AMD vs nvidia 4k longevity

zqa20

Honorable
Jan 12, 2014
582
0
10,990
So I don't plan on upgrading my PC for at least 12-18 months as I'm happy with my current 1080p gaming build (3570k@4.5 and gtx 980).

After 12-18 months I want to build a 4k SLI/crossfire gaming PC but after just browsing youtube videos it seems like AMD cards seem to have a bit more longevity and age better. I've seen comments saying "AMD cards are like a fine wine".

I tend to only upgrade my GPU every 3-5 years and with this timescale in mind should i go AMD or nvidia when I build my next system?

Also is it true that nvdia gimps their older gen GPUs to push people towards upgrading their cards or do they just stop investing time and money into drivers?

How's the 780ti now slower than a 290x in almost all new games when it had quite the comfortable lead back in the day? Is this a trend in AMD vs nvidia GPUs?


Thanks in advance.

 
Solution
People said nvidia gimp kepler but many of them did not try to look what exactly happen. That "fine wine" we look at AMD GPU is thanks to the major console using AMD hardware in them. The changes nvidia with maxwell to certain extend was to address this issue. Take outlast 2 for example. In that game 780ti actually even faster than Fury X! Performance wise it was lkke this: 780ti >Fury X>RX 580 = GTX1060. if nvidia intentionally gimping kepler there is no way 780ti end up being faster than gtx1060 in that game.

Also when it comes to optimization focus both AMD and nvidia did focus less on their older generation of cards. This thing is not specific to nvidia only. Look at Forza Horizon 3 performance during it's initial release. GTX1060...
Generally I would say get the best you can afford. I'm wary of a multi graphics card set up as it seems to be poorly supported and doesn't particularly scale well. But how long it will last will depend on expectations and what you intend to run, so there will always be a bit of uncertainty on the needs of future game engines.

From several tech channels it does seem AMD graphics cards age better. But as I understand it, they are computationally more powerful. This seems to apply for RX Vega where gaming isn't as strong as its Nvidia counterparts.

Nvidia gimping their graphics cards is a myth according to some (Linus Tech Tips on Youtube recently went through this). Graphics cards were created with certain technologies at the time. As development changes it could mean those graphics cards can no longer do the things newer software wants to do. I believe the Keplar architecture was badly affected by this, but it doesn't necessarily mean it is deliberate.
 
A year out is a little hard to speculate who'll have the best card, and how long it will keep up as it ages. Trends point to NVidia leading in performance, and AMD just barely keeping up in some cases, and other cases outperforming or breaking even. It depends on what level of graphics you're wanting. Just get the best you can afford at the time you purchase, don't play the waiting game unless it is about a couple weeks, max when you're ready to buy.

NVidia does have the rep of gimping older cards, although they deny it. It might be more like focusing less and less on them though. AMD does seem to improve over time. How long will the GPU serve you well? usually the higher end, the longer... newer cards do tend to add features and offer other improvements as well.
 
People said nvidia gimp kepler but many of them did not try to look what exactly happen. That "fine wine" we look at AMD GPU is thanks to the major console using AMD hardware in them. The changes nvidia with maxwell to certain extend was to address this issue. Take outlast 2 for example. In that game 780ti actually even faster than Fury X! Performance wise it was lkke this: 780ti >Fury X>RX 580 = GTX1060. if nvidia intentionally gimping kepler there is no way 780ti end up being faster than gtx1060 in that game.

Also when it comes to optimization focus both AMD and nvidia did focus less on their older generation of cards. This thing is not specific to nvidia only. Look at Forza Horizon 3 performance during it's initial release. GTX1060 and RX480 was about equal in performance. Then in digital foundry test they also compare old cards like GTX970 and R9 390 to see how those older cards fare. Some people might expect 390 will murder 970 espcially when considering the game is pure DX12 tittle but the exact opposite actually happen. The 390 was noticebly behind 970 in performance. And there is also Oculus ASW where nvidia support both pascal and maxwell gpu on release while on AMD side only the new RX400 series was supported. Back then the minimum gpu requirement on nvidia side was GTX960. On AMD side it was RX470. GTX960 direct competitor the R9 380 are not supported by AMD at the time.

Right now when it comes to 4k nvidia the only one have the raw power for it with 1080ti.
 
Solution