-
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
Mate, I really enjoy it and he has now brought NVidia's shield in to defend his way of thinking. DLSS wasn't great from the off and it did look like vaseline had been wiped on the screen at times but since then, NVidia have got on top of it and it is much much better. I genuinely look forward to what he is going to post next and unlike Melmac and TNA, I have no chance of 'resisting'
yes its class every morning he puts up something different to be amused at lol.
I am quite sure that is a difference between the RX 590 and RTX 2070:
RX 590:
RTX 2070:
Are we really arguing over the difference in a zoomed in 4k image and a pixel difference here or there? That top image doesnt really look any different to the image below. Both are a bit blurred i see the same details across the board with very little difference. Probably because like me you gone messed up and put the 590 image twice.
I also ran cards side by side and on the same monitors and suspect you are searching for something that either isnt really there or simply has so little impact that after looking for 5 mins I can bearly see what you are trying to prove. By extension you are basically feeding the thread with more images where the two are broadly comparable.
Last edited:
I am quite sure that is a difference between the RX 590 and RTX 2070:
RX 590:
RTX 2070:
You know nothing. You have proved that you know nothing. Time and time again you have shown that you are incapable of understanding even the basics of any technology.
Where are the tech sites complaining about this image quality difference?
You ignored my last post because it shows what a complete numpty you are.
Thanks but it doesn't matter. I will always prefer the AMD image because to me it looks with higher texture resolution, nicer colours, and AMD works on technologies like Radeon Image Sharpening and FidelityFX, while nvidia does the opposite - introduces DLSS..
See that is an OK statement. That is your preference so wicked but to actively try and prove inferior image on the other side is almost impossible even if you think it is there. btw any chance you can correct the double rx590 image and update the 590 one for a 2070 so im not looking at the same image twice trying to find a difference?
Or is that even the case? Either way they are not an image of the same frame. Judging by the layers on the right these are both of a 2070? Possibly, assuming the labels are correct.
LOL what a joke. The colours can be made look the exact same on both AMD and NVidia.
But at least we are getting to the truth now. There is no difference in image quality, You are only seeing what you want to see.
I dunno if I agree that the colours can look exactly the same, near as damn it but, and i have said it a few times in the thread, I also like the AMD presentation better. I can't put my finger on exactly what it is but to me it just looks better, a bit crisper and a bit more vivid, again though preference and opinion are massive factors here. I can tune the nv card to look very similar but I can't seem to get it looking exactly the same.
FWIW when I was playing last night I found a rendering issue in csgo, mirage - playing T and heading towards B, pull out an AWP and zoom in on a set of window shutters above van from Kitchen, the shutters will start flickering and being generally annoying. I noticed this on my AMD recordings and in game but it is not there with NV so swings and roundabouts in that regard. I also validated it by firing up csgo on my desktop and id never noticed in in the midst of a battle (have about 4k hours on csgo) but it is there on my 7 as well. I recon that just goes to show that when you are engaged with the game and actually playing it that these minor differences in the rendered images count for nothing and you would probably never even notice unless you have zoomed in images side by side.
Also there is an issue with flickering textures in tarkov on the shoreline map, right on the shoreline looking at the wall near the CCP TEMP extraction point from the hill just across the road, dunno if its AMD specific or engine or whatever as I haven't tested yet on NV but it is there and i've validated that on 3 AMD cards (Vega M GL, Vega 64 and Radeon 7). Again something I never noticed in a normal battle but looking hard for these "differences" or "rendering issues" or whatever and you start noticing little things that you never normally would. Sometimes its there on all hardware and sometimes it isn't.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 28 May 2007
- Posts
- 10,204
I can see the differences easy enough between the two. The veins on the leaves are easier to see on the AMD image and some of the lines are much clearer. Would this be noticable while playing and zoomed out i doubt it. Guy in the video pointed it out as the biggest difference in all games tested. The Nvidia image overall is just that bit more blurry again though zoomed out would i notice. The easiest way to see it is open the 2 pics in different windows and click back and forward between them. Just staring at them is much harder.
Problem with that is they aren't then the same frame so can we compare where the frames are different? we know it isn't the same frame as the position of the flag against the branches is entirely different, at least in the screenshots. Perhaps I need to watch the video.
I think your sentence about preference is the important one.
Our brain tricks us in so many ways. Have you ever used a monitor calibration tool?
Soldato
- Joined
- 28 May 2007
- Posts
- 10,204
It's pretty close and not sure if that flag moves in the wind.
I think your sentence about preference is the important one.
I have used several, I also rock DreamColour displays at work along with a firey on a production (versant) printer so colour and it's correctness is important to me if im in photoshop, or at least correctness against a print or a design filing.
Soldato
- Joined
- 28 May 2007
- Posts
- 10,204
I think your sentence about preference is the important one.
There seem to be a lot of brains that prefer the AMD image compared to the Nvidia one who have genuinely used both companys. From what i have seen most are still using Nvidia as well. Could it just not be that AMD's colours are what the majority of people like better full stop.
Soldato
- Joined
- 17 Aug 2003
- Posts
- 20,160
- Location
- Woburn Sand Dunes
I'm amused at the thought of people revisiting that video again and trying to find differences when he said there's no real difference between the two at the end of the vid. Some guys really go to the nth degree dont they 
@4K8KW10, did you like my blurry ass washed out screenshot from CS Source? let me know your thoughts mate. I'm interested.
@4K8KW10, did you like my blurry ass washed out screenshot from CS Source? let me know your thoughts mate. I'm interested.
Well, I started to dig into this deeper after trying to play with a GeForce. The lower resolution textures are most obvious when one is in gameplay, in static imagery it's still pretty visible but it doesn't look as bad as when the images move.
Also, if we think logically, if AMD throws more hardware resources at the problem, why are still GeForce in the worst case on par? It makes no sense. The GeForces should be slower.
Look, for example at the newly released RX 5600 XT and RTX 2060 KO:
ROPs/TMUs - 64/144 vs 48/120
Pixel fillrate - 116.5 vs 88.3
Texture fillrate - 262.1 vs 220.8
Memory throughput - 357.1 vs 399.4
Price:
Performance - the same:
https://www.techpowerup.com/review/sapphire-radeon-rx-5600-xt-pulse/27.html
I'm amused at the thought of people revisiting that video again and trying to find differences when he said there's no real difference between the two at the end of the vid. Some guys really go to the nth degree dont they
@4K8KW10, did you like my blurry ass washed out screenshot from CS Source? let me know your thoughts mate. I'm interested.
Well the crucial thing was he found a few outlier games where one or the other had less crisp surface materials - it wasn't like it was a one sided story and in the bulk of scenarios there was no difference to be found.
It is getting boring now @4K8KW10, it is fine to post an opinion but to not engage or back it up when engaged is trolling. Final warning.[/Q
Well, I started to dig into this deeper after trying to play with a GeForce. The lower resolution textures are most obvious when one is in gameplay, in static imagery it's still pretty visible but it doesn't look as bad as when the images move.
Also, if we think logically, if AMD throws more hardware resources at the problem, why are still GeForce in the worst case on par? It makes no sense. The GeForces should be slower.
Look, for example at the newly released RX 5600 XT and RTX 2060 KO:
ROPs/TMUs - 64/144 vs 48/120
Pixel fillrate - 116.5 vs 88.3
Texture fillrate - 262.1 vs 220.8
Memory throughput - 357.1 vs 399.4
vs
Price:
vs
Performance - the same:
https://www.techpowerup.com/review/sapphire-radeon-rx-5600-xt-pulse/27.html
i would give this up because as ppl have said THEIRS NO REAL DIFFERENCE AND YOUR gonna get banned is it worth it ?!?!.