nVIDIA, AMD, what are the pros and cons of each side?

[MxPhenom 216]

Why the R9 290?



Yeah but I don't which games I'd like to try later one. So I'd rather choose I GPU on its general performances and power comsumption.



Could you recommend me one please? I don't know who to trust lol



Not sure yet .

either

I5 4690k
Asus VII gene
Fractal kelvin T12/S24/ Swiftech h220
mx100 256gb
Kingston fury 2x4 GB ddr3 1866
Bitfenix Aegis
Cooler master VSM 550w

or

I5 4690k
z97 atx board
Fractal kelvin T12/S24/ Swiftech h220
mx100 256gb
Kingston fury 2x4 GB ddr3 1866
Bitfenix Aegis
Evga g2 750/850w
Phanteks Enthoo Luxe.

Second system for sure.

 

[Exodus]

Okay so I'll get a r9 290 then. As for the cooler choice, how does sapphire handle the RMA? Because the place it is available is on newegg.ca which don't really seems to be trustworthy.
Also, for silence, shouldn't I get a DirectCU II (I'll be buying with NCIX if I get any Asus components in my build so RMA is less of a concern in that case. )

Second system for sure.

Nope first build ever lol. My brother's choice of getting an ATI radeon with a shitty cooler has traumatized me although.

 

[GreiverBlade]

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/R9_290/
the review that decided me for a 290, thought i got a Reference design from ASUS i would strongly recommend a Sapphire as i wrote previously the Tri-X has my preference for the factory OC and cooling solution + potential for further OC if needed (i run mine 1000/1300 like a charm coming from a stock 947/1250) and as i play nearly all the game you mentioned, i don't need more than 53/50mhz more

i had only one RMA once on a 270X from MSI but you shouldn't worry too much for it, ASUS DCUII should be fine too
mind you my Ref 290 run 65% fan all time ahahah ... never got past 85° on opposite to 94° and throttling on auto profile well not too noisy ingame with the sound and all, since i play often with my own playlist and the only noise my neighbor has to complain is Zardonic 10th anniversary mix

afaik a DCUII isn't too much more silent than a Twin Frozr IV for MSI or the Tri-X from Sapphire

sidenote ... consumption is overrated ... a 290 is not too much more power hungry than the others in range

 

[MxPhenom 216]

Okay so I'll get a r9 290 then. As for the cooler choice, how does sapphire handle the RMA? Because the place it is available is on newegg.ca which don't really seems to be trustworthy.
Also, for silence, shouldn't I get a DirectCU II (I'll be buying with NCIX if I get any Asus components in my build so RMA is less of a concern in that case. )



Nope first build ever lol. My brother's choice of getting an ATI radeon with a shitty cooler has traumatized me although.

No, wtf? The two systems you posted that you are trying to decide between, get the 2nd one. The last one you shared.

 

[remixedcat]

nVidia has more stable drivers

 

[erocker]

nVidia has more stable drivers

Noooooooo!!! Well... maybe. Actually, no. Not in my experience. Unless you're using two or more cards, then... probably. Non-issue though in my opinion.

 

[el etro]

1- Silence - Buy custom cards to care less about it, but Nvidia is sightly better on this. It may not affect your brand decision;


2- Good performances - Nvidia optimizes their games faster on their drivers, but the paradigm is changing on the last years. AMD is doing a better job with their drivers and optimization for newer games is coming on launch for the biggest titles;


3- Great customization (Fan speed control, easy overclocking) - Is an AIB related decision. Depends on what specific card you are trying to get(Ex: An Asus 290X DirectCU TOP card or a MSI HD7970 Lightning Boost Edition card);


4- More details in games - Any of them.


5- Good quality/price ratio - AMD;


6- other things - Depends of what features you want. Nvidia haves Physx, Gameworks, Hairworks, Cuda(not for gamers). AMD haves Mantle, TrueAudio, Eyefinity(That Nvidia haves too with another name), better 4k resolution support.

 

[OneMoar]

Noooooooo!!! Well... maybe. Actually, no. Not in my experience. Unless you're using two or more cards, then... probably. Non-issue though in my opinion.

unless you happen to be watching youtube with flash hardware acceleration enabled
in witch case enjoy your bsods

 

[Exodus]

No, wtf? The two systems you posted that you are trying to decide between, get the 2nd one. The last one you shared.

Lol I totaly misunderstood what you meant. But why the last one?

Noooooooo!!! Well... maybe. Actually, no. Not in my experience. Unless you're using two or more cards, then... probably. Non-issue though in my opinion.

I might be making a dual GPU setup. I'm not sure if I should go with a mATX or ATX build.

1- Silence - Buy custom cards to care less about it, but Nvidia is sightly better on this. It may not affect your brand decision;


2- Good performances - Nvidia optimizes their games faster on their drivers, but the paradigm is changing on the last years. AMD is doing a better job with their drivers and optimization for newer games is coming on launch for the biggest titles;


3- Great customization (Fan speed control, easy overclocking) - Is an AIB related decision. Depends on what specific card you are trying to get(Ex: An Asus 290X DirectCU TOP card or a MSI HD7970 Lightning Boost Edition card);


4- More details in games - Any of them.


5- Good quality/price ratio - AMD;


6- other things - Depends of what features you want. Nvidia haves Physx, Gameworks, Hairworks, Cuda(not for gamers). AMD haves Mantle, TrueAudio, Eyefinity(That Nvidia haves too with another name), better 4k resolution support.

What I meant by more detail in game was the little sparks and moving sheets of paper that physX adds. Does AMD haves an equivalent? And which card would you recommend me that suit my needs?

 

[MxPhenom 216]

Lol I totaly misunderstood what you meant. But why the last one?



I might be making a dual GPU setup. I'm not sure if I should go with a mATX or ATX build.



What I meant by more detail in game was the little sparks and moving sheets of paper that physX adds. Does AMD haves an equivalent? And which card would you recommend me that suit my needs?

Dude physx is in all of like 5 games.

 

[Exodus]

So with a r9 290 I'll be able to max out 100-120fps on most game on 1080p with just a bit of AA? Also will I be fine if i make a crossfire setup or should I go nVIDIA?
And if I choose to go nVIDIA's side (which I don't think I'll do), which GPU should I get?

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/R9_290/
the review that decided me for a 290, thought i got a Reference design from ASUS i would strongly recommend a Sapphire as i wrote previously the Tri-X has my preference for the factory OC and cooling solution + potential for further OC if needed (i run mine 1000/1300 like a charm coming from a stock 947/1250) and as i play nearly all the game you mentioned, i don't need more than 53/50mhz more

i had only one RMA once on a 270X from MSI but you shouldn't worry too much for it, ASUS DCUII should be fine too
mind you my Ref 290 run 65% fan all time ahahah ... never got past 85° on opposite to 94° and throttling on auto profile well not too noisy ingame with the sound and all, since i play often with my own playlist and the only noise my neighbor has to complain is Zardonic 10th anniversary mix

afaik a DCUII isn't too much more silent than a Twin Frozr IV for MSI or the Tri-X from Sapphire

sidenote ... consumption is overrated ... a 290 is not too much more power hungry than the others in range

I'll be playing with headphones, but my brother and sister are at university and they're studying next to my room and I don't if they just try trying to piss me or if they have sonar like ears but any little noise can disturb them. So the more quiet the better.

Dude physx is in all of like 5 games.

Which ones? Because I know Batman use physX but they might be other games on my lists I'm not aware of. If there is more then 3 it might become really useful.
And why do you prefer the second system?

 

[erocker]

Check out the review section that I posted above for the R9 290. The reviews list various games and the performance you get in them.

The GTX 770 costs the same as a R9 290... but gives you less performance. You don't want that.

unless you happen to be watching youtube with flash hardware acceleration enabled
in witch case enjoy your bsods

I remember having that issue once in a while while using Internet Explorer a way back. I don't use IE now, no problems.

 

[v12dock]

I switched from Nvidia(GTX 660) to AMD (R9 280X) and I am 100% satisfied with the upgrade. I have had problems with both Nvidia and AMD drivers I see them as both equal

 

[Jetster]

They are so close nowadays that your question is invalid

 

[erixx]

maybe that ^.
A standard user does not really know all about all, but it's a forum!
Anyway, as I have repeated tons of time, I would rather pay 20 € or $ more and have 5% less performance but a card that works everytime I need it.

 

[GreiverBlade]

but a card that works everytime I need it.

so then both brand does it, i never ran into a driver problem or card problem from my 1st nV card or ATI/AMD card until today, except BSOD while i was being a bit too optimistic with OC'ing.
driver tweak with AMD to get it right? never had one, CFX problem? ok some little stuttering but case per case and the issue is going less and less since a while, SLI problems, except a little overheat problem when i ran a GTX580 Matrix never had one (2x3 slots is insane ) youtube well as erocker wrote: no IE no problems

So with a r9 290 I'll be able to max out 100-120fps on most game on 1080p with just a bit of AA? Also will I be fine if i make a crossfire setup or should I go nVIDIA?
And if I choose to go nVIDIA's side (which I don't think I'll do), which GPU should I get?

100-120fps nope and neither with Nvidia (unless 690/Titan Z/7990/295X2 and then you face SLI/CFX problem as they are dual gpu board but as said CFX/SLI problems tend to get better with time) the thing is once above 30fps you notice more smoothness but your eyes make no difference 50-60fps is good enough (unless you run in med/low settings ofc and then 100fps+ is attainable)

equivalent to the 290 then : on the same perf level (but not price) 780/Titan, higher perf level (and totally not the same price price/perf ratio) 780Ti/Titan Black

PhysX hum ... no game that ask me to install PhysX driver bother me, calculation by CPU and i have a AMD FX 6300 (which is "way" weaker than what you plan to get) so PhysX is not a valid enough argument.
Tesselation nVidia does it a bit better but except for some heavy tesselated benchies no games is a problem with it.

 

[Sempron Guy]

Questions like these I usually tell them to get the best their budget permits be it nvidia or amd. If they are dead close in terms of price, then there goes reviews.

 

[micropage7]

Normally Intel/Nvidia is the "more powerful" combo while AMD is the "budget" way to go. Don't get me wrong, AMD does offer some pretty good GPUs and a mid-grade Nvidia can do a pretty good job.

Nvidia for power.
AMD for budget.

yea, some people prefer that
but since the difference not much you couldnt feel the difference, except you do ultra setting or benchmarking

i prefer nvidia since its driver feels better than amd. i dont say amd driver is bad but i more comfortable with nvidia.
i may consider amd since they rolled out R series

 

[ChristTheGreat]

nVidia has more stable drivers

LOL, you just made my day lol, This is a huge lie, and since a long time.

Oh wait, nVidia had 2 or 3 driver that killed GPU? Or people saying that vista was bad because of the driver support but:

Come on stop being in 2002... the 2 company has good driver, pro and cons, that's it..






Back to topic, just choose the card you like for price/performance, and you won't have any issue.. my last card were HD4870, 5770, 6950, 7950 7970, and no issue at all. alot of friend of mine had nVIdia GPU since the last 3-4 years and all went good. So don't worry, choose the one you like forthe price you want. As long as it has the best performance for your budget...

 

[Frag_Maniac]

With a 120Hz display and the games/criteria you mentioned, I would def use the upper end of your max budget. But you DO know if you only wait thru summer you may not see the best Nvidia has to offer in that price range don't you? The high end Maxwell cards are supposed to release by end of this year.

That said, I just saw an EVGA 780 non reference card that's only slightly over your budget on Newegg's Shell Shocker for $475 w/ MIR. http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...4130951&cm_re=evga_780-_-14-130-951-_-Product

They also have an MSI 780 that's well within your max budget, but it's clocked lower and not reviewed as well. http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814127746&cm_re=GTX_780-_-14-127-746-_-Product

If you haven't, sign up for Newegg's email promo deals. They send them out daily and they have a LOT of GPUs on it lately.

On G-Sync, not enough is know about it or AMD's "Free Sync" alternative, other than one seems to require specific brand/model displays carrying the G-Sync chip that cost more, or getting a display with the upcoming DisplayPort 1.3, which should be no additional cost.

