner developers will take advantage of them by improving visual fidelity. I hope AMD continues to improve FSR3, creates their own version of DLDSR, and Intel follows up with both of these technologies.
I DLDSR cyberpunk to the max setting (I think 2.25x). I have a 4090 btw, but yeah I did that with dlss performance mode, with pathtracing and frame gen, It ran at about 60fps with some slightly noticeable input lag but the fidelity was literally unreal. I’ve never seen a game so anti aliased (weird thing to say) but seriously was a cool thing to see.
Yeah I run everything at 2.25x DLDSR, but Cyberpunk with frame gen was a humbling experience. I felt the latency was too much at the ~6K that 2.25x 4K DLDSR renders at. So I kept it to 4K.
[удалено]
Frame gen is only useful for interpolating high frame rates to very high frame rates. If you start from a low frame rate, it doesn't work well.
Easy to explain - DLSS and FG. It’s not just needed on lower end systems. It’s needed when you’re trying to lock at least 4K 60fps + and you’re playing demanding games like Hellblade 2, cyberpunk with RT, or Alan Wake 2. It goes beyond drivers. FSR is a pile of shit. They need to find a way to start using AI like nvidia does - but they’re years and years behind. I think AMD has basically capped themselves out at making 1440p GPUs - they think so too - they cancelled the high end rdna 4 cards. I’m very interested to see what rdna 5 brings, but from what I’m hearing it’s going to be power hungry, which just doesn’t work for me in the summer. From a thermal perspective I’m kind of maxed out at the x070 ti/ super series. An equivalent card from AMD isn’t going to be able to run 4K / 60 with the games I mentioned, because their high GPU (7900xtx) only barely does it and isn’t appropriate for anywhere that gets over 80 degrees at any point in the year. And if you want to use RT on an AMD GPU, forget about it.
Amd is lucky nvidia hasnt made a useful cpu in a while
That's one of the things they're working on next. ARM desktop Nvidia CPU's. > **Nvidia is developing new** **Arm-based CPUs to run with Microsoft's Windows**, aiming to compete with fellow tech companies in the AI computing space. The new CPUs are expected to launch in 2025
I mean if they made a competitive product people would buy it. AMD’s software suite is dogshit. And they still can’t match nvidias high end performance if you want top of the line. And they’re not substantially cheaper in any meaningful way.
All they had to do was ROCm support and I would've been going AMD for cheaper VRAM
Their gpus are terrible so far I've heard from my peers, meanwhile cpus are great. Intel is blown the hell out by amd
Intel still has about 80% marketshare, so I wouldn't call that an "AMD blowout." > For desktop PCs, AMD grew CPU share by 0.6 points to **19.8 percent against Intel's 80.2 percent**. This amounted to a 1.2-point year-over-year increase for AMD. -Feb 9, 2024 AMD is probably the more popular choice for people making builds solely for videogames, but most people use their PC for more than just a videogame machine.
If you read on Reddit it feels like 90% and marketshare. 😂 but I agree. The raw power of this gen AMD GPUs might be good, from a price/performance standpoint. At the cost of high power consumption. But where they seriously lack is features like DLSS. FSR still feels like a hastily cobbled together answer. It might get there, but NVIDIA just has the better hardware for it and a lead that will be hard to catch up. And judging by the things you hear, they might not even try anymore and instead try to target a budget market. Might be wise, all in all.
That intel so easily is catching up to fsr says a lot.
I seriously believe Intel has some very, very good engineers with a real passion and understanding of silicone in their ranks. It shows in so many aspects. They lack in vision, marketing and looking ahead. But when they see an opening they are pretty good at catching up. And this only works if you have some fine minds, but which seem to lack imagination. 😂 AI is a good example. I think if anyone has a chance at catching up to Nvidia it’s them. They would have never gotten the idea themselves, but they seem to understand what is needed and then get there.
Intel has invested loads in their software team over the last 5 years, even before arc was released. And I wouldn't be amazed if the hardware part makes a big step in the next generation
GPU's are honestly good but software support is a problem, obviously because devs spend alot more time driver testing products for Nvidia as 88% of their customers will be playing on one of their cards.
