When choosing a modern discrete graphics accelerator for a desktop computer, a dilemma arises as to which company product to choose: NVidia or AMD? Only these two companies occupy a dominant position in the niche of discrete graphics cards, and, in essence, they currently have no real alternative. It is the model range of adapters of these two manufacturers that this material will be devoted to.
Types of Graphics
By the method of execution, video cards can be integrated and discrete. In the first case, the video adapter is either part of the chipset on the system board, or is located on the silicon base of the central processing unit. The first performance is obsolete today and is rarely seen in new computers. But the second option now occupies a dominant position in the segment of entry-level computing systems. As a rule, such video subsystems have a rather low speed, which is sufficient only for the implementation of the simplest tasks.
Also, in this part of the video card market there is no choice between NVidia or AMD for the reason that the first of them does not produce central processors and initially it cannot have integrated graphics adapters. The dominant position in this case is occupied by AMD, and Intel is competing with it. Discrete video accelerator is a separate board, which is installed in the expansion slot of the motherboard. Conventionally, such computer components are divided into three levels:
- Entry level solutions.
- Middle-class adapters.
- Premium graphics accelerators.
It is in this niche that there is direct competition between manufacturers, and here the question: “Which video card to choose: NVidia or AMD?” Is as relevant as possible.
What are the manufacturers of graphics accelerators today?
Actually in the list of manufacturers of chip video cards today there are 4 companies: AMD, NVidia, Intel and Matrox. The first of them, as noted earlier, is capable of manufacturing both integrated adapters and discrete ones. The only caveat: it does not have premium-level adapters that are able to compete on equal terms with the flagship NVidia.
The second company produces discrete accelerators. Moreover, in the assortment of its products there are both entry-level adapters and video accelerators of an average and even premium level. The cost of the latter can reach 1000 dollars. In turn, Intel specializes in integrated accelerators, which are most often found only in office systems or multimedia stations.
Also, the capabilities of such accelerators may be enough to run some toys at minimum settings. Until recently, Matrox made video cards based on its chips. But the difficult economic situation and minimal demand forced her to use the solutions of a direct competitor - AMD.
Segmentation of products
The distribution of video cards of the three leading manufacturers by market segments is shown in the table below. Matrox company is absent for the reason that it refused to manufacture its video chips and uses AMD semiconductor solutions for these purposes.
The distribution of video accelerators by niches of the main manufacturers can be seen in the table.
| Market niche | AMD Radeon | NVidia GeForce | Intel HD Graphics |
Integrated graphics cards | R7 240, R7 250 | - | 610, 620 and 630 |
Low cost adapters | RX 460, RX 470 | 1050, 1050 Ti | - |
Mid-Range Accelerators | RX 480 | 1060, 1070 | - |
Premium Video Accelerators | - | 1080, 1080 Ti | - |
In almost all segments of the market for graphic accelerators, except for the most productive solutions, there are AMD Radeon adapters. NVidia, in turn, can offer a video accelerator in any segment of the video subsystem market, except integrated solutions. Intel boasts only integrated video accelerators.
Therefore, the competition between AMD Radeon vs NVidia can be observed only in the niches of budget adapters and mid-range accelerators.
Integrated graphics cards
As noted earlier, Intel and AMD compete in the integrated accelerator segment. Therefore, the choice between AMD Radeon or NVidia GeForce in this case does not exist. The list of Intel offers in this case is presented by three models of the HD Graphics series with indices 610, 620 and 630.
The higher the model number, the higher the speed. Therefore, the 610 and 620 are great for office PCs and various multimedia stations. But the model 630 can already launch some games. Only with minimal settings.
A key factor that limits the performance of such video subsystems is the memory subsystem. Such video adapters use the RAM of a personal computer. Her chips operate at lower frequencies, and this has a very negative effect on performance.
The second leading manufacturer of integrated graphics is AMD. Its accelerators are built into the A-series chips. They belong to the Radeon series and are labeled R7 250 or R7 240. In essence, these are truncated modifications of budget video accelerators. Their productivity is higher than that of a competing company. But the main problem, as in the previous case, is the low speed of the memory subsystem.
