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.
It's not they have been involved with Graphics for a long time and there first attempt at discreet is no where close. 230w for a turd ain't impressive. What you seem to be more impressed with is there software but the card is not great at all. It sold just about as bad as it is compared to the competition.
No question AMD is best on Linux, but Nvidia isn't far behind in my limited experience the last few years. Only a couple of games have been an issue and eventually drivers fixed them.
Nothing like that from my experience. Can't speak for all distros, but on arch you just install the Nvidia packages with pacman and it just works.
It does matter more further down the ladder. I never bother about power but to some it does matter. In this case I am using it to show how bad the card is for its performance. You could also say what you are saying about AMD Cpu's but look how that's going. Amd have good idea's and it looks like AMD will be improving there RT by 4x next gen and are finally looking at ai for there upscaling. That alone will put Intel back in there bed on the Gpu front. AMD played a long game with cpu's they look to be trying the same with Gpu's with mcm. Time will tell and i don't think intel are a threat for a while. As for dx11 yea Nvidia wrote good stuff into there drivers where as AMD relied on hardware but come dx12 that paid off for a while from what i have read. Nvidia have the best package overall but for what i play it's to expensive with no benefits for me. Intel have nothing to offer me atm and until they do they won't be a consideration.Power consumption and efficiency matters again then?
Intel have a similar approach to nvidia for RT grunt/perf too, which is why they demolish amd here so no it's not just software. Of course their current version isn't good hence why I and many others haven't touched it, it has arguably been an alpha/beta product, doesn't change the fact that they have addressed many flaws very quickly, AMD have taken how long in the past to address some of their massive downsides like black screening, poor dx 11 performance and so on? Pretty sure we're talking about months and even years for them. But unlike amd, intel will be heavily investing more into their dgpu than amd since amds focus isn't here now.
Lets not compare 4090 users with low to mid level buyers. I am only talking about watts more because Intel got rubbish performance for that amount of power. My last 3 cards were 290/Vega64/7900xt (all cards were eating power stations in there gen) but they all offered good performance and a lower price compared to what Nvidia had on offer. Nvidia have mainly offered less performance at a higher price but better power consumption. A few bucks a month has never been a worry for me. Intel offer high power with no real benefit, they need to get there performance/watt up a lot more to get competitive.
A770 media PC i take it.Some of us buy both levels.
www.digitaltrends.com
videocardz.com
