1706193341
My experience with AMD GPUs is deeply sad.
My experience is exactly the opposite. With ATI/AMD my monitors have always worked without any problems, while with Nvidia I’ve experienced all sorts of crazy things. This ranges from no DisplayPort output at boot (so I had to use HDMI to do anything in the BIOS) to the monitors not waking up or even shutting down spontaneously. The same monitors then work without any problems with AMD.
I didn’t really have any problems with driver crashes with either of them, except when it came to broken driver versions and both often made a lot of mistakes there. I still have the AMD software installed even though I replaced my 6650 XT with a 3080. Causes 0.0 problems even though I could only use it for my 7800X3D’s iGPU
The software itself is significantly better at AMD. Fewer background processes, a modern, smooth interface and you get all the features without having to log in. GFE is an awfully slow piece of shit, with a login wall required if you want to use things like Shadowplay. And without GFE you’re at the mercy of CP, which is literally from 2003, without getting things like Shadowplay
And to add to your previous comment:
Gsync/dlss1.0/3.5
DLSS 1.0 was a lot of fun, we don’t talk about that. This was no better than FSR 1.0.
They didn’t invent anything with G-Sync, it’s been around in eDP since 2009. They have developed a scaler that integrates the VESA function into a monitor scaler, but they have not invented the technology itself. Smart idea to make money with an existing technology, but innovative? NO. How else do you think AMD had a proof-of-concept demo ready less than a month after Nvidia released G-Sync, which was included as standard in DP 1.2a five months later? The technology was already there.
And frame generation (“DLSS” “3.5”) is just interpolation, that’s nothing new. The only difference is that the interpolation is now performed by an ML model rather than a simpler algorithm. If this is innovation, we need to rewrite the last 30 years, because any form of AA is “innovation,” even if it is just different algorithms with the same goal.
Conversely, you can also be grateful to AMD for Vulkan and DX12; The first is practically a copy of Mantle and it is AMD, which has also started working on DX12 with MS and Nvidia. Do you already have an innovation? ATI has been doing tessellation in all possible forms since 2001 and tessellation should have been included in DX10 (2006, 2007 on the market), but because Nvidia wasn’t ready for it, it was postponed to DX11 (2008, 2009 on the market). Or display voltage (Eyefinity / Nvidia Surround), ATI/AMD did that earlier and better than Nvidia. Nvidia initially turned up its nose, but apparently secretly liked it because they had cobbled together a broken software implementation before releasing Fermi.
The fact is that both have done all sorts of innovative things, the difference is that Nvidia usually only thinks about itself and stands back, while ATI (and now AMD) usually pushes for more interoperability – this has been the case since Nvidia’s early days World in the 1990s. The latter was also necessary so that a technology could be widely used, because no one wanted to work with manufacturer-specific junk. Nvidia once started pushing things like this very hard by spending a lot of money on them (PhysX and GameWorks are the easiest example), and now unfortunately their dominance in terms of market share and mindshare is such that things like G-Sync be picked up immediately by other manufacturers because virtually no marketing is required.
#AMD #officially #releases #GPU #drivers #Fluid #Motion #Frames #support #Computer #News