Monday, July 8th 2024

AMD is Becoming a Software Company. Here's the Plan

Just a few weeks ago, AMD invited us to Barcelona as part of a roundtable, to share their vision for the future of the company, and to get our feedback. On site, were prominent AMD leadership, including Phil Guido, Executive Vice President & Chief Commercial Officer and Jack Huynh, Senior VP & GM, Computing and Graphics Business Group. AMD is making changes in a big way to how they are approaching technology, shifting their focus from hardware development to emphasizing software, APIs, and AI experiences. Software is no longer just a complement to hardware; it's the core of modern technological ecosystems, and AMD is finally aligning its strategy accordingly.

The major difference between AMD and NVIDIA is that AMD is a hardware company that makes software on the side to support its hardware; while NVIDIA is a software company that designs hardware on the side to accelerate its software. This is about to change, as AMD is making a pivot toward software. They believe that they now have the full stack of computing hardware—all the way from CPUs, to AI accelerators, to GPUs, to FPGAs, to data-processing and even server architecture. The only frontier left for AMD is software.
Fast Forward to Barcelona
We walked into the room in Barcelona expecting the usual fluff talk about how AI PC is the next big thing, and how it's all hands on deck to capture market share—we've heard that before, from pretty much everyone at Computex Taiwan. Well, we did get a substantial talk on how AMD's new Ryzen AI 300 series "Strix Point" processors are the tip of the spear for the company with AI PCs, and how it thinks that it brings a winning combination of hardware to see it through; but what we didn't expect was to get a glimpse into how much the company AMD is changing things around to gain competitiveness in this new world, which led to a stunning disclosure by the company.

AMD has "tripled our software engineering, and are going all-in on the software." This not only means bring in more people, but also allow people to change roles: "we moved some of our best people in the organization to support" these teams. When this transformation is completed, the company will more closely resemble contemporaries in the industry such as Intel and NVIDIA. AMD commented that in the past they were "silicon first, then we thought about SDKs, toolchains and then the ISVs (software development companies)." They continued "Our shift in strategy is to talk to ISVs first...to understand what the developers want enabled." which is a fundamental change to how new processors are created. I really like this quote: "the old AMD would just chase speeds and feeds. The new AMD is going to be AI software first, we know how to do silicon"—and I agree that this is the right path forward.

AMD of the Old: Why Hardware-first is Bad for a Hardware Company in IT
AMD's hardware-first approach to tech has met with limited market success. Despite having a CPU microarchitecture that at least matches Intel, the company barely commands a quarter of the market (both server and client processors combined); and despite its gaming GPUs being contemporary, it barely has a sixth of this market. This is not for a lack of performance—AMD makes some very powerful CPUs and GPUs, which are able to keep competitors on their toes. The number-one problem with AMD's technology has been relatively less engagement with the software vendor ecosystem—to make best use of the hardware's exclusive and unique capabilities through first-party software technologies—APIs, developer tools, resources, developer networking, and optimization.

For example, Radeon GPUs have had tessellation capabilities at least two generations ahead of NVIDIA, which was only exploited by developers after Microsoft standardized it in the DirectX 11 API, the same happened with Mantle and DirectX 12. In both cases, the X-factor NVIDIA enjoys is a software-first approach, the way it engages with developers, and more importantly, the install-base (over 75% of the discrete GPU market-share). There have been several such examples of AMD silicon packing exotic accelerators across its hardware stack that haven't been properly exploited by the software community. The reasons are usually the same—AMD has been a hardware-first company.

Why is Tesla a hotter stock than General Motors? Because General Motors is an automobile company that happens to use some technology in its vehicles; whereas Tesla is a tech company that happens to know automobile engineering. Tesla vehicles are software-defined devices that can transport you around. Tesla's approach to transportation has been to understand what consumers want or might need from a technology standpoint, and then building the hardware to achieve it. In the end, you know Tesla for its savvy cars, much in the same way that you know NVIDIA for GPUs that "just work," and like Tesla, NVIDIA's revenues are overwhelmingly made up of hardware sales—despite them being software-first, or experience-first. Another example of exactly this would be Apple who have built a huge ecosystem of software and services that is designed to work extremely well together, but also locks people in their "walled garden," enabling huge profits for the company in the process.

NVIDIA's Weakness
This is not to say that AMD has neglected software at all—far from it, the company has played nice-guy by keeping much of its software base open-source, through initiatives such as GPUOpen and ROCm, which are great resources for software developers, and we definitely love the support for open source. It's just that AMD has not treated software as its main product, that makes people buy their hardware and bring in the revenues. AMD is aware of this and wants "to create a unified architecture across our CPU and RDNA, which will let us simplify [the] software." This looks like an approach similar to Intel's OneAPI, which makes a lot of sense, but it will be a challenging project. NVIDIA's advantage here is that they have just one kind of accelerator—the GPU, which runs CUDA—a single API for all developers to learn, which enables them to solve a huge range of computing challenges on hardware ranging from $200 to $30,000.

On the other hand, this is also a weakness of NVIDIA, and an advantage for AMD. AMD has a rich IP portfolio of compute solutions, ranging from classic CPUs and GPUs, to XDNA FPGA chips (through the Xilinx acquisition), now they just need to bring them together, exposing a unified computing interface that makes it easy to strategically shift workloads between these core types, to maximize performance, cost, efficiency or both. Such a capability would give the company the ability to sell customers a single-product combined accelerator system comprised of components like a CPU, GPU and specialized FPGA(s)—similar to how you're buying an iPhone and not a screen, processor, 5G modem and battery to combine them on your own.

Enabling Software Developers
If you've sat through NVIDIA's GTC sessions like we have, barely 5-10% of the showtime is spent talking about NVIDIA hardware (their latest AI GPUs or accelerators up and down the stack), most of the talk is about first-party software solutions—problems to solve, solutions, software, API, developer tools, collaboration tools, bare-metal system software, and only then the hardware. AMD started its journey toward exactly this.

They are now talking to the major software companies, like Microsoft, Adobe and OpenAI, to learn what their plans are and what they need from a future hardware generation. AMD's roadmaps now show the company's plans several years into the future, so that their partners can learn what AMD is creating, so the software products can better utilize these new features.

Market Research
We got a detailed presentation from market research firm IDC, which AMD contracted to study the short- and medium-term future of AI PCs, and the notion that PCs with native acceleration will bring a disruptive change to computing. This happened before, when bricks became iPhones, when networks became the Internet, and when text-based prompts were banished for GUI interfaces. To be honest, generative AI has taken a life of its own, and is playing a crucial role in the mainstreaming of this new tech, but the current implementation relies on cloud-based acceleration. Running everything in the cloud comes with huge power usage and expensive NVIDIA GPUs are used in the process. Are people willing to buy a whole new device just to get some of this acceleration onto their devices for privacy and latency? This remains to be seen. Even with 50 TOPS, the NPU of AMD "Strix" and Intel "Lunar Lake" won't exactly zip through image generation, but make text-based LLMs viable, as would certain audiovisual effects such as Teams webcam background replacements, noise suppression, and even live translation.

AMD is aware of the challenges, especially after Intel (Meteor Lake) and Microsoft (Copilot) spammed us with "AI" everywhere, and huge chunks of the userbase fail to see the convincing arguments. Privacy and Security are on AMD's radar, and you need to "demonstrate that you actually increase productivity per workload. If you're asking people to spend more money [... you need to prove that] you can save hours per week....that could be worth the investment, [but] will require a massive education of the end-users." There is also a goal to give special love to "build the most innovative and disruptive form factors" for notebooks, so that people are like "wow, there's something new here". Specifically in the laptop space they are watching Qualcomm's Windows on Arm initiative very closely and want to make sure to "launch a product only when it's ready," and to also "address price-points below $1000."