Until recently, an NVidia or AMD graphics card could be selected in this market segment. But now the first of them was forced to abandon the release of such products for the reason that the adapter was transferred from the set of system logic to the CPU. Well, NVidia is not involved in the manufacture of such products and was forced to exclude such solutions from its model range.
Entry-level adapters
The only part of the graphics market where the choice between AMD or NVidia is most acute. The lineup of the first company is represented by RX460 and RX470 solutions. Their technical characteristics are given in the table below.
The characteristics of the RX460 and RX470 are shown in the table.
Parameter Name | Rx460 | Rx470 |
GPU Type | Polaris 11 | Polaris 10 Pro |
Technology | 14 nm |
Stream processors | 896 | 2048 |
TMU units | 48 | 128 |
ROP blocks | 16 | 32 |
Frequencies, MHz | 1090-1200 | 926-1206 |
The amount of memory GDDR5, GB | 2/4 | 4/8 |
Memory bus bit | 128 | 256 |
RAM frequency, MHz | 7000 | 6600 |
Thermal package, W | 75 | 120 |
Their direct competitors are 1050 and 1050 Ti, respectively. Their specifications are shown in the table below.
1050 and 1050 Ti adapter specifications
Parameter | 1050 | 1050Ti |
GPU | GP107 |
Technology, nm | fourteen |
Number of stream processors | 640 | 768 |
TMU, pcs | 40 | 48 |
ROP pcs | 32 | 32 |
Frequency Range, MHz | 1354/1455 | 1290/1392 |
RAM GDDR5, GB | 2 | four |
Memory frequency, MHz | 7008 |
Power consumption | 75 | 75 |
Now let's compare the AMD Vs NVidia solutions presented earlier in real tests. In 3DMark, accelerator forces in points are distributed as follows:
- RX470 - 9207.
- 1050Ti - 7078.
- 1050 - 6489.
- RX460-5263.
In the game Thief with a resolution of 1920 × 1080 and high picture quality, we get such results in fps:
- RX470 - 69.
- 1050Ti - 52.
- 1050 - 48.
- RX460 - 39.
In Metro: Last Light, in the same mode and identical quality, the results:
- RX470 - 39.
- 1050Ti - 31.
- 1050 - 28.
- RX460 - 20.
The previous results indicate that the RX460 is an unconditional outsider in this case. He has the lowest cost, but also the corresponding performance. On average, 1050 percent are ahead of 1050 in tests. Moreover, this GPU has 2 times more video buffer. 1050Ti has 10 percent faster performance.
Well, the absolute leader in this niche is the RX470. This adapter has the highest cost, but its performance is at the appropriate level. If the budget allows, then the RX470 is the best choice for this niche of graphics solutions.
Middle class accelerators
The situation in the middle segment dramatically changes when comparing AMD vs NVidia. In this case, already the second company offers products with improved performance and improved specifications.
The key factor is that NVidia video accelerators in this price category support virtual reality technology (they even have the inscription VR Ready), and AMD's solution lacks such an important feature. RX480 specifications are listed in the table below.
Specifications RX480
Parameter Name | Rx480 |
GPU Model | Polaris 10 HT |
Process technology, nm | fourteen |
Frequency formula, MHz | 1120/1266 |
RAM size GDDR5, GB | 8 |
Video Buffer Frequency, MHz | 8000 MHz |
Shader units | 2304 |
ROP pcs | 32 |
TMU, pcs | 144 |
RAM bus width, bit | 256 |
Power consumption, W | 150 |
At NVidia, to date, 2 adapters belong to the segment of middle-class solutions - these are 1060 and 1070. Their main technical parameters are shown in the table below.
Parameters 1060 and 1070
Parameter Name | 1060 | 1070 |
GPU | GP06 | GP104 |
Production technology, nm | 16 |
Frequency values, MHz | 1506/1708 | 1503/1683 |
GDDR5 video buffer, GB | 3/6 | 4/8 |
The frequency of the memory, MHz | 8000 |
Shader processing units, pcs | 1280 | 1920 |
ROP pcs | 64 | 48 |
TMU, pcs | 80 | 120 |
The capacity of the RAM interface, bit | 256 | 192 |
TDP, W | 120 | 150 |
A comparison between the AMD Radeon vs NVidia GeForce in this niche indicates a significant advantage of the products of the second company. Moreover, this can be seen not only in technical characteristics, but also in the test results. For example, in the game Battlefield 4, these adapters in the resolution 2560X1440 and with ultra-high settings give out such a number of fps:
- 1070 - 50-63.
