Quantcast

Jump to content

» «
Photo

AMD or Nvidia for graphics? Intel or AMD for processor?

93 replies to this topic

Poll: What graphics card and processor? (190 member(s) have cast votes)

What graphics card?

  1. NVidia (137 votes [72.11%])

    Percentage of vote: 72.11%

  2. AMD (53 votes [27.89%])

    Percentage of vote: 27.89%

What processor?

  1. Intel (153 votes [86.44%])

    Percentage of vote: 86.44%

  2. AMD (24 votes [13.56%])

    Percentage of vote: 13.56%

Vote Guests cannot vote
Bonaldo
  • Bonaldo

    Homie

  • Members
  • Joined: 14 Sep 2013

#1

Posted 10 June 2014 - 10:02 PM Edited by Bonaldo, 11 June 2014 - 02:52 PM.

I'm quite convinced that NVidia cards have more support from game developers, and games are more optimized for them, therefore they create less problems with games.

 

So I'm voting NVidia


FranklinDeRoosevelt
  • FranklinDeRoosevelt

    32nd President of Los Santos

  • Members
  • Joined: 02 Aug 2013

#2

Posted 10 June 2014 - 10:06 PM

PS4 uses AMD, but look how great it looks. It's going to be optimized for both.


theNGclan
  • theNGclan

    All your gold are belong to us.

  • Members
  • Joined: 06 Apr 2011
  • United-States

#3

Posted 10 June 2014 - 10:06 PM

Pick your poison. Don't ask hateful teens on the net. :) :^:

  • PreciousWall, bensons and soudruhger like this

Jimbatron
  • Jimbatron

    Gangsta

  • Members
  • Joined: 08 Jan 2009
  • United-Kingdom

#4

Posted 10 June 2014 - 10:09 PM

The only thing worse than the console wars on here when GTA IV launched was the NVidia vs AMD fanboyism.

 

I haven't upgraded my PC since 2010 however, so I'm a bit behind on the pros and cons of current cards. Would be interested to hear genuinely balanced views.


Xerukal
  • Xerukal

    Kind ol' Trev

  • Members
  • Joined: 21 Sep 2013
  • None

#5

Posted 10 June 2014 - 10:10 PM

Even though I love NVIDIA because of Shadowplay and other such goodies. I do not like their Gameworks bollocks which basically sabotages AMD GPU functionality in certain games.

 

Thankfully, we all know that Rockstar is smart enough not to fall for this sh*t. They'll optimize for both equally. I've accepted the fact that Rockstar consists of wizards and magicians, performing all kinds of dark arts on hardware to just make it work. Noone knows how. Noone cares. It just f*cking happens. 

  • dimitrispgr, Luismy_MMD and Vice City criminal like this

thestig93
  • thestig93

    Wanted for Grand Theft Auto

  • Members
  • Joined: 14 Jun 2008
  • Bulgaria

#6

Posted 10 June 2014 - 10:11 PM Edited by thestig93, 10 June 2014 - 10:12 PM.

If you're more interested in Ubisoft games, go for Nvidia. If you're more interested in EA games, then go for AMD. They're both great companies and this AMD vs Nvidia fanboyish war is kinda pointless. Although I gotta admit that Nvidia has more exclusive deals with developers than AMD. Or at least it's perceived that way. Either way, I reckon GTA is gonna be a vendor neutral game.


Luismy_MMD
  • Luismy_MMD

    Thug

  • Members
  • Joined: 27 Jul 2013
  • None

#7

Posted 10 June 2014 - 10:13 PM

I like them both, but since I'm a poor ass dude, I chose AMD for my gpu and processor.

 

Maybe I'll do intel/nvidia next time, some day.

 

 

As for GTA V, I really hope they don't partner with any manufacturer, like WD did. And if they get partnertships, hopefully it will be AMD, but without savotaging Nvidia pls.


Bonaldo
  • Bonaldo

    Homie

  • Members
  • Joined: 14 Sep 2013

#8

Posted 10 June 2014 - 10:15 PM Edited by Bonaldo, 10 June 2014 - 10:15 PM.

I heard that you should NEVER put AMD processor + Nvidia graphics and Intel processor + AMD graphics combo into your PC :D

 

It's always Intel + Nvidia and AMD + AMD


DaRkL3AD3R
  • DaRkL3AD3R

    Gangsta

  • Members
  • Joined: 02 May 2013

#9

Posted 10 June 2014 - 10:17 PM

As someone who's done multiple team changes over the last 15 years, I have concluded that without a shadow of a doubt Nvidia is the better company to give your money to. Superior hardware and software hands down.
  • theNGclan likes this

Bonaldo
  • Bonaldo

    Homie

  • Members
  • Joined: 14 Sep 2013

#10

Posted 10 June 2014 - 10:20 PM

I updated the OP with processor question

 

But I don't know how to edit the title of a thread :D


thestig93
  • thestig93

    Wanted for Grand Theft Auto

  • Members
  • Joined: 14 Jun 2008
  • Bulgaria

#11

Posted 10 June 2014 - 10:23 PM Edited by thestig93, 10 June 2014 - 10:25 PM.

I heard that you should NEVER put AMD processor + Nvidia graphics and Intel processor + AMD graphics combo into your PC :D

 

It's always Intel + Nvidia and AMD + AMD

This was the deal back in like... 2002. Anyone who says that in 2014 is full of crap and knows nothing about PCs. Only pseudo-tekkies spew that kind of sh*t. 

  • hornedturtle and soudruhger like this

Bonaldo
  • Bonaldo

    Homie

  • Members
  • Joined: 14 Sep 2013

#12

Posted 10 June 2014 - 10:26 PM Edited by Bonaldo, 10 June 2014 - 10:27 PM.

AMD was dominating the processor market until Intel came up with Core 2 Duo

 

Since then, AMD is constantly losing the processor battle

 

The same goes for ATI

 

They had more powerful graphic cards in early 2000s, but then NVidia took the cake again (with 6xxx series I think)


Andreas
  • Andreas

    GTAV Forum Leader

  • Leone Family Mafia
  • Joined: 27 May 2012
  • Austria
  • Best Avatar 2013
    Best New Member 2012
    Contribution Award [GTA V]

#13

Posted 10 June 2014 - 10:27 PM Edited by Andreas, 10 June 2014 - 10:29 PM.

I haven't upgraded my PC since 2010 however, so I'm a bit behind on the pros and cons of current cards. Would be interested to hear genuinely balanced views.

At this point, nVidia and AMD are equally good. AMD improved their drivers significantly over the past few years. I remember there were still some driver issues on cards of the HD5000 series, but these problems were fixed for the most part with the introduction of the HD6000 and vanished almost completely when the HD7000 cards were out for a while. I heard that this is not the case for everyone, though. CrossFire also improved a lot, although it's not working as good as SLI just yet. Not that it really matters though, that's not of interest for single-GPU users.
 
Not much has changed in the last years when it comes to the price ratios of AMD versus NV. The former are mostly cheaper than the latter, but at the same time nVidia offers quite a few tools that may or may not be interesting to the one or the other user. I personally don't care about any of these features, so that isn't a selling point for me. That goes for both companies.
 
I have experienced graphic-cards of both of them and there isn't really a winner, in my opinion. And it apparently depends on if you purchase Low-End, Mid-End, High Performance or High-End cards, too.
 

But I don't know how to edit the title of a thread  :D

You can't edit the topic title yourself. What do you want to have it changed to? I can edit it for you.

  • Jimbatron likes this

DaRkL3AD3R
  • DaRkL3AD3R

    Gangsta

  • Members
  • Joined: 02 May 2013

#14

Posted 10 June 2014 - 10:28 PM


I heard that you should NEVER put AMD processor + Nvidia graphics and Intel processor + AMD graphics combo into your PC :D
 
It's always Intel + Nvidia and AMD + AMD

This was the deal back in like... 2002. Anyone who says that in 2014 is full of crap and knows nothing about PCs. Only pseudo-tekkies spew that kind of sh*t. 

In his defense AMD spouts a lot of nonsense like "for the best experience pair an AMD this with AMD that!" Which is obviously nothing more than marketing bullsh*t to get you to buy more of their stuff without it actually doing anything for you.

To be honest I would never recommend AMD/ATI to my worst enemy. Garbage.

Bonaldo
  • Bonaldo

    Homie

  • Members
  • Joined: 14 Sep 2013

#15

Posted 10 June 2014 - 10:31 PM Edited by Andreas, 10 June 2014 - 10:32 PM.

You can't edit the topic title yourself. What do you want to have it changed to? I can edit it for you.

Change it to "AMD or Nvidia for graphics? Intel or AMD for processor?"

 

Done.


thestig93
  • thestig93

    Wanted for Grand Theft Auto

  • Members
  • Joined: 14 Jun 2008
  • Bulgaria

#16

Posted 10 June 2014 - 10:32 PM Edited by thestig93, 10 June 2014 - 10:34 PM.

AMD was dominating the processor market until Intel came up with Core 2 Duo

 

Since then, AMD is constantly losing the processor battle

 

The same goes for ATI

 

They had more powerful graphic cards in early 2000s, but then NVidia took the cake again

The latter part is not entirely true. Although Nvidia has been holding the majority of the market, back in 2010 their hardware was very bad. Yes I'm talking about that oven called Fermi. The ATI 5800 series was vastly superior to Fermi. Both in terms of power consumption and heat. + Fermi ran like a tractor. Performance was kinda even. The GTX 480 came 6 months after the 5870 and it still didn't manage to beat it. The 5000 series were a technological marvel for their time. And so were the 6000 series for that matter. Even today, 4 years later, their performance/watt is still on par with the newest cards.

  • Andreas likes this

FranklinDeRoosevelt
  • FranklinDeRoosevelt

    32nd President of Los Santos

  • Members
  • Joined: 02 Aug 2013

#17

Posted 10 June 2014 - 10:34 PM Edited by FranklinDeRoosevelt, 10 June 2014 - 10:36 PM.

 

 

I heard that you should NEVER put AMD processor + Nvidia graphics and Intel processor + AMD graphics combo into your PC :D
 
It's always Intel + Nvidia and AMD + AMD

This was the deal back in like... 2002. Anyone who says that in 2014 is full of crap and knows nothing about PCs. Only pseudo-tekkies spew that kind of sh*t. 

In his defense AMD spouts a lot of nonsense like "for the best experience pair an AMD this with AMD that!" Which is obviously nothing more than marketing bullsh*t to get you to buy more of their stuff without it actually doing anything for you.

To be honest I would never recommend AMD/ATI to my worst enemy. Garbage.

 

Sorry but are you saying nVidia doesn't do any marketing bullsh*t? They've been doing that for years now, making their overhyped product expensive as f*ck and showing off different tools as gimmicks and then AMD comes with a graphic card just as powerful at half the price. For example, the Titan Z is scheduled to come with a price of $3000 while the R9 295x2 is literally half the price and is almost as powerful.

 

The GTX 7 series is good, but prices need to go down. Titan is such a waste of development. And so is the 780 TI, kind of.


AlasClarin
  • AlasClarin

    Mack Pimp

  • Members
  • Joined: 18 Aug 2013

#18

Posted 10 June 2014 - 10:35 PM

There is no a better one in my opinion, it just depends on the models and budget.


Bonaldo
  • Bonaldo

    Homie

  • Members
  • Joined: 14 Sep 2013

#19

Posted 10 June 2014 - 10:35 PM Edited by Bonaldo, 10 June 2014 - 10:37 PM.

 

AMD was dominating the processor market until Intel came up with Core 2 Duo

 

Since then, AMD is constantly losing the processor battle

 

The same goes for ATI

 

They had more powerful graphic cards in early 2000s, but then NVidia took the cake again

The latter part is not entirely true. Although Nvidia has been holding the majority of the market, back in 2010 their hardware was very bad. Yes I'm talking about that oven called Fermi. The ATI 5800 series was vastly superior to Fermi. Both in terms of power consumption and heat. + Fermi ran like a tractor. Performance was kinda even. The GTX 480 came 6 months after the 5870 and it still didn't manage to beat it. The 5000 series were a technological marvel for their time. And so were the 6000 series for that matter. Even today, 4 years later, their performance/watt is still on par with the newest cards.

 

 

I remember the FX series from NVidia

 

Those were pieces of sh*t :D

 

Also Geforce 2 MX and GeForce 4 MX

  • PacketOVerload_x64Bit likes this

‹bermacht
  • ‹bermacht

    It means Superior

  • Members
  • Joined: 20 Feb 2012
  • None

#20

Posted 10 June 2014 - 10:40 PM Edited by ‹bermacht, 10 June 2014 - 10:40 PM.

Nvidia cards have PhysX, Shadowplay, and generally better drivers/optimisation, and some games take advantage of the PhysX stuff.

 

But AMD cards have mantle, which could be a big advantage in years to come, and are generally cheaper in terms of performance.

In terms of processors? Intel everytime.


PacketOVerload_x64Bit
  • PacketOVerload_x64Bit

    Window Licker 4 Blondes

  • Members
  • Joined: 13 Mar 2010
  • Canada

#21

Posted 10 June 2014 - 10:41 PM

All fanboy-ism's and junk science aside, this is my experience and opinion only. I have a good outlook on those as I deal with hundreds, if not over a thousand computers every year. As well as my own gaming and computers in my home. I switched from ATi a long time ago after purchasing a 7950GT OC and experiencing the difference in colors, programming paths and performance. I have a Radeon 7970 + Core i5 (watercooled) in one gaming tower at home, and in my other tower i have an eVGA 570GTX + Core i5 (watercooled): while the Radeon 7970 performs quite well, the drivers and CCC are a bit of a pain compared to the NVidia CP. Also, side by side, on the same "type" of TN panel, colors on the ATi Radeon appear a little, muddy for lack of better words. The color isn't as vibrant. 

I've chosen Nvidia based cards for the last eight years.


thestig93
  • thestig93

    Wanted for Grand Theft Auto

  • Members
  • Joined: 14 Jun 2008
  • Bulgaria

#22

Posted 10 June 2014 - 10:43 PM

AMD cpus are just crap. Sure they offer great deals in terms of price/performance, but their power consumption is just ridiculous. 130W of tdp on the AMD side for the performance Intel manages in just 84W. And they haven't released anything worth mentioning since 2012 (FX8350). + they completely left the enthusiast market. They said they're developing a new architecture with hyperthreading (that's right no modules anymore) which is coming in a few years, probably 2017. Let's hope it works out fine for them. But AMD hardware on the graphics side of things is very good. The recent Hawaii chips were kind of a letdown, but nevertheless AMD builds great graphics hardware. 


Bonaldo
  • Bonaldo

    Homie

  • Members
  • Joined: 14 Sep 2013

#23

Posted 10 June 2014 - 10:44 PM Edited by Bonaldo, 10 June 2014 - 10:45 PM.

I also remember back in 2002 - 2003 when ATI was beating the sh*t out of NVidia with Radeon 9xxx series

 

Especially Radeon 9700 Pro

 

It's a legendary card

  • thestig93 and PacketOVerload_x64Bit like this

DaRkL3AD3R
  • DaRkL3AD3R

    Gangsta

  • Members
  • Joined: 02 May 2013

#24

Posted 10 June 2014 - 10:48 PM

I also remember back in 2002 - 2003 when ATI was beating the sh*t out of NVidia with Radeon 9xxx series
 
Especially Radeon 9700 Pro
 
It's a legendary card


Yep I own it. Was a massive step up from my Geforce 2 MX 400.

Unfortunately AMD doesn't have that same oomph as they used to. And now all the great stuff Nvidia provides makes it a clear choice which company to go with.

Shadowplay is the best thing since sliced bread. I absolutely love it.

Andreas
  • Andreas

    GTAV Forum Leader

  • Leone Family Mafia
  • Joined: 27 May 2012
  • Austria
  • Best Avatar 2013
    Best New Member 2012
    Contribution Award [GTA V]

#25

Posted 10 June 2014 - 10:52 PM

For example, the Titan Z is scheduled to come with a price of $3000 while the R9 295x2 is literally half the price and is almost as powerful.

The Titan Z consists of two GTX Titan that are heavily underclocked, whereas the R9 295X2 consists of two R9 290X are are overclocked. Just to clarify: the R9 290X is mostly faster than the Titan, BF3 is one of the exceptions as far as I know. If the single cards are anything to go by, then the R9 295X2 is likely significantly faster than the Titan Z.
  • FranklinDeRoosevelt likes this

Bonaldo
  • Bonaldo

    Homie

  • Members
  • Joined: 14 Sep 2013

#26

Posted 10 June 2014 - 10:54 PM Edited by Bonaldo, 10 June 2014 - 10:57 PM.

I'm waiting for official requirements and I plan to buy some 3.0Ghz+ quad core i5, and GTX 760

 

That's if nothing better comes to the market for similar price

 

But I don't know if there are any plans for new processors/graphic cards releases in Fall.

 

I plan to spend around $1000 for PC, and I think it should be enough to play GTA V maxed out with at least 30fps


Ewok626
  • Ewok626

    Prankster

  • Members
  • Joined: 11 Oct 2013

#27

Posted 10 June 2014 - 10:55 PM

I prefer intel CPUs but I like both amd and nvidia GPUs.


Perfect Blade xD
  • Perfect Blade xD

    North Yankton

  • Members
  • Joined: 01 Nov 2013
  • Romania

#28

Posted 10 June 2014 - 10:59 PM

Pick your poison. Don't ask hateful teens on the net. :) :^:

This...^^.

Ivars
  • Ivars

    HiiiPoWeR

  • Members
  • Joined: 18 Jun 2010
  • Latvia

#29

Posted 10 June 2014 - 10:59 PM

Geforce is too expensive, you can get same performance with AMD 2x cheaper. If you want most powerful motherf*cker around - take Geforce, but if you're wise take AMD. That mantle doe :)

Also I prefer intel CPUs.


thestig93
  • thestig93

    Wanted for Grand Theft Auto

  • Members
  • Joined: 14 Jun 2008
  • Bulgaria

#30

Posted 10 June 2014 - 11:00 PM

I'm waiting for official requirements and I plan to buy some 3.0Ghz+ quad core i5, and GTX 760

 

That's if nothing better comes to the market for similar price

 

But I don't know if there are any plans for new processors/graphic cards releases in Fall.

 

I plan to spend around $1000 for PC, and I think it should be enough to play GTA V maxed out with at least 30fps

You could build a rig with a 780 Ti for 1000$. 





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users