Actually, I very much agree with AMD's approach to creating open technologies that benefit everyone, rather than NVIDIA who create closed-off, proprietary technologies to try and lock you into their product ecosystem.plex wrote:Everyone here must be a shill because i haven't had one single issue with my 290x since the release date when i bought it.. i regularly update to beta and/or WHQL drivers and get most of the latest games on pre-order.
Not sure what planet you guys are from but im sticking with AMD for the price/performance. nVidia people are probably just mad because they pay $250 more dollars for the same performance
Unfortunately this approach doesn't always work for them, and NVIDIA's equivalent ends up being more desirable. The most recent example of that being G-Sync vs FreeSync.
You have to wonder whether AMD would be taking this approach if they were in the position that NVIDIA are in now though, and you have to wonder if their focus on things like Mantle/Vulkan rather than improving performance in existing API's that are used everywhere today is a good idea.
Their CPU architecture is focused on having lots of cores and multi-threaded performance, rather than single-thread performance like Intel's CPUs, and yet their DirectX drivers don't support multi-threading at all. It's ridiculous, and means that their GPUs perform best when paired with their main competitor's CPUs.
And for me, price/performance is not really the issue at this point.
Not that I have unlimited funds to throw at GPUs every time something new comes out, but if I thought there was a good reason for me to own a Titan X, I'd get one.
But frankly I think it's a bad idea when the next Titan will be using HMB2, and when I had a 970 I seemed to be running into CPU limitations more than GPU limitations. The upper range of my framerates improved, but minimums did not seem to change much at all - and that's exactly where AMD's performance falls apart, since they don't support multi-threading.