Where Does AMD Begin in 2024?
What's the first stop in AMD's journey? It's to ensure that it's able to grow its market-share both on the client side with AI PCs, and on the data-center side, with its AI GPUs. For AI PCs, the company believes it has a winning product with the Ryzen AI 300 series "Strix Point" mobile processors, which it thinks are in a good position to ramp through 2024. What definitely helps is the fact that "Strix Point" is based on a relatively mature TSMC 4 nm foundry node, with which it can secure volumes; compared to Intel's "Lunar Lake" and upcoming "Arrow Lake," which are both expected to use TSMC's 3 nm foundry node. ASUS already announced a mid-July media event where it plans to launch dozens of AI PCs, all of which are powered by Ryzen AI 300 series chips, and meet Microsoft Copilot+ requirements. Over on the data-center side, AMD's MI300X accelerator is receiving spillover demand from competing NVIDIA H100 GPUs, and the company plans to continue investing in the software side of this solution, to bring in large orders from leading AI cloud-compute providers running popular AI applications.

The improvements to the software ecosystem will take some time, AMD is looking at a three to five year timeframe, and to support that, AMD has greatly increased their software engineer headcount as mentioned before. They have also accelerated their hardware development: "we are going to launch a new [Radeon] Instinct product every 12 months," which is a difficult task, but it helps react quicker to changes in the software markets and its demand. On the CPU side, the company "now has two CPU teams, one does n+1 [next generation] the other n+2 [two generations ahead]," which reminds us a bit of Intel's tick-tock strategy, which was more silicon manufacturing focused of course. When asked about Moore's Law and its demise, the company also commented that it is exploring "AI in chip design to go beyond place and route," and that "yesterday's war is more rasterization, more ray tracing, more bandwidth," the challenges of the next generations are not only hardware, but software support for nurturing relations with software developers plays a crucial role. AMD even thinks that the eternal tug-of-war between CPU and GPU could shift in the future: "we can't think of AI as a checkbox/gimmick feature like USB—AI could become the hero."

What's heartening though is that AMD has made the bold move of mobilizing resources toward hiring software talent over acquiring another hardware company like it usually does when its wallet is full—this will pay off in the coming years.
Add your own comment

139 Comments on AMD is Becoming a Software Company. Here's the Plan

#76
ir_cow
evernessinceI didn't attach nuance to your comment, I pointed out the complete lack of it. The "nuance" I had in my comment was recommendations as to how you could word it better but clearly you'd rather fight than consider constructive criticism.
This is getting silly now and it's time to move on. I'm not fighting anyone. I defending ability to freely say what I want and you don't like it. Simple.
Posted on Reply
#77
evernessince
ir_cowThis is getting silly now and it's time to move on. I'm not fighting anyone. I defending ability to freely say what I want and you don't like it. Simple.
No one ever said you couldn't say whatever you want. That doesn't stop anyone from pointing out the pitfalls of making inflammatory, unpopular or poorly worded comments when you are TPU staff member without properly stipulating that you speak for yourself and only yourself.

I'll re-post my original comment for reference:
I don't think the issue he had was that you have an opinion but that you expressed it as a broadly applicable fact that AMD has bad drivers. If you are speaking for yourself you need to be verbose about it as in your case you are TPU staff. Had your first comment been "My person experience with AMD drives has been sub-par" is a good example of a measured comment but unfortunately in this case it's your 2nd stab at it. In addition, working for a company does come with some compromises in terms of free speech as your actions reflect on said company. If something could be considered inflammatory extra consideration should be taken and there's always the option of not commenting and letting whatever TPU's stance on a specific matter stand. I have seen quiet a few staff members express opinions as of late that do not align with TPUs own reviews or articles on the respective topics and often have only served to further inflame the comments section. If TPU doesn't already, it should have rules in regards staff member conduct in the forums / comments.

