Brand Loyalty or Agnosticism?

[jackstar7]

Curious what drives people to make their graphics card purchases.

Simple poll.

Please do not comment on wood screws, drivers, or anything else in this thread. This is just informational, not judgmental.

Thank you.

 

[skipsneeky2]

Biggest decision for me this time around was noise and the fact 290/290x doesn't come with DVI-I.I am in the minority here but gaming on a t.v that has vga,i simply need DVI-I for converting to vga.

Questionable adapters are so wonky,they work or don't work or if they work they work up to a certain resolution so functions like DSR/VSR will not work and i use this feature.It's luck of the draw on what issues may or may not come out of converting analog to digital with one of these.

 

[Jaskalas]

Currently using AMD.
If buying today I'd go Nvidia.

I've a history of flipping back and forth when I purchase video cards.
Price / performance are the big issues, but I'll also watch heat and power usage. Don't want to buy a toaster oven.

 

[Udgnim]

I do price / performance in the $200-$300 price segment

also consider fan noise, heat, overclock potential, and games I play, but price / performance at the resolution I expect to be using is my biggest factor

don't pay that much attention to TDP other than making sure my PSU has the appropriate connectors

have not had bad experiences with either brand's drivers although having never gone beyond single GPU probably helps with that

 

[VirtualLarry]

Biggest decision for me this time around was noise and the fact 290/290x doesn't come with DVI-I.

No DVI ports on 290/X? Or you are saying, they only carry DVI-D, not DVI-I? That's a change for the worse, I hadn't realized that.

 

[jackstar7]

To answer my own question, I started with ATi and had a X800XL that I enjoyed using back in the day. Then switched to nVidia with the 8800 era. Eventually, I moved to AMD for Eyefinity and their port layout with lots of Displayports. Lately, I'm waiting to see where things fall with a specific monitor I desire. Either Freesync or G-sync at 3440x1440. If the Predator turns out to be this, then I'll need to move to nVidia and G-sync. If someone else gets a Freesync to market, then I'll need to move up to the new GCN to get that benefit.

 

[skipsneeky2]

No DVI ports on 290/X? Or you are saying, they only carry DVI-D, not DVI-I? That's a change for the worse, I hadn't realized that.

They only have DVI-D,on both ports.It isn't a big issue for the majority but its a issue for me.

 

[bigboxes]

I'm usually all about the ~$200 best value at the time of purchase. I am not brand loyal. I'm in the process of putting together a new build as I can afford it. I had settled on the 970 and had been researching the different brands and models of that chip. Then the Nvidia spec fiasco has me rethinking. I have been looking at 290X cards now that are cheaper, faster and have a full 4GB ram. Then there is the possibility I will just wait until the new round of cards are released. Either the performance will be considerably higher or the current cards will experience a price drop. Sounds like a win-win for me as I am patient.

 

[Gloomy]

I have an R9 290. If I were buying two weeks ago I'd have picked up a 970. If I were buying today I would pick an R9 290. I don't think I am agnostic. I do favor one brand over the other. Just not when it comes to making purchasing decisions.

I consider being a fan of someone who is selling you things to be Stockholm syndrome-tier brain problems.

 

[S.H.O.D.A.N.]

Used to be that I bought whatever was the fastest at the moment of building a new rig. Now I just run two machines with gpus from either company, though admittedly my Nvidia rig is running only a single 980 that I haven't even installed yet.

 

[chimaxi83]

Absolutely agnostic. Don't care about power usage/efficiency. Performance and price/performance are all that matter to me. I went AMD last time because of Mantle and True Audio, which have proved to be meh in my personal experience, other than great smoothness in BF4. We'll see what happens next round, because I planned to go Nvidia to maximize my Witcher 3 experience, but Gameworks is a steaming turd of a program. We shall see.

 

[Blain]

Brand Loyalty or Agnosticism?

Curious what drives people to make their graphics card purchases.

MSI, Asus and Gigabyte are the best brands.

 

[jackstar7]

MSI, Asus and Gigabyte are the best brands.

I like EVGA for nV and Sapphire for AMD. But those are based on past experience.

 

[lavaheadache]

I've become more prone to buying certain AIB's vs. gpu maker. Msi and Gigabyte are my current personal fav's but I will go with others depending on what's going on.

Over the years too many companies have both shined and faded to get too loyal to anything though.

 

[Erenhardt]

Add option 4:
Brand Agnostic (purchase based on performance/$. regardless of brand)
Because option 1 sounds like poor nv trolling - Buy only the most efficient card now. A year ago purchased the card with best smoothness/dB, and even before that only features like physx counted.

 

[lavaheadache]

To answer my own question, I started with ATi and had a X800XL that I enjoyed using back in the day. Then switched to nVidia with the 8800 era. Eventually, I moved to AMD for Eyefinity and their port layout with lots of Displayports. Lately, I'm waiting to see where things fall with a specific monitor I desire. Either Freesync or G-sync at 3440x1440. If the Predator turns out to be this, then I'll need to move to nVidia and G-sync. If someone else gets a Freesync to market, then I'll need to move up to the new GCN to get that benefit.

3440x1440 is the best way to go right now IMO. good call.

 

[skipsneeky2]

3440x1440 is the best way to go right now IMO. good call.

Bit off topic but i googled up that 7800 gs Bliss,very interesting as i had the regular 16 pipe version in AGP.

 

[railven]

I feel I'm not represented very well. I wouldn't say I'm brand agnostic (old ATI colors has a special place in my heart). I admit to my AMD...no that's wrong, to my Radeon Bias, but I'm rocking GeForce because I just couldn't support Hawaii XT at launch.

Abstain.

 

[videogames101]

Agnostic, first card was an ATI 9800Pro, switched to Nvidia for a 7800GT, switched back for the HD4870 and followed that up with the current 7870. If I was buying today I would probably buy an nvidia card, because I'm toying with an ITX build and the power/noise/temperature will become an issue unlike inside my antec 1200. So always based on the features and price point I'm looking for at the time.

 

[xthetenth]

Agnostic but going with AMD next time. It's just a matter of timing to wait until they're better price/performance, and nV deserves to lose at least one sale over Kepler tanking and the 970 shenanigans meaning I have no faith in my 970 lasting as long as I bought it for.

 

[3DVagabond]

Add option 4:
Brand Agnostic (purchase based on performance/$. regardless of brand)
Because option 1 sounds like poor nv trolling - Buy only the most efficient card now. A year ago purchased the card with best smoothness/dB, and even before that only features like physx counted.

Agreed. Words straight out of the argument people make to justify over paying for nVidia.

 

[5150Joker]

Used to purchase both brands but lean more heavily towards NVIDIA for personal use. I still recommend AMD products to people I know when the need arises but for the most part I avoid their products due to past problems with them.

 

[nitromullet]

It's difficult to not bring up drivers in a discussion like this.

I've owned at least one high end card from both AMD(ATI) and NVIDIA each generation since 2005. The exception to this are the Radeon HD 2900, and thus far Maxwell, but this generation isn't over yet...

It has been my experience that both have made great hardware over the years, and often the only significant difference between them has been driver support for a specific title, or an issue that might be a deal breaker for me.

I've have good and bad driver experiences with both over the years, but I feel that overall I tend to have fewer issues with NVIDIA cards. That being said, I'll keep buying both because they both still offer a great experience, and AMD usually does it for less.

 

[SPBHM]

I always tend to go with what looks like the best deal for me (price, performance, power and a few other things)... I've had enough graphics cards (from S3, SiS, Intel, 3dfx, Ati/AMD and Nvidia) not to be overly attached to any brand

 

[BonzaiDuck]

Agnostic but going with AMD next time. It's just a matter of timing to wait until they're better price/performance, and nV deserves to lose at least one sale over Kepler tanking and the 970 shenanigans meaning I have no faith in my 970 lasting as long as I bought it for.

Last time I bought an AMD/[ATI?] Radeon card, it was for Mom's Win 98 machine. I stuck with the NVidia side of the duopoly just because I "got used to it."

I was actually going to post another thread touching on the 970 fiasco. I think the misgivings are overblown. I also bought one -- mere days before the "Gurr-reat Revelation."

Let me look into my crystal ball, with a thought about what's "past."

I've got an HDTV and an HD monitor. The TV is perhaps 3-years-old; the monitor -- maybe 4, possibly 5-years-old.

The 1920x1080s still dominate the market at their price-point. If you want a "4K' monitor, you'll pay at least $600 to "the-sky's limit" into the thousands depending on size, whether it's "TV" or a desktop monitor and other factors.

To the statistically-likely consumer, this would obviously be seen as a sort of durable-goods investment decision. Are you going to sell and replace your LCD-LED TV over the incremental PERCEPTUAL difference between HD and 4K? The last I looked, the cable-providers were still broadcasting 60hz, even though newer models (of HD 1920x1080) provide for 120 and 240.

A GTX 970 is fully ample for gaming with a single card for 1920x1080. Plenty as far as I can tell! 2x 970 SLI would likely allow for it at 4K. I'm not really clear as to "shortfalls" with a single card and 4K; I'd heard mention of "stuttering" -- here and there, but even that observation and opinion varies.

Are games going to pre-empt you from an enjoyable experience at 1920x1080? Or with 4 cores instead of 6? Not likely. The game makers will aim for a segmented market that allows for the largest revenues in sales. More is better.

So "future-proof" is indeed "in the eye of the beholder" and the beholder's affinity for established HD resolution as opposed to 4K. Long ago, I'd seen people hold on to a Sony color TV set for 15 years. Maybe that profile has changed, but similar imperatives are effective.