• 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.

For those who dislike nvidia, why do you keep buying nvidia and not amd?

Nexus18

Nexus18

Nexus18

Caporegime
Joined
4 Jun 2009
Posts
31,866
Lets keep all the nvidia vs amd BS out so no baiting/trolling at all and keep purely to the thread title question.

Context:

Genuinely find this fascinating lately, the amount of threads that just end up with nvidia bashing is crazy now i.e. "rt/rtx is ****", "dlss is fake/crap", "frame generation is ****/fake", "planned obsolescence", "low vram", "nvidia ripping you off", this is all I see in threads recently especially around vram......

So question is....

Why do people keep buying nvidia and not amd? AMD provide:

- slightly cheaper gpus
- larger vram pool than the nvidia competing gpus
- match/beat nvidia competing gpus in raster

Yet, the people who keep complaining about nvidia practices/products don't show their support by buying AMD?
 
Last edited:
Many people are used to buying NVIDIA, they've bought them for many years and trust them to produce a good product. NVIDIA lead the way and AMD clumsily follow.
My reaction when I think about buying is that a 4080 is about £1200 and a 7900xtx is about £1000. At those sorts of levels of cost I'm just not going to take a chance on a brand I haven't tried in many, many years.
And most gamers, when they think of a 4080, they don't think of the 7900xtx, rather they try to work out how they can afford a 4090.
I think that AMD had the opportunity to clean up with this generation but they dropped the ball. They didn't have any competition for the 4090 so they really needed to trash the 4080. But they went and pitched their price slightly under the 4080, and it just wasn't enough to lure NVIDIA buyers away from their favourite brand. Neither the 4080 or the 7900xtx are good value for money.
Had AMD launched it at £800, I would have bought one. As it stands, I would buy a 4080.
 
Back in the day I had 7900GT which I had to RMA, they sent me an 8800GT which I had to RMA, they sent me an 9800GT which died and I couldn't RMA it.

After that bad experience I tried the ATI 5870, but the drivers were shocking, my friends had GTX 460 which worked flawlessly and my 5870 drivers crashed in almost every game.

Then I got a 780 which was OK but loud and not enough vram, so had to upgrade to a 1080 which has been the only card I've actually been happy with.

So I don't like nvidia for all the obvious reasons, but I've tried AMD before and it was worse.

Looking back, GPUs have been among the worst products I've ever bought, pretty much regardless of brand or model.

Generally I hate feeling ripped off and believe in voting with my wallet. Maybe it is time to try AMD again as it has been a while. (maybe Intel?)

Edit: I chose a "FreeSync (G-Sync compatible)" monitor to not be vendor-locked.
 
Last edited:
throwaway4372 said:
Back in the day I had 7900GT which I had to RMA, they sent me an 8800GT which I had to RMA, they sent me an 9800GT which died and I couldn't RMA it.

After that bad experience I tried the ATI 5870, but the drivers were shocking, my friends had GTX 460 which worked flawlessly and my 5870 drivers crashed in almost every game.

Then I got a 780 which was OK but loud and not enough vram, so had to upgrade to a 1080 which has been the only card I've actually been happy with.

So I don't like nvidia for all the obvious reasons, but I've tried AMD before and it was worse.

Looking back, GPUs have been among the worst products I've ever bought, pretty much regardless of brand or model.
Click to expand...

I had pretty much the same experience. I remember an AMD I bought many years ago and the damn drivers were horrible. I've never forgiven them for that.
 
personally found that the 3080FE I bought wasn't up to scratch on my 3440x1440p panel and the VRAM temperatures without modding were a joke. I was very underwhelmed by it.

Moved to the 6900XT which has more grunt in raster, which is what I mostly game with (RT wasn't there really back then) and will probably keep it until it gives up the ghost / I change panel / RT becomes something I actually care about.
 
Last edited:
I hardly ever had issues with AMD drivers. I always do a clean install of windows when changing from Nvidia to AMD or vice versa.

The issue for me is not drivers. I actually like AMD's nice UI. The issue is they just copy Nvidia pricing and do not price GPU's properly. The issue is FSR is not as good as DLSS. The issue is their RT is not as good. The issue is the resale value is not as good.

Therefore they need to do more than just offer a bit of extra vram and a hundred bucks off if they want me back.

As far as I am concerned Nvidia pricing is looney and so is AMD's. AMD should have come in at £699 and £549 and called the cards 7800 XTX and 7800 XT. They would have had my money if they did.

Before people winge and say why should AMD price it so low? Well for one, do they want my money? And two, £699 or thereabouts is what I think the RTX 4080 should have been priced at!
 