It's too soon to tell yet how the quality, price or availability of each will compare.

 

[Shambles1980]

the only reason i have been ati for so long now is because nvidia removed overscan/underscan from the controll pannel so i couldnt make it fit my projector many years ago.
so i gave my 6600 away even paid the postage to send it to some guy in america (he never even said thanx lol) and have been using ati ever since.
If i was to go back to nvidia "which i may do" it would be because of physx and only if it became mainstream (but i think cpu's will have that covered and physx will be redundant soon enough any way)

it really is simply down to which card works best with your system at the most reasonable cost.

 

[Hilux SSRG]

Shocked no one has mentioned Matrox gfx cards.

So with a r9 290 I'll be able to max out 100-120fps on most game on 1080p with just a bit of AA? Also will I be fine if i make a crossfire setup or should I go nVIDIA?
And if I choose to go nVIDIA's side (which I don't think I'll do), which GPU should I get?

I think a GeForce GTX 770 is a good candidate with oc headroom; easily comparable to a Radeon R9 290 for about $50-80 less.

 

[Frag_Maniac]

the only reason i have been ati for so long now is because nvidia removed overscan/underscan from the controll pannel...

Both have had scanning adjust-ability for some time.

I'm doubtful that PhysX will ever become truly mainstream, but Nvidia are outdoing AMD on other useful features, like ShadowPlay.

I'm not sure either camp has any compatibility issues with certain hardware. More like just getting you spec balanced as far as CPU, GPU, RAM and PSU.

It's mostly a case of which vendor's product works best with what games. Drivers can be hit and miss on both sides. AMD was coming out with tons of driver updates right after I bought my 7970, and quite often they had betas that really help fix bugs and improve performance. All they've had for the last year or so though is Crossfire improvements that don't pertain to me. I also get stuttering in lots of games lately, but that is largely due to poorly coded games.

I can't stress enough that 99% of performance issues on PC are due to crap coding, crap porting, or even intentionally dumbed down graphics to make PCs not stand out from consoles, as we've read recently with these Ubi employee testimonials. The state of PC gaming seemed to be getting better with increased game sales, but now it's as if the corporate entities controlling the console industry won't stand for that.

I think a GeForce GTX 770 is a good candidate with oc headroom; easily comparable to a Radeon R9 290 for about $50-80 less.

Compared stock to stock, it takes a 780 to equal a 290, not a 770.

 

[GhostRyder]

Look ill just throw my opinion in since it seems thats what this thread is about.

I prefer AMD for graphics and Intel for processors (I intend to switch back to Intel soon) mostly because of the multi GPU performance, the price/value, and the extra ram/support on high resolution setups. I have Nvidia in my laptop but on my desktop ever since I switched after my pair of 580's I have yet to look back. Not to say Nvidia is bad, just I do not like the cost mixed with the value you get in this day and age. A 780ti is faster but lacks VRAM which is bad for lastability and high resolution setups which to me is very important.

As for your budget, the R9 290 is definitely the best option. It will serve your purposes the best and offer a lot of performance for the price.

As for drivers, they both work equally well in single, dual, or higher configs and there are very little differences. Nvidia and AMD both work just as well drivers side and have not caused any problems for me on any game recently minus one or two late CFX profiles (Like watchdogs).

 

[remixedcat]

LOL, you just made my day lol, This is a huge lie, and since a long time.

Oh wait, nVidia had 2 or 3 driver that killed GPU? Or people saying that vista was bad because of the driver support but:

Come on stop being in 2002... the 2 company has good driver, pro and cons, that's it..






Back to topic, just choose the card you like for price/performance, and you won't have any issue.. my last card were HD4870, 5770, 6950, 7950 7970, and no issue at all. alot of friend of mine had nVIdia GPU since the last 3-4 years and all went good. So don't worry, choose the one you like forthe price you want. As long as it has the best performance for your budget...

That's vista. -_-

I've had more problems with that OS then most others. Even wireless networking was really really bad with both Atheros and realtek chips. Upgraded to windows 7 on that laptop and there was no issues with both.

Vista was a POS OS and basing performance off that is like using shoney's or golden corral as a example of fine dining.