- 1060 - 47-60.
- RX480 - 32-44.
The ideal ratio of software and hardware in NVidia products in this case leaves no chance for AMD’s leading adapter.
Slightly changing the balance of power in the game Batman: Arkham Khight. In this case, the image resolution remains the same, and its quality is high. As a result, video accelerators produced such values in fps:
- 1070-59-91.
- RX480 - 43-65.
- 1060 - 40-64.
AMD’s leading solution slightly bypasses the youngest representative of this family in the person of 1060, but it is still hopelessly behind 1070. The explanation for this result is as follows: in 1060 there are only 6 GB, and this toy already requires 8 GB.
As a result, a system RAM is used that operates at substantially lower frequencies, and this reduces the speed of the video subsystem. Another failure occurs when testing the RX480 in the game DIRT. The resolution in this case corresponds to “2K”, and the settings are maximum. As a result, we get such a number of fps:
- 1070 - 67-79.
- 1060 - 48-58.
- RX480 - 36-47.
Again, a more sophisticated architecture and optimized software in this case re-arrange everything in its place. RX480 can give a decent answer in the game Total War: Warhammer. In this game, the picture was displayed in 1080p format with maximum quality. As a result, the following results were obtained in the number of frames per second:
- RX480 - 49-55.
- 1070 - 45-51.
- 1060 - 42-46.
In this case, the game is well optimized for AMD Vulkan API and it is precisely its products that show impressive results. But still, NVidia products are preferable in this niche, and when assembling a PC of this level it is better to choose it.
Most productive solutions
In the niche of the most productive graphics accelerators with the highest level of performance, today there is no choice between AMD or NVidia for the reason that the first company now does not have such adapters.
But the second manufacturer has two premium level accelerators at once - these are 1080 and 1080 Ti. Like the two mid-range models, they support VR technology. Also, these solutions function perfectly in 4K mode.
The presence of such a component in a PC today allows its owner not to think about the speed of the video subsystem for the reason that it is not difficult to complete any actual task on such hardware.
Separately, it is necessary in this case to note the video buffer. The memory type in this case is GDDR5X. Its chips operate at a frequency of 10 GHz in the case of 1080 and 11 GHz in 1080Ti. The amount of RAM in the first adapter is 8 GB, and in the second - 11 GB. As soon as these parameters leave no chance for competing solutions, NVidia products can outperform any AMD adapter in terms of performance.
Software situation
An important component of any modern graphics subsystem is the driver. It is on how much the latest version of the latter is installed, and the final level of computer performance depends. Initially, developers do not fully optimize application software packages.
In the future, testing of the product provided to users takes place and shortcomings and errors are revealed, which are gradually corrected and adjusted. Also, manufacturers take into account the software that appears on sale at this time. These are toys, and graphic packages, and software for designing various kinds of systems. The hardware along with a set of drivers is optimized for such programs. And only after that an updated program for managing the graphics adapter appears on the official website of the manufacturer.
Catalyst - the so-called software for the implementation of AMD graphics adapter, which includes the AMD driver. NVidia calls its similar software package System Tools. It is important to keep track of updates and install them regularly. This will avoid possible problems when installing new software and in some cases will increase the performance of existing software.
Possible alternatives
There are only two alternative options for those who do not want to buy products of two leading companies and do not want to think about which is better, AMD or NVidia. One of them is the use of integrated Intel solutions. This approach is justified only in cases where the computer will solve the most simple tasks. If the requirements for the graphics subsystem of the electronic computing subsystem go beyond this framework, then it is unacceptable to use such a solution.
The second possible alternative is the accelerators of the Canadian company Matrox. But recently, this company abandoned the development of its own graphics processors and began to use AMD semiconductor chips. Also, such products are used only in cases where it is necessary to display information on several monitors, which can be connected up to 9 pieces.
Development prospects
As part of this material, only relevant manufacturers accelerators were considered. But there are still stocks and outdated versions of graphics accelerators, starting with the NVidia GeForce GTX 660.
AