The problem is that NVIDIA isn’t resting on their laurels, they improve by a large margin from architecture to architecture and continue to innovate features. AMD can barely keep up imitating some of these features (upscaling, RT, frame generation, heck even NVENC is superior to what Radeon offers) and the results are often worse (RT performance, DLSS vs FSR).
AMD only barely undercuts NVIDIA’s pricing based on raster performance, so this is essentially the easiest upsell ever. Pay 15 % more but get better versions of features, new features early, broader compatibility also in terms of compute and more efficiency? Sure, most people will pay 15 % more for that.
AMD needs to be way more aggressive on pricing and try to innovate useful features first on Radeon. That being said, I think NVIDIA would simply price-match as soon as AMD gains any traction.
At this point I have more faith in Intel to be competitive in a few generations. They seem to be able to almost match RT performance, already putting AMD to shame with their first generation of Arc GPUs. Their upscaling tech is way closer to DLSS, Intel QSV is a pretty solid hardware encoder and let’s hope they do a better job competing at compute.
The problem is that Nvidia pulls proprietary nonsense out of their ass, specifically to say “AMD can’t do [blank]!”
Physics. Sound. Compute. Hair. Raytracing. Upscaling. And on and on and on, aggressively poised to be incompatible. CUDA is fifteen years old and Nvidia still threatens anyone who tries cross-compiling it to SPIR-V or OpenCL.
This is anti-competitive behavior from a blatant monopoly. They have supermajority market share - they are abusing it. The right answer is to shatter this corporation.
The problem is that NVIDIA isn’t resting on their laurels, they improve by a large margin from architecture to architecture and continue to innovate features. AMD can barely keep up imitating some of these features (upscaling, RT, frame generation, heck even NVENC is superior to what Radeon offers) and the results are often worse (RT performance, DLSS vs FSR).
AMD only barely undercuts NVIDIA’s pricing based on raster performance, so this is essentially the easiest upsell ever. Pay 15 % more but get better versions of features, new features early, broader compatibility also in terms of compute and more efficiency? Sure, most people will pay 15 % more for that.
AMD needs to be way more aggressive on pricing and try to innovate useful features first on Radeon. That being said, I think NVIDIA would simply price-match as soon as AMD gains any traction.
At this point I have more faith in Intel to be competitive in a few generations. They seem to be able to almost match RT performance, already putting AMD to shame with their first generation of Arc GPUs. Their upscaling tech is way closer to DLSS, Intel QSV is a pretty solid hardware encoder and let’s hope they do a better job competing at compute.
The problem is that Nvidia pulls proprietary nonsense out of their ass, specifically to say “AMD can’t do [blank]!”
Physics. Sound. Compute. Hair. Raytracing. Upscaling. And on and on and on, aggressively poised to be incompatible. CUDA is fifteen years old and Nvidia still threatens anyone who tries cross-compiling it to SPIR-V or OpenCL.
This is anti-competitive behavior from a blatant monopoly. They have supermajority market share - they are abusing it. The right answer is to shatter this corporation.