Anyone else had loads of hardware issues with AMD current gen?

[eyetrip]

So I am gathering from reading between the fluff and mud slinging that perhaps I have just been really, really unlucky?

As an aside, the Gigabyte and EVGA GTX 670's are running nicely together. Apart from my annoyances with having to stick with Nvidia...

Things like having to do an edid override to use 3dvision on a passive screen really irk me. Or them having done something in drivers that cause crashes in games trying to use Tridef...

Hopefully the 2GB memory will be enough to see me through a couple of years at least...

 

[Gregster]

His dislike doesn't even have any logic to it.

At least when I moan and whinge about nVidia, it's relevant stuff that anyone could look up, like the limitations and practicality of PhysX (it doesn't stop some people though)

Spoffle whinging about PhysX shocker! I seriously miss the point of you again beating on PhysX. It is an added extra that comes with Nvidia cards. You don't have an Nvidia card, so why does it bother you so much?

 

[Stanners]

The irony of some the posts, Spoffle for one is one of the most biased AMD lovers in this place. How he can have a go at someone else is beyond me.

 

[Rusty0611]

Hopefully the 2GB memory will be enough to see me through a couple of years at least...

I would sell when the next generation comes to be fair. 2GB is perfectly matched to the GPU grunt of a 670/680. I would say you're unlikely to have to worry about VRAM. You're likely to have more choice come next generation and hopefully nVidia won't release their top end cards with a 256 bit bus again.

As I'm back in the realms of single 1080 screen... it doesn't matter THAT much to me but if there's a cheaper 384 bit bus card from AMD on offer again then I'll definitely be going that way from the off.

 

[Stanners]

I would sell when the next generation comes to be fair. 2GB is perfectly matched to the GPU grunt of a 670/680. I would say you're unlikely to have to worry about VRAM. You're likely to have more choice come next generation and hopefully nVidia won't release their top end cards with a 256 bit bus again.

As I'm back in the realms of single 1080 screen... it doesn't matter THAT much to me but if there's a cheaper 384 bit bus card from AMD on offer again then I'll definitely be going that way from the off.

Back on a more interesting note, Do you people think AMD gave Nvidia a bit of breathing space in relation to Nvidia's true high(If it existed) end card not been ready and the performance of there mid end card matching AMDs high end(Again if that is true).

 

[Rusty0611]

Back on a more interesting note, Do you people think AMD gave Nvidia a bit of breathing space in relation to Nvidia's true high(If it existed) end card not been ready and the performance of there mid end card matching AMDs high end(Again if that is true).

I think it's pretty funny that AMDs high end card is matched by nVidia's "mid range" card and yet people (usually AMD mud slingers) say that the 680 was a mid range card like it's a bad thing. If anything it's a damning indictment on AMD... more of which in a moment.

I'd say to 95% of consumers it doesn't matter if the card was originally scheduled to be a "mid range" card or not... what really matters is how the card performs when it's in its PCI-E slot chugging away. There's no doubt in my mind that GK104 was originally earmarked to be the 660Ti and downwards.

The 7900 series are on paper definite "high end" cards with more memory, wider bus and more direct compute. They were massively under performing though upon release hence nVidia kind of getting away with releasing the 670/680 as they were and directly competing and drawing a lot sales away from AMD and still ending up with a very, very good market share. This isn't a particularly great thing for AMD as if you take the cards on paper there is only one winner.

I'll ask: who do you think was making more money per unit when the two sets of cards were priced pretty closely? Of course it's nVidia: their cards must have been quite cheaper to produce compared to the technically superior 7900 series cards.

I think that kind of answered my view point on the matter .

 

[humbug]

Back on a more interesting note, Do you people think AMD gave Nvidia a bit of breathing space in relation to Nvidia's true high(If it existed) end card not been ready and the performance of there mid end card matching AMDs high end(Again if that is true).

Are you talking about that fabled "big Kepler" GK110?

I don't know how that started but that is their $3200 K20 server / compute unit.

A lot of Nvidia god posturing by so called reviewers started that.
It was never intended to be a Desktop GPU.

Indecently, the AMD FirePro S10000 is more powerful.

 

[siege2]

Have an XFX "one Fan on it" Since release, now have just purchased an Gigabyte edition to run in crosfire "NOT A PROBLEM AT ALL NVIDIA FANS"

LOL

 

[Stanners]

Have an XFX "one Fan on it" Since release, now have just purchased an Gigabyte edition to run in crosfire "NOT A PROBLEM AT ALL NVIDIA FANS"

LOL

Why would you want an nvidia fan on it?

 

[Gregster]

Why would you want an nvidia fan on it?

 

[siege2]

 

[spoffle]

Spoffle whinging about PhysX shocker! I seriously miss the point of you again beating on PhysX. It is an added extra that comes with Nvidia cards. You don't have an Nvidia card, so why does it bother you so much?

You're saying I whinge about PhysX like I never said it first myself...

You also don't really miss the point, you just ignore it. I've said loads of times what the issue is, you readily admit to having limited knowledge on things, like PhysX yet still try to argue about it using things that don't apply.

I've said loads of times now that it's not even "PhysX" that I have an issue with, it's how it's used that's the issue, how it's used is the very reason why it hasn't been taken up properly, oh and what do you know? They're actually making changes with PhysX because it's just possible that they've actually realised/accepted what they're doing doesn't make sense, so with PhysX 3.0 they are actually completely re-writing it so that it properly takes advantage of a multi-core CPU instead of being gimped to running badly on a CPU.

They're probably doing this because PhysX isn't taken as seriously as they'd like it to be, and really, who would take it seriously? No devs can implement it in such a away that it'd make BIG changes to gameplay if it only works on nVidia hardware, so nVidia themselves are limiting PhysX and using it purely as a way to one-up AMD instead of developing it further for people who enjoy games.

So to be blunt, your issue is due to a lack of understand of the subject, so you just see me making posts that aren't ultra-mega positive and take offense to it. If you understood the situation properly, you wouldn't react the way you do. So maybe you should educate yourself on PhysX? I know I've tried to spell it out to you multiple times but you refuse to listen.

The irony of some the posts, Spoffle for one is one of the most biased AMD lovers in this place. How he can have a go at someone else is beyond me.

Care to back those claims up there? Can you actually isolate what makes me an AMD lover? Because I have no love for AMD, just disdain for nVidia because of the many underhanded things they've done and continue to do, and as a result of that choose not to give my money to nVidia.

Say, if I have a disdain for Apple, what does that make me a lover of? Because, you know, to dislike a company it's GOT to be because I'm in a one-sided love affair with their competition, right?

 

[Stanners]

You're saying I whinge about PhysX like I never said it first myself...

You also don't really miss the point, you just ignore it. I've said loads of times what the issue is, you readily admit to having limited knowledge on things, like PhysX yet still try to argue about it using things that don't apply.

I've said loads of times now that it's not even "PhysX" that I have an issue with, it's how it's used that's the issue, how it's used is the very reason why it hasn't been taken up properly, oh and what do you know? They're actually making changes with PhysX because it's just possible that they've actually realised/accepted what they're doing doesn't make sense, so with PhysX 3.0 they are actually completely re-writing it so that it properly takes advantage of a multi-core CPU instead of being gimped to running badly on a CPU.

They're probably doing this because PhysX isn't taken as seriously as they'd like it to be, and really, who would take it seriously? No devs can implement it in such a away that it'd make BIG changes to gameplay if it only works on nVidia hardware, so nVidia themselves are limiting PhysX and using it purely as a way to one-up AMD instead of developing it further for people who enjoy games.

So to be blunt, your issue is due to a lack of understand of the subject, so you just see me making posts that aren't ultra-mega positive and take offense to it. If you understood the situation properly, you wouldn't react the way you do. So maybe you should educate yourself on PhysX? I know I've tried to spell it out to you multiple times but you refuse to listen.




Care to back those claims up there? Can you actually isolate what makes me an AMD lover? Because I have no love for AMD, just disdain for nVidia because of the many underhanded things they've done and continue to do, and as a result of that choose not to give my money to nVidia.

Say, if I have a disdain for Apple, what does that make me a lover of? Because, you know, to dislike a company it's GOT to be because I'm in a one-sided love affair with their competition, right?

Disdain for a company is fine, your logic for that disdain seems one sided, Have AMD never done anything underhand? i.e. driver optimisations for certain benchmarks lowering quality etc. now do not get me wrong, Nvidia have pulled more than there fair Share.

What is it then that Nvidia have done that makes them so much worse to AMD to bring on this disdain?

 

[spoffle]

Disdain for a company is fine, your logic for that disdain seems one sided, Have AMD never done anything underhand? i.e. driver optimisations for certain benchmarks lowering quality etc. now do not get me wrong, Nvidia have pulled more than there fair Share.

Well firstly, you're talking about ATi, not AMD, secondly you've made this in to an AMD and nVidia thing because it seems like people can't complain about nVidia without people accusing them of being AMD fanboys.

What is it then that Nvidia have done that makes them so much worse to AMD to bring on this disdain?

Plenty of things really. The way they have forced PhysX to run badly on a CPU to make their GPU performance look much better.

The way they advertise PhysX and intentionally mislead, things like "With GeForce" and "Without GeForce", implying PhysX doesn't run on the CPU AT ALL.

The Batman AA issue (the whole AA code bit where nVidia and rocksteady blamed eachother, the code basically removed anti-aliasing for people who didn't have ge-force GPUs).

