So, you think that Apple, Microsoft and Sony using Radeon graphics is bias, too?!
He's referring to your "the way is radeon" presumably.
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.
So, you think that Apple, Microsoft and Sony using Radeon graphics is bias, too?!
Yep. AMD Drivers were greatly improve around early 2015, and especially 2016 with the new GUI and all the tweaking. fps cap that actually works, easy settings per game, very good overclocking facilities and no crash even at extreme unstable overclock, when Nvidia just hangs the system requiring hard reboot.Agreed! This very much, people are so stuck in the past history of AMD drivers that all they see if the bad and not the good what has happened over the years.
He's referring to your "the way is radeon" presumably.
So, you think that Apple, Microsoft and Sony using Radeon graphics is bias, too?!
Yep. AMD Drivers were greatly improve around early 2015, and especially 2016 with the new GUI and all the tweaking.
The fact that AMD feel the need to 'commission' such a report only goes to reinforce their inferiority complex imo (instead of letting the results speak for themselves).
There's only 2 companies who would commission such an evaluation
The fact that AMD feel the need to 'commission' such a report only goes to reinforce their inferiority complex imo (instead of letting the results speak for themselves).
Agreed! This very much, people are so stuck in the past history of AMD drivers that all they see if the bad and not the good what has happened over the years.
How far back are we going here? As I don't remember ATi drivers bad back in the 00s. Heck, I used to use the Omega drivers.
The only ever issues I ever remembered was the big silver control panel. It really wasn't an issue though, maybe inconvenience since it took 4 - 8 seconds to load.
https://techreport.com/review/7356/ati-radeon-x700-xt-graphics-card/3
Back in the ATI era, Omega drivers were better than ATI indeed. But that was 12+ years ago. Since then a lot of water has gone under the bridge.
True the old style Catalyst were bit clunky to configure stuff, but for the last 2 1/2 years AMD has moved the drivers ahead to 21st century, while Nvidia is stuck still in the 90s.
I see that Nvidia's control panel has not really changed or moved on since my 8800 days...Back in the ATI era, Omega drivers were better than ATI indeed. But that was 12+ years ago. Since then a lot of water has gone under the bridge.
True the old style Catalyst were bit clunky to configure stuff, but for the last 2 1/2 years AMD has moved the drivers ahead to 21st century, while Nvidia is stuck still in the 90s.
And compare this
to that
I see that Nvidia's control panel has not really changed or moved on since my 8800 days...
This, of course, is very false - any company can do it - starting with AMD as the obvious because they want the myth busted, then Intel, then Apple, then such companies like HP, Dell, Microsoft, Sony, Matrox.
Even you can do it, I can do it, those guys with the YouTube videos - AdoredTV.
BTW, AdoredTV can focus on such surveys, not on meaningless, complex and heavy explanations why chiplets are better economy-on-scale than monolithic dies, meh...
The first problem is, how many studies did AMD pay for that showed Nvidia had better drivers but they didn't publish?
NVIDIA's is from the XP era. You can see the old toolbar icons but yes, it's badly outdated. My big gripe is, even if NVIDIA manages to come out with a new UI, it'll likely be horribly buggy. I can guarantee it. As overall, NVIDIA's drivers has been somewhat poor quality in releases lately.
I see that Nvidia's control panel has not really changed or moved on since my 8800 days...
2006/7. Just before Vista.