You could also hold your opinion but also acknowledge the strides AMD has taken in regards to their driver quality. The two are not mutually exclusive.
My original comment was worded in a very constructive manner but hey, can't stop people from doubling down on the internet I guess.
Posted on Reply
#78
wolf
Better Than Native
eidairaman1The biggest issue with Advanced Micro Devices is their Lack of Advertising.
That and from my experience, poor and/or misleading advertising when they do it. The amount of times the marketing material has backfired, like they manage to kick and own-goal .... to me it's no surprise they're shy about doing a whole lot of it. As others have suggested even just little AMD stickers on stuff that has their APU's somewhere might be a start, heck it could even be hard to spot like a little easter egg that becomes fun to find, put it on consoles, steam deck, handhelds etc.
ir_cowI defending ability to freely say what I want and you don't like it. Simple.
Yet I get the distinct feeling that if those comments were about a couple of other brands, there would be no uproar at all, AMD is the chosen one don't you know ;)

As for this whole push, it does smell of wanting a slice of the success felt by Nvidia, but boy oh boy do they have an absolute mountain-and-a-half to climb if they want to even feel half of their success. I wish them all the best, competition is sorely needed and good for everyone, but they better be truly committed and willing to play the long game.
Posted on Reply
#79
A Computer Guy
ir_cowIf AMD can't make good drivers for their own GPUs, how can anyone trust them to be a software company?
I almost threw in the towel with AMD after I got my RX 5700 because of driver issues. Thankfully they got it sorted (mostly) because even discounted GPU water blocks are kinda expensive. I'm sure Nvidia has a few issues too somewhere but after I put in my 4060 low profile in a different Windows build for the first time I had zero problems and it felt good, real good. On Linux I was having a much harder time with getting it to play nice but it might have been with the game I was testing and it ended up being a dumpster fire. So I think I've settled for using Nvidia GPU's on Windows and AMD GPU's on Linux as a general rule going forward. Having said that using only the WHQL drivers now my issues have been minimal with AMD GPU's on Windows.
Posted on Reply
#80
Sound_Card
evernessinceThis was your original comment for reference:


I didn't attach nuance to your comment, I pointed out the complete lack of it. The "nuance" I had in my comment was recommendations as to how you could word it better but clearly you'd rather fight than consider constructive criticism.

"you think staff views should always align with TPU reviews" is simply a scarecrow argument on your part, not what I said. You are trying to strip my argument of context because you know such a statement doesn't stand when taken in whole.

"I was laughing inside" reacting with an emoji is an externalization.
I agree, it really is an obtuse post. But to his credit, it probably is not his actual opinion.
wolfYet I get the distinct feeling that if those comments were about a couple of other brands, there would be no uproar at all, AMD is the chosen one don't you know ;)

As for this whole push, it does smell of wanting a slice of the success felt by Nvidia, but boy oh boy do they have an absolute mountain-and-a-half to climb if they want to even feel half of their success. I wish them all the best, competition is sorely needed and good for everyone, but they better be truly committed and willing to play the long game.
But my question is ... is really about just being competitive? The x1900xt and x1800xt were objectively faster than the 7900GTX and 7800GTX and they got outsold 11-1.

Nvidia can price a video card at $2,000 dollars and it will outsell an AMD card priced at $1000 that performs within 15% of it 20-1. This is not about being competitive, Nvidia is a cult.
Posted on Reply
#81
Nordic
MakaveliDoes that 90% include games with anti cheat?
Most games with anti cheat or drm don't work on Linux because the developer refuses to allow it on linux. Easy anti cheat for example works fine with linux if the developer allows it.

Rather than taking me at my word of "90%" go look at protondb. Out of the top 100 most popular games on Steam, 89% are playable without any messing around with settings. www.protondb.com/
Sound_CardNvidia can price a video card at $2,000 dollars and it will outsell an AMD card priced at $1000 that performs within 15% of it 20-1. This is not about being competitive, Nvidia is a cult.
Nvidia is insanely overpriced. I don't care about RTX or DLSS. I think AMD is a much better buy. I am but one consumer. The market is not a cult just because you disagree. People are choosing the product that best meets their needs. Nvidia isn't outselling AMD for arbitrary reasons. Most GPU consumers think it is a better product.
Posted on Reply
#82
95Viper
I will say this just once.
Discuss the topic.
And, the topic is "AMD is Becoming a Software Company. Here's the Plan".
It is not bickering with each other about what one believes or does not believe.
Let's keep it civil and non-personal.
Posted on Reply
#83
lilhasselhoffer
unwind-protectThat is for training the models.

Consumers running the trained form of these LLMs locally do inference which is nicely done with cheaper hardware.



I am optimistic because I think AMD has no choice. NVidia's customers hate to be locked in. I'm talking about customers like Google here. They want choice. They want the certainty that the software is not developed in an unwanted direction in the future. AMD better complies with that.
Please square the circle.

If you read the piece, you'd have noted that part of this was to save on having to unload the heavy computation to outside sources. IE you'd not need something like an H20 because they'd magic together some software that would use internal accelerators like your own GPU to do the work locally.... If not, and I'm understanding this right, then the claim is that LLMs will continue to work exactly the same as they always did and thus nothing changes... I either missed a step, or you're claiming their same magical "software will fix everything" shenanigans.

I for one think that something like an ASIC+CPU+FPGA would be a fantastic fusion of hardware to make something that can retool itself to virtually any task...but I've also got no illusions to this being PR more than game changing. Note that whatever BS Nvidia says, 12 grand a pop is going to be a huge plus for the stock holders....the only people that they absolutely have to please. Proving that CUDA is worth millions will be much harder...unless they intend to go whole hog and start charging for their "software" which only runs on their hardware...which I see as a cost of business for industry but basically killing consumer sales.
Posted on Reply
#84
Caring1
Is the is the No plan, plan?
I find they tend to work the best. :D
Posted on Reply
#85
wolf
Better Than Native
Sound_CardBut my question is ... is really about just being competitive? The x1900xt and x1800xt were objectively faster than the 7900GTX and 7800GTX and they got outsold 11-1.

Nvidia can price a video card at $2,000 dollars and it will outsell an AMD card priced at $1000 that performs within 15% of it 20-1. This is not about being competitive, Nvidia is a cult.
They have absolutely had some bangers over the years that sold very well and took the top spot (performance), they can do it again and if they get on the right path keep building a good thing, the ship takes a long time to turn, but it can turn. That's all squarely on AMD to sort out, consumers shouldn't have to do them favors and buy inferior products and act like volunteer sales reps just to help a multi billion dollar company (obviously not all do but some clearly do, don't have to look far), and why would their competition take their foot off the gas pedal intentionally?

Nvidia is more of a household name I'd argue, and has mindshare due to the years and years of getting it right and having polished hardware, software and features. From my perspective, AMD (Radeon) fits the description of cult far more but I digress.

In some ways I think they're damned if they do and damned if they don't, many products would FLY off shelves at sharper prices, but then they wouldn't be able to produce enough to meet demand, driving the price back up and being accused of a paper launch, maybe that'd beat what they do often now with underwhelming launch prices?
Posted on Reply
#86
AusWolf
Vayra86Yeah at the time that whole strategy did sound like a plan though right? This software company thing strikes me as similar. It feels similarly unfocused, not really worked out, just general ideas flying over the table there about some sort of new direction while keeping the old. Everyone feels that something is needed and that it is probably found 'in software'. But there's no strategy involved any deeper than 'we need to cover this space'. No shit, sherlock.

