- Brand placement? nVidia has it all with most AAA PC titles being TWIMTBP and having their logo appear in the beginning of each game. Is AMD changing this?
Perfect example of what will never change unless AMD can re-position the Radeon brand as a premium brand once again. That doesn't happen if they have to continually offer their cards as the "discount" alternative to Nvidia.
- Custom game enhancements? None that I've heard of. nVidia has all of those: PhysX, unlocked AA modes, GPGPU assisted effects like Just Cause 2. Is AMD changing this?
- GPGPU? nVidia is light-years ahead with almost every GPGPU-enabled software having a "main" CUDA path and then sometimes they go out of their way to enable an OpenCL path. Now that the GCN is a much more compute-friendly architecture, I have no doubts that this will change, but the current paradigm is: nVidia is better for computing. No brand advantages there, yet.
PhysX is debatable. I find it worthless. At best it's a cheap gimmick in games. At worst it's a cheap gimmick that drags down performance when enabled (on supported video cards) for minimal gains. I realize that other people feel differently, for them it probably is an advantage.
As for GPGPU, GTX 680 has taken a step both forwards and backwards at the same time. Sometimes faster than GTX 580 sometimes radically slower.
And when it comes to consumer gaming, CUDA is going to matter less and less as DXcompute matures. For prosumer markets, the GTX 680 has taken a step backwards. OpenCL may become relevant but I don't have high hopes for that. I expect DXcompute to mature far faster and be far more prevalent in the consumer gaming sector.
And there, the 79xx cards will likely have an advantage in some cases while the GTX 680 may have some advantages in some cases. I'd call it a potential wash at this point.
- Multi-monitor gaming? Yeah, Eyefinity was here first, but how many people exactly have such a setup? Now nVidia has it too for single-card usage, so expect all TWIMTBP games to feature this.
Nvidia have certainly caught up but they are still some distance behind in multi-monitor gaming. But certainly a niche, but a very important niche for cards costing 500 USD or more. As is the 2560x1600 gaming market. Both area's BTW where the 7970 closes the gap in performance and surpasses the GTX 680 in more cases.
- 3D displays? nVidia is also miles ahead here. Sure, AMD stated they would follow the "open" way, which is nice and all, but when a game supports stereo 3D, which system does it use? 3D Vision.
Again a wash here. For Nvidia you have to buy their 3D vision whatever mabobber thing. For AMD you have to buy software to force it in games that don't support it naturally.
For Nvidia users that want to use, say a 3D HDTV, they have to buy the same software that AMD users have to buy.
Speaking of 3D HDTV's. If a game natively supports AMD's HD3D (like Deus Ex: HR), then you don't even have to buy anything extra if you already have a 3D capable display.
Speaking of native support. All of the above will become less and less relevant as Microsoft starts to incorporate stereoscopic support into DirectX.
As to the quality of the experience. The last comprehensive test I saw that pitted Nvidia's 3D vision, versus AMD with HD3D and the 2 available software enablers shows a general wash. In some games Nvidia did better with 3D vision. In some games AMD was better with those software enablers.
- Driver quality? Hardly.. nVidia is a lot faster in releasing updated drivers when a new AAA game comes out. Probably related to the fact that their engineers partially develop the games themselves. I have no problems whatsoever with AMD drivers, but clearly they're not on top and clearly there's no brand advantage here.
Again, until AMD can once again price their cards as premium graphics cards, they won't be able to make enough profit to expand their driver team. If they even need to do that.
They've started being like Nvidia with releasing frequent BETA drivers to address problems in games. Nvidia are a bit faster at it, whether that's due to experience of doing it for such a long time or that their driver team is better funded, who knows. But AMD are certainly catching up fast in that area.
AND, they still maintain their WHQL'd monthly driver releases. And Nvidia still can't touch this. Like PhysX above, it's not a bonus for some people, but it is a big bonus for others.
So what exactly is AMD sitting on here? For 99% of the people who purchase graphics cards in the $500 range, where exactly is the advantage in purchasing a HD7970 instead of a GTX680?
A card that was in retail 2.5 months before the competition. A card that at low resolutions is only 10-15% slower than the competition at stock clocks. 5-8% slower at higher resolutions at stock on average.
And when
both cards are overclocked (which is highly likely with people spending 500+ USD on a video card) it is roughly the same speed at low resolutions. But takes the lead at higher resolutions. And suddenly depending on your gaming environment the 7970 becomes the better value (well if they were priced the same).
So, yes, I can certainly see
eventually dropping it to 499 USD to match the GTX 680. But until supply and demand for the GTX 680 start to even out, there is very little pressure on AMD to adjust the price of the 7970. AMD can certainly thank Nvidia for that gift.
Hence, premium price to rebuild mindshare as a premium brand.
BTW - just so we're clear,
I don't like it personally. But then I'd love it if both companies could sell enthusiast class video cards for 300 USD or less or possibly as high as 350 USD. The reality is that neither company is going to make money if they do that.
And if AMD are forced out of the video card market due to having to price their cards differently than Nvidia despite having similar performance and swapping performance leads with them... Then things will rapidly get a whole lot worse for the consumer.
Regards,
SB
