Its official, at least for now, AMD is the king of GPU Value.

[xSOSxHawkens]

https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-graphics-cards-are-better-value-than-nvidia

"Save money by opting for Radeon GPUs" - Toms Hardware

From the top of the stack to the bottom, with the only outlier (right now) being the Halo tier (where we await the 7900xt/xtx) the Radeon Lineup consistently gives better FPS:$$$ spent ;)

And though I dont personally see the 7900xtx over taking the 4090 in raw performance, I do suspect that once the XT/XTX hit the same argument of FPS:$$ will apply in the Halo tier too.

Happy (and lucky) Black Friday and Cyber Monday deals to you all, hopefully some of you grab that new GPU you have been eyeballing!

[Ebony Woman Enjoyer]

Cope thread for people that can't afford a 4090.
I mean I can't either, but I don't go around pretending my card is jusasgud.

[emoticorpse]

Първоначално публикувано от UserNotFound:

Първоначално публикувано от emoticorpse:

Possibly but not guaranteed. Some people equate lower price with lower quality. Ryzen was an example of a product that quickly beat that equation when everyone tried it for themselves and realized how great they actually performed I think AMD GPUs haven't had the same luck up to this point.

Yeah, IF only these people try out AMD GPUs, then they might change their minds, and mindset. I own both AMD and nVidia cards thru the years, when it comes to driver issues, both have had their share of issues, but nothing major that would cause me to say one is better than the other. Now, when it comes to functionality of drivers, for me, it's AMD hands down.

As someone had pointed out, just about all the functionalities one need for the GPU, from monitoring framerate to UV'ing or OC'ing, it's all there with Adrenalin control panel. For nVidia, I'd have to run MSI AB and install Rivatuner to do the same. It's just that, many nVidia holdbacks chime in with what crappy drivers AMD has (yes, there may be issues with some drivers, but it's the same for nVidia as well).

One thing I've seen that causes an issue with AMD GPUs, it's due to driver installation. I sometime come across posts from peeps who are complaining about their AMD cards crashing, and the crux of the issue laid in swapping out cards. This is especially so when swapping from nVidia to AMD, the latter can be a tad finicky about driver install, they simply uninstall previous (nVidia) driver, swap cards, then install AMD driver. There may be conflict with the remnant of nVidia driver that they may not be aware which might cause crashing issue.

As someone who's used AMD for a long time, I'm aware enough to run AMDCleanuputility (for AMD GPUs only) or DDU to remove all traces of previous AMD/nVidia driver when swapping out cards, and I've had no major issue with AMD cards when I do this. Heck, I'd even run DDU to clean up all traces of previous AMD drivers before installing the latest driver.

The point made about being more expensive means 'better' is true, many would look at the RTX 4080 at 1200USD (minimum for FE model) and straight off, would think it's better than the RX 7900 XTX which cost 'only' 1k USD (minimum for reference model). More expensive = better, that's the mindset, unfortunately.

Hey, I have a question for you. I earlier posted about how my personal main reason for trying to stick with Nvidia is because of Nvenc. Encoding movies is literally like 3x faster than with my cpu and that's with a 2070. I assume 3000 or 4000 would probably do significantly better.

Do you know if AMD offers significant features and if so does it incorporate well I to software? I wouldn't want to go AMD and find that applications can't utilize the gpu encoding (if there is any). And If it is there, is it just as powerful?. I would hate to go AMD and find out their gou encoding is much slower like equivalent to my cpu when my 2070 blows it out of the water.

[Bad 💀 Motha]

AMD encoder is a joke. Especially for OBS or SLOBS.

RTX 3070 encoder would be a decent 5-6X faster over a 2070. RTX 4090 is insanely good at such things, something like 20X faster over a 3090

[UserNotFound]

I can't say, I guess you'd have to refer to such software and hardware review sites for the answer. the only software I see that uses both AMD and nVidia hardware acceleration (I think) is when I use Handbrake, I'm now on my laptop with an RTX 3070 and I use H.265 NVenc and it's pretty decently fast.

IIRC, when I do encoding (from large MKV format to 720P format for phones and such) on my desktop, I'd have the option of using AMD acceleration (can't recall what it's called) for encoding, it was pretty fast too.....at least, a fair bit faster than relying purely on CPU (I have an R9 5900X).

[r.linder]

Първоначално публикувано от Bad 💀 Motha:

AMD encoder is a joke. Especially for OBS or SLOBS.

RTX 3070 encoder would be a decent 5-6X faster over a 2070. RTX 4090 is insanely good at such things, something like 20X faster over a 3090

Maybe actually explain why it's bad instead of just saying it's bad and making yourself look extremely biased and proving UserNotFound's point. I've had bad experiences with AMD but I don't trash every single thing they put out, just the things that are actually trash, like the 6500-XT.

The reason why AMD's encoding is bad is because of quality issues with their H.264 encoder compared to NVEC. AMD AMF encoding has been improved so it's about on par with NVEC but support for AMF is extremely limited, so most of the time, AMD's H.264 encoder is the one that's being used, which is noticeably to considerably worse than NVEC for streaming.

[Electric Cupcake]

No surprise.

AMD has always been more user-friendly, with actively supporting linux drivers, and allowing you to completely disable HDCP, and working on the superior FreeSync.

Though their graphics control panels are a godawful cluttered eyesore.

[UserNotFound]

Първоначално публикувано от 尺．し工几句ヨ尺:

Maybe actually explain why it's bad instead of just saying it's bad and making yourself look extremely biased and proving UserNotFound's point.

I wasn't aware that I was making a point, in fact, I'd thought I was being neutral as encoding isn't my jam. The point I was making was that I can't tell, first because I can't compare a laptop RTX 3070 140W against my desktop RX 6900 XT, and secondly, it was just one program that I use, that is Handbrake.

[r.linder]

Първоначално публикувано от UserNotFound:

Първоначално публикувано от 尺．し工几句ヨ尺:

Maybe actually explain why it's bad instead of just saying it's bad and making yourself look extremely biased and proving UserNotFound's point.

I wasn't aware that I was making a point, in fact, I'd thought I was being neutral as encoding isn't my jam. The point I was making was that I can't tell, first because I can't compare a laptop RTX 3070 140W against my desktop RX 6900 XT, and secondly, it was just one program that I use, that is Handbrake.

I meant earlier when you were talking about NVIDIA users hating on AMD's driver software.

They have a point, it's not as streamlined as NVIDIA's panel and there aren't as many options, but it's not as bad as they claim in more recent years. The only issue I had with it was the infamous blackscreen issue that was happening for a small percentage of users for years with no fix in sight, and issues specifically with Gigabyte's garbage models because I had to choose between the GPU overheating or sounding like a ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ jet engine because of the way Gigabyte made their cooler, and their fans were just too loud above 60% fan speed, louder than my Zotac 3080 at 100%, and louder than my Gigabyte 2080 at 100%. But at 60% and below, the hotspot would run too hot and cause the GPU to shut off.

I try not to be overly biased, but some people on this forum just can't help themselves at all when it comes to trashing a brand but they don't even take the time to explain to people WHY they're supposedly bad in detail. It's just, "[insert brand here] is bad, lol." If you dislike a brand, at least back up your freaking opinion with some actual information if you want people to take you seriously, otherwise you'll just look like a clown. If Steve Burke, Linus Sebastian, or any of these other tech journalists did that crap, they would get torn apart by people on social media.

[Illusion of Progress]

Първоначално публикувано от emoticorpse:

I might have a reason. I have gotten used to using NVENC to encode movies. I am not sure if AMD GPUs can compete in this area and with my research can't get a conclusive answer which is why I haven't gone AMD yet.

Well, I gave two reasons I could see for going for nVidia, and yours does fall under one of them.

[Electric Cupcake]

Първоначално публикувано от UserNotFound:

Първоначално публикувано от 尺．し工几句ヨ尺:

Maybe actually explain why it's bad instead of just saying it's bad and making yourself look extremely biased and proving UserNotFound's point.

I wasn't aware that I was making a point, in fact, I'd thought I was being neutral as encoding isn't my jam. The point I was making was that I can't tell, first because I can't compare a laptop RTX 3070 140W against my desktop RX 6900 XT, and secondly, it was just one program that I use, that is Handbrake.

Try Avidemux. It's much more versatile, without being overwhelming like Blender and Cine.

[xSOSxHawkens]

Първоначално публикувано от emoticorpse:

Hey, I have a question for you. I earlier posted about how my personal main reason for trying to stick with Nvidia is because of Nvenc. Encoding movies is literally like 3x faster than with my cpu and that's with a 2070. I assume 3000 or 4000 would probably do significantly better.

Do you know if AMD offers significant features and if so does it incorporate well I to software? I wouldn't want to go AMD and find that applications can't utilize the gpu encoding (if there is any). And If it is there, is it just as powerful?. I would hate to go AMD and find out their gou encoding is much slower like equivalent to my cpu when my 2070 blows it out of the water.

For your use case AMD would be perfectly suitable and just as good.

AMD's hardware encoder is not *quite* up to NVENC, but where it *specifically* falls short is in high compression low bandwidth qualities. At mid bitrate or higher, its nearly identical to NVENC (some argue actually better then NVENC at high bitrates like 80mbps+).

Simply put, NVENC hold the lead for specifcally *streaming* use. Thats where the quality of the AMD h.264 leacks.

But in h.265 they are pretty equal, and in local-playback quality (read recording gameplay local or remixing movies at local quality bitrates) they are also equal. For streaming AMD is adequate, but software or NVENC will be better.

The streaming lead Nvidia holds could change soon through. AMD is a Diamond Sponsor now for OBS and is directly partnered with OBS on AV1 encoder integration to try and offer a competitive alternative to nvidia options. So we might see change in the streaming leads NV holds soon which would make the field more or less totally even then as AMD already is on parity outside streaming as mentioned above.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/yllp5u/amd_as_the_new_diamond_sponsor_for_the_obs_project/

(Also @Emoticorpse - If you want some comparable performance numbers and such add me on Steam and I will work with you on some type of open-source vid file and can send you some handbrake encoded copies and performance factors re: the encode speeds for you to check out locally and compare to ones you make on handbrake using comparable NV settings so you can make your own judgement!)

[Tiberius]

Sadly amd gpus are lacking when it comes to studio related stuffs (which is also probably the reason why so many laptops come with nvidia gpu, rather than amd gpu)

[Jamebonds1]

For now. May want to wait for nvidia's improved on 12VHPWR cable for rtx 40X0. Burned connector is from loose connection of 4 connector to one connector adapter. It is a bad idea to use this adapter. Instead, PSU manufacturers should be the one that proved 12VHPWR cable that has a connector from PSU to GPU without any connector in the middle.

[emoticorpse]

Първоначално публикувано от xSOSxHawkens:

Първоначално публикувано от emoticorpse:

Hey, I have a question for you. I earlier posted about how my personal main reason for trying to stick with Nvidia is because of Nvenc. Encoding movies is literally like 3x faster than with my cpu and that's with a 2070. I assume 3000 or 4000 would probably do significantly better.

Do you know if AMD offers significant features and if so does it incorporate well I to software? I wouldn't want to go AMD and find that applications can't utilize the gpu encoding (if there is any). And If it is there, is it just as powerful?. I would hate to go AMD and find out their gou encoding is much slower like equivalent to my cpu when my 2070 blows it out of the water.

For your use case AMD would be perfectly suitable and just as good.

AMD's hardware encoder is not *quite* up to NVENC, but where it *specifically* falls short is in high compression low bandwidth qualities. At mid bitrate or higher, its nearly identical to NVENC (some argue actually better then NVENC at high bitrates like 80mbps+).

Simply put, NVENC hold the lead for specifcally *streaming* use. Thats where the quality of the AMD h.264 leacks.

But in h.265 they are pretty equal, and in local-playback quality (read recording gameplay local or remixing movies at local quality bitrates) they are also equal. For streaming AMD is adequate, but software or NVENC will be better.

The streaming lead Nvidia holds could change soon through. AMD is a Diamond Sponsor now for OBS and is directly partnered with OBS on AV1 encoder integration to try and offer a competitive alternative to nvidia options. So we might see change in the streaming leads NV holds soon which would make the field more or less totally even then as AMD already is on parity outside streaming as mentioned above.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/yllp5u/amd_as_the_new_diamond_sponsor_for_the_obs_project/

(Also @Emoticorpse - If you want some comparable performance numbers and such add me on Steam and I will work with you on some type of open-source vid file and can send you some handbrake encoded copies and performance factors re: the encode speeds for you to check out locally and compare to ones you make on handbrake using comparable NV settings so you can make your own judgement!)

I'm definitely interested in this. One video is all it would take. You can pick any video you want and run it through any application you want and just let me know how long it takes you, and I'll do the same on my pc and see how long it takes me.

Definitely interested if possible if you could test a couple different applications that I also use and let me know if the AMD GPU is available as an encoder and what the performance hit is as it's utilizing it.

I mainly use Vidcoder (I know a lot more people use Handbrake but I higly prefer the 2-pass file size limit which Handbrake doesn't offer if I'm not mistaken), OBS studio and Avidemux.