AMD Vs. Nvidia Image Quality - Old man yells at cloud

TNA · 28 Dec 2019 at 23:29

4K8KW10 said:
It's possible that nvidia makes this difference intentional as some sort of weird product differentiation strategy. As reported, with a GeForce you are very likely to observe the following effects:

1. Textures look lower resolution because of applied texture compression;
2. Some parts of trees and bushes like branches and foliage are cut off the scene;
3. Distant objects look washed out, loss of detail in distance
4. Colours look washed out, applied very thin white colour filter on the images;
5. Fonts look with irregular shape, sharp curves instead of smooth curves, thicker letters, sometimes lighter black on the fonts
6. Contrast balance is broken

Prove it consistently over 5-10 recent games. Nope you can’t can you? Just a waste of words then.

MyBrainz · 29 Dec 2019 at 00:11

10 years on AMD (last Nvidia GPU was a 7600GS) and now on a 1660 Super, i see a difference, quailty looks poorer and AA doesnt seem to smooth out jaggies as good as AMD, especially in GTA V.

Same PC and monitors and only changed the GPU, using same settings as i did on my Vega 56. Deffo looks worse but it isnt a huge difference.

hyperseven · 29 Dec 2019 at 00:22

4K8KW10 said:
It's possible that nvidia makes this difference intentional as some sort of weird product differentiation strategy. As reported, with a GeForce you are very likely to observe the following effects:

1. Textures look lower resolution because of applied texture compression;
2. Some parts of trees and bushes like branches and foliage are cut off the scene;
3. Distant objects look washed out, loss of detail in distance
4. Colours look washed out, applied very thin white colour filter on the images;
5. Fonts look with irregular shape, sharp curves instead of smooth curves, thicker letters, sometimes lighter black on the fonts
6. Contrast balance is broken

Now this is next level nonsense :rolleyes:

Are you now internationally trolling the threads I see you posting in?

I should put you on ignore but the sheer lunacy of your posts is amusing...for now

Phixsator · 29 Dec 2019 at 01:26

TNA said:
Prove it consistently over 5-10 recent games. Nope you can’t can you? Just a waste of words then.

I've had issues with image quality on all my geforce cards going back to at least the 980ti that i can remember. However it's certainly not a consistent thing from game to game. The last issue i remember would be degrade in quality on some distant objects in Doom 2016 leading parts of small things(like something sticking out on the back end on what looked like a crane) not actually rendering unless i went into the NCP and turned the quality setting from default to high. Colours also seemed off at times, having to adjust Gamma settings on a global scale for it to be fixed. But certainly not as i already said consistent and not enough to prove anything really without a shadow of a doubt.

Rroff · 29 Dec 2019 at 03:20

MyBrains said:
10 years on AMD (last Nvidia GPU was a 7600GS) and now on a 1660 Super, i see a difference, quailty looks poorer and AA doesnt seem to smooth out jaggies as good as AMD, especially in GTA V.

Same PC and monitors and only changed the GPU, using same settings as i did on my Vega 56. Deffo looks worse but it isnt a huge difference.

I find AA a mixed story - between the two - couldn't say which was "better" at lower amounts but I find at low levels like 2x and 4x I find I need higher levels on AMD to eliminate my perception of jagged edges generally but at higher levels nVidia seem to have put more focus into their various alternative forms of AA (which aren't all that IMO) to the detriment of their higher quality implementation where AMD's options seem to have both crisper and smoother, cleaner edges - until you turn to SLI AA which is another level again.

TNA · 29 Dec 2019 at 09:12

Phixsator said:
I've had issues with image quality on all my geforce cards going back to at least the 980ti that i can remember. However it's certainly not a consistent thing from game to game. The last issue i remember would be degrade in quality on some distant objects in Doom 2016 leading parts of small things(like something sticking out on the back end on what looked like a crane) not actually rendering unless i went into the NCP and turned the quality setting from default to high. Colours also seemed off at times, having to adjust Gamma settings on a global scale for it to be fixed. But certainly not as i already said consistent and not enough to prove anything really without a shadow of a doubt.

Fair enough

4K8KW10 · 29 Dec 2019 at 09:12

hyperseven said:
Are you now internationally trolling the threads I see you posting in?

Give a single reason why I should be trolling. Normal users always examine options and buy products with higher quality. What's so difficult for you to understand that the differences are significant?

So, now, blind test on CS Source map Militia, res 1920 x 1080, maxed out, you can see the differences:

Nasher · 29 Dec 2019 at 09:46

Top one is AMD? The textures and shadows are more defined.

Gregster · 29 Dec 2019 at 09:58

bru said:
Oh blast, that will teach me for reading and posting before reading further......lol

It will not matter, as he will skip past anything that shows him wrong....

james.miller · 29 Dec 2019 at 09:59

Top one is missing some trees in the center of the image. Crosshairs are also different so I assume they are taken on different setups. Also, acient game AGAIN.

TNA · 29 Dec 2019 at 10:01

Nasher said:
Top one is AMD? The textures and shadows are more defined.

Do you see how he keeps picking games from over 10 years ago and cannot pick 10 recent games and consistently show us? All he ever does is how us old stuff. What does that say?

Gregster said:
It will not matter, as he will skip past anything that shows him wrong....

Yep and then proceeded to use 15 year old images to bang on about his point. Lol.

Nasher · 29 Dec 2019 at 10:05

TNA said:
Do you see how he keeps picking games from over 10 years ago and cannot pick 10 recent games and consistently show us? All he ever does is how us old stuff. What does that say?

Yep and then proceeded to use 15 year old images to bang on about his point. Lol.

It hasn't changed though.

Gregster · 29 Dec 2019 at 10:06

MyBrains said:
10 years on AMD (last Nvidia GPU was a 7600GS) and now on a 1660 Super, i see a difference, quailty looks poorer and AA doesnt seem to smooth out jaggies as good as AMD, especially in GTA V.

Same PC and monitors and only changed the GPU, using same settings as i did on my Vega 56. Deffo looks worse but it isnt a huge difference.

I will put this here again.

More so for 4K8K/Nasher to watch (even though he won't).

Gregster · 29 Dec 2019 at 10:11

TNA said:
Yep and then proceeded to use 15 year old images to bang on about his point. Lol.

He used Half Life as an example and I also loaded up HL that the guy used 12 years ago and oddly enough, no difference. I also remember doing a test against Humbug in BF3 or 4 and his AMD image looked better but when I investigated why, I found that performance was set to "max performance" and not "Max detail", so user error.

TNA · 29 Dec 2019 at 10:32

Nasher said:
It hasn't changed though.

So it would not be hard to prove would it? But no one can or they would have.

Tell me, why is it AMD’s marketing department are happy to come out with Poor Volta and other rubbish but actually not use this “superior image quality” that they have? Why won’t ANY website, even the small ones that have NOTHING to lose not publish this? Would generate a lot of clicks, and put the websites name on the map. Hell even a small time YouTuber could do this and gain a lot of views and make them selves known.

But no one is doing this... Why? I think the answer is obvious. Even if there is a difference it is so small that who gives a **** basically and this is coming from someone who likes his image quality.

4K8KW10 · 29 Dec 2019 at 10:37

Nasher said:
Top one is AMD? The textures and shadows are more defined.

Yes, top one is Radeon RX 560X over my notebook screen via EDP.
The bottom one is GeForce 8400M GS which is running on another laptop and with my LG 24UD58-B via HDMI.

Both screens are from today, nvidia control panel is tweaked for maximum image quality.

AMD's image quality is great in the tree leaves and the lack of the whitish fog in the middle of the screen towards the bridge on the GeForce image, I don't know why it's missing a tree or two in the distance.

CS Source uses the Source engine which is used in many games, including CS: GO and many others.

I don't have other games besides CS 1.6 on the GeForce laptop.

CS Source is what I game these days.

Nasher said:
It hasn't changed though.

It hasn't changed, yes. Both setups are with the most recent drivers for the corresponding system.

TNA · 29 Dec 2019 at 10:40

You know, what these guys do not get it is, I would actually like this to be true and for someone to conclusively prove it so AMD can get some more market share. Would actually love to see AMD taking the market share lead for a while as this would encourage competition which we would all benefit from.

TNA · 29 Dec 2019 at 10:46

Gregster said:
I will put this here again.

More so for 4K8K/Nasher to watch (even though he won't).

He won’t watch it and even if he does he will ignore anything that does not match with is current beliefs. He will continue to cherry pick over decade old games to prove his point. He will ignore requests to prove it on current games consistently (because he can’t) so basically he is not to be taken seriously and has an agenda and does not care for the truth.

I will leave this here again, it really is fitting about him:

Listen, and understand. That 4K8K is out there. It can’t be bargained with. It can’t be reasoned with. It doesn’t feel pity, or remorse, or fear. And it absolutely will not stop, ever, until you are brain dead.

Gregster · 29 Dec 2019 at 11:15

TNA said:
He won’t watch it and even if he does he will ignore anything that does not match with is current beliefs. He will continue to cherry pick over decade old games to prove his point. He will ignore requests to prove it on current games consistently (because he can’t) so basically he is not to be taken seriously and has an agenda and does not care for the truth.

I will leave this here again, it really is fitting about him:

The guy in the video agrees with me and states that AMD has the better colour "out the box" compared to NVidia and it has been that way for years and could be addressed for improvement. Whilst it is no issue for me, others seem to struggle adjusting the colours for some reason.

Gregster · 29 Dec 2019 at 11:21

Also, 8400M GS has 3 year old drivers now (so old, it is discontinued) and comparing a notebook GPU to a desktop GPU and on a 20 year old game.

https://www.techpowerup.com/gpu-specs/geforce-8400m-gs.c1696

Edit: A 12 year old GPU with a whopping 256MB of super fast DDR2.... A fair comparison if ever I see one.