Should I switch to AMD or stick to Nvidia with a new graphics driver I'm saving for.

[Gat 8 Washington]

I currently have a Geforce GTX 1650 SUPER, and I'm looking to upgrade at one point, should it be AMD or Nvidia? I have an AMD Ryzen 5 3500, 8 GB RAM, and a 1 TB SSD if that information matters for the answer to my question.

[Omega]

That is no easy question to answer, when you decide to upgrade you should look at who provides the best bang for the buck. Who is the current go-to will differ per generation, and even mid-generation there could be factors which could tip the scale in favor of either Intel, AMD or Nvidia.

On top of that you should of course take in to consideration any specific requirements you might have, if any.

[Illusion of Progress]

This is up to you.

As of right now, AMD objectively offers better rasterized performance for the same price. nVidia has better ray tracing performance, and (at least counting the RTX 40 series) better outright rasterized performance, should you want performance beyond what AMD caps out at with the RX 6950 series (if you were going that high, I'd say the CPU and RAM might warrant some extra consideration too, but they would be fine to go forward with if you're not looking too high on the GPU).

Some people may prefer nVidia due to uncertainly and fear of AMD's drivers, or due to outright intangibles where nVidia may actually be better. maybe a particular game, mod, setting, etc. plays better with nVidia. Such situations do exist.

It's ultimately up to you. If rasterized performance is really all you're after (meaning ray tracing isn't as huge of a concern, even though AMD does well enough there too), than unless you have a reason to prefer nVidia, AMD will offer more for you right now. This is coming from someone who really likes nVidia hardware and hasn't ever had an AMD GPU (because they were still called ATI the last time I had one).

For the GPU, what resolution are you running? What frame rate/refresh are you after, or what settings in what games? Knowing how your current GTX 1650 is holding up might give better indications as to how much higher you might want to go. Budget ultimately determines this too.

[xSOSxHawkens]

Right now, this moment, I think its *very* hard to argue with the AMD RX-6800xt which can be had at sub 550.

Its a card that with tweaking can trade blows with the 6900xt or 3080ti/3090 when those cards are running stock, and can be bought online for like ~525 bucks. Super insane bang/buck when looking at raw FPS in non RT titles.

Outside of that general recommendation we need more info such as budget, games intended, rez and refresh etc. As of right this moment RTX4k is king but stupid priced, and between RX6k vs RTX3k it all comes down to rez and RTX intentions. RT is weaker on AMD, but AMD is cheaper typically. In raw performance they trade blows but AMD tends to be on top in each raw category slightly. That said Rez will impact this with AMD consistently leading in 1080p high refresh (due to the cache the card uses), the two brands being withing spitting of each other typically in 1440p, and NV taking the lead in 4k nearly all the time because the NV VRAM is faster than the AMD VRAM and the cache can no longer keep up how it did in the lower rez.

________________________

Entirely separate from the performance conversation is the company conversation. Neither company is perfect, and AMD is far from a benevolent figure, but to say that NV has a historical pattern of doing things anti-consumer is to put it lightly. NV makes amazing hardware, and from a capitalistic standpoint they are a "good" business, but from a consumer stand point they are much like apple. They charge allot, they are closed garden in their company deign philosophy, and they will not support Open Standards unless they are forced into doing so and then only do so to the minimum they have to in order to gain the press they need to look "better".

For me personally, they have to have a *great* product at a *great* price for me to over look their historical behaviors and give them money. And sometimes they have had that. The last few gens they have had *great* products. Just as insane prices lmao. Sadly it looks like Monolithic dies will keep them priced to the moon for another generation at least, and for once I think their CEO was being pretty transparent when he claimed that such prices simply cant get down much. NV is making a chip that comparatively uses a ton more silicon and is *far* more likely to have failures leading to required new wafers. Their chips wont get cheaper for awhile.

[Bad 💀 Motha]

If looking for best bang for buck right now for 1080p or 1440p; look at AMD 6600/6650 XT cards.

I would strongly advise you get at least another 8GB of RAM as well.

[76561198343548661]

Add extra 8GB of RAM . it helps . My PC feels a lot better with 16GB than 8GB . I use GTX 1650 non S and it runs everything . But if you want an upgrade , both brands are good . Every certain GPU stands for itself . Just check some reviews . If you insist to get a card with faster ray tracing get NVidia , otherwise AMD Radeon is a very good option .

[CZI]

For now I stick with Nvida for Ansel.

[Tiberius]

No one can answer without knowing your budget

[DarkStarClassic]

Pay 600 more for some RT or go for more efficient plus raster seems NOBRAINER TO ME, also current gen AMD is priced very low comparing to Nvidia.

500+ for 6800xt 600+6900xt is TOP BANG FOR BUCK TO ME(Europe)

Seems AMD 7xxx series is better priced more efficient with superior platform the way to go for now at least in europe. 4080 minimal 1600+ euros 4090 minimal 2200+. If all go well AMDstay at least 600+ below these prices.

AMD wins this GPU WAR it seems with flying colors!!!

