5 ms·

First of all, AMD does release drivers and fix issues. It takes a couple weeks but it happens. And if you look at benchmarks the r9 290 still trades blows with

First of all, AMD does release drivers and fix issues. It takes a couple weeks but it happens. And if you look at benchmarks the r9 290 still trades blows with the 970, there's no huge disparity like Nvidia wants you to believe and your 70% comment is just plain rediculous. But second, seriously? No logical reason to stick with AMD? You have no moral dilemma here? So you want to continue buYing from the company that lies about their most popular card's specs then refuses to apologize and instead tells you how grateful you should be? A company that intentionally sabotages performance of their last generation of cards because it might make the new one look bad and it may make people buy a new card (then we'll do it again next generation!)? A company that attacks open standards and tries to create schisms in the community? Can you not see what they'd do if they didn't have a competitor? And don't forget - this is all in trade for a 5% performance improvement and some power draw reduction. That's just sad.

criley2 11y ago
We all have different definitions of "sad". "Sad" can also be accepting inferior products because of emotional and moral reasons. We're not talking about human rights violations or something here, so not everyone has an appetite for moral grandstanding and voting with your wallet. "A company that attacks open standards and tries to create schisms in the community? " Amusingly, many software darlings of Silicon Valley behave poorly. Uber, Twitter, Apple, Google, Facebook all behave aggressively anti-competitively in their own immoral and unique ways. Every company I listed attacks open standards in some way or another and creates schisms in communities on a regular basis (or their entire market is based on such walled schisms of larger markets). If you're the kind of person who assess all hardware and software from a moral perspective, then that's an interesting and rare way to approach your decisions in this space, but not everyone finds it "sad" to use "use the best available".
- Retric 11y ago
  Considering they downgrade older cards with driver updates 'the best available' over the lifetime of the card is directly influenced by their poor behavior. Sure, back when a card where more than doubling in speed every year this was less of an issue. However, now that things have slowed down your better off getting a high end AMD card than a mid-range nVidia with forced obsolescence. PS: And I say this as someone that has been using nVidia cards for a while, but watching framerates drop when replaying older titles is simply unacceptable.
- FG_Regulus 11y ago
  I'm not an evangelical snob, I can forgive transgressons obviously. But we aren't talking about a company that doesn't only attack open standards. This isn't even really a moral argument anymore. If you buy Nvidia you can't have good faith they'll continue to develop and optimize your card the next year when new cards are out. You can't be sure that when games that push it are released you won't stutter uncontrollably, or your stay doing GPGPU work with specific hardware in mind and its not running right because they lied about specs, etc. And again - 5% performance difference, $100 more expensive, and not the best available (that would be 980/295x2/titan x).
freehunter 11y ago
Morality is not logical, so my saying "no logical reasoning" does not preclude a moral reasoning. There are a lot of things that people should do morally but they choose the logical answer instead. Like I said, I don't want to play politics. I don't care about which option is morally superior. I worry about moral choices all day, I take the moral high ground where I can, I recycle and I buy fair trade coffee and I make sure my clothes don't come from sweatshops, but at the end of the day... I just want to play my video games. I owe absolutely nothing to AMD, they've never saved my kitten from a tree, so logically why would I buy their products if there is something that works better? I mean if you want to bring up morals, think about that power draw reduction... I'm getting that power from a coal plant down the road. Isn't the morally correct option to go with hardware that draws less power so I can save the environment?
- Qwertious 11y ago
  >Morality is not logical, This is BS. Morality is extensively covered in game theory and is all about getting the best possible outcome for every member of the group, including not fucking yourself over long-term. We don't buy Nvidia when they do this shit, because doing otherwise will encourage them to do it and fuck us over in the long-term when they potentially put AMD out of business in the long term and then they have us by the balls. More importantly, if all of us will sacrifice a little in the short term, we will ALL be better off in the long term. It's logical, it's just not purely selfish (but a four year old could tell you that).
  - ars 11y ago
    There is a strange underlying assumption here that nvida is immoral and AMD is full of virtue. I see absolutely no evidence that this is remotely true. At best there is evidence that AMD is incompetent. So morality doesn't even enter into the discussion. If nvidia required exclusivity that would be one thing, but they don't.
    - FG_Regulus 11y ago
      No one said AMD is virtuous. However they work hard to produce and mantain open standards that benefit everyone. The only other GPU producer is anti-competitive and anti-customer, so obviously we'll say "buy from AMD, they're better. " You bet the moment AMD starts bad practices (again?), I'll be putting the same critisisms on them. With your last sentence, I don't see how meeting the basic "not exclusive" keyword to avoid legal trouble makes this okay? Nvidia doesn't allow the code to be shared or even communication with AMD (correct me if I'm wrong of course). I'm not really sure how AMD is supposed to work with that.

criley2 11y ago

We all have different definitions of "sad". "Sad" can also be accepting inferior products because of emotional and moral reasons. We're not talking about human rights violations or something here, so not everyone has an appetite for moral grandstanding and voting with your wallet. "A company that attacks open standards and tries to create schisms in the community? " Amusingly, many software darlings of Silicon Valley behave poorly. Uber, Twitter, Apple, Google, Facebook all behave aggressively anti-competitively in their own immoral and unique ways. Every company I listed attacks open standards in some way or another and creates schisms in communities on a regular basis (or their entire market is based on such walled schisms of larger markets). If you're the kind of person who assess all hardware and software from a moral perspective, then that's an interesting and rare way to approach your decisions in this space, but not everyone finds it "sad" to use "use the best available".

Retric 11y ago
Considering they downgrade older cards with driver updates 'the best available' over the lifetime of the card is directly influenced by their poor behavior. Sure, back when a card where more than doubling in speed every year this was less of an issue. However, now that things have slowed down your better off getting a high end AMD card than a mid-range nVidia with forced obsolescence. PS: And I say this as someone that has been using nVidia cards for a while, but watching framerates drop when replaying older titles is simply unacceptable.
FG_Regulus 11y ago
I'm not an evangelical snob, I can forgive transgressons obviously. But we aren't talking about a company that doesn't only attack open standards. This isn't even really a moral argument anymore. If you buy Nvidia you can't have good faith they'll continue to develop and optimize your card the next year when new cards are out. You can't be sure that when games that push it are released you won't stutter uncontrollably, or your stay doing GPGPU work with specific hardware in mind and its not running right because they lied about specs, etc. And again - 5% performance difference, $100 more expensive, and not the best available (that would be 980/295x2/titan x).

freehunter 11y ago

Morality is not logical, so my saying "no logical reasoning" does not preclude a moral reasoning. There are a lot of things that people should do morally but they choose the logical answer instead. Like I said, I don't want to play politics. I don't care about which option is morally superior. I worry about moral choices all day, I take the moral high ground where I can, I recycle and I buy fair trade coffee and I make sure my clothes don't come from sweatshops, but at the end of the day... I just want to play my video games. I owe absolutely nothing to AMD, they've never saved my kitten from a tree, so logically why would I buy their products if there is something that works better? I mean if you want to bring up morals, think about that power draw reduction... I'm getting that power from a coal plant down the road. Isn't the morally correct option to go with hardware that draws less power so I can save the environment?

Qwertious 11y ago
>Morality is not logical, This is BS. Morality is extensively covered in game theory and is all about getting the best possible outcome for every member of the group, including not fucking yourself over long-term. We don't buy Nvidia when they do this shit, because doing otherwise will encourage them to do it and fuck us over in the long-term when they potentially put AMD out of business in the long term and then they have us by the balls. More importantly, if all of us will sacrifice a little in the short term, we will ALL be better off in the long term. It's logical, it's just not purely selfish (but a four year old could tell you that).
- ars 11y ago
  There is a strange underlying assumption here that nvida is immoral and AMD is full of virtue. I see absolutely no evidence that this is remotely true. At best there is evidence that AMD is incompetent. So morality doesn't even enter into the discussion. If nvidia required exclusivity that would be one thing, but they don't.
  - FG_Regulus 11y ago
    No one said AMD is virtuous. However they work hard to produce and mantain open standards that benefit everyone. The only other GPU producer is anti-competitive and anti-customer, so obviously we'll say "buy from AMD, they're better. " You bet the moment AMD starts bad practices (again?), I'll be putting the same critisisms on them. With your last sentence, I don't see how meeting the basic "not exclusive" keyword to avoid legal trouble makes this okay? Nvidia doesn't allow the code to be shared or even communication with AMD (correct me if I'm wrong of course). I'm not really sure how AMD is supposed to work with that.