• 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.

Reality check, are AMD just as bad as Nvidia.

dave28 said:
Everyone wants Nvidia anyway, or at least most do. the marketing is strong in them
Click to expand...

Perhaps, but most of the serious buyers of the top end products are aware of fact over the marketing. While their pricing and nerfing of memory is seriously taking the **** they do have some genuine value adds over AMD. DLSS 2 is significantly ahead of FSR, DLSS gives the card another generational level of performance if you need it or when the card starts to become dated it'll allow you to use it for longer. FSR isn't really worth using atm. Frame Gen does seem to work well and will likely only get better. RT will probably also become better and more mainstream in upcoming years. Nvidia Drivers probably have the edge too. As well as power consumption.

To be clear I have no affinity to either brand and if anything would probably pick AMD if all were equal. But DLSS, FG, RT, and drivers do offer customers something extra.

To be fully competitive AMD need to come up with something compelling other than being a single digit % ahead in raster for a few less quid. They either need to lower prices more, be MUCH more powerful at raster, or catch up with the value add features.
 
gjbf1 said:
Perhaps, but most of the serious buyers of the top end products are aware of fact over the marketing. While their pricing and nerfing of memory is seriously taking the **** they do have some genuine value adds over AMD. DLSS 2 is significantly ahead of FSR, DLSS gives the card another generational level of performance if you need it or when the card starts to become dated it'll allow you to use it for longer. FSR isn't really worth using atm. Frame Gen does seem to work well and will likely only get better. RT will probably also become better and more mainstream in upcoming years. Nvidia Drivers probably have the edge too. As well as power consumption.

To be clear I have no affinity to either brand and if anything would probably pick AMD if all were equal. But DLSS, FG, RT, and drivers do offer customers something extra.

To be fully competitive AMD need to come up with something compelling other than being a single digit % ahead in raster for a few less quid. They either need to lower prices more, be MUCH more powerful at raster, or catch up with the value add features.
Click to expand...

You started well with the first line, but then parroted Nvidia's marketing exactly to justify their under performing over priced GPU's, and without a hint of irony.
 
Last edited:
humbug said:
You started well with the first line, but then prorated Nvidia's marketing exactly to justify their under performing over priced GPU's, and without a hint of irony.
Click to expand...

Did I? DLSS quality mode for an extra 25% FPS and the extra eye candy of RT are things genuinely appealing to me. I largely PC game for graphics fidelity (and controls), otherwise I'd just use my Xbox.

I'm not justifying their sales strategy either, it's actually the reason I still haven't bought and the card currently sitting in my basket is a 6950XT.
 
gjbf1 said:
Did I? DLSS quality mode for an extra 25% FPS and the extra eye candy of RT are things genuinely appealing to me. I largely PC game for graphics fidelity (and controls), otherwise I'd just use my Xbox.

I'm not justifying their sales strategy either, it's actually the reason I still haven't bought and the card currently sitting in my basket is a 6950XT.
Click to expand...

Its used as a poor substitute to raw performance, cheaply made slow GPU's sold as premium products.

How about this, the 4060Ti was actually 40% faster than the 3060Ti at the same price WITHOUT the need for marting branded resolution reduction software?
 
humbug said:
Its used as a poor substitute to raw performance, cheaply made slow GPU's sold as premium products.

How about this, the 4060Ti was actually 40% faster than the 3060Ti at the same price WITHOUT the need for marting branded resolution reduction software?
Click to expand...

The 4060 TI is a complete POS no doubt about that.

I disagree about DLSS. The 4080/90 or maybe even the 4070 TI are not cheap underpowered or non-premium GPUs. They're just insanely overpriced!! But in 3-5 years when their raw performance is waning on top titles DLSS could allow you to go another gen without upgrading. Or let you use RT if you're struggling for playable rates. RT will become mainstream eventually too. It is good and useful tech. But being sold at 30-60% above what it should be.

I'm not sure AMD are really doing themselves any favours now with their pricing either TBF. If they dropped prices 20% and think a huge majority would jump to the red side. But they're piggybacking off Nvidia's greed too.
 
They are all POS, with the exception of the 4090, perhaps.

But they're piggybacking off Nvidia's greed too.
Click to expand...

Of course they are, Nvidia and AMD want the same thing but any BS AMD come up with first is instantly called out as BS.

They're just insanely overpriced!!
Click to expand...

In this context what's the difference between overpriced and underperforming?
 
SpellowHouse said:
They can all go **** themselves. They have priced me out of buying regular upgrades. I have no idea when I will buy another graphics card, but it isn't going to be soon.
Click to expand...

Given we now have Nvidia's full line up, pretty much, i'm going to wait to see what the rasterisation performance is on AMD's GPU's in relation to my 2070S and price.

Couldn't give a flying #### about hit or miss and depend on 3'rd party substitutes. Good Grief!
 
Last edited:
humbug said:
They are all POS, with the exception of the 4090, perhaps.



Of course they are, Nvidia and AMD want the same thing but any BS AMD come up with first is instantly called out as BS.



In this context what's the difference between overpriced and underperforming?
Click to expand...

Raw performance Vs previous gen. The 4060TI is underforming as it's no better than what it replaced. The 4070/Ti/80/90 all perform significantly better than what they are replacing. But at higher cost / overpriced. If the 4080 was £700 people probably wouldn't complain about it at all.
 
gjbf1 said:
Raw performance Vs previous gen. The 4060TI is underforming as it's no better than what it replaced. The 4070/Ti/80/90 all perform significantly better than what they are replacing. But at higher cost / overpriced. If the 4080 was £700 people probably wouldn't complain about it at all.
Click to expand...

There's that marketed branding again....

The 4070Ti is 15% faster than the 3080 and.... yes its 15% more expensive. but what's in a name, right?
 
humbug said:
There's that marketed branding again....

The 4070Ti is 15% faster than the 3080 and.... yes its 15% more expensive. but what's in a name, right?
Click to expand...

You're saying the 4070TI is really a 4080? So then what is the 4080? A 3090 replacement?

Brackish said:
Even if the prices come down performance won't change much and you still have upscaling being pushed. Buy and pay more or buy later when the next gen is due out and prices crash again.
Click to expand...

Do you expect prices to crash net gen?
 
Brackish said:
Even if the prices come down performance won't change much and you still have upscaling being pushed. Buy and pay more or buy later when the next gen is due out and prices crash again.
Click to expand...

Yeah, its why i singled out the 4060 series, the rest, so far, are not bad cards in of themselves, they can easily be salvaged if pricing is brought down.

All the 4060's are just bad GPU's, that's not to say they are that at any cost, but, they are just crap.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom