AMD: ''Nvidia are full of sh*t and asshurt''

"""In fact, based on our testing, Radeon cards seem to handle PhysX slightly better than their GeForce counterparts. When running Borderlands 2 at 1920x1200, the HD 7970 only took a 15% performance hit after enabling PhysX (dropping from 72fps to 61fps), whereas the GTX 680 fell 19% from 74fps to 60fps.""" http://www.techspot.com/review/577-borderlands-2-performance/page7.html You are a soulless troll who argue just for the sake of arguing i proved how HSA only work on HSA able hardware,and now i prove how Radeons card actually ran PhysX by using mod and the results were not only better than on the 680GTX the quality was the same...tormentos

Yet in this benchmark the GTX 680 averages 69 fps while the 7970 averages 33 fps. http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Graphics-Cards/Borderlands-2-PhysX-Performance-and-PhysX-Comparison-GTX-680-and-HD-7970/GPU-

This site recommends disabling physx on amd gpu's. http://www.hardocp.com/article/2012/10/01/borderlands_2_gameplay_performance_iq_review/3

Meh, does doesn't take away the fact that Nvidia are walking over AMD in the graphics card wars.clyde46

[QUOTE="clyde46"]Meh, does doesn't take away the fact that Nvidia are walking over AMD in the graphics card wars.Messiahbolical-

You pay for better drivers, more features like adaptive vsync and phys x.Cranler

Yet in this benchmark the GTX 680 averages 69 fps while the 7970 averages 33 fps. http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Graphics-Cards/Borderlands-2-PhysX-Performance-and-PhysX-Comparison-GTX-680-and-HD-7970/GPU-

This site recommends disabling physx on amd gpu's. http://www.hardocp.com/article/2012/10/01/borderlands_2_gameplay_performance_iq_review/3

[QUOTE="Cranler"][QUOTE="tormentos"] Different sites mine says different.. There is a link there read it..tormentos

[QUOTE="Cranler"]You pay for better drivers, more features like adaptive vsync and phys x.Messiahbolical-

[QUOTE="clyde46"]Meh, does doesn't take away the fact that Nvidia are walking over AMD in the graphics card wars.Messiahbolical-

[QUOTE="faizan_faizan"][QUOTE="ShadowriverUB"] No, but it does not mean you can't do something similar on any other GPU, bah if not corporate issues nvidia could make CUDA work on any other GPU. Anyway i think OpenCL is better as it's open and it will work on any other GPU (if drivers supports it), developers don't need to care about what GPU hardware hasShadowriverUB

[QUOTE="Messiahbolical-"]

[QUOTE="Cranler"]You pay for better drivers, more features like adaptive vsync and phys x.Cranler

PC Gaming requires patience to debug crap like that. You should been persistent because AMDs hardware is superior in this case.

[QUOTE="Cranler"][QUOTE="Messiahbolical-"] So in other words basically nothing.

EvanTheGamer

PC Gaming requires patience to debug crap like that. You should been persistent because AMDs hardware is superior in this case.

[QUOTE="Cranler"][QUOTE="Messiahbolical-"] Not sure if serious. I tried AMD once and it was awful. All kinds of driver issues that simply dont exist with Nvidia. Adaptive vsync is the best driver innovation in years. You get what you pay for. EvanTheGamer

PC Gaming requires patience to debug crap like that. You should been persistent because AMDs hardware is superior in this case.

[QUOTE="Eddie-Vedder"]

That's pretty much what most of SW said too lol. SW ahead of the curve.

SaltyMeatballs

[QUOTE="Chozofication"]

[QUOTE="tormentos"] Yes and nvidia also sell GPU for Cell phones tables and integrated GPU,so is not that big of a win either way.. But how does that change the fact that their GPU are over priced.? And over hyped .? I remember when the original xbox specs were announce the xbox was introduce as a 300 million polygon console,then the GPU was downgrade clock wise and the end results were 125 million... Nvidia always over sell,the xbox PS3 and now the Titan are a testament to that.tormentos

Actually the original Xbox had the absolute top of the line GPU from Nvidia at the time.  The only "downgrade" was a single digit clockspeed reduction, might have been less than 5mhz, can't remember.

The Xbox was the only console that could ever have such a GPU though because it was so huge...

Just checked, the Xbox gpu was a derivitive of the Geforce 3 series, the highest clocked of which was 250 mhz.  So it was a 17mhz clock downgrade.  The Xbox gpu ran at 233.  I knew all that I just didn't know what the highest clocked geforce 3 was.

And I don't care to know about those BS number's wherever you came up with them, out your ass I suspect, you should know that the polygon number's game is always more than 10 fold of what the console can actually do.  Your own math fails, 1/6 of a decrease in clockspeed equals more than 200% less polygon's?

[QUOTE="Messiahbolical-"]

[QUOTE="Cranler"]You pay for better drivers, more features like adaptive vsync and phys x.Cranler

[QUOTE="Messiahbolical-"][QUOTE="clyde46"]Meh, does doesn't take away the fact that Nvidia are walking over AMD in the graphics card wars.Cranler

[QUOTE="EvanTheGamer"]

[QUOTE="Cranler"]

PC Gaming requires patience to debug crap like that. You should been persistent because AMDs hardware is superior in this case.

04dcarraher

The problem with Intel is the pricewar coming from ARM.

AMD Jaguar's die size rivals ARM's Cortex A15 die size.

Building King Tigers tanks doesn't win the war.

Intel also has a stake to sure the X86 wins the war hence thier support for Sony's PS4 GPU Physics.

[QUOTE="Cranler"][QUOTE="Messiahbolical-"] So in other words basically nothing.ronvalencia

[QUOTE="ronvalencia"][QUOTE="Cranler"] Not sure if serious. I tried AMD once and it was awful. All kinds of driver issues that simply dont exist with Nvidia. Adaptive vsync is the best driver innovation in years. You get what you pay for. Cranler

Read http://www.evga.com/forums/tm.aspx?m=302859&mpage=1 for Bad Company 2 loading issue and NVIDIA GF100.

[QUOTE="Cranler"][QUOTE="ronvalencia"] NVIDIA has it's own issues. Should one start re-posting issues from NVIDIA .com's forums?ronvalencia

Read http://www.evga.com/forums/tm.aspx?m=302859&mpage=1 for Bad Company 2 loading issue for NVIDIA.

[QUOTE="Cranler"][QUOTE="Messiahbolical-"] What's the graphics card war? War for the best high-end cards? Well that's irrelevant unless you're going to pay hundreds upon hundreds of dollars for the best cards. ATI gives you the most bang for your bucks, and that's all that matters to me. I payed a mere $85(Newegg) for my Sapphire Radeon HD 6770 like a year and a half ago and it still pumps out enough power to run most brand games with all settings on high(some on Ultra) at smooth framerates. I'm playing Bioshock Infinite @ 1080p with a lot of settings on Ultra, Anti-Aliasing turned on, texture filtering at ultra, dynamic lighting/light beams turned all the way up, and a few unimportant settings turned down a bit. I don't understand the need to spend a $600+ on a video card(or 2) when cards half or less of the price can do the job just fine for at least a few years. I've found that if your compare prices of an Nvidia and ATI card of very comparable capabilities, the Nvidia GPU is usually at least 15-30% more expensive than the ATI. Why? Kind of like how AMD CPUs give you more bang for your buck than Intel CPUs. Seems like you're paying for the brand name.ronvalencia

[QUOTE="ronvalencia"]

[QUOTE="Cranler"] Never said Nvidia had no issues, just far less issues in my experience. For example right off the bat after I got my 5870 there were loading time issues with AMD on Bad Company 2. Never had an issue like that with Nvidia. clyde46

Read http://www.evga.com/forums/tm.aspx?m=302859&mpage=1 for Bad Company 2 loading issue for NVIDIA.

[QUOTE="ronvalencia"][QUOTE="Cranler"]You pay for better drivers, more features like adaptive vsync and phys x.Cranler

Still no statistical backing. What cool features does NVIDIA drivers have like AMD proper GpGPU support or DirectX11.1 Level 11.1?

PS; GK110 still supports DirectX11.1 Level 11.0.

Still no statistical backing

ronvalencia

We can create a statistical measurement from SW users and use that as the basis for Nvidomination over AMDoesntwork.

[QUOTE="Cranler"][QUOTE="ronvalencia"] Better driver is not statistical fact.ronvalencia

Still no statistical backing. What cool features does NVIDIA drivers have like AMD proper GpGPU support or DirectX11.1 Level 11.1?

PS; GK110 still supports DirectX11.1 Level 11.0.

So basically, we do support 11.1 features with 11_0 feature level through the DirectX 11.1 API. We do not support feature level 11_1. This is a bit confusing, due to Microsoft naming. So we do support 11.1 from a feature level for gaming related features."

In laymans terms please describe how gpgpu support would give the 7970 an advantage over the gtx 680 for example.

Oh and look at all the crap you have to go through to create a game profile with catalyst, what a joke. http://www.tweakguides.com/ATICAT_9.html

[QUOTE="ronvalencia"]

[QUOTE="Cranler"] Updating drivers is faster and simpler, easier to set custom game profiles. What cool features does Amd drivers have like Nvidia's adaptive vsync? Cranler

Still no statistical backing. What cool features does NVIDIA drivers have like AMD proper GpGPU support or DirectX11.1 Level 11.1?

PS; GK110 still supports DirectX11.1 Level 11.0.

So basically, we do support 11.1 features with 11_0 feature level through the DirectX 11.1 API. We do not support feature level 11_1. This is a bit confusing, due to Microsoft naming. So we do support 11.1 from a feature level for gaming related features."

In laymans terms please describe how gpgpu support would give the 7970 an advantage over the gtx 680 for example.

Oh and look at all the crap you have to go through to create a game profile with catalyst, what a joke. http://www.tweakguides.com/ATICAT_9.html

Typical NVIDIA PR spin, NVIDIA doesn't support UAVs(random read/write) for all shader types. I'm sure domain/vertex/hull shaders for UAVs are game related APIs.

A simple GpGPU example is the practical double precision floating point performance not just a tick box support.

PS4's GPU support is beyond DirectX11.1 Level 11.1+ features support e.g. shader interrupt instructions. Note that this issue also affects all PCs with DX.

[QUOTE="Cranler"]

[QUOTE="ronvalencia"]

Still no statistical backing. What cool features does NVIDIA drivers have like AMD proper GpGPU support or DirectX11.1 Level 11.1?

PS; GK110 still supports DirectX11.1 Level 11.0.

So basically, we do support 11.1 features with 11_0 feature level through the DirectX 11.1 API. We do not support feature level 11_1. This is a bit confusing, due to Microsoft naming. So we do support 11.1 from a feature level for gaming related features."

In laymans terms please describe how gpgpu support would give the 7970 an advantage over the gtx 680 for example.

Oh and look at all the crap you have to go through to create a game profile with catalyst, what a joke. http://www.tweakguides.com/ATICAT_9.html

Typical NVIDIA PR spin, NVIDIA doesn't support UAVs(random read/write) for all shader types. I'm sure domain/vertex/hull shaders for UAVs are game related APIs.

A simple GpGPU example is the practical double precision floating point performance not just a tick box support.

Yeah,that´s exactly what they said :roll: And Nvidia is a much bigger and way more profitabe company than AMD,why would there be any butthurt is beyond me,unlike AMD,Nvidia is ablçe to be picky with contracts,that´s why they didn´t do any console builds,they don´t need to and they ask for way more than AMD,for AMD these console deals have been their saving grace and even with that Nvidia still is by far the most profitable company.MrYaotubo

Go back a few years prior to Apple launching the Iphone.  Blackberries and Nokia were the leaders, to say that Apple would topple them would have been laughed at, by all the Blackberry and Nokia fans.  But what happned?!!  

I think the same thing Will happen here.  AMD is making the right moves while Nvidia continues behave as if people need them. Their prices are high and not many developers even push their code to make it preform better on Nvidia. 

[QUOTE="ronvalencia"]

[QUOTE="Cranler"] Updating drivers is faster and simpler, easier to set custom game profiles. What cool features does Amd drivers have like Nvidia's adaptive vsync? Cranler

Still no statistical backing. What cool features does NVIDIA drivers have like AMD proper GpGPU support or DirectX11.1 Level 11.1?

PS; GK110 still supports DirectX11.1 Level 11.0.

So basically, we do support 11.1 features with 11_0 feature level through the DirectX 11.1 API. We do not support feature level 11_1. This is a bit confusing, due to Microsoft naming. So we do support 11.1 from a feature level for gaming related features."

In laymans terms please describe how gpgpu support would give the 7970 an advantage over the gtx 680 for example.

Oh and look at all the crap you have to go through to create a game profile with catalyst, what a joke. http://www.tweakguides.com/ATICAT_9.html

That's pre-12.1 profile creation. Read http://www.hardocp.com/article/2011/12/19/amd_catalyst_121_preview_profiles_performance/#.UVjV2LO4bwM for 12.x's profile creation.

As for DirectX 11.1 level 11.1 support, refer to Geforce 7x0 series (not mobile 710M/720M i.e. renamed 630M or renamed Kelper 1.0).

On DX11.1 Level 11.1 and Geforce 600 issues refer to http://forum.beyond3d.com/showthread.php?p=1681417

[QUOTE="HaloinventedFPS"]

I don't like either of them, especially not Nvidia since they keep Physx & CUDA Nvidia only, which screws over a heap of PC gamers

but Nvidia were right, PS4 isn't a high end PC for $400

cfisher2833

Just wondering, but where do people keep getting the idea that the PS4 will be $400? Sony isn't in a position to take a huge loss for each console sold, and considering the WiiU (which we all know is a weak as hell system) retails for $350, I just don't get where people are getting this figure. I could maybe see the  low end version of the 720 retailing for $400 if it is indeed weaker than the PS4, but the idea that the PS4 will be $400 just seems like wishful thinking. I would at least expect the low end version to retail for $500 and the higher end one to retail for $600. 

Did you guys get this figure from Pachter or something!? :lol:

The CPU in the APU is just right for it to do its job.  It is not ment to bottleneck or reduce the GPU. 

The GPU can be accessed at a lower leve than GPUs on PCs so to copare you would need to compare it to a higher level GPU. 

This system will also give developers more direct access to the shader pipeline than they had on the PS3 or through DirectX itself. "This is access you're not used to getting on the PC, and as a result you can do a lot more cool things and have a lot more access to the power of the system," Norden said. A low-level API will also let coders talk directly with the hardware in a way that's "much lower-level than DirectX and OpenGL,"  http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2013/03/sony-dives-deep-into-the-ps4s-hardware-power-controller-features-at-gdc/

SO Even though PCs have the "Brute Force" to out power the PS4, the PS4's capabilities come from the dedication to Games and its ability to use low level programing.  The whole system makes it more powerful than an equal power "on paper" than one would believe. BUT we will wait and see the games to compare.  

[QUOTE="tormentos"][QUOTE="Cranler"] Heres another bench showing the 680 winning by a large margin. So thats 3 to 1. http://www.pcgameshardware.de/Borderlands-2-PC-234034/Tests/Borderlands-2-Physx-Test-1026921/Cranler

[QUOTE="Messiahbolical-"][QUOTE="clyde46"]Meh, does doesn't take away the fact that Nvidia are walking over AMD in the graphics card wars.clyde46

Just checked, the Xbox gpu was a derivitive of the Geforce 3 series, the highest clocked of which was 250 mhz.  So it was a 17mhz clock downgrade.  The Xbox gpu ran at 233.  I knew all that I just didn't know what the highest clocked geforce 3 was.

And I don't care to know about those BS number's wherever you came up with them, out your ass I suspect, you should know that the polygon number's game is always more than 10 fold of what the console can actually do.  Your own math fails, 1/6 of a decrease in clockspeed equals more than 200% less polygon's?

Chozofication

[QUOTE="tormentos"][QUOTE="04dcarraher"] Also AMD tends to drop dual gpu driver support very quickly 04dcarraher

Not to mention, the 560ti overclocks like a beast. I am personally waiting until the 760ti. There's no reason right now to upgrade as my 560ti gets me a constant 60fps for the vast majority of games. 

[QUOTE="04dcarraher"][QUOTE="tormentos"] This conversation is for people who can afford high end GPU not for 560TI peasants so get loss.:lol:cfisher2833

Not to mention, the 560ti overclocks like a beast. I am personally waiting until the 760ti. There's no reason right now to upgrade as my 560ti gets me a constant 60fps for the vast majority of games. 

Nvidia is butthurt that AMD secured the deal for next gen consoles.

AMD was panicking and had to secure a deal for next gen or go bankrupt.

Oh yeah, that part about the APU and GPU integration not being possible from Nvidia....that's horse sh1t. Nvidia's RSX also had integration capabilities with the Cell for the ps3. There is no moral high ground here. Both parties are talking out of their a$$es

[QUOTE="cfisher2833"]

[QUOTE="04dcarraher"] That excludes you..... :roll: in 2011 a GTX 560ti was medium to high end and I have no real reason to upgrade at the moment since I have no need too.... 04dcarraher

Not to mention, the 560ti overclocks like a beast. I am personally waiting until the 760ti. There's no reason right now to upgrade as my 560ti gets me a constant 60fps for the vast majority of games. 

This is what I have mine set at. Runs really stable.

Nvidia is butthurt that AMD secured the deal for next gen consoles.

AMD was panicking and had to secure a deal for next gen or go bankrupt.

Oh yeah, that part about the APU and GPU integration not being possible from Nvidia....that's horse sh1t. Nvidia's RSX also had integration capabilities with the Cell for the ps3. There is no moral high ground here. Both parties are talking out of their a$$es

jhcho2