• 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.

NVIDIA Retained 80% Discrete GPU Market Share Versus AMD’s 20% In Q2 2022 Despite Gaming Revenue Losses

My issues were strictly with AMD's 5000 series GPU's. specifically the 5700-XT so can't comment.
Overall though Nvidia were always more stable FOR ME, my experience...
Take that how you will.
 
Dave2150 said:
I've heard that this generation of AMD GPU's have better drivers - though we have to accept that millions of gamers have voted with their wallets, Nvidia have an 80% market share.

Also, on ocuk forum (and many other forums) there tends to be a huge following of enthusiasts, that are emotionally (and often financially) invested into AMD. These fans will flood forums, with countless posts that AMD drivers are perfect, no issues etc, making the truth very hard to discern. They're actually the minority (else AMD's market share would not be so low), though they're active and passionate enough that they attempt to 'take over' many forums, painting a different picture of reality. It's quite strange.
Click to expand...
It can seem like that, but truly none of us know, if you can find validation for your own issues then it helps, I did that and have settled with the fact that yes AMD drivers are worse but I don't have experience of all GPUJ's from AMD with all setups.
Regardless my issues were not anything I had done, they were well known, it still stands that FOR ME PERSONALLY yes AMD drivers are objectively worse from a stability standpoint, I don't do mental gymnastics to appear to fit in anywhere, but I can definitely accept that not all people have driver issues since I am not there to confirm my thoughts.

You have mentioned that AMD have a lower market share, yes you are right to a degree with your reasoning, however it is their marketing team who screws them over more so than the product half of the time.

This advert.

This advert.

05162903139s.jpg


This crap which matters to no normal user but they used it in the past.


This trash. We all know an overclocked 980X destroys any FX chip even the 3000 and 9000 chips, they pushed overclocking then get mad when intel users could clock the crap out of the intel chip and destroy them.
At release the 8 core 8150 was positioned next to the i7 not the 2500K but they then cut the cost near or below the i5 product then pitted it against the 2500K which again in anything that is not cinebench or encoding video which they knew most of their products were not for those types, the FX chips get's it's ass whooped really hard by the i5 and then not to their favor was the advent of encoding on a GPU which destroys the argument altogether.



The world was less connected, there was far more room for marketing like this to happen, though recently AMD screwed up saying 8GB Vram is not enough then released a 4GB 6500XT as it was just trying to hurt Nvidia and have mindshare where in many instances they are very wrong, are they fully wrong? Evidence shows around 2 games are problematic at the highest of high rendering levels on 8GB 3000 series GPU's, I own one, but it truly is a needle in a haystack issue, overall you are not going to run into these issues unless you only play FC6 and must have the texture pack.

Both destroyed themselves, both intel and Nvidia were far ahead in performance, all they could do is be bitches about it.
It failed, they thought people are gullible enough. The market share speaks for it's self.

It don't mean that AMD deserves all of the crap from Intel or Nvidia though, no company is objectively superior or to be viewed as a victim of anything, only fanboys do this.

It's more than just drivers, yes you are correct, but not the full truth, I have had very stable GPU's from AMD, at a lesser rate than Nvidia though and that is the subjective experience of my use.

Be happy there is competition and use your brain to see between the marketing garbage for both sides.
 
I think part of it is that AMD weren't able to respond to the increase in demand from the crypto boom due to console chips being on the same process node. It's likely they will increase their market share with this upcoming gen, supply shouldn't be an issue and their chiplet design should result in lower manufacturing costs compared to Nvidia.
 
DeliciousStorage said:
I think part of it is that AMD weren't able to respond to the increase in demand from the crypto boom due to console chips being on the same process node. It's likely they will increase their market share with this upcoming gen, supply shouldn't be an issue and their chiplet design should result in lower manufacturing costs compared to Nvidia.
Click to expand...
Tbf AMD had plenty of stock and the cards were sitting on shelves from mid last year while nvidia was still out of stock. The problem for AMD was they tried to price match nvidia without having the mindshare so if people were going to overpay for cards then they might as well go with nvidia.
 
Speaking as someone that's used both AMD and nVidia GPUs since the AGP days, this generation nVidia had more performance and features in areas that interested me. I'm looking forward to seeing what RDNA3 has in store because I'm pretty sure AMD's gonna make some huge strides to compete with nVidia on RT and DLSS.

To gain marketshare AMD has to be better and cheaper than nVidia - they can do it - look at what they've done with Ryzen vs. Intel - but they're not there yet (although they are catching up).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom