Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

NVIDIA vs AMD Videocards

APRIMEAPRIME Member UncommonPosts: 76
I've only ever used NVIDIA products but was thinking about picking up an AMD card.  However, I keep hearing that AMD's cards are more prone to crashes and BSOD, and that the drivers aren't as good as NVIDIA's.  What comments do any of you have on the issue?  I'd especially like to hear from people that have used GPU's from both companies.  Thanks!
«134

Comments

  • JayFiveAliveJayFiveAlive Member UncommonPosts: 601
    Never had bluescreens or crashes using an AMD card, but their drivers aren't as optimized for many games. They tend to run hotter and have louder fans from my experience, though maybe the newer ones are better.

    We need AMD around to keep nvidia pricing in line, but I don't see myself ever buying AMD anything again. They need some help :-[
  • RoinRoin Member RarePosts: 3,444
    Stick with Nvidia.

    In War - Victory.
    In Peace - Vigilance.
    In Death - Sacrifice.

  • NyghthowlerNyghthowler Member UncommonPosts: 392

    Up until 2 years ago I used strictly Nvidia, but was persuaded to try a Radeon HD 7770. I haven't had any BSOD or crashing issues with it and it gives me a decent FPS on the games I play. I have had issues getting the drivers to install correctly, though.

    I have a EVGA 970 superclocked on the way because my 7770 wont handle W3. I checked into getting an R9 280 or 290 but the specs show they consume ALOT more power then the 970. Minimum power supply required is a 750 watt with two 8 pin connectors.

    So for now I would advise sticking with Nvidia.

  • saurus123saurus123 Member UncommonPosts: 678
    never had any problems with ATI/AMD cards
  • RidelynnRidelynn Member EpicPosts: 7,383

    AMD vs nVidia - it's about a draw really, and you need to compare specific cards to get any kind of meaningful data.

    Some cards use more power than others (AMD and nVidia both, you gotta look at specific models). Driver differences go either way, depending on which week of the month it is, but both are updated semi-regularly. Both cards support pretty much every game you'd want to play, but optimizations go either way (I can find about as many AMD-optimized titles as nVidia ones).

    AMD has a bit better multi-monitor support, speaking generically, and supports Mantle for as long as that remains somewhat relevant. nVidia has proprietary things that are nice sometimes (GSync, Shield streaming, PhysX, etc), and much better Linux support.

    Crossfire/SLI - both are pretty spotty in coverage on these, and I'd steer clear of either one if you can help it at all.

    Now, comparing card manufacturers (Sapphire, Gigabyte, Asus, PowerColor, etc) - there are some differences there, particularly when you get into the non-reference stuff. that can make a world of difference. And when it comes to temps/noise, that's pretty much all on the manufacturer and not so much on AMD/nVidia.

    I've run both brands, I go with whichever model at the time I'm buying as the most bang for the amount of bucks I'm willing to spend. Some days that's AMD, some days that's nVidia, and as I long as I get a good card manufacturer, I've never regretted going one way or the other. Don't get too caught up in the red/green power struggle, just get the best for your dollar.

    Right now, nVidia's Maxwell-based cards are pretty attractive if you have a bit of money to throw at them (compared to the AMD Hawaii architecture) - but AMD has been very aggressive with their pricing and you can get a lot of AMD card for low dollars right now too.

  • APRIMEAPRIME Member UncommonPosts: 76

    Thanks for the comments guys.  I think I'll stick with NVIDIA then.

  • APRIMEAPRIME Member UncommonPosts: 76
    Originally posted by Ridelynn

    AMD vs nVidia - it's about a draw really, and you need to compare specific cards to get any kind of meaningful data.

    Some cards use more power than others (AMD and nVidia both, you gotta look at specific models). Driver differences go either way, depending on which week of the month it is, but both are updated semi-regularly. Both cards support pretty much every game you'd want to play, but optimizations go either way (I can find about as many AMD-optimized titles as nVidia ones).

    AMD has a bit better multi-monitor support, speaking generically, and supports Mantle for as long as that remains somewhat relevant. nVidia has proprietary things that are nice sometimes (GSync, Shield streaming, PhysX, etc), and much better Linux support.

    Crossfire/SLI - both are pretty spotty in coverage on these, and I'd steer clear of either one if you can help it at all.

    Now, comparing card manufacturers (Sapphire, Gigabyte, Asus, PowerColor, etc) - there are some differences there, particularly when you get into the non-reference stuff. that can make a world of difference. And when it comes to temps/noise, that's pretty much all on the manufacturer and not so much on AMD/nVidia.

    I've run both brands, I go with whichever model at the time I'm buying as the most bang for the amount of bucks I'm willing to spend. Some days that's AMD, some days that's nVidia, and as I long as I get a good card manufacturer, I've never regretted going one way or the other. Don't get too caught up in the red/green power struggle, just get the best for your dollar.

    Thx.

  • QuizzicalQuizzical Member LegendaryPosts: 25,347

    It's not the logo on the box that matters.  It's the particular card you get.  It can easily happen that, at a given moment in time, one brand is clearly the superior option if you're looking to spend $200 on a card, while the other brand is the clearly superior option if you're looking to spend $300.  Even if brand X has the best option in your price range, you can get the wrong card from brand X and severely overpay for a stupid card.  And if you're looking at a laptop instead of a desktop or Linux instead of Windows, that changes the situation a lot, too.

    Asking whether you should buy Nvidia or AMD is the wrong question entirely.  The right question is, here's what else is in your rig, here's how much you're willing to spend, and which particular card should you buy?  You need to narrow down your particular situation rather than just asking about brands in the abstract.

  • QuizzicalQuizzical Member LegendaryPosts: 25,347
    Originally posted by APRIME
    I've only ever used NVIDIA products but was thinking about picking up an AMD card.  However, I keep hearing that AMD's cards are more prone to crashes and BSOD, and that the drivers aren't as good as NVIDIA's.  What comments do any of you have on the issue?  I'd especially like to hear from people that have used GPU's from both companies.  Thanks!

    Claiming that AMD cards crash a lot is pure FUD, whether from Nvidia or their fanboys trying to scare you away from perfectly good products.  I've had an AMD card in my current computer for about 5 2/3 years, and the computer has crashed exactly three times in that duration.  That doesn't mean that the video card caused the computer to crash three times; it means three crashes in total for any reason--such as flooding or power outages, let alone other drivers or programs that don't even touch the GPU doing something stupid.

  • TheHavokTheHavok Member UncommonPosts: 2,423
    Originally posted by Quizzical
    Originally posted by APRIME
    I've only ever used NVIDIA products but was thinking about picking up an AMD card.  However, I keep hearing that AMD's cards are more prone to crashes and BSOD, and that the drivers aren't as good as NVIDIA's.  What comments do any of you have on the issue?  I'd especially like to hear from people that have used GPU's from both companies.  Thanks!

    Claiming that AMD cards crash a lot is pure FUD, whether from Nvidia or their fanboys trying to scare you away from perfectly good products.  I've had an AMD card in my current computer for about 5 2/3 years, and the computer has crashed exactly three times in that duration.  That doesn't mean that the video card caused the computer to crash three times; it means three crashes in total for any reason--such as flooding or power outages, let alone other drivers or programs that don't even touch the GPU doing something stupid.

    Out of sheer curiosity, what card have you been using for the last 5 2/3 years?

  • QuizzicalQuizzical Member LegendaryPosts: 25,347
    Originally posted by TheHavok
    Originally posted by Quizzical
    Originally posted by APRIME
    I've only ever used NVIDIA products but was thinking about picking up an AMD card.  However, I keep hearing that AMD's cards are more prone to crashes and BSOD, and that the drivers aren't as good as NVIDIA's.  What comments do any of you have on the issue?  I'd especially like to hear from people that have used GPU's from both companies.  Thanks!

    Claiming that AMD cards crash a lot is pure FUD, whether from Nvidia or their fanboys trying to scare you away from perfectly good products.  I've had an AMD card in my current computer for about 5 2/3 years, and the computer has crashed exactly three times in that duration.  That doesn't mean that the video card caused the computer to crash three times; it means three crashes in total for any reason--such as flooding or power outages, let alone other drivers or programs that don't even touch the GPU doing something stupid.

    Out of sheer curiosity, what card have you been using for the last 5 2/3 years?

    Radeon HD 5850.  It was the only DirectX 11 card in stock on New Egg when I bought it.  It's a reference card that had fan problems about a year after I bought it, so I replaced the cooler with something from Zalman.  A number of reference cards from both vendors have had noise or cooling issues, which is why board partners seem so eager to get away from the reference cards and stick their own cooler on.

    The whole computer is about due for a replacement by now, but I'm waiting to see how Fiji (rumored Radeon HD 390X) performs.  If it's competitive with a Titan X, I'll probably buy one.  If not, and if Nvidia decides to support adaptive sync, I'll likely get a Titan X or perhaps the rumored GTX 980 Ti or whatever Nvidia decides to call a salvage part of the Titan X.  And if Nvidia won't support adaptive sync and the R9 390X is no better than the R9 290X, then I'm not sure what I'll do.

  • centkincentkin Member RarePosts: 1,527

    Total cost of ownership...

     

    If you use your computer 30 hours a week, and the card uses 100 extra watts, and you pay 20 cents for kwh of electricity, and you keep that video card for 4 years, you are looking at 3*.20*4*52=$124.80 extra going with the card that uses more electricity.

     

    It also means more wear and tear on the power supply(if not using a larger one), more heat(shortening the life of the computer), and a shorter run time on a UPS if you have one...

     

     

  • DullahanDullahan Member EpicPosts: 4,536

    Only drawback I've found with radeon is driver support in the past.  Some say its better now, others pretend it was never a problem despite my personal experience, that of friends, and the internet.

    About 4 years ago I got a radeon card.  I tried to play a game (Age of Wushu) and noticed problems.  I figured maybe I hadn't updated my driver in a while.  It had been about 9 months and there was no new update, my card being less than 2 years old.  Thats horrible support IMO.  I traded it on craigslist for a nvidia card of similar power (someone wanted to use my radeon for a bitcoin machine).  I got home and literally that day nvidia had a new update for the old card (a 580).  I looked back and it had only been a few months since the previous update.

    Not gonna say I wouldn't try radeon again down the road, but its still "too soon" for me.


  • AethaerynAethaeryn Member RarePosts: 3,149

    I always bought Nvidia cards but bought a 7870 1.5 years ago.    It has been great for me and I don't see a point in any upgrades soon.  No BSODs either.  I still feel like a bit of an Nvidia fanboy but I honestly feel this card has made me feel more on the line.  I would agree with Quizical that it depends what is out at the time.

    Have had 4 Nvidia cards and two AMD.  They were all great and the best bang for my buck at the time.

    Wa min God! Se æx on min heafod is!

  • QuizzicalQuizzical Member LegendaryPosts: 25,347
    Originally posted by centkin

    Total cost of ownership...

     

    If you use your computer 30 hours a week, and the card uses 100 extra watts, and you pay 20 cents for kwh of electricity, and you keep that video card for 4 years, you are looking at 3*.20*4*52=$124.80 extra going with the card that uses more electricity.

     

    It also means more wear and tear on the power supply(if not using a larger one), more heat(shortening the life of the computer), and a shorter run time on a UPS if you have one...

    You do realize that video cards clock down when they're idle, don't you?  Modern gaming cards typically have idle power consumption in the ballpark of 10 or 20 watts.  AMD managed to get that down to about 3 W if the monitor turns off; I'm not sure if Nvidia has done likewise yet.

  • LuposDavalteLuposDavalte Member UncommonPosts: 91

    My current observations lead me to believe that Nvidia is receiving far more support from game designers and publishers.

    The optimisation  would appear to be more frequently in favour of Nvidia in the last 6 months IMO

  • QuizzicalQuizzical Member LegendaryPosts: 25,347
    Originally posted by LuposDavalte

    My current observations lead me to believe that Nvidia is receiving far more support from game designers and publishers.

    The optimisation  would appear to be more frequently in favour of Nvidia in the last 6 months IMO

    You say that as if there are Windows games that don't try to support both Nvidia and AMD graphics.  Don't confuse shenanigans in a handful of sponsored titles with typical gaming performance.

  • IselinIselin Member LegendaryPosts: 18,719
    Originally posted by Quizzical
    Originally posted by APRIME
    I've only ever used NVIDIA products but was thinking about picking up an AMD card.  However, I keep hearing that AMD's cards are more prone to crashes and BSOD, and that the drivers aren't as good as NVIDIA's.  What comments do any of you have on the issue?  I'd especially like to hear from people that have used GPU's from both companies.  Thanks!

    Claiming that AMD cards crash a lot is pure FUD, whether from Nvidia or their fanboys trying to scare you away from perfectly good products.  I've had an AMD card in my current computer for about 5 2/3 years, and the computer has crashed exactly three times in that duration.  That doesn't mean that the video card caused the computer to crash three times; it means three crashes in total for any reason--such as flooding or power outages, let alone other drivers or programs that don't even touch the GPU doing something stupid.

    +1

     

    I've gone back and forth between AMD and Nvidia for years and I've had very few problems with either. They are both very competitive and are neck & neck in performance. I buy them according to whichever single card suits my needs best whenever I'm ready to upgrade and I do the same for systems I build for family and friends according to their budget.

     

    What I don't do with either is SLI or Xfire since it's never worth the extra power consumption for something that has problems with many specific games. Their performance looks good in synthetic benchmarks and that's about it.

     

    Don't listen to superstitious fanboi claptrap about either brand.

    "Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”

    ― Umberto Eco

    “Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” 
    ― CD PROJEKT RED

  • booniedog96booniedog96 Member UncommonPosts: 289

    I own both brands and I haven't come across an issue on either that I couldn't handle on the spot.  I have BSOD'd on both cards, I've ran them up to 80c for hours on benchmarking software.  One HD7870 (1080p monitor), one GTX 680 (1440p monitor) both are 2GB flavored.  I've had them for years and up to now I still can't find any reason to swap them out since they serve me just fine.

     

    My advice is to figure out what resolution you will be playing at ie: 1080p, 1200p, 1440p, or 1600p.  Once you figure out what resolution, you go out and buy the best GPU you can afford for the job.  Example: 1080p/1200p - R9 280/x or R9 285, GTX 960 for 1440p/1600p - R9 290/x, GTX 970, GTX 980.  

     

    Remember, you are buying these GPUs to play games and not to benchmark all day long.  Happy hunting.

  • mbrodiembrodie Member RarePosts: 1,504

    i mean i'm running dual R9 290x cards and havent had one issue yet... case and point

     

    i've been running single card because all my friends with nvidia cards have been having performance / crashes etc... with The Witcher 3.

    everyone was like you're only not experiencing problems because you're running dual cards... so i took one one. Running 1 r9 290x i still have had 0 performance issues with the game running 4k with everything on ultra, the only thing turned off is motion blur and thats basically because i dont like it. and i'm still get 73 fps on windows 10 insider preview.

    i have another friend running a R9 280x he has also experienced no issues with the witcher 3

     

    i know about 4 people playing it with nvidia cards... 2 x GTX 970 / 1 x 980 and 1 x 780 and they have had to clear out drivers, reinstall drivers, update drivers, mess with settings and still experiencing crashes and performance issues.

     

    Does it mean AMD is better, no i've read plenty of people having big issues with AMD cards also which is meant to be linked to nvidia gameworks, fortunately a friend and i haven't had these issues.

    The point i'm trying to make is, my last cards were 2 x GTX 780s and i had nothing but issues with them, had to have them RMA'd twice and in the end i got over it, i've pretty much been onboard with nvidia since i started building my own PC's but there is merit / good and bad in either cards. find one that suits your budget / needs and go with that, because at the end of the day there is going to be good and bad cards with either provider and a lot of it comes down to chance.

  • SeelinnikoiSeelinnikoi Member RarePosts: 1,360

    Have you ever seen any game endorse an AMD card?

    Nope. And for a reason...

    I regret to this day having bought this Radeon 6950 card, so I am saving up to a higher quality Nvidia card.

    If you are a Star Wars fan, why not try the Star Wars The Old Republic?
    New players can get a welcome package and old/returning players can also get a welcome back package and 7 days free subscription time! Just click here to use my referral invitation
  • LobotomistLobotomist Member EpicPosts: 5,963

    People are living in the past.

    AMD was relevant 5-10 years ago and had slight competitive price to Nvidia.

    However for at least 5 years they have been dragging behind. They have worse graphic cards but with similar prices to Nvidia. And their drivers are bad and mostly poorly supported by game developers and game compatibility.

    There is really not one reason to buy AMD product today , except perhaps brand loyalty.

     

    So if you like buying brand name for no other reason than its nifty logo or some nostalgia , than buy AMD.

    Otherwise keep away.



  • mbrodiembrodie Member RarePosts: 1,504
    Originally posted by Seelinnikoi

    Have you ever seen any game endorse an AMD card?

    Nope. And for a reason...

    I regret to this day having bought this Radeon 6950 card, so I am saving up to a higher quality Nvidia card.


    what lol

    try not to spread the bullshit too thick next time...

    http://www.amd.com/en-us/markets/game/featured/all-games

     
    wow.. even star citizen is jumping on the AMD bandwagon.
  • PhryPhry Member LegendaryPosts: 11,004

    Technically, AMD cards can often be the more powerful, the problem, as is usually the case with comparing these cards, is the games themselves, or to put it another way, real world application.

    Nvidia has the advantage for the most part, games are heavily optimised usually in Nvidia's favour, where you can sometimes get the crazy situation where 2 virtually identical PC's can be running the same game, but one, despite having a less 'technically' capable GPU, outperforms the higher spec'd GPU, and its just down to how the game is coded. Its not fair, but its business and its so far allowed Nvidia to keep ahead of AMD.

    http://www.forbes.com/sites/jasonevangelho/2014/05/28/nvidia-fires-back-the-truth-about-gameworks-amd-optimization-and-watch-dogs/

    So, Nvidia tends to work better with games. Does make buying a GPU a bit more complicated, and sometimes it just means that buying an Nvidia gpu is the 'easy' option.image

  • FdzzaiglFdzzaigl Member UncommonPosts: 2,433

    Nvidia usually has the advantage performance wise.

    That said, you can't go wrong with the higher end cards of AMD price / quality wise imo. Yes they're slower with drivers but it isn't usually that much of a big deal imo.

    I've been sticking with AMD cards for the last decade. And the one time when I switched to a Geforce Nvidia series, I actually had a crapload of issues.

    Feel free to use my referral link for SW:TOR if you want to test out the game. You'll get some special unlocks!

Sign In or Register to comment.