Why is Nvidia recommeded over AMD GPU's?
Posted: 04 Sep 2020 22:14
vlad01 wrote:Well it depends on your application. For GPGPU computing its almost impossible to recommend anything but the AMD cards, hence why they are top choice for mining. For best of best top of the line graphics for gaming then the nvidia 1080 and 1080 Ti.
I run an AMD FX with a GTX 980, both which are water cooled and OC'd. For some things the FX is a terrible CPU and holds back the 980 some what (like Unreal Tournament 99 for me and Universe Sandbox 2) . For others like SE the FX is great! and the 980 is actually what is holding back SE, its ok but bit slow as its maxed out all of the time and VRAM is always full., CPU does bugger all in SE.
I have preferred nvidia for the most part, mainly because they often had the outright fastest product historically (except Fermi/Kelper days and FX series) and I am very familiar with them as I have used them since early 2000s. Radeon had some top cards then, but I was not in the position to upgrade then so I never benefited from those AMD cards
I like AMDs drivers and innovation with GPU design a lot better, they always strive to make architecture well optimized, but have in recent years been let down on the fabrication front ( too much power and low clocks).
I dislike nvidia's driver sloppyness and overheads which slow down many cards as newer drivers come out and also cut support they previously had, quite the opposite is true for their pro cards like quadro etc... driver support for those are excellent!
Also the other thing that annoys me is their holding back of products to consumers, one reason I have refused to upgrade until they release the next top end new gen card, the Ti or what ever it will be not the mid range xx80 card which people believe is high end but its not. If you can'y tell I have a love hate relation ship with nvidia lol, I like their products but dislike their corporate morals.
As for CPUs, I have always for the most part preferred AMD CPUs. I had good impressed back in the Athlon XP and Athlon 64 days.
FX was a stop gap, not the best but offered decent multi threading at absolute bargain prices, nothing price to performance at the time from intel could match even if the FX was a lot slower. That latter changed as AMD fell well behind but I have since held out to see what they would release next as I didn't want to pay the premium intel tax for what had been the same CPUs for almost 10 years, good CPUs but the same old stuff every year and requires a new socket and board for no good reason for every small increment.
Glad I waited as we have the Zen CPUs and they are awesome! They are very competitive in performance, significantly cheaper, better quality and are more efficient in multi threading and lower power consumption. Also have good backwards compatibility that is not offered by intel. Its more pros than cons for my use case so Zen gets a win in my book.
I havn't got one yet as I am waiting for new GPUs on the market and then I will go for a top end nvidia with AMD 2700X or similar.
Anyway it doesn't matter what someone gets or likes, the important thing it to ignore what people suggest without reason, do informed factual research and choose parts that fits your use scenarios. There is a lot of ill informed people out there who will choose a brand for the sake of loyalty. Just need to learn to see through that and get what you need and and you alone.
corporate morals is also why I dont choose Intel CPU and dont really like Nvidia either, but I use them because they are fast (but I dont upgrade often)