[Guydodge]

doesnt do you one bit of good to buy a card you wont like whatever brand it is you
like stick with your gut.nothing worse then buyers regret.i'd much rather pay more for something
i want then something i'd be settling on.what are we talking 200-500 dollars cheaper or more over 3-5 years.its nothing when you look at the big picture.

[DarkStarClassic]

Guydodge님이 먼저 게시:

doesnt do you one bit of good to buy a card you wont like whatever brand it is you
like stick with your gut.nothing worse then buyers regret.i'd much rather pay more for something
i want then something i'd be settling on.what are we talking 200-500 dollars cheaper or more over 3-5 years.its nothing when you look at the big picture.

[Julien, cut it out.]

Just discussing your setup:

There could be (are) some issues with your setup.

Your processor has no SMT and the setup is likely to run in single-channel configuration with low MT/s.

Buying a more expensive piece of hardware might actually be throwing money out of the window, since the processing power will be left on the table due to other hardware bottlenecking.

Can you post a CPU-Z validation link?
Since you're on AM4 - depending on the chipset of your motherboard - there are some great Zen 3 processors available.
For instance, the 5600 is low power processor that can also be run on a cheap A chipset.

>The cheapest way to get better performance is a dual-channel RAM setup. 2x8GB 3200 MHz Cl14 or CL16.

What's your resolution and FPS target?
To avoid screen tearing, the FPS target should be the monitor's refresh rate (Hz) with VSync enabled. If the monitor is capable of VRR, the FPS target should be within the sync window.

The question is therefore, is your setup able to perform to your content and hit your fps target consistently?

Install a hardware monitoring tool like MSI Afterburner + RTSS or CapFrameX + RTSS to monitor your hardware and to determine which component is the limiting factor (when performance is bad).

[piet11111]

i would pick a 3080 and get a ryzen 5000 series cpu and some fast ram at least 16gb now that ddr4 is cheap and readily available.

[UserNotFound]

OP has a 6C/6T CPU, a single stick of 8GB RAM, (could be 2x 4GB but I find that highly unlikely), so even with a GPU upgrade, that single stick of RAM is gonna be a bottleneck affecting game performance.

I would suggest getting a minimum of 2x 8GB DDR4 3200MHz RAM (or 3600MHz RAM) to reap the benefit of dual channel mode. While there's nothing that can be done with the lack of SMT on the CPU, 6C/6T is still better than 4C/4T any day.

As for a GPU upgrade, AMD cards tend to present better bang-for-buck against equivalent nVidia cards. Depending on the res and refresh rate target you're shooting for, an RX 6600 to RX 6700 XT would be the cards to look at.

For example, the 12GB RX 6700 XT can be had for less than the 8GB RX 3060 Ti, and is very competitive against it (outperforms the 3060 Ti in most rasterized games, that is, no RT. Heck, the RX 6800 can be had for less than the RTX 3070, yet outperforms it quite nicely, plus with 16GB VRAM, it is actually powerful enough to make use of the extra VRAM at higher res and ingame setting.

[UserNotFound]

piet11111님이 먼저 게시:

i would pick a 3080 and get a ryzen 5000 series cpu and some fast ram at least 16gb now that ddr4 is cheap and readily available.

OP is asking about a change of GPU from his crappy GTX 1650 Super and you're suggesting a high end GPU and CPU change as well? The GTX 1650 Super wasn't a powerful card at launch to begin with, so an upgrade here would yield the most visible result. Again, I stress it depends on his screen res and target refresh rate, but AMD cards tend to be better value against their nVidia counterparts.

He can change his CPU to one with SMT, preferably an 8C/16T CPU, assuming he has a decent mobo and the budget for it later. Meanwhile, he can still game decently well enough with an upgraded GPU along with his R5 3500. It would not be ideal nor would it be the best gaming experience with his present CPU, but it'd be good enough for now.

[piet11111]

UserNotFound님이 먼저 게시:

piet11111님이 먼저 게시:

i would pick a 3080 and get a ryzen 5000 series cpu and some fast ram at least 16gb now that ddr4 is cheap and readily available.

OP is asking about a change of GPU from his crappy GTX 1650 Super and you're suggesting a high end GPU and CPU change as well? The GTX 1650 Super wasn't a powerful card at launch to begin with, so an upgrade here would yield the most visible result. Again, I stress it depends on his screen res and target refresh rate, but AMD cards tend to be better value against their nVidia counterparts.

He can change his CPU to one with SMT, preferably an 8C/16T CPU, assuming he has a decent mobo and the budget for it later. Meanwhile, he can still game decently well enough with an upgraded GPU along with his R5 3500. It would not be ideal nor would it be the best gaming experience with his present CPU, but it'd be good enough for now.

Yes i am the ryzen 5000 series cpu's are really cheap right now and much faster then his ryzen 5 3500.
Depending on his motherboard such an upgrade will add many years of use to his computer.
a 5700 seems a solid choice for a cpu and that is around $220 according to a quick google search.