Last edited:
At my price point the Nvidia card seemed the better choice, I have used AMD and Nvidia and consider myself brand agnostic. I am used to the current Nvidia tech, RT and DLSS etc, Nvidia would probably have to release a really bad generation for me to switch to AMD for the next gen on-wards. My current card will likely last me a couple of years just like my 3070 before it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TNA
For me, I simply wanted the 'best' as I was coming from nothing and don't intend on upgrading for a good while, however, I decide this after the AMD card let me down as I initially was looking for bang for buck.

I tried AMD but driver problems killed it for me (constant driver timeout errors and other nonsense like black screens). This was the first card I had tried from them in 15 years after I got rid of that one because I had an issue with the fans always being maxed. Suffice to say I see absolutely no reason to go and try them probably ever again, unless they can actually match the performance of their Nvidia counterparts across all areas, not just the price.

Edit. One positive, I liked the overlay thing where you could tune games etc and put different settings against them.
Big fan of the CPU's, this is not a weird brand tribalism decision.
 
Last edited:
SpellowHouse said:
Many people are used to buying NVIDIA, they've bought them for many years and trust them to produce a good product. NVIDIA lead the way and AMD clumsily follow.
My reaction when I think about buying is that a 4080 is about £1200 and a 7900xtx is about £1000. At those sorts of levels of cost I'm just not going to take a chance on a brand I haven't tried in many, many years.
And most gamers, when they think of a 4080, they don't think of the 7900xtx, rather they try to work out how they can afford a 4090.
I think that AMD had the opportunity to clean up with this generation but they dropped the ball. They didn't have any competition for the 4090 so they really needed to trash the 4080. But they went and pitched their price slightly under the 4080, and it just wasn't enough to lure NVIDIA buyers away from their favourite brand. Neither the 4080 or the 7900xtx are good value for money.
Had AMD launched it at £800, I would have bought one. As it stands, I would buy a 4080.
Click to expand...
throwaway4372 said:
Back in the day I had 7900GT which I had to RMA, they sent me an 8800GT which I had to RMA, they sent me an 9800GT which died and I couldn't RMA it.

After that bad experience I tried the ATI 5870, but the drivers were shocking, my friends had GTX 460 which worked flawlessly and my 5870 drivers crashed in almost every game.

Then I got a 780 which was OK but loud and not enough vram, so had to upgrade to a 1080 which has been the only card I've actually been happy with.

So I don't like nvidia for all the obvious reasons, but I've tried AMD before and it was worse.

Looking back, GPUs have been among the worst products I've ever bought, pretty much regardless of brand or model.

Generally I hate feeling ripped off and believe in voting with my wallet. Maybe it is time to try AMD again as it has been a while. (maybe Intel?)
Click to expand...

I would have also said the same but the people I refer to also swear that amd drivers are just as good, if not better than nvidia now so that can't be why they keep buying nvidia either :p

Personally I never had any real problem with amd over several years of different architectures. Do prefer the amd UI/CP but at the same time, I'm never in the driver control panels past initial setup.

NZXT30 said:
VR performance and DLSS + FSR.
Click to expand...

VR performance is a valid point although it's still rather niche isn't it and I think amd have improved here quite a bit (know RDNA 3 had big problems on launch but think they've been fixed too)? Given the amount of hate we see on here for upscaling/dlss especially having to "pay for it", this shouldn't be a factor as to why those people keep buying nvidia either.



One thing which does come to mind is nvidia streaming/recording, I think this is an area where amd fall short massively (personally I don't care for this but can see why it would be make or break for a few gamers)
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: TNA
TNA said:
I hardly ever had issues with AMD drivers. I always do a clean install of windows when changing from Nvidia to AMD or vice versa.

The issue for me is not drivers. I actually like AMD's nice UI. The issue is they just copy Nvidia pricing and do not price GPU's properly. The issue is FSR is not as good as DLSS. The issue is their RT is not as good. The issue is the resale value is not as good.

Therefore they need to do more than just offer a bit of extra vram and a hundred bucks off if they want me back.

As far as I am concerned Nvidia pricing is looney and so is AMD's. AMD should have come in at £699 and £549 and called the cards 7800 XTX and 7800 XT. They would have had my money if they did.

Before people winge and say why should AMD price it so low? Well for one, do they want my money? And two, £699 or thereabouts is what I think the RTX 4080 should have been priced at!
Click to expand...

Pretty fair point tbh. If the 7900XTX and 4080 were both under a grand (where they should be), I think more would take the feature rich 4080.

As we move further into the future and RT becomes more of a standard feature to games AMD will either need to price super low or get their finger out in regards to RT performance, even if it means dialling back on their raster numbers.

I'm not too worried about FSR / DLSS as personally I think it's disgusting that ANY card over 1k needs these turning on to play games at max resolution. All it will do is make both teams skimp back on their cards and push these features over native. But you can bet prices won't come down :( !
 
montymint said:
Pretty fair point tbh. If the 7900XTX and 4080 were both under a grand (where they should be), I think more would take the feature rich 4080.

As we move further into the future and RT becomes more of a standard feature to games AMD will either need to price super low or get their finger out in regards to RT performance, even if it means dialling back on their raster numbers.

I'm not too worried about FSR / DLSS as personally I think it's disgusting that ANY card over 1k needs these turning on to play games at max resolution. All it will do is make both teams skimp back on their cards and push these features over native. But you can bet prices won't come down :( !
Click to expand...

I have been really enjoying DLSS. I have been running most my games using DLDSR + DLSS Quality and boy does that make a big difference to image quality. Even old games like Dishonored 2 look superb.

Lets see how next gen goes. AMD really should just come in swinging though and not wait for Nvidia so they can play it safe. They should be able to do really well as they have chiplets working now. But I won't hold my breath.

My prediction is they will wait for Nvidia again and do the same. Nvidia will be up their VRAM offerings next gen an 16GB will be the new norm. Also they will price their cards a bit more competitively relative to Ada.
 
Truly brand agnostic here, i'd buy PowerVR if it was still about. This has typically been mostly been ATI/AMD because of the price/performance and longevity, with a sprinkling of Nvidia in the last 10 years or so.

The problem I think is unfamiliarity, perception and reputation. Myself, I've had no more problems with AMD than the Nvidia driver suite. I think the thing about AMD drivers being crap goes all the way back to the Rage Fury Maxx which was absolutely atrocious driverwise (I bought one cheap and it never really worked well), and it's almost become a genetic race memory in the PC gaming circle - whether someone has had experience with AMD cards or not. This coupled with the reputation AMD drivers have sees people blame them first rather than elsewhere in their system, if I could be bothered I could link to a number of threads on this forum from people with problematic AMD cards and drivers (even down to exploding chips!) - where the problem was something elsewhere in their setup (or badly stored cards), this creates a bad perception to someone just glancing at the forum and reinforces the idea that AMD drivers are rubbish/problematic.

So I guess it all boils down to the oft cited "mindshare".

As an aside, I've also been around long enough to see arguments about hardware TnL, types of antialiasing, physx, hairworks, Freesync/Gsync and now the latest; raytracing. In my experience, before these features become an issue or a "must have" one of the following would have happened:

1. You've upgraded
2. one manufacturer or another catches up
3. It's superceded by something better entirely
4. It was a rubbish idea anyhow
5. A New console generation has come out and all the multiplatform games which have been developed for it run like **** and you need to upgrade whatever you had at the time anyhow...the situation pretty much now.
 
Last edited:
Mercurial said:
perception
Click to expand...
This for me is the biggest issue - I’ve personally never owned an nvidia gpu, always preferred the more budget offerings by Amd - but I’ve fitted countless gpus for family and friends and I, a long time ago, stopped bothering to suggest Amd as most of them pulled weird faces and said daft words. Similar faces and noises when Amd cpus are mentioned, though not quite so much.
 
Last edited:
Stanners said:
We will leave this to run but please stick to the question and not off topic bickering.
Click to expand...

We should take bets on how many days the thread survives before getting locked. Poll anyone?

Nexus18 said:
Lets keep all the nvidia vs amd BS out so no baiting/trolling at all and keep purely to the thread title question.

Context:

Genuinely find this fascinating lately, the amount of threads that just end up with nvidia bashing is crazy now i.e. "rt/rtx is ****", "dlss is fake/****", "frame generation is ****/fake", "planned obsolescence", "low vram", "nvidia ripping you off", this is all I see in threads recently especially around vram......

So question is....

Why do people keep buying nvidia and not amd? AMD provide:

- slightly cheaper gpus
- larger vram pool than the nvidia competing gpus
- match/beat nvidia competing gpus in raster

Yet, the people who keep complaining about nvidia practices/products don't show their support by buying AMD?
Click to expand...


Back in the day when I didn't have as much money I owned AMD GPUs. I stopped pc gaming for a while between 2012 and 2016 and when I came back I built a new PC and went with Nvidia because they had the fastest GPU and money wasn't a problem for me. I've just stuck with Nvidia since 2016 as their GPUs have been the fastest and I can afford it
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom