- Joined
- Nov 14, 2002
- Location
- Nashville
Ok. Thanks.
I really think we keep getting back to the same kind of argument with this Nvidia vs AMD. Nvidia values RT/DLSS and charges more for access to them.
For people like me who have 0 games that have RT, I dont use upscaling, and most of the games I play are RTS or 4x with lots of mods (mostly 3d assets, models, and textures) V-RAM is actually very valuable to me.
So, the argument that Nvidia is better because it has RT and DLSS and even if my usecase does not benefit from them, I will in the future, falls kinda flat to me. I wont benefit now or in the next 2-3 years from nvidia's features.
I think that is kinda Haider's point in this thread too. He is not saying AMD has a better card, he is saying that AMD's features have more direct value to him. Just like the X3D and RT/DLSS have more value to you.
You are happy paying that premium because you benefit. Like e-cores for me, RT/DLSS only have value to me if they are "free" as in P-Core/Threads to Zen Cores/Threads or Raster/Price with graphics.
A good example is a 7900XT vs 4070 TI Super. Both are around the same price but the 4070 TI Super tends to average about $100 more than the 7900XT. They generally offer similar raster performance with the 7900XT having a slight edge over all. In my specific use case paying an extra $100 for the Nvidia card would actuall end up in a worse user experience.
The 7900XT is not better or worse, its just better for my use case, and offers a better value for my use case.
As I have argued before, I wont default suggest either MFG unless the person is looking for specific funcionality or has games/applications that specifically benefit from the feature set of nvidia or AMD.
I dont know that I have ever seen you suggest that maybe an AMD card might offer more value to anyone. And thats fine because you clearly value RT/DLSS, but I think applying that value to everyone is an error.
I really think we keep getting back to the same kind of argument with this Nvidia vs AMD. Nvidia values RT/DLSS and charges more for access to them.
For people like me who have 0 games that have RT, I dont use upscaling, and most of the games I play are RTS or 4x with lots of mods (mostly 3d assets, models, and textures) V-RAM is actually very valuable to me.
So, the argument that Nvidia is better because it has RT and DLSS and even if my usecase does not benefit from them, I will in the future, falls kinda flat to me. I wont benefit now or in the next 2-3 years from nvidia's features.
I think that is kinda Haider's point in this thread too. He is not saying AMD has a better card, he is saying that AMD's features have more direct value to him. Just like the X3D and RT/DLSS have more value to you.
You are happy paying that premium because you benefit. Like e-cores for me, RT/DLSS only have value to me if they are "free" as in P-Core/Threads to Zen Cores/Threads or Raster/Price with graphics.
A good example is a 7900XT vs 4070 TI Super. Both are around the same price but the 4070 TI Super tends to average about $100 more than the 7900XT. They generally offer similar raster performance with the 7900XT having a slight edge over all. In my specific use case paying an extra $100 for the Nvidia card would actuall end up in a worse user experience.
The 7900XT is not better or worse, its just better for my use case, and offers a better value for my use case.
As I have argued before, I wont default suggest either MFG unless the person is looking for specific funcionality or has games/applications that specifically benefit from the feature set of nvidia or AMD.
I dont know that I have ever seen you suggest that maybe an AMD card might offer more value to anyone. And thats fine because you clearly value RT/DLSS, but I think applying that value to everyone is an error.