There's been multiple complaints about nVidia paying developers to exclude other companies from working with them to make games run better (or at least appear to) on nVidia hardware.

The failing laptop GPUs (millions of them) that they wouldn't even acknowledge without a class action lawsuit.

All the whinging they did over Assassin's Creed (the DX10.1 AA).

The way they messed with their drivers to block hybrid PhysX (for anyone trying to use an nVidia GPU for PhysX with their main GPU being from AMD)

The aggressive pompous attitude of nVidia staff that very clearly rubs off on the things they do, companies don't even like working with them because of the attitude they have.

That whole weird nVidia focus group thing, that whole "AMD drivers never work" thing never started from people who use or own AMD hardware, it makes you think really, especially because nVidia have the worst documented cases of driver issues than AMD in terms of damage and things going wrong.

The whole Vista release drivers where nVidia simply couldn't get a working driver out (another class action lawsuit). Those drivers that came out that "accidently" turned off the fans on graphics cards causing them to overheat and burn out (permanently broken), which conveniently was just when a new range of graphics cards had just come out, and to a lesser extend a driver that did something similar to GTX590s, the stutter bug with the GTX6XX series, where nVidia seemingly didn't want to acknowledge, some people think they pulled their forums as a result of this to stop the complaining people were doing.


Additionally, you're assuming that my disdain of nVidia means I don't criticise AMD, when that's not true. I do criticise AMD but the way it is currently, there's simply more to complain about when it comes to nVidia.


Nearly all of the above is to the detriment of PC gamers and the PC gaming industry, I don't have an issue with it because of anything to do with AMD, I have an issue with it because what they're doing to further their own goals is detrimental, and other companies in the industry don't like working with them, why do you think the next gen of consoles are looking like they're going to be using AMD hardware instead of nVidia?

 

[Tonester0011]

I'll get your a GTX690 for christmas Spoffle, hopefully it will stop your moaning on these forums.

When you get a Nvidia card, hopefully your loyalties will shift.

 

[spoffle]

Why would I want a GTX690?

Why do you "hope" that my "loyalties" shift as well? My loyalty lies with my bank balance/wallet.

What exactly is "wrong" with what I've said?

 

[Tonester0011]

Nothing
It would just be funny, if i gifted you a 690...you wouldn't deny it, it would also mean you couldn't hate on it

 

[Gregster]

Why would I want a GTX690?

Why do you "hope" that my "loyalties" shift as well? My loyalty lies with my bank balance/wallet.

What exactly is "wrong" with what I've said?

Seriously?

You need to lighten up. PhysX is part of Nvidia and I have no clue as to why you have a hatred for Nvidia because they are not utilising PhysX to your liking.

I don't buy a car and then learn mechanics, the same as I don't buy a GPU and learn programming. I have no clue how PhysX works and don't care. What I do care about is buying new hardware to get the best detail and if the odd few games use PhysX, I have that covered.

The way you hate on Nvidia isn't healthy

 

[spoffle]

Well I wouldn't deny it, no, who would?

As I've said, my main issue revolves around giving them any of my money as I'd see that as me supporting the things they'd do.

It's not really about "my money" as such anyway, I'm a big fan of price/performance but I do like high end stuff, hell I've just built a Sandybridge-E computer with a 3930K, 32GB of RAM, 2 SSDs, dual graphics, watercooled in a TJ07 with 3x 2560x1440 monitors

If I got a 690 for free, I'd just sell it and recoup the costs of my new PC.

 

[spoffle]

Seriously?

Uhhhh not again, stop playing dumb greg.

You need to lighten up. PhysX is part of Nvidia and I have no clue as to why you have a hatred for Nvidia because they are not utilising PhysX to your liking.

Are you misunderstanding on purpose? I'm explaining my issue with PhysX, it's not about "I" want them to use it, it's about what makes sense and currently they are squandering PhysX basically.

I don't buy a car and then learn mechanics, the same as I don't buy a GPU and learn programming. I have no clue how PhysX works and don't care. What I do care about is buying new hardware to get the best detail and if the odd few games use PhysX, I have that covered.

Yet you try to enter in to arguments about PhysX despite not understanding much about it. If you want to talk about mechanics, would you argue with someone who understands mechanics about mechanics, despite knowing nothing about it? Because that's what you're doing here.

If you don't care about how PhysX works, don't enter in to debates about how it works, and the technicalities about it, it's very very simple.

The way you hate on Nvidia isn't healthy

Why? All the things I listed in my other post, is it unhealthy to have a disdain for a company that's done all that?

Let me guess, your response will revolve around how you don't really care, you just buy the hardware and use it? Well the above applies, don't get in to a debate about it if you don't understand the topic.