Steam'i Yükleyin
giriş
|
dil
简体中文 (Basitleştirilmiş Çince)
繁體中文 (Geleneksel Çince)
日本語 (Japonca)
한국어 (Korece)
ไทย (Tayca)
Български (Bulgarca)
Čeština (Çekçe)
Dansk (Danca)
Deutsch (Almanca)
English (İngilizce)
Español - España (İspanyolca - İspanya)
Español - Latinoamérica (İspanyolca - Latin Amerika)
Ελληνικά (Yunanca)
Français (Fransızca)
Italiano (İtalyanca)
Bahasa Indonesia (Endonezce)
Magyar (Macarca)
Nederlands (Hollandaca)
Norsk (Norveççe)
Polski (Lehçe)
Português (Portekizce - Portekiz)
Português - Brasil (Portekizce - Brezilya)
Română (Rumence)
Русский (Rusça)
Suomi (Fince)
Svenska (İsveççe)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamca)
Українська (Ukraynaca)
Bir çeviri sorunu bildirin
Tartışma Kuralları ve Yönergeleri
Bu iletiyi bildir
I'd say MasterBlaster is right, CryEngine and Frostbite aren't exactly scalable. Maybe Unreal has made us spoiled, but the way these engines handle budget end hardware is pretty disappointing.
I got the RX 580 for $250. Everything says it's intended to compete with the 1060 but it's 256 bit and the one I bought has 8 gig of VRAM. It's better than the 1060 in many ways, especially with twice the bit path. Yes Homefront flies now of course.
I swore by Nvidia. In the end maybe their cards and drivers try to do too much at once, hd sound, 3d, etc., and now VR too.
Whoever has the most marketshare doesn't really matter in relation to quality. Often it's a compatibility issue, and for Homefront: The Revolution, I found Nividia has too many issues, too much map corruption.
Additionally I play some old games, Pax Imperia and Master of Orion II. With nvidia there was no adjustment to make them playable, they had pixelated colors after a driver update about a year ago. There's some free program that patches older games to work through the changes made to nvidia drivers. These programs worked until another 2 patches later. The only other fix was to exit Windows Explorer, remove it from RAM, I believe after you launch the game.
With my AMD Radeon I just played with preferences and learned that the programs toggle compatibility from one computer start up to another. I set the properties moving between windows 98/me and windows 95, depending on what the compatibility is set to when I bring up the properties for the game, and they run fine. Easy to get round the issue and weekly driver updates haven't messed it up so far hahaha
I can't recommend them in good faith anymore. I've found Nvidia Inspector to be far more reliable than RadeonPro from my own experience, and I've rarely had old games' compatibility come down to that-- whether dgVoodoo, closing explorer, or using a DX9 conversion ENB, I can't think of a single time where Nvidia cards have had issues in old games where AMD thrived. Newer games are a different story of course, but I'm not keen on buying from the company that just ripped me off and told me I was screwed TWICE.
I tend to get support without any issues, free food, had 6 months of free cable internet after they paid for the repairs which included digging up the street and getting permits etc., so I'll figure it's something in how it was handled on both ends. I haven't needed support from either Nvidia or AMD so not a factor in what I brought up.
Here's a link regarding the issue, it's older, but the patcher still fixes things when you're using nividia, I don't need it now, https://www.sevenforums.com/gaming/2981-starcraft-fix-holy-cow-22.html
My old games played fine until last year when they did some patch of Nvidia's drivers. I figured I'd need to do the same patch to these games with my Radeon, but nope, and in fact the patched versions give me run issues, like "snow" that we used to see on the old cathode ray televisions with VHF rabbit ears :p
But from the historical of that link to personal experience I figured good to share for those who may be similarly situated, which doesn't include you guys obiously hahahaha
Be relevant if the game didn't say 560 ti minimum. Again, I've been a pro-nvidia person since the 5200, in fact I believe mine is a pci slot version, from during the time of agp just coming into existence. Had a 5200, 6600, 7800 agp, 8800 pci-e, 460gtx, 660gtx, 760ti. Issues began after the 460, of course windows from 95 to now 7 through the course of that. Pentium Taulitin, to K6, K7, K8, AMD 2, AMD 3, and current AMD 3+ looking to go to a Ryzen AMD 4 16 core when the prices are better. The Taulitin core was the last Intel processor I would trust. 20% higher throughput than what became the Pentium 4, and root of what is being used today for the most part.
I think you're about right to say that. I've had AMD and now I have NVIDIA GTX and I think regardless the whole thing is preference. In my opinion AMD is just as good nowadays with their recent gpus just as much as NVIDIA. Both are improving a ton and I really don't think AMD is that far behind NVIDIA just go look at the clocking ratios for comparison, it's only a hair of a difference on a lot of them.
I've had a ton of issues since trying Nvidia on this rig that I didn't have with AMD on my last computer and it was annoying to try to find a way to fix it. Both have their pros and cons truthfully and they're about even as far as I'm concerned but I've noticed that most seem to tend to flock and prefer nvidia which I believe is because of the obvious " claimed " brand performance ploys and also if you look at the system specs you'll see hair differences in the min and max specs for games which only proves my theory.
Well I am just not sure AMD is "behind" when i look at the crispness on my old display. Used to play Anarchyonline, so I'll say around 10 years ago when I had a Radeon card in an old PC the view wasn't very crisp, movement smooth but felt gimmicky smooth. Thus why I stayed with nvidia so long, thought Radeon is just behind. Their drivers needed a lot of work, I mean, constant incompatibilities.
For what I see now, Nvidia focused on their supercomputer stuff. I am not saying they didn't keep going with what they have, nor that they didn't try to create a new lower price point. I am saying that these things came out of their other development, which isn't the same as focusing on graphics with all their resources and coming up with something even more astounding. Nvidia became comfortable, doing what usually happens with that comfort: branching out into something else. Sometimes it can pay off in spades, and that may still be the case with something else in graphics cards that they do in the future. But for now Nvidia seem to have lost their edge, not the technical one but the quality one.
AMD taking over ATI seems to have brought something unexpected. Basically they learned from ATI and brought the knowledge of quality to Radeon products. I am not saying it's flawless. I am saying AMD's graphics cards are light years ahead of what ATI had delivered alone.
Now I think the tech advantage is with AMD. Not looking to argue just stating what over a decade of using Nvidia to then use AMD now has resulted in demostrating from the end user perspective. For me it's like I bought a new display too hahaha
I will say that aside from JC3' Beta driver and the newer stuff, AMD's drivers never had a single issue in 2014 onward for new games (IIRC that was when I bought my 280), but they've been getting worse in recent times. The double failure with Adrenalin/DX9 and PR alongside the second class treatment I got for buying a Vega more or less guaranteed that I don't want anything to do with AMD in the future.
That's not even mentioning some of the broken DX9 games that went unnoticed, as AMD users are left in the cold while trying to fix Psychonauts (excessive pop-in, Settings fail to override) and Battlefront II (color corruption and crashing, can't be fixed, also Omega 15.7.1 and never addressed) as well as the small issues in recent times (R6 Siege: Pulse is unplayable due to artifacting, random crashes during breaches).
It's sad to give up FreeSync, but I can only willingly stick my hand in the oven before I realize the bacon inside just isn't worth the pain to get there.
Well with your superior knowledge and expertise in the finer things Nvidia why'd you ever try anything else? Or you saying there wasn't a REASON you swtiched to something else? For me the switch was the only option left. Tried numerous adjustments, especially on those older games, link given above explaining the problem across an array of older games, and the solution that, w7ddpatcher I believe it is, overwrote in 2 nvidia patches and windows updates later. So I feel your pain, just from the other side, and my purchase of my RX 580 was based on the issues with Nvidia that made the notion of paying 500 bucks for the same problem seem like me demanding not to be kissed before being....Anyway, point being my switch to AMD had a reason, an intention to solve the problem, and it had a simple solution right in AMD's configuration software. Others similarly situated to myself deserve to know there may be an option in AMD. I am sorry for your situation with AMD and wish it could have worked out better for you.
As for the solution for me, you can refer to AMD's user interface as lesser by referring to it "casual user friendly" in an opposing point to "Intimidating to the less technologically obsessed" regarding Nvidia's interface, but I submit that what you explain is exactly the same thing I am explaining regarding quality.
Quality includes knowing what the user will perceive from your actions, no matter what you're developing. If the user interface isn't designed to be easy to use by the same potential audience you're trying to reach, you've just made a quality error. The user doesn't care if one is technical or one is not, we just want to get done what we want to get done, to fix or adjust things as easily as possible, without needing a call to Tech Support or to read droning pages of some wiki. This inclusion of prediction is especially true for something designed for users to use for years, or designed with that intention. Changes from Windows, drivers, hardware, etc., will occur and the product developer has committed to the product working for a lifecycle the price and number sold support.
So if the user has this or that issue and your product doesn't have an easy remedy, you open the door for your competition, e.g. I bought an RX 580 and wouldn't even consider Nvidia from all the problems I had had for 2 cards in a row, with no solution or every solution being destroyed by Nvidia's next driver update and/or a Windows update.
This doesn't mean the products are obsolete, unless of course we're saying Nvidia makes a substantially inferior quality product, so much so it doesn't work properly with existing sofware being sold right here on Steam even when exceeding the minimum standards according to model number. But it does mean the companies involved, Nvidia and Microsoft, failed to think of the customers they had in relation to brand loyalty, to consider how what their company does now assures user decisions in in the future and making every effort to assure those decisions to not exclude the easiest to replace of these 2 companies. Windows prevalence is due to Linux "Flavor Overwhelming." But folks aren't happy with Windows as much as feeling required to use it. The Age of NSA and Microsoft's backdooring for Madison Avenue "PUP" programs hasn't helped. The line is crossed. For me 2 cards in a row pushed the dissatisfaction with the entire coattailing of Microsoft's business model index line to the end (as Microsoft has proven it assumes, and so far we have capitulated, the user will comply).
Suggested reading, The Eternally Successful Organization, Philip B. Crosby.
You're 100% right in userface design. Nvidia's is downright archaic, and perhaps on par with AMD Catalyst. My real issue with AMD is that while Nvidia overrides generally take effect, I can only think of one or two games out of the hundreds I've tried where an AMD Crimson tweak actually worked successfully; most of the time, my commands are outright ignored, especially since Crimson. It doesn't matter if you know what your tweaks do or not if they don't take effect.
This means that while games like Battlefront II and Psychonauts could be fixed with a simple tweak, the driver effects don't actually take place, making it worthless. No matter which vendor you go with, know that RadeonPro and Nvidia Inspector are mandatory in old-game territory. Keep a DX8-to-DX9 ENB on hand for older games like Red Faction that use DX8 and ignore RadeonPro, this type of interceptor saved me a lot of headaches with RadeonPro not hooking.
You're right that AMD is nailing the hardware side of things as usual, and up until recently, I've never complained. I have a GTX 960 4GB in another computer and an R9 280 in my main, and I've seen the way both drivers have equally screwed up... Nvidia just seems like the lesser of two evils unfortunately, and it's the whole reason why I'm looking to buy a GTX 1070 in the future.
Aside from that, DX12 hasn't taken off like I thought it would. It's gone largely ignored, save for games like Civilization VI... in which case it's not that vital anyway.
Appreciate the advice and suggestion as well :)
Hope your GTX 1070 solves your issues.
And maybe Microsoft overbit on the DX12 thing. They've moved quickly toward their annual Windows lease thing (soon to come), and that likely put off a few Devs who invested in DX11 only to see Microsoft move to the next thing. They aren't about to just write off their investment, it was done for a return so it seems a Microsoft miscalculation unless they're willing to foot the bill.