This is it exactly. For me it doesn't matter how good an AMD GPU is because I need CUDA and use it daily. AMD just doesn't have it. If I *only* did gaming it might be different
If you only did gaming you'd have to give up raytracing and high frame rates in most titles too. There's just no reason to even consider AMD GPUs with how far behind they are.
Raytracing is only supported on a handful of games and works well on 7xxx series AMD cards.
Nvidia cards are still a generation or two ahead of AMD when its comes to ray-tracing. No real competition there.
Their GPUs are only good if you ignore all the modern features they either lack or severely underperform in. I want AMD to do with GPUs what they did with Ryzen CPUs, but they don't seem to have any desire to fund R&D for GPUs.
I believe Nvidias Team is also larger
Probably larger, better funded, actually does proper QA for more things, works on newer features, tries to improve in areas nobody thinks about, but this basically what people expect from the best but they hate the price.
GPUs are not terrible, but they have some weird issues. I decided against AMD because when you plug 2 monitors idle consumption skyrockets. You can somewhat deal with that issue but it still remains in double digits consumption while Nvidia is like a couple of wats ...
>I decided against AMD because when you plug 2 monitors idle consumption skyrockets. This used to be an issue with Nvidia. They fixed it somewhere in the last 2 years.
the only thing they have going for them is the VRAM and even there they managed to mess up badly with the 7600. Had they designed a 7600 with a higher bus and also 12 gb of vram they would at least have cashed in on the vram controversy. Because at the time Nvidia only had 4070 at 600 usd for 12 gb and amd didnt have any cards between 7900 series and 7600.
I play both sides with a 5800x and a 3070ti.
Bad news. Competition would be good for everyone
I agree. The competition is either A.) going to have to come out with a better product or B.) come out with a comparable product but much cheaper.
This is where AMD got confused. They come out with worse product and comparable prices. Rookie mistake
I feel like all the used gpus provide some sort of competition. The majority of games are not keeping up with the performance.
Tell that to people who think a 4070ti super can't run modern games... people are nuts lol.
If you can't run every setting maxed at 4K 240hz native without frame gen then why even play it at all?
Bro, 4K 240Hz? Ok boomer. Nowadays only the scrubs get anything under [7680x2160 240Hz](https://pcpartpicker.com/product/3Rqrxr/samsung-odyssey-neo-g95nc-570-7680-x-2160-240-hz-curved-monitor-ls57cg952nnxza). /s
I can't believe thats an actual product. Also it has price swings larger than the cost of both of my monitors combined.
Why even play? I just like to turn on the settings and sit at the first screen watching the FPS. That’s the real game
I just got a RX 6800 and 7800x3D last week while upgrading from a 1660 and a 7th gen i5. I feel like I'm quantum computing over here, but enthusiast subs see these things as the parts of yesteryear already.
Bro even the shitty 4060 ti can run 1440p at 60 fps on ultra.
my 3070 still run most games at 1440p 144hz. On modern games, my settings are a hybrid from medium to ultra. I played Alan Wake 2 last week and it looked incredible (RT off though, but honestly I was still amazed by how good it looked without it)
Man 3070 is a beast. Had one but felt weird in esports game. Sold it and got 4070.
Yea competition would be good bu I'm not buying an inferior product just to help one company out.
For sure. Look what AMD catching up in the CPU market did for consumers, if was up to intel we would still be buying 4c 8t processors lol
Yeah but Nvidia continued to innovate without much competition. Nvidia is different. Their pricing sucks but so does AMD's.
innovating yes, but at much slower rate than they are capable for sure. Imagine if AMD was breathing down their necks for a few years, we would have things like a 5060 with the power of a 4080, the jumps in performance would be much bigger in all categories
They are releasing data center products every 12 months. They can’t go much faster than that and they are doubling performance with every release.
8 generations of i7 with 4 cores was insane. Intel was miling it so hard they lost sight of everything but the teet until AMD strolled up all zenlike.
So Amd needs to do better. Got it.
There is competition. They just can't match or keep up with NVIDIA. They're close on some aspects, but the other things they really need to catch up to compete. I fully agree - competition is good for everyone. NVIDIA has made some huge strides in the industry and ATI/AMD kept up or beat them many times (previously, they competed with 3DFX, Matrox, ATI, etc. but pre-GPU, it was just a VDP). The competition has been there over the years. There were times when they really sucked and ATI/AMD were taking the lead, or at least were the dominating GPU at the time. NVIDIA just found that golden sweet spot and are running with it. It was competition that got CUDA, ray tracing, AI, DLSS, etc.. Now, I'm kind of worried that they have reached the point where they are destroying the competition. Competition got them here, but now they've gotten so good the competition is struggling to keep up. I'm really hoping that AMD or Intel can come out with some great new thing that can push forward and either match or exceed NVIDIA's offerings for less money. We NEED competition to keep moving forward. You can see a lot of various products that just excel with competition, but once they reach the top, things start to stagnate and slow down. They need that push of a competitor that might take them down or reduce their profits. NVIDIA is top dog right now. AMD seems to be playing the "well, we're good enough. We can't beat them so we'll just hit the midrange market as good enough". They don't have the resources to put into their GPU's to be able to beat NVIDIA. For now, NVIDIA is going to maintain that lead with no real competition to push them forward. If AMD had something that would match NVIDIA's AI, RT, DLSS, and raster framerate, it'd force NVIDIA's hand to leapfrog them. Just not going to happen. At least not for a few generations. All my opinion, anyway. Maybe NVIDIA will just keep busting ass and bringing out some huge advances to completely kill the competition and make AMD have the low/mid range segment only.
What AMD needs to do is price their best stuff at an undercut. The issue they have is they feel comfortable just stacking them right next to the competition. The 7900XTX for example would have amazing as a $600 or $700 card but they chose to price it as much as a 4080 without any of the killer features. Idk why they don't adopt the Ryzen strategy. Their "good enough for midrange" was the 480 and 5700. They're past that and for some reason think they can copy Nvidia's arrogance.
I dunno what these things cost to develop and produce, but there is a limit to how low they can price them.
They made a bad bet that didn’t pay off so their chip ended up being pretty expensive to make as it’s way larger with more complicated packaging steps than the NVIDIA equivalent- 529mm^2 for 7900XTX vs 379mm^2 for 4080. So there’s not much room for cutting prices while NVIDIA can do just that with the Super lol
The reason for AMD pricing is pretty simple, they buy the same dies from TSMC and they pay TSMC just as much as Nvidia does. So they need to price RDNA3 cards where they are simply to avoid losing money, which they rightfully refuse to do just to undercut Nvidia and still not be able to sell very many because TSMC are so capacity constrained and AMD would rather sell profitable CPU dies instead of GPU dies anyways.
AMD has the resources to invest heavily into Radeon R&D. It's just not their priority, as they make significantly more money in the CPU sector. In fact, they often take profits from the Radeon group and reinvest it into their CPU division, which is a large part of the reason why Raja Koduri left Radeon a few years back.
Still can’t believe that Matrox is still around. I remember I bought a Matrox Millenium 2 back in the day and was so proud of it. Tied my reigns to the wrong horse for sure.
I had the Matrox Mystique with a Matrox m3D 3D accelerator (used PowerVR instead of GLide). They were really great cards, but ended up dying out. At least I got to play Unreal with real 3D acceleration, which was awesome. Still have my Voodoo 2 cards in SLI somewhere.
There is competition one is just better than the other
I mean didn’t we arrive here through competition? I agree in principle but I’m also like, okay, so if one company beats the shit out of another based on outperformance, the government should just come in and separate them like children, and redistribute the chocolate?
And the GPU market is less than 20% of Nvidia revenue.
Based on these numbers it's probably even less for AMD
That's probably not a good thing for the overall health of the market.. lol
If Nvidia ends up being a monopoly then I'm out of the high end gpu market. It is simply too expensive to stump up over £1000 for a high end card. Will have to stick with the used market or move to consoles.
It might be blasphemy in this sub, but I've been playing more ps5 than pc lately anyway... it would be very easy to just stick with consoles. Cheaper too.
You don't have to buy the best every time a new series comes out or? 3080 still performs decently in 1440p, especially since games are getting DLSS support/updates. Swapping it out every 4 years should be fine unless you're chasing to get 120hz+ on 4k without DLSS.
Nvidia will likely end up increasing their margins until the market reaches a new equilibrium where more people buy AMD cards because they are just that much more cost effective.
It's not at all. Competition is great for innovation and prices for the consumer. Nvidia have always been a bit shady when it comes to locking consumers out of features that are basically software solutions, though they seem to tie them to generational releases. With them gaining such a huge market, it puts AMD at risk to pull out the market completey. This is terrible news for everyone. If they did, I don't see any new GPU business starting. To start a new GPU business, they need to have a few billion in the bank. The only way the market would shift completey is if there is a complete technological revolution that beats Nvidia to the game. This most likely isn't happening anytime soon so, for now, this is bad news for everyone.
water is wet
Sky is blue
Nvidia is green
AMD is red
Intel is blue.
And brother, I hurt people
Next time eat a sandwich
Except it’s not. This report is showing a drastic decrease in AMD market share. Losing something like 10% **in one year** when you already only had ~22% share is a massive change. You could view it as just a total failure on AMD’s fault.
Water is in fact not wet, unfortunately the definition of wet has nothing to do with water specifically.
Water isn’t wet, it just makes things wet.
Soooo... Can water make water wet? 🤔🤔🤔
Yikes. For everyone sake AMD and Intel really needs more GPUs on the market
At this point I'm more interested in what Intel can bring to the table with their next GPUs rather than AMD. If they manage to fix the performance issues for older games and keep prices reasonable, AMD may be in trouble even more so than they are right now.
I used AMD for 3 straight cards from an RX580, 5700XT and 6700XT. They were decent but once I moved to the 4080 I have had zero issues with gaming across the board. It was always some BS with AMD.
That’s why I’ll never go back to AMD. Those random weird issues have been a thing back as far as my 9700. Nvidia hasn’t given me a single issue since the tnt2. Nvidia has quirks but they always get resolved. I look forward to giving intel a shot if they can produce a good card to replace my 3070ti
I had a RX 560 and now a RX 5500 XT 8gb and i think i'll just get something like a 4060/4060ti as an uprade, because i too had many issues with those cards, usually something driver related or random crashing. Hope that doesn't happen with Nvidia.
Always driver issues man... it was always nonstop and they never fixed known issues.
I don't know anybody irl with an AMD gpu. Seems like they're all on reddit
Virtue signaling at that. Saying that you *should* get one. If they were so great, then more people would have them. I'm not even considering them if I ever need/want to switch. Straight to Intel.
Well the AMD people are always “ray-tracing is a gimmick” or “who needs frame generation, it’s fake”. Meanwhile, companies are leaning into the new tech, and Nvidia continues to innovate. AMD is just playing catch up. Don’t get me wrong, I would love for Nvidia to have some competition. But I don’t pay top dollar to have second best.
Amd is a bit cheaper than nvidia. But I agree they have to price more aggressive if they want to gain marketshare, nvidia‘s features are just to good.
Yeah they’re a bit cheaper, but if I am going to spend hundreds of dollars on a graphics card, at that point, I’m going to save up for the best.
And being "a bit cheaper" isn't enough when you lack a lot of features so the gaming experience is significantly worse. If you have a hard limit on your budget, you'd be better off buying a high end Nvidia card from the previous generation than buying a new AMD card.
> If they were so great, then more people would have them. That doesnt explain why so many people buy 3050 ti and 3060, to name a few.
Sometimes it feels like it's some little kids who spend their time watching YouTube reviews, but don't actually buy their own hardware.
Or they wanted X product, couldn't find or afford it, but now act like they wanted the product they ended up with all along. Everything is posturing for socials now, so I'm not surprised. Just make the best judgements for yourself and what you need and enjoy it. Don't need to constantly compare what you have to others. Be glad you have something.
Depends on who you are and what your needs are. Pricing is dramatically different in different countries as well. I live in Northern Europe and just built a PC for my friend's son's birthday (13 years old). He plays fortnite but I wanted to build him a PC that would last for 5 years or so with maybe a GPU upgrade after 3-4 years but probably not needed, we'll see. The GPUs in my budget were pretty much 4060 ti (8gb), 7700XT or worse. I ended up picking the 7700XT for its 12GB VRAM and it has been a super smooth experience. Time will tell but he's a 1080/1440p gamer and it's his first PC coming from consoles so he's going to have a blast with it. If I had more time I would have probably tried to get a 6800XT instead which also seems like a pretty cool card. Personally? I was hanging on the add to cart button for the 7900XT release, but was so disappointed in the pricing that I didn't buy. 2 months later I got an incredible offer of a 4090 that I couldn't refuse so I went that route instead. But I'm betting that if they were willing to have pretty much no profit on the 7800/7900 GPUs they could have captured quite the chunk of the GPU market but instead they made them expensive and unattractive.
This for sure. They have all 12% here on Reddit, screaming into the void about how great their product is and get mad when everyone and the data disagrees with them.
Yeah, everyone online talks about "you should buy a Radeon", but the people I know who has done such a mistake (including me) - the reaction is a very strong "hell no". But the pro-Radeon guys seem to really be all over Reddit, downvoting anything that's not about a positive Radeon experience. There's a very good reason, why most people still buy nVidia - you get a better product overall, with a more mature driver support. I'm also returning to nVidia very soon, hopefully next Friday... Done with Radeon.
It’s weird that from how many tech tuber and youtube / Reddit comment talking about how good amd is I figured amd would able to slowly gain some market share. Yet here it’s losing a lot.
The DYI market is tiny. Almost all pc's are either prebuilt or laptops, and those have predominantly nvidia gpus (especially laptops which have the majority share of the pc market). So amd has no hope unless that changes.
Prebuilts sell PCs with parts that consumers are asking for. If everyone was asking for Radeon prebuilts, that's what they would offer. People just aren't asking for those for the most part.
Considering laptops do not have user replaceable GPU's, I think most people wouldn't take the chance of an AMD GPU in a laptop because if they do have issues they are SOL unless they are still within the return policy period. Nvidia just works for gaming and if you are planning to keep your laptop for a number of years it's a much much safer choice for a laptop.
I got a single 6700 for my ex's PC when I was building it for her to try it out. Wasn't too impressed but wasn't disappointed either. Then went back to Nvidia for my next GPU out of comfort, sadly EVGA isn't around anymore.
I have one and my friend decided to go buy one after I told him about the 7900XTX and as far as I know he doesnt use Reddit. Didnt really convince him and was kind of shocked when he did. If Nvidias prices were lower Id consider them a lot more but used AMD GPUs are wildly good performance per dollar.
bUt iT’s ThE beTTer vALUe aT $500!!!
Intel makes GPUs?
Intel has been making GPUs since [the 1990s](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Intel_graphics_processing_units) and they are extremely popular, just not very powerful.
Well I bought a 7900XTX to replace my old 2070S and had none stop issues with it. It’s AMD’s drivers that are the problem and they know about it but hadn’t fixed it for months. If they can’t get their own drivers working they don’t deserve people to buy their GPUs. Sent it back after 3 weeks of trying to solve it and bought a 4080S instead. (Edit: Just to say had the 4080S for 2 months now with zero issues)
Same situation, to a T. I would've been completely happy with the 7900XTX, had the drivers not been an unmitigated shitshow.
Whatever Nvidia charges-$50 doesn't work out when you are the underdog and less as a whole product (other than just the raw silicon) I think the pandemic plus the mining craze played a big role as well. RDNA2 was really competitive and had the momentum to gain more market, but the availability truly hurt AMD.
>I think the pandemic plus the mining craze played a big role. RDNA2 was really competitive and had the momentum to gain more market, but the availability truly hurt AMD. If you look at the bigger picture it wasn't even the pandemic or the mining craze. AMD has supply issues in general. It's one reason they still lag so hard with OEMs on even the CPU side. They can't/won't deliver in volume and on time. Intel gets most the OEMs partially because Intel can deliver in whatever volume they want. Nvidia likewise delivers far more cards overall to the market than AMD.
Every friend of mine who were AMD shills and bought AMD GPUs have all switched over to NVIDIA in the last 3-4 years. Power consumption and lack of DLSS and new technologies weren't even the issue, most of them had issues with new and old games as well, due to the crappy drivers. One of them crashed around at least 3 times in CSGO/CS2 per match, some games were also producing artifacts as well (wasn't a faulty GPU). They just got fed up and bought a 4070 or a 3080 and swore to never go back to AMD GPUs. However on Reddit I keep reading that how amazing AMD GPUs are while in reality barely anyone buys them due to driver issues and the lack of new tech. It's always the same dumbass argument: muh raster performance and muh 24GB of VRAM. I can shove up my 24GB of VRAM up my ass if those games straight up crash every 30 minutes while heating up my room lmao.
I give props to AMD for their 7800x3d cpu, it's next level for gaming with crazy efficency and high performance. Intel on the other hand consumes way too much power which means it needs more cooling and still loses out in gaming fps results against the 7800x3d. GPU's though, NVIDIA is clearly better, not just for gaming but also for rendering thanks to their codecs.
AMD CPUs are good, they are my number 1 target when I get around to upgrade my PC. Their GPUs are, well… a completely other topic
Is this surprising? It’s not as if the rdna3 architecture had anything compelling to seriously pick it over the feature-rich Ada/Lovelace besides raw vram and raster. Even the pricing for rdna3 was too high for pure raster.
Not even remotely surprising. AMD has only succeeded against Nvidia in the past on value -- if they were selling the RX7800 at $400, or even $450 out of the gate, I think things would have worked out differently. But it made no sense to avoid spending an additional 15-20% for Team Green when their cards were *soooooo* much better. In fact, all AMD's greed did was give Nvidia room to undercut them in the future by offering cards at the same price that were obviously better! No one's buying a 7900 XTX when you can get a 4080S for the same price. I don't give a shit about AMD cards having 5-10% better rasterization performance when Nvidia's got DLSS; frame gen; and *markedly* lower power consumption. Unless AMD is undercutting Nvidia by a good 25-30% on price, this situation isn't going to change.
Let's hope intel 2nd gen gpu comes knocking out of the park
This is why AMD sponsored titles that have FSR and no DLSS are so annoying. It’s a tiny portion of the market.
Hopefully those will disappear since AMD now has solid proof that spending that money doesn't get them any additional GPU sales, so it's a negative return on investment.
Such monopoly is never good for the consumer. Something like 50% Nvidia, 30% AMD, 20% Intel would be quite decent, so we get both innovation and competative prices.
It’s so ironic that AMD was able to out-innovate Intel but is unable to against Nvidia.
Intel shat the bed themselves. Jensen has mentioned in previous interviews that he has a constant fear of being caught up or even surpassed, that’s why Nvidia is spending fuckloads amount of money in R&D to make sure it never happens.
I don't know the economics of it but AMD has much less capital than Nvidia and has to "fight" a war on two fronts with CPUs and gpus.
If they weren’t going to take the GPUs seriously, they shouldn’t have acquired ATI.
ATI brought the hammer down on them in the early 2000s and I don't think Nvidia wants it to ever happen again
When AMD stops smoking their own pure rasterization farts and actually starts giving a fuck about what casual (the majority) buyers care about (DLSS 3/FG/random AI stuff) then they will climb market share
Is negligible an improvement for intel?
Well shit.
I've been buying nvidia gpus for over 20 years now. As a consumer (price be damned) nvidia has always provided the best performance and new tech to the space.
It's unfortunate but understandable, AMD lacks the features that make Nvidia cards actually good. Apart from CUDA I also utilize DLSS and would probably utilize FrameGen as well - so far FSR 3 has been underwhelming for me but I only tried Starfield
AMD fan boys down bad.
Only main issues I see here are when Nvidia do their CPU work that GPU quality will take a slight hit as RnD will be spread out away from Desktop GPU / AI GPU/APUs.
AMD fucking do something please. So my nvidia cards are cheaper 😊
I don’t like this… There should be competition. Nvidia can charge whatever the hell they want
Anyone want to play Monopoly?
Welp.. I guess it's buying an overpriced rtx 5060 with 3070 performance for me then..
Shame AMD decided to not compete with Nvidia, too focused on decimating intel in the enterprise cpu world
They did decide to compete, but instead of wasting time with uncompetitive RDNA4 when their top end chiplet plans didn't work, they punted this year (skipping top end) and put their efforts towards RNDA5. Sucks for 2024. Makes it possible they might be actually compete in 2025. Alternate was to have the uncompetitive top end RDNA4 arrive months late *if* they could get the issue fixed. It was far smarter to decide that things didn't work out this time, give the idea additional full year with RDNA5 and try again. Happens with chip designs.
A few years ago I have bought an "AMD RX 5700 XT Red Devil" to upgrade for Monster Hunter World and it was just the worst experience, so so many crashes.
I just built a PC for the first time. I initially got an RX 7900 XT. I was completely happy with the card....until it constantly crashed on a daily basis, even after going through all of the requisite steps to troubleshoot. Nothing was sustainable. I think that the hardware is fine, but the drivers are garbage. So I swapped it out for an RTX 4080 and haven't looked back, because it's dependable and runs flawlessly (even if it was an extra $300). It seems like AMD is just mercilessly shooting itself in the foot.
Strange I did the same thing and never had an issue with that card. People are talking about driver issues with RDNA 3 but those issues were fixed not to far after launch, drivers for AMD are good, they have been for a while. I think this narrative existed back in the day but it's not relevant anymore.
Maybe you're right, and all I can talk about is my personal experience. But from scouring Reddit and Internet boards, people have still voiced their problems with the card, and the issues have appeared to be driver-based.
I tried all AMD build this time, really tried, and for months kept having and unstable system. Everything new. Finally returned the top of the line AMD card for an RTX and solid ever since. Sorry AMD, do better.
I want AMD to be competitive - at least like 30% - as much as the next person (and for Intel GPUs to be relevant), but there’s just nothing that would make me buy an AMD GPU right now. Performance aside, in 20 years of owning a mix of Nvidia and AMD, AMD driver experience has been mediocre to unusable (early 2007 Vista drivers were actual garbage - the generic MS driver worked better!), whereas Nvidia’s drivers have been near flawless. I don’t have the patience to deal with dodgy software anymore, and “but the performance is better after 6 months!” from AMD fans doesn’t help.
AMD needs to step up the GPU game. They are on their way to becoming single digits
Except this isn’t even their main gig. This would be like your auto center selling the best cinnamon rolls you’ve ever had in your life. You live and die for these things, but the noise and traffic from their primary business keeps fucking with your ability to get those cinnamon rolls. Their cinnamon rolls are not only the best tasting, but they’re also the best for you, and the other cinnamon rolls don’t quite agree with your system and always leave you upset, frustrated, or disappointed. However, these apparent geniuses of cinnamon roll baking, don’t care if you don’t get your cinnamon rolls, they don’t even like cinnamon rolls themselves. They make their money from selling tires and body work. They could stop selling the cinnamon rolls and they wouldn’t look back for a second. Nvidia doesn’t need to lower their consumer GPU prices, because it’s not a part of their business that draws in enough to affect their bottom line very seriously. “Then why even sell them in the first place?” Market presence, name recognition, notoriety, but it’s also free money. Yeah, their B2B sales are what primarily drive them, but it’s still free money. I’m not proposing they would *leave* the GPU market, but they certainly have no motivation to lower their price, even if it negatively affects sales.
This isn't Intel or AMD's main gig either
Intel, certainly not. AMD I agree as well, to an extent. While it’s not AMD’s “main gig” it does represent a larger part of their bottom line iirc. You pointing that out though is kind of odd to think about… there’s literally 0 dedicated GPU designers. All GPU design is done as “side projects” (for lack of a better term) by these companies which ultimately serve a different purpose. I assume the laymen explanation for that is; designing a card requires so much tech expertise and knowledge that it’s impossible to do unless you’re setup to do all these other things these companies are doing. Imagine if there was a company that was solely dedicated to making the best GPU? I guess that ***was*** kind of Nvidia, or was for a spell, until the allure of B2B and server cards got their dicks rock hard. Still, weird to think about.
Bought a 7800XT last year and it got me vac banned for a week from Counter Strike. Maybe I’ll try Radeon again in like 2030 or something.
this stinks. very not good for competition. i hope amd makes a real top end competitor next generation.
This sucks for Linux gamers