I haven't used anything so fancy, but, I have calibrated a few monitors in my time and I got my Pioneer Lx5090 professionally calibrated when I bought it years ago. I could always get the colours to look the same between my Nvidia and AMD setups.
-
Competitor rules
Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.
AMD Vs. Nvidia Image Quality - Old man yells at cloud
- Thread starter shankly1985
- Start date
I haven't used anything so fancy, but, I have calibrated a few monitors in my time and I got my Pioneer Lx5090 professionally calibrated when I bought it years ago. I could always get the colours to look the same between my Nvidia and AMD setups.
I don't see why it's trolling. I have provided the technical specification proving that the RX 5600 XT has 30% higher pixel fillrate and 15-20% higher texture fillrate, and have asked a simple question - why is it on par with the slower RTX 2060 KO? The possible explanation is because it computes more, hence the higher texture resolution which is obvious in all the images provided in the thread so far. I don't work for neither AMD nor nvidia, so am absolutely neutral and get what's superior to my eyes.
There are differences in the default setups on both Nvidia and AMD. It's natural for people to prefer AMD's default as it's more saturated. Colours look more vivid. That's what people are noticing when they switch over. It's like when you go into a TV shop, they are all setup in store mode because people are attracted to that and that's what sells. And if you show a calibrated TV, it looks dull and yellow compared to them. The point is that you can get the colours to look as near the same as makes no difference on AMD and Nvidia. They can be easily changed to suit your preference.
Going back to the leaf example you said you clearly notice a difference in. The difference is tiny, but, I am pretty sure if you did a enough looking you could find plenty of samples to show the Nvidia image to have more details. I would even bet money that if you took the same screenshot 100 times on two different AMD cards you would see slight differences each time.
when people have proved you wrong you don't reply. Instead you go away and come back with something else that's completely wrong. AN example would be you accusing Nvidia of using bad texture compression in their GPUs called ASTC. It's not used in GPUs. When challenged about that, you post screenshots from your 10 year old laptop showing fog in Counter Strike. Of course you ignored the reply when I explained why you were getting fog.
Your latest post comparing the 2060KO with the 5600XT is another example of you not having a clue what you are talking about. Nvidia's architecture is completely different from AMD's. It's really that simple. But you wouldn't know logically if it hit you in the face.
Caporegime
Like Vince, I have used differing brands and still have a 290X and if I was bothered, I would do a comparison with both cards in my machinne and I have said it before and I will say it again, I do personally feel that the 'out the box' colours on AMD are better than NVidia's. That is my thinking though and of course people will agree or disagree. I calibrate my monitor to my liking and off I go and play games and other than frame differences, I wouldn't know which is which. I see 4K8K is still banging the drum and having used a forum where an individual was moaning about the IQ on an NVidia shield and getting owned, he moves on to the next thing and that is comparing a card with differing cores/memory speeds/etc and using that in a desperate attempt to show his utter BS bias to AMD with. It is funny mind 
ASTC is just a detail. A texture compression is still being used even with a different name. I have asked you which one and you didn't respond?
Different architectures but also different level of game developers involvement in the process. AMD has the whole consoles market, its graphics microarchitectures are being open and the games developed for them. Plus AMD's own software engineers who should extract maximum performance out of the resources.
Last edited:
Caporegime
He won't listen.
Soldato
i love these forums beer time chaps lol..
I'll have one with ya, god knows i need one.
There is a range of compression used - textures are often stored using DXT (based off of S3TC IIRC) which is largely lossless though there are some lossy variants IIRC but they are mostly not used. That is usually implemented at an application level though rather than driver so the application developer has control over the level of compression used.
ASTC (and the other forms) is not used in a context relevant to what you are talking about really - though it can be forced/recompression on texture upload which in some variants does result in a loss of detail that is generally not used on desktop hardware or forced at the driver level and mostly used on low end mobile hardware, etc. to compensate for very low spec. Even if it was in use and causing loss of quality it wouldn't manifest in the way you are talking about colour/quality differences - you'd largely just see banding on certain surfaces.
Internally delta compression (which at a simple level only transmits changes) and run length encoding is used in some parts of the GPU when transferring data especially colour information however these are lossless systems that have no impact on the fidelity of the data and typically result in between 1:4 and 1:8 compression of data.
ASTC is just one example of you not understanding what you are talking about and willing to lie about things to try and prove you are right.
There are a few different texture compression techniques been used depending on the situation. Rroff went into more detail.
And this is the other reason why people think you are trolling. You either twist people's words in your reply or deliberately misunderstand them.
You can't look at the specs of Nvidia and AMD cards and compare them directly like you tried to do. AMD and Nvidia are using two different architectures.
And Nvidia aren't using lower quality textures, that's a load of rubbish. Where is your proof? Tech sites would be all over this if it was true.
Caporegime
His proof is his 10+ year old laptop and dodgy grey matter. Everyone else is clearly lying, oh and the earth is flat!
You and TNA are trolls and it's quite visibly clear to everyone in the forum.
AMD texture resolution:
nvidia texture resolution:
Permabanned
- Joined
- 27 Sep 2019
- Posts
- 2,570
Soldato
You and TNA are trolls and it's quite visibly clear to everyone in the forum.
AMD texture resolution:
nvidia texture resolution:
Two random images with no additional context are beyond useless.
You call people trolls yet you are the one who has been threatened with suspension because of your posting habits
Two random images with no additional context are beyond useless.
You call people trolls yet you are the one who has been threatened with suspension because of your posting habits
No one is safe. Today I am trying to release the facts to the public, tomorrow it may be you or any other forum member.
I have been under threat because of always defending AMD's products' qualities which is against the interests of many publication sites because they receive money from nvidia and/or cooperate with nvidia.
Permabanned
- Joined
- 27 Sep 2019
- Posts
- 2,570
So it is a conspiracy and you are trying to beat the overlords (kind of like the Matrix)?
Look at TechpowerUp's page and say honestly don't they receive money from nvidia?
https://www.techpowerup.com/