John Carmack picks a side in the Nvidia/AMD GPU war.

PCG: If you were to buy a graphics card right now, what would you get?

Let me caution this by saying that this is not necessarily a benchmarked result. We've had closer relationships with Nvidia over the years, and my systems have had Nvidia cards in them for generations. We have more personal ties with Nvidia. As I understand it, ATI/AMD cards are winning a lot of the benchmarks right now for when you straight-out make synthetic benchmarks for things like that, but our games do get more hands-on polish time on the Nvidia side of things.

Nvidia does have a stronger dev-relations team. I can always drop an email for an obscure question. So its more of a socio-cultural decision there rather than a raw "Which hardware is better." Although that does feed back into it, when you've got the dev-relation team that is deeply intertwined with the development studio. That tends to make your hardware, in some cases, come out better than what it truly is, because it's got more of the software side behind it.

Carmack

This seems to be the case for many years now, will AMD ever do something about this so that their card's get the same level of support?

Synthetic benches? I can sure see he's been told what to say. I'm starting to care less and less about his opinion.

The guy hasn't been relevant in gaming since Quake 3. "Id is starting to remind me of an old rock band known for a few great hits way back when".

Synthetic benches? I can sure see he's been told what to say. I'm starting to care less and less about his opinion.

The guy hasn't been relevant in gaming since Quake 3. "Id is starting to remind me of an old rock band known for a few great hits way back when".

MrGrimFandango

Yeah but he made Doom. Doom.

when I saw your name as the author I knew it would be something like this. However, nvidia lines the pockets of this man and other people like him out there to say things like this. What do you think 'The way its meant to be played" game sponsors by nvidia is for? Also whats even more pathetic is the fact that AMD with half a billion in profit this last quarter does not resort to dirty tactics like proprierty software (physx/cuda) and instead promotes open source programmingfor their hardware , while Nvidia with only 150 million in profit does the opposite and promotes closed propriety bs software every time. This is a main reason why big developers like gabe from valve (someone who has so much money and cant be bought) support AMD's open source stance. In fact on the very main page of the steam store, AMD is listed as a partner.

Hell even intel is supporting AMD with open source programming for their hardware by going opengl. Nobody has went cuda b/c its good for no one except nvidia.

amd the fanboy in gambler shines through as clear as day..

your a slave to nvidia/intel

and fyi a phenom III x4 is better than any core 2 quad and the athalon II x4 matches most of em stride for stride in any benchmark ive seen..

http://www.frostytech.com/articleview.cfm?articleid=2549&page=13

http://tpucdn.com/reviews/AMD/Athlon_II_X4_645/images/pcvantage.gif

http://tpucdn.com/reviews/AMD/Athlon_II_X4_645/images/wprime.gif

This is not new, it's pretty known that AMD is pretty poor when it comes to dealing with developers directly. They have been trying to change that though.

This is not new, it's pretty known that AMD is pretty poor when it comes to paying developers money to put their logo in the splash screens.

Espada12

Fixed for you;).

[QUOTE="Espada12"]

This is not new, it's pretty known that AMD is pretty poor when it comes to paying developers money to put their logo in the splash screens.

topgunmv

Fixed for you;).

Well yeah but nvidia does make sure their GPUs get special attention and I applaud them for that haha. The only thing I don't like is the physx.. I want to see that in all games. Alice has it and it looks good.

AMD fanboy rambling

ionusX

Intel CPU's have much slower default clocks thats why it seems like AMD beats core 2 quad, bring in overclocking and then talk. I very specifically said "clock for clock" in that thread.

A logical reasoning from Carmac as usual ^^

It is not something that could not change I think, AMD has gotten better at reaching out to devs if we are to belive some of the stories around (Plausible most likely), but the card manufactor that gives best help to the devs working on thier hardware will ofcourse be the preferred one.

I guess that in 5 years time it is likely 50/50 From devs point of view. I hope so. I do not like a huge imballance.

[QUOTE="Espada12"]

This is not new, it's pretty known that AMD is pretty poor when it comes to paying developers money to put their logo in the splash screens.

topgunmv

Fixed for you;).

[QUOTE="ionusX"]

AMD fanboy rambling

Gambler_3

Intel CPU's have much slower default clocks thats why it seems like AMD beats core 2 quad, bring in overclocking and then talk. I very specifically said "clock for clock" in that thread.

Clock for clock the power 7 destroys everything.

It's about total performance. IPC+GHz= performance The p4s sucked because they had high GHz and low IPC, the coreI processors are amazing because they have a high IPC and good GHz

However, nvidia lines the pockets of this man and other people like him out there to say things like this. What do you think 'The way its meant to be played" game sponsors by nvidia is for? blaznwiipspman1

so john carmack likes a product and he is in bed with the company? guy is not allowed to have an opinion about something that is different from yours?

also, "the way its meant to be played" is a marketing thing. its what companies do. if you think amd is so awesome because they don't do that, good for you. use amd products.

but there is no sense in blaming a company for marketing its products.

amd the fanboy in gambler shines through as clear as day..

your a slave to nvidia/intel

and fyi a phenom III x4 is better than any core 2 quad and the athalon II x4 matches most of em stride for stride in any benchmark ive seen..

http://www.frostytech.com/articleview.cfm?articleid=2549&page=13

http://tpucdn.com/reviews/AMD/Athlon_II_X4_645/images/pcvantage.gif

http://tpucdn.com/reviews/AMD/Athlon_II_X4_645/images/wprime.gif

ionusX

So AMD's current cpus are better than Intel's CPUs from three generations ago? What is your point?

After what ATI and Creative Assembly did with the recent Shogun 2 patch i'm inclined to disagree

[QUOTE="ionusX"]

amd the fanboy in gambler shines through as clear as day..

your a slave to nvidia/intel

and fyi a phenom III x4 is better than any core 2 quad and the athalon II x4 matches most of em stride for stride in any benchmark ive seen..

http://www.frostytech.com/articleview.cfm?articleid=2549&page=13

http://tpucdn.com/reviews/AMD/Athlon_II_X4_645/images/pcvantage.gif

http://tpucdn.com/reviews/AMD/Athlon_II_X4_645/images/wprime.gif

Brean24

So AMD's current cpus are better than Intel's CPUs from three generations ago? What is your point?

2 generations ago.

[QUOTE="ionusX"]

amd the fanboy in gambler shines through as clear as day..

your a slave to nvidia/intel

and fyi a phenom III x4 is better than any core 2 quad and the athalon II x4 matches most of em stride for stride in any benchmark ive seen..

http://www.frostytech.com/articleview.cfm?articleid=2549&page=13

http://tpucdn.com/reviews/AMD/Athlon_II_X4_645/images/pcvantage.gif

http://tpucdn.com/reviews/AMD/Athlon_II_X4_645/images/wprime.gif

Brean24

So AMD's current cpus are better than Intel's CPUs from three generations ago? What is your point?

This, and i find those stupid benchmarks to be stupid. they are always on medium and usually at 720p

[QUOTE="Brean24"]

[QUOTE="ionusX"]

amd the fanboy in gambler shines through as clear as day..

your a slave to nvidia/intel

and fyi a phenom III x4 is better than any core 2 quad and the athalon II x4 matches most of em stride for stride in any benchmark ive seen..

http://www.frostytech.com/articleview.cfm?articleid=2549&page=13

http://tpucdn.com/reviews/AMD/Athlon_II_X4_645/images/pcvantage.gif

http://tpucdn.com/reviews/AMD/Athlon_II_X4_645/images/wprime.gif

James161324

So AMD's current cpus are better than Intel's CPUs from three generations ago? What is your point?

This, and i find those stupid benchmarks to be stupid. they are always on medium and usually at 720p

hurr hurr you test the cpu by setting graphics down

[QUOTE="blaznwiipspman1"]

However, nvidia lines the pockets of this man and other people like him out there to say things like this. What do you think 'The way its meant to be played" game sponsors by nvidia is for? PRowcester

so john carmack likes a product and he is in bed with the company? guy is not allowed to have an opinion about something that is different from yours?

also, "the way its meant to be played" is a marketing thing. its what companies do. if you think amd is so awesome because they don't do that, good for you. use amd products.

but there is no sense in blaming a company for marketing its products.

I respect AMD for not trying to standardize propriety software and make it exclusive to their hardware. For example a while back physx actually WORKED with a single radeon card and another geforce card dedicated to physx. Nvidia released drivers that disabled this feature because they didn't like that their software was also being used with another companies card without the other company licensing it. Its a disgusting practise and its not good for consumers. Not to mention the billions of dollars they spend to try to make sure that games run better on their hardware by writing code specifically tailored to their cards. You can call that marketing but I find things like that pathetic and illegal. A reason why I respect AMD is that you won't see them doing stuff like this and they are much more supportive of open source software. I personally won't be buying another geforce card until nvidia fixes their way.

[QUOTE="PRowcester"]

[QUOTE="blaznwiipspman1"]

However, nvidia lines the pockets of this man and other people like him out there to say things like this. What do you think 'The way its meant to be played" game sponsors by nvidia is for? blaznwiipspman1

so john carmack likes a product and he is in bed with the company? guy is not allowed to have an opinion about something that is different from yours?

also, "the way its meant to be played" is a marketing thing. its what companies do. if you think amd is so awesome because they don't do that, good for you. use amd products.

but there is no sense in blaming a company for marketing its products.

I respect AMD for not trying to standardize propriety software and make it exclusive to their hardware. For example a while back physx actually WORKED with a single radeon card and another geforce card dedicated to physx. Nvidia released drivers that disabled this feature because they didn't like that their software was also being used with another companies card without the other company licensing it. Its a disgusting practise and its not good for consumers. Not to mention the billions of dollars they spend to try to make sure that games run better on their hardware by writing code specifically tailored to their cards. You can call that marketing but I find things like that pathetic and illegal. A reason why I respect AMD is that you won't see them doing stuff like this and they are much more supportive of open source software. I personally won't be buying another geforce card until nvidia fixes their way.

physx is going to go the way of glide.

[QUOTE="PRowcester"]

[QUOTE="blaznwiipspman1"]

However, nvidia lines the pockets of this man and other people like him out there to say things like this. What do you think 'The way its meant to be played" game sponsors by nvidia is for? blaznwiipspman1

so john carmack likes a product and he is in bed with the company? guy is not allowed to have an opinion about something that is different from yours?

also, "the way its meant to be played" is a marketing thing. its what companies do. if you think amd is so awesome because they don't do that, good for you. use amd products.

but there is no sense in blaming a company for marketing its products.

in all honesty i won't moatter pysx was developed by nvidia, so all in all if it's their software they have everyright in doing what they please to hold back from other companies being able to use, yes it is greedy but hey wth can you do they did develop it.

I respect AMD for not trying to standardize propriety software and make it exclusive to their hardware. For example a while back physx actually WORKED with a single radeon card and another geforce card dedicated to physx. Nvidia released drivers that disabled this feature because they didn't like that their software was also being used with another companies card without the other company licensing it. Its a disgusting practise and its not good for consumers. Not to mention the billions of dollars they spend to try to make sure that games run better on their hardware by writing code specifically tailored to their cards. You can call that marketing but I find things like that pathetic and illegal. A reason why I respect AMD is that you won't see them doing stuff like this and they are much more supportive of open source software. I personally won't be buying another geforce card until nvidia fixes their way.

[QUOTE="blaznwiipspman1"]

[QUOTE="PRowcester"]

so john carmack likes a product and he is in bed with the company? guy is not allowed to have an opinion about something that is different from yours?

also, "the way its meant to be played" is a marketing thing. its what companies do. if you think amd is so awesome because they don't do that, good for you. use amd products.

but there is no sense in blaming a company for marketing its products.

Nethemis

I respect AMD for not trying to standardize propriety software and make it exclusive to their hardware. For example a while back physx actually WORKED with a single radeon card and another geforce card dedicated to physx. Nvidia released drivers that disabled this feature because they didn't like that their software was also being used with another companies card without the other company licensing it. Its a disgusting practise and its not good for consumers. Not to mention the billions of dollars they spend to try to make sure that games run better on their hardware by writing code specifically tailored to their cards. You can call that marketing but I find things like that pathetic and illegal. A reason why I respect AMD is that you won't see them doing stuff like this and they are much more supportive of open source software. I personally won't be buying another geforce card until nvidia fixes their way.

in all honesty i won't moatter pysx was developed by nvidia, so all in all if it's their software they have everyright in doing what they please to hold back from other companies being able to use, yes it is greedy but hey wth can you do they did develop it.

Physx was made by aegia not nvidia

[QUOTE="Nethemis"]

[QUOTE="blaznwiipspman1"]

I respect AMD for not trying to standardize propriety software and make it exclusive to their hardware. For example a while back physx actually WORKED with a single radeon card and another geforce card dedicated to physx. Nvidia released drivers that disabled this feature because they didn't like that their software was also being used with another companies card without the other company licensing it. Its a disgusting practise and its not good for consumers. Not to mention the billions of dollars they spend to try to make sure that games run better on their hardware by writing code specifically tailored to their cards. You can call that marketing but I find things like that pathetic and illegal. A reason why I respect AMD is that you won't see them doing stuff like this and they are much more supportive of open source software. I personally won't be buying another geforce card until nvidia fixes their way.

GummiRaccoon

in all honesty i won't moatter pysx was developed by nvidia, so all in all if it's their software they have everyright in doing what they please to hold back from other companies being able to use, yes it is greedy but hey wth can you do they did develop it.

Physx was made by aegia not nvidia

I am sure they would let AMD licence it if they were willing to pay or else it could be deemed uncompetitive practice.....but physx has been a flop so far so I doubt they need to do that. I would be concerned about physx if I was a multi-card user but how can physx be justified with the kind of performance drop it gives on single cards is beyond me.....I'll rather play in 60FPS without physx than 40FPS with physx.

So he is a fanboy because he prefers NVIDIA's dev support?

Seems to me that this forum is filled with ATI fanboys.

[QUOTE="Nethemis"]

[QUOTE="blaznwiipspman1"]

ahh i stand corrected, but aren't they part of nvidia though?

I respect AMD for not trying to standardize propriety software and make it exclusive to their hardware. For example a while back physx actually WORKED with a single radeon card and another geforce card dedicated to physx. Nvidia released drivers that disabled this feature because they didn't like that their software was also being used with another companies card without the other company licensing it. Its a disgusting practise and its not good for consumers. Not to mention the billions of dollars they spend to try to make sure that games run better on their hardware by writing code specifically tailored to their cards. You can call that marketing but I find things like that pathetic and illegal. A reason why I respect AMD is that you won't see them doing stuff like this and they are much more supportive of open source software. I personally won't be buying another geforce card until nvidia fixes their way.

GummiRaccoon

in all honesty i won't moatter pysx was developed by nvidia, so all in all if it's their software they have everyright in doing what they please to hold back from other companies being able to use, yes it is greedy but hey wth can you do they did develop it.

Physx was made by aegia not nvidia

[QUOTE="GummiRaccoon"]

[QUOTE="Nethemis"]

in all honesty i won't moatter pysx was developed by nvidia, so all in all if it's their software they have everyright in doing what they please to hold back from other companies being able to use, yes it is greedy but hey wth can you do they did develop it.

Gambler_3

Physx was made by aegia not nvidia

I am sure they would let AMD licence it if they were willing to pay or else it could be deemed uncompetitive practice.....but physx has been a flop so far so I doubt they need to do that. I would be concerned about physx if I was a multi-card user but how can physx be justified with the kind of performance drop it gives on single cards is beyond me.....I'll rather play in 60FPS without physx than 40FPS with physx.

I know they didn't pick them up for nothing. I am just irritated at them for doing with physx what 3dfx did with glide. If nvidia hadn't picked up ageia or they didn't refuse to make it compatible with ati cards, physx would be nearly everywhere right now and I'd have an nvidia physx card in my system along with my 6950.

[QUOTE="Gambler_3"]

[QUOTE="GummiRaccoon"]

Physx was made by aegia not nvidia

GummiRaccoon

I am sure they would let AMD licence it if they were willing to pay or else it could be deemed uncompetitive practice.....but physx has been a flop so far so I doubt they need to do that. I would be concerned about physx if I was a multi-card user but how can physx be justified with the kind of performance drop it gives on single cards is beyond me.....I'll rather play in 60FPS without physx than 40FPS with physx.

I know they didn't pick them up for nothing. I am just irritated at them for doing with physx what 3dfx did with glide. If nvidia hadn't picked up ageia or they didn't refuse to make it compatible with ati cards, physx would be nearly everywhere right now and I'd have an nvidia physx card in my system along with my 6950.

i agree with what your saying...but how many games actually utilize PysX these days anyways.