You know what it reminds me of? Volkswagen 'switching to the EV'. They've produced some okay EV's but nothing special in any sort of way, while the competition is racing past them left and right, both in the West and East. They're still making ICE's, still spending tons of resources on it, still really not changing anything and thinking they can do EV's 'on the side'. It really spells lack of commitment, and I think AMD is guilty of the same thing. Its the story of their GPU architectures' lives too. Good start, sometimes a good followup, and then things stall again. The only space where they keep their commitment (renewed...) is CPU.
If it's really like Volkswagen with EV's, then you can't fault them for not fully committing to something that has no long term track record of being successful. A handful of companies parroting "this is the future" is not the same as being successful and making long term profit. This can be said about EVs and AI/software alike.
ir_cow@evernessince TPU staff have independent thought. We can say whatever we please outside a review. Also not all staff are reviewers either. Remember that.

I didn't say TPU hates AMD and that is exactly what you are making it seem like.
"My experience with AMD drivers has been sub-par" is an expression of opinion. "AMD drivers are bad" is a broad fact statement (which happens to be false).

My experience with the R5 3600 was bad. It was slow, and hot as heck. I couldn't cool it with any LP cooler in a slim case. The i7-11700 worked out a lot better, it could take a lot more power under similar circumstances before throttling. Does this mean that the R5 3600 is a bad CPU? Absolutely not.

Having an opinion is fine, but the way you express it matters.
Posted on Reply
#87
nguyen
Well AMD could definitely act more mature and not compare itself against other companies for once, AMD could simultaneously improve on their weaknesses and investing in new products/softwares to strengthen their brand name.

For example AMD could have created their own handheld gaming device, instead of relying on Valve or other AIB. But nah AMD prefers to spend their money buying IP, making them look like an IP hoarder instead of a tech company.
Posted on Reply
#88
Vayra86
AusWolfIf it's really like Volkswagen with EV's, then you can't fault them for not fully committing to something that has no long term track record of being successful. A handful of companies parroting "this is the future" is not the same as being successful and making long term profit. This can be said about EVs and AI/software alike.
It is like that. So you can't fault AMD either then, right? They do what they think is best at the time, we can't really tell if software is the key to a successful EV errr GPU :D Meanwhile Nvidia BYD / XPENG and others are driving around an oversized smartphone filled with software, and even every Western competitor has a much better Android Car experience going on inside.

Just to place things in parallel here... do you see how silly it is what you're saying? AMD should have started software focus many years ago and now we can't fault them for not going all in because 'they might not make it'. LOL. This is about risk averse management and no follow through. In one way understandable, in the other it all signifies too little too late. With great risk comes great reward and in business, the actual opportunity you might strike gold and a new market. Look at Nvidia. The best way to mitigate that risk, is by working through a strategy that mitigates that risk. I'm not seeing strategy in this Editorial.

Timing is everything and AMD has steadily been late.
Posted on Reply
#89
AusWolf
Vayra86It is like that. So you can't fault AMD either then, right? They do what they think is best at the time, we can't really tell if software is the key to a successful EV errr GPU :D Meanwhile Nvidia BYD / XPENG and others are driving around an oversized smartphone filled with software, and even every Western competitor has a much better Android Car experience going on inside.

Just to place things in parallel here... do you see how silly it is what you're saying? AMD should have started software focus many years ago and now we can't fault them for not going all in because 'they might not make it'. LOL. This is about risk averse management and no follow through. In one way understandable, in the other it all signifies too little too late. With great risk comes great reward and in business, the actual opportunity you might strike gold and a new market. Look at Nvidia. The best way to mitigate that risk, is by working through a strategy that mitigates that risk. I'm not seeing strategy in this Editorial.

Timing is everything and AMD has steadily been late.
AMD has been a pioneer of many things that ended up being failures. The biggest one that comes to mind is Bulldozer. The difference between Nvidia and AMD is that Nvidia has way more money to play with and can afford a lot more risk in future ventures. They also have a lot more marketing power to turn any potential failures into successes.
Posted on Reply
#90
Vayra86
AusWolfAMD has been a pioneer of many things that ended up being failures. The biggest one that comes to mind is Bulldozer. The difference between Nvidia and AMD is that Nvidia has way more money to play with and can afford a lot more risk in future ventures. They also have a lot more marketing power to turn any potential failures into successes.
True just the same... Hindsight...
Posted on Reply
#91
AusWolf
Vayra86True just the same... Hindsight...
"Burn me once, shame on you. Burn me twice, shame on me", I guess.
Posted on Reply
#92
Kn0xxPT
Sound_CardBut my question is ... is really about just being competitive? The x1900xt and x1800xt were objectively faster than the 7900GTX and 7800GTX and they got outsold 11-1.

Nvidia can price a video card at $2,000 dollars and it will outsell an AMD card priced at $1000 that performs within 15% of it 20-1. This is not about being competitive, Nvidia is a cult.
I must say that AMD Gpus are more a cult than Nvidia.
yeah, AMD gpus are cheaper, and have litte more performance. but it doesn have everything else. the "eco system" that works best.
The thing is that Nvidia GPU's just works and are efficient, very efficient (power wise) and drivers are optimized(compared with AMD ones). In the end, Nvidia offers what AMD has but better and at premium. Why buy something inferior ?
A friend of mine is struggling on imagequality to have a 4k gameplay with Upscalling because it uses AMD. While Im using an inferior Nvidia GPU with no problems in DLSS. those things makes a difference in day-to-day gameplay.
AMD gpus are a cult, Nvidia gpus are just better.
I do hope that AMD and Intel surpasses Nvidia. because nvidia is having to much "premium pricetag".
Posted on Reply
#93
ARF
Kn0xxPTThe thing is that Nvidia GPU's just works and are efficient, very efficient (power wise) and
AMD GPUs can be undervolted and underclocked.
Kn0xxPTdrivers are optimized(compared with AMD ones)
How?
Kn0xxPTA friend of mine is struggling on imagequality to have a 4k gameplay with Upscalling because it uses AMD. While Im using an inferior Nvidia GPU with no problems in DLSS. those things makes a difference in day-to-day gameplay.
Tell your friend to stop using the nasty upscaling techniques, but rather turn the settings down, from ultra to high, from high to medium, etc.
Posted on Reply
#94
DaemonForce
Kn0xxPTI must say that AMD Gpus are more a cult than Nvidia.
yeah, AMD gpus are cheaper, and have litte more performance. but it doesn have everything else.
What do you mean everything else? Are you the type to subscribe to the "check all relevant and irrelevant boxes" philosophy?
There are three major things I care about when picking a GPU:
The raw stats like generation, clockspeed, cores and shaders.
The actual memory type, size and bandwidth.
Then there's the actual displacement of the card. I can fit any longboi but anything deeper than a triple slot is a chonker that needs to go on a diet that even water cooling may not provide.
The total performance of the card in DX9/10/11/12/Vulkan apps seems like an afterthought but I shouldn't have to think about things like that anymore. Pixel shader? Vulkan version? OpenGL? It exists, it's good. The only real extras on the table that grab my attention are the encoders. I need those for creation.

How do nVidia users pick a card? How fast it makes their wallet implode?
Posted on Reply
#95
AusWolf
Kn0xxPTI must say that AMD Gpus are more a cult than Nvidia.
yeah, AMD gpus are cheaper, and have litte more performance. but it doesn have everything else. the "eco system" that works best.
The thing is that Nvidia GPU's just works and are efficient, very efficient (power wise) and drivers are optimized(compared with AMD ones). In the end, Nvidia offers what AMD has but better and at premium. Why buy something inferior ?
A friend of mine is struggling on imagequality to have a 4k gameplay with Upscalling because it uses AMD. While Im using an inferior Nvidia GPU with no problems in DLSS. those things makes a difference in day-to-day gameplay.
AMD gpus are a cult, Nvidia gpus are just better.
I do hope that AMD and Intel surpasses Nvidia. because nvidia is having to much "premium pricetag".
"Ecosystem" is just a marketing buzzword. AMD GPUs have the exact same feature set for gaming except for DLSS, which isn't necessary when you have FSR. Day-one drivers aren't necessary to run your games, either. AMD drivers work just as well as Nvidia. I know because I own several GPUs from both manufacturers.
Posted on Reply
#96
wolf
Better Than Native
ARFAMD GPUs can be undervolted and underclocked.
So can nvidia GPU's, further enhancing how they perform stock, moot argument.
ARFTell your friend to stop using the nasty upscaling techniques, but rather turn the settings down, from ultra to high, from high to medium, etc.
They're not mutually exclusive, you can do one, the other or even both, all are tools in your optimisation toolbox to get your desired balance of IQ and performance for your setup. Calling it nasty just reeks of ignorance, as if using it isn't perfectly valid and useful.
Posted on Reply
#97
Assimilator
AusWolfAMD has been a pioneer of many things that ended up being failures. The biggest one that comes to mind is Bulldozer. The difference between Nvidia and AMD is that Nvidia has way more money to play with and can afford a lot more risk in future ventures. They also have a lot more marketing power to turn any potential failures into successes.
Wrong, the difference is the execution strategy. NVIDIA has consistently demonstrated that they have a long-term one that outright prevents failures from occurring or is able to compensate for them quickly, while AMD has historically appeared to pin all their hopes on moonshots like Bulldozer while having no backup if those big plans don't pan out.
AusWolf"Ecosystem" is just a marketing buzzword. AMD GPUs have the exact same feature set for gaming except for DLSS, which isn't necessary when you have FSR. Day-one drivers aren't necessary to run your games, either. AMD drivers work just as well as Nvidia. I know because I own several GPUs from both manufacturers.
Ecosystem matters in business, which is what this thread is about. Please can we stop derailing it with fanboyism about consumer GPUs.
Posted on Reply
#98
AusWolf
AssimilatorWrong, the difference is the execution strategy. NVIDIA has consistently demonstrated that they have a long-term one that outright prevents failures from occurring or is able to compensate for them quickly, while AMD has historically appeared to pin all their hopes on moonshots like Bulldozer while having no backup if those big plans don't pan out.
That's a fair point.
AssimilatorEcosystem matters in business, which is what this thread is about. Please can we stop derailing it with fanboyism about consumer GPUs.
Ecosystem is a buzzword, regardless of which company uses it. There's no fanboyism here.

To me, ecosystem means a set of features and/or products that work closely with each other to provide a distinct experience. AMD has nothing of the sort. Nvidia has one single distinct feature, DLSS, which on its own, is hardly an ecosystem. Every other feature runs on any GPU from any vendor. I don't see any ecosystem here - it only exists in marketing.
Posted on Reply
#99
wolf
Better Than Native
AusWolfOpinions and facts do need to be worded differently.
Don't they just! Plenty of other examples don't get called out however, some in this very thread, so it seems like personal bias (form absolutely everyone) about the facts and opinions seems to override the compulsion to take exception to every time they're worded incorrectly.
Posted on Reply
#100
the54thvoid
Super Intoxicated Moderator
Can people please stick to the topic which is AMD's move to becoming a software orientated outfit. If you feel the need to talk about Nvidia (already being a software focused company), do it in a constructive way that doesn't require sticking pointless hostility (and epeen) into the thread.

If you can't make a post without attacking someone else, you should walk away from the thread before you get an enforced holiday. I can't speak for the other mods, but I am sick and tired of the needless antagonism that AMD/NV threads provoke. Debate and critique, by all means, but do it without being an arse to your fellow TPU'ers.

Thanks.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment
Nov 26th, 2024 06:29 EST change timezone

New Forum Posts

Popular Reviews

Controversial News Posts