Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Solved

Nvidia gpu or AMD

Tags:
  • Graphics
  • AMD
  • Games
  • Nvidia
  • GPUs
  • Graphics Cards
Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
September 27, 2014 1:25:35 AM

I play shooter games(fps mainly) and a few open world games like gta. I was going too get the r9 270x but I saw on a post that some games work better on nvidia and some work better on AMD. So what gpu should I get.?
My processor is i5 2320.
Also what is mantle and what is physx?

More about : nvidia gpu amd

a b U Graphics card
September 27, 2014 1:36:45 AM

both are decent companies you know, AMD focus on best bang for the buck and raw power, nvidia focuses on power efficiency and smooth performance. r9 270x is a bit outdated though,if you have the cash id get the newer models like R9 285 or GTX 970. though if you're on budget, r9 270x, GTX 660,r9 270,GTX 750 Ti are all great options.
m
0
l

Best solution

a b À AMD
a b Î Nvidia
a c 158 U Graphics card
September 27, 2014 1:43:33 AM

Mantle gives a performance increase to AMD cards in some games, but it means you need a lot more video memory.
PhysX is an API for physics in games. Nvidia has hardware acceleration for this.
Nvidia also has ShadowPlay and g-sync as features.

For any particular level of performance, both AMD and Nvidia have a card to offer.
Each have their benefits.
What you really need to decide is what resolution and detail settings you want and then get a card to suit.
Alternatively, you may choose a card on your budget and then just use the best detail settings that card will allow.

The R9 270X is ok for high settings at 1920x1080 resolution.
The equivalent Nvidia card is the GTX 760.
If you want ultra settings, look instead at the R9 290 from AMD or the GTX 970 from Nvidia.
Share
Related resources
a b U Graphics card
September 27, 2014 1:47:42 AM

VincentP said:
Mantle gives a performance increase to AMD cards in some games, but it means you need a lot more video memory.
PhysX is an API for physics in games. Nvidia has hardware acceleration for this.
Nvidia also has ShadowPlay and g-sync as features.

For any particular level of performance, both AMD and Nvidia have a card to offer.
Each have their benefits.
What you really need to decide is what resolution and detail settings you want and then get a card to suit.
Alternatively, you may choose a card on your budget and then just use the best detail settings that card will allow.

The R9 270X is ok for high settings at 1920x1080 resolution.
The equivalent Nvidia card is the GTX 760.
If you want ultra settings, look instead at the R9 290 from AMD or the GTX 970 from Nvidia.


1) the equivalent of GTX 760 by price is R9 280, since GTX 760 got quite moderate price difference between it and R9 270X
2) GTX 970 beats the shit out of R9 290.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
September 27, 2014 1:52:39 AM

I'd go for a GTX 760. They just dropped in price and they're great cards.
If you can spend more, grab a GTX 970. MSI, ASUS and Gigabyte are the best imo.
m
0
l
a b À AMD
a b Î Nvidia
a c 158 U Graphics card
September 27, 2014 1:54:25 AM

random5 said:
VincentP said:
Mantle gives a performance increase to AMD cards in some games, but it means you need a lot more video memory.
PhysX is an API for physics in games. Nvidia has hardware acceleration for this.
Nvidia also has ShadowPlay and g-sync as features.

For any particular level of performance, both AMD and Nvidia have a card to offer.
Each have their benefits.
What you really need to decide is what resolution and detail settings you want and then get a card to suit.
Alternatively, you may choose a card on your budget and then just use the best detail settings that card will allow.

The R9 270X is ok for high settings at 1920x1080 resolution.
The equivalent Nvidia card is the GTX 760.
If you want ultra settings, look instead at the R9 290 from AMD or the GTX 970 from Nvidia.


1) the equivalent of GTX 760 by price is R9 280, since GTX 760 got quite moderate price difference between it and R9 270X
2) GTX 970 beats the shit out of R9 290.


R9 270X and GTX 760 have equivalent performance.
Yes, the GTX 760 is more expensive.
It also has a number of Nvidia only features.

The suggestion of R9 290 or GTX 970 is based purely on being suitable for ultra settings at 1920x1080 or 2560x1440 in most games.
Yes, the GTX 970 is faster. It also uses less power and has Nvidia only features.
The performance difference is only about 5%, so it isn't a big deal:
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-gtx-...

Price comparisons aren't helpful because prices vary significantly from country to country as well as week to week. There are special deals, bundled games.
It is better to compare models based on performance and then decide based on the features offered and the price you can get them for today which is the better buy.
I think there will be a lot of price movement over the next few weeks after the release of the GTX 970 and 980. I personally would wait until the prices settle as they will likely come down in most cases.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
September 27, 2014 2:01:14 AM

VincentP said:

R9 270X and GTX 760 have equivalent performance.
Yes, the GTX 760 is more expensive.
It also has a number of Nvidia only features.

The suggestion of R9 290 or GTX 970 is based purely on being suitable for ultra settings at 1920x1080 or 2560x1440 in most games.
Yes, the GTX 970 is faster. It also uses less power and has Nvidia only features.
The performance difference is only about 5%, so it isn't a big deal:
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-gtx-...


glad we understood eachother bro,so yeah he doesn't seem like somebody who needs shitlaod of features so his choice of R9 270X is self-explanatory.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
September 27, 2014 2:03:00 AM

btw, GTX 970 not only more powerful,way more efficient,using way more electrcity,has more features but also is a hell shitload cheaper than R9 290, lets face it man, R9 290 is GONE FOREVER,erase it from your memory.
m
0
l
a b À AMD
a b Î Nvidia
a c 158 U Graphics card
September 27, 2014 2:09:14 AM

random5 said:
btw, GTX 970 not only more powerful,way more efficient,using way more electrcity,has more features but also is a hell shitload cheaper than R9 290, lets face it man, R9 290 is GONE FOREVER,erase it from your memory.


The performance difference isn't enough to care about.
The efficiency difference is useful if you can get a lower rated power supply or if you need less case cooling through less heat. It won't save you much on power bills though and isn't particularly important to many gamers.
AMD isn't simply going to stop selling these cards, they will offer then at a price they can sell them.
The R9 290 and 290X will have to come down in price to match Nvidia, which means below the GTX 970.
Eyefinity and mantle are selling points for some people.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
September 27, 2014 2:15:38 AM

power bills not important to gamers? you gotta be kidding man.. im running the maxwell 750 Ti myself, most efficient GPU around,i prefer to sacrifice some graphical settings in exchange for lower power bills, electrcity costs shitload here. 0.24$/kwh

Yeah they might stop selling em, look how AMD gave up on high end CPU market, they might do just that on high end GPU market focusing on mid range and low end GPUs where they still rule and beat the shit out of nvidia and intel,which are greedy devious treehuggers!
m
0
l
a b À AMD
a b Î Nvidia
a c 158 U Graphics card
September 27, 2014 2:24:06 AM

random5 said:
power bills not important to gamers? you gotta be kidding man.. im running the maxwell 750 Ti myself, most efficient GPU around,i prefer to sacrifice some graphical settings in exchange for lower power bills, electrcity costs shitload here. 0.24$/kwh


Difference between the GTX 970 and R9 290 is about 85W.
At 80% efficiency, that is 106.25W at the wall.
Say you run the card at full load for 4 hours a day, 365 days a year.
That is 155kWh. At $0.24 per kWh that is $37.23 per year.
I'm all for saving power, but energy saver light bulbs, a more efficient refrigerator or setting your air conditioner 2 degrees warmer in summer and 2 degrees warmer in winter will all have a bigger impact on your power bill.

I just had a look online for prices here in Australia too. Choosing Gigabyte as an example, I can get the GTX 970 for $519 or an R9 290 from the same store for $479. It looks like prices have already adjusted here after the release of these cards.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
September 27, 2014 2:28:39 AM

But the 970 is far better than the 290, and even beats the 290X at stock.
Overclocked, it performs better than the 780ti.
m
0
l
September 27, 2014 2:31:29 AM

Go for the 270x as everyone has mentioned above there is actually just a marginal difference in game play with the gtx so go the AMD way and save some for the future
m
0
l
a b À AMD
a b Î Nvidia
a c 158 U Graphics card
September 27, 2014 2:42:39 AM

Alex Kelly said:
But the 970 is far better than the 290, and even beats the 290X at stock.
Overclocked, it performs better than the 780ti.


The GTX 970 is around 5% faster than the R9 290. The difference is not significant.
The R9 290X is between the two, again not enough of a difference to matter.
The R9 290X was never good value compared to the R9 290.

The Tom's hardware review didn't cover overclocking the GTX 970, but for the comparison to a GTX 780 Ti to be fair they would both have to be overclocked.

I'm not saying I wouldn't choose the GTX 970.
My point is that the R9 290 and GTX 970 have similar performance and you have to weigh up any differences against the price you can get them for. If you can get the R9 290 for a significantly lower price, in your country, on the day you buy it, then this is better value.

m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
September 27, 2014 3:28:46 AM

290 can't be OCed much, 970 can be OCed heaps, that's my point :) 
It makes up for the slight price difference, imo.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
September 27, 2014 3:58:55 AM

vincent,ffs stop fighting for R9 290s honor, its days are OVER.Your recklessness and ignorance just makes it look even worse.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
September 27, 2014 4:00:09 AM

^ That was rude, it's inferior to the 970 though yes.
m
0
l
a b À AMD
a b Î Nvidia
a c 158 U Graphics card
September 27, 2014 4:16:56 AM

random5 said:
vincent,ffs stop fighting for R9 290s honor, its days are OVER.Your recklessness and ignorance just makes it look even worse.


You get all sorts of people on internet forums.
Some will get very excited about what is new today.
Others will cling to a favourite brand or product.

Nvidia has a new product out. It offers better efficiency than anything we had before and offers better performance for the price than what we had before.That's good.
There are two major manufacturers of gaming GPUs. It is a shame there aren't more.
Both of these companies do what they can to make money, so they sell cards at the price they can.
AMD will simply drop the price of their competing card if it is a little slower than the new Nvidia offering.

I guess in a few months time AMD will release something new and you will get very excited about that too.
For the average person though, it is about what you get for the price you have to pay.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
September 27, 2014 4:34:10 AM

yea many people were excited as R9 285 came out since it blown away the stereotypes that AMD isn't going to innovate and isnt going to go more efficient.still I believe R9 285 is as high as they're going to go, ain't think they're up for competing in the highest end GPU market since its a battle which isn't worth it to be fought,they could focus upon low and middle end GPUs just like they did with CPUs,where they offer more for less..way less. that would be a nice sign of new beggining, whole new era for the entire hardware industry where giants happily share profits instead of fighting eachother.Nvidia could keep customers which want top end gaming performance and/or high quality products, while AMD can have its share of budget-conscious buyers which prefer quantity over quality, obviously then each card nvidia sells would sell for more than the lower branch cards AMD could sell,however high end cards are bought and replaced less often,also fewer people can afford em so profits could somewhat even out.
m
0
l
a b À AMD
a b Î Nvidia
a c 158 U Graphics card
September 27, 2014 4:43:18 AM

Anyway, to the original poster.
Buy whatever card is better value for what you need and has the features you want.
If you are happy with high detail settings, the Radeon R9 270X or GeForce GTX 760 are suitable. The GTX 760 is a little faster and is generally a little more expensive.
If you want to be able to run ultra settings, you will need a Radeon R9 290 or GeForce GTX 970. The GTX 970 is more power efficient, faster and is a much newer card. Prices will be very variable at the moment.

AMD offers mantle (performance increase in some games) and eyefinity (multi-monitor up to 6 monitors).
Nvidia offers ShadowPlay, PhysX and Nvidia Surround.
If none of these features matter to you, choose on price.
With any of these cards, buy a card with a good cooler.

Personally I wouldn't buy a graphics card for a few weeks until prices settle down.
m
0
l
September 27, 2014 4:53:53 AM

^^ AMD is going to release a new R9 300 series based on 20 nm manufacturing process which would improve the TDP and cooling quite a lot. It should be out in December this year or early 2015 and the rumored specs of the 390X are 15% faster than the GTX 980 for supposedly the same price. They will eventually get back into the competition for the topmend, but they just took a big blow from Nvidia with the 900 series.

What do you mean AMD can't compete in the top end GPU market? They have the R9 295x2 which is faster than SLI 780 ti's and runs much cooler and quieter too with it's own water cooler at $1,000. And for people like me power consumption isn't much of a concern as electricity is 5C per KW. And I'm not the person who uses the aircon much or turns on the lights unnecessarily either. Currently Nvidia's 970 Is a better buy over the R9 290 like the R9 290 was a better buy over the GTX 780.
m
0
l
September 27, 2014 7:14:58 AM

VincentP said:
Mantle gives a performance increase to AMD cards in some games, but it means you need a lot more video memory.
PhysX is an API for physics in games. Nvidia has hardware acceleration for this.
Nvidia also has ShadowPlay and g-sync as features.

For any particular level of performance, both AMD and Nvidia have a card to offer.
Each have their benefits.
What you really need to decide is what resolution and detail settings you want and then get a card to suit.
Alternatively, you may choose a card on your budget and then just use the best detail settings that card will allow.

The R9 270X is ok for high settings at 1920x1080 resolution.
The equivalent Nvidia card is the GTX 760.
If you want ultra settings, look instead at the R9 290 from AMD or the GTX 970 from Nvidia.


I have a monitor with max resolution 1280x1024
I would like to play games at medium to low settings
my budget is 200$ max. Is the gtx 760's performance boost significant enough?
Can u explain what shadowplay is ? (surround is probably sound related and does not matter to me)

m
0
l
September 27, 2014 7:18:03 AM

CAaronD said:
^^ AMD is going to release a new R9 300 series based on 20 nm manufacturing process which would improve the TDP and cooling quite a lot. It should be out in December this year or early 2015 and the rumored specs of the 390X are 15% faster than the GTX 980 for supposedly the same price. They will eventually get back into the competition for the highest end, but they just took a big blow from Nvidia with the 900 series. What do you mean AMD can't compete in the top end GPU market? They have the R9 295x2 which is faster than SLI 780 ti's and runs much cooler and quieter too with it's own water cooler at $1,000. And for people like me power consumption isn't much of a concern as electricity is 5C per KW. And I'm not the person who uses the aircon much or turns on the lights unnecessarily either. Currently Nvidia's 970 Is a better buy over the R9 290 like the R9 290 was a better buy over the GTX 780.


Is there going to be a 300 series card for 200$ or less? or are they all top range? should I wait for th new cards to be released ?

m
0
l
a b À AMD
a b Î Nvidia
a c 158 U Graphics card
September 27, 2014 7:20:58 AM

Atmadeep Banerjee said:
VincentP said:
Mantle gives a performance increase to AMD cards in some games, but it means you need a lot more video memory.
PhysX is an API for physics in games. Nvidia has hardware acceleration for this.
Nvidia also has ShadowPlay and g-sync as features.

For any particular level of performance, both AMD and Nvidia have a card to offer.
Each have their benefits.
What you really need to decide is what resolution and detail settings you want and then get a card to suit.
Alternatively, you may choose a card on your budget and then just use the best detail settings that card will allow.

The R9 270X is ok for high settings at 1920x1080 resolution.
The equivalent Nvidia card is the GTX 760.
If you want ultra settings, look instead at the R9 290 from AMD or the GTX 970 from Nvidia.


I have a monitor with max resolution 1280x1024
I would like to play games at medium to low settings
my budget is 200$ max. Is the gtx 760's performance boost significant enough?
Can u explain what shadowplay is ? (surround is probably sound related and does not matter to me)



Nvidia surround is for playing games across multiple monitors. This is Nvidia's version of AMD's Eyefinity but they are different.
ShadowPlay is for recording games. I works a little like fraps but the graphics card does the work instead of the CPU.
At 1280x1024 the R9 270X or GTX 760 are both fine for high settings.
I would stick with the R9 270X if it is cheaper, or an R9 280 if not too much more expensive.
m
0
l
a b À AMD
a b Î Nvidia
a c 158 U Graphics card
September 27, 2014 7:23:12 AM

Atmadeep Banerjee said:
CAaronD said:
^^ AMD is going to release a new R9 300 series based on 20 nm manufacturing process which would improve the TDP and cooling quite a lot. It should be out in December this year or early 2015 and the rumored specs of the 390X are 15% faster than the GTX 980 for supposedly the same price. They will eventually get back into the competition for the highest end, but they just took a big blow from Nvidia with the 900 series. What do you mean AMD can't compete in the top end GPU market? They have the R9 295x2 which is faster than SLI 780 ti's and runs much cooler and quieter too with it's own water cooler at $1,000. And for people like me power consumption isn't much of a concern as electricity is 5C per KW. And I'm not the person who uses the aircon much or turns on the lights unnecessarily either. Currently Nvidia's 970 Is a better buy over the R9 290 like the R9 290 was a better buy over the GTX 780.


Is there going to be a 300 series card for 200$ or less? or are they all top range? should I wait for th new cards to be released ?



AMD will no doubt release a full range of new GPUs from the bottom end to the top eventually.
Nvidia will do the same, likely releasing more cards in the GTX 900 series.
There will always be something coming that gives you better performance for the same money.
m
0
l
September 27, 2014 7:25:24 AM

I believe they will have the R9 370x for under $200. But it just isn't worth waiting, especially since the resolution of your monitor is 1280x1024. At that resolution you could run Crysis 3 ultra with smooth FPS around 60 with a GTX 760. A 750ti/R7 265 ($120) would be great for your resolution and needs! :) 
m
0
l
September 29, 2014 4:58:41 AM

Sorry for the late response but there is one last thing I want to ask
Is nvidia cuda useful for gaming and does AMD have a counterpart for cuda?


Thanks for all the help.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
September 29, 2014 5:11:52 AM

Alex Kelly said:
290 can't be OCed much, 970 can be OCed heaps, that's my point :) 
It makes up for the slight price difference, imo.


This point is not true, I can achieve a very nice OC on a 290, and stable.

My question to the OP: What PSU do you have? Brand/model.
m
0
l
September 29, 2014 6:16:31 AM

AMvidia is the best
m
0
l
September 29, 2014 8:02:04 AM

maxtex said:
AMvidia is the best


Do you mean a system with both nvidia and AMD cards?
I would like something like that too but I hear that they are buggy
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
September 29, 2014 8:02:48 AM

Atmadeep Banerjee said:
maxtex said:
AMvidia is the best


Do you mean a system with both nvidia and AMD cards?


he's trolling you man, you can only run two of the same brand cards in 1 PC xD
m
0
l
September 29, 2014 8:11:50 AM

Embra said:
Alex Kelly said:
290 can't be OCed much, 970 can be OCed heaps, that's my point :) 
It makes up for the slight price difference, imo.


This point is not true, I can achieve a very nice OC on a 290, and stable.

My question to the OP: What PSU do you have? Brand/model.


I currently don't have a branded psu but I will get a seasonic s12ii 520w or a seasonic neoco 600w
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
September 29, 2014 9:23:15 AM

A 270x would match your CPU well. Those PSU will also be fine.
Do you have a GPU budget?
m
0
l
September 29, 2014 11:21:00 AM

Embra said:
A 270x would match your CPU well. Those PSU will also be fine.
Do you have a GPU budget?


Yeah. 200$ max.

m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
September 29, 2014 12:05:39 PM

Seriously, at 1280x1024 it doesn't matter much what you get. Your CPU is going to be much more important at that low resolution. Get a GTX 750 Ti or R7 265. Really all you'd need.
m
0
l
a b À AMD
a b Î Nvidia
a c 158 U Graphics card
September 29, 2014 4:43:27 PM

Atmadeep Banerjee said:
Sorry for the late response but there is one last thing I want to ask
Is nvidia cuda useful for gaming and does AMD have a counterpart for cuda?


Thanks for all the help.


CUDA is used to allow the GPU to be used for complex mathematical computation. It is aimed particularly at scientific computing, not games.
m
0
l
September 29, 2014 5:06:17 PM

Nvidia's 970 smokes anything AMD has right now.

I've seen a lot of 290 and even 290X customers regretting their purchase.
m
0
l
September 30, 2014 12:37:57 AM

Ok. Thanks everyone.
I have selected the best answer.

m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
October 1, 2014 10:08:17 AM

Your best answer selection is complete overkill for your low resolution monitor. He made it before you posted that you only have a 1280x1024 monitor. None of those powerful GPUs are going to be of much use at that low of a resolution and all you are going to do is waste money by purchasing something like a GTX 970 or R9 290.
m
0
l
October 1, 2014 7:37:19 PM

An R9 270x/GTX 760 would run all the latest games on ultra with that sort of res though.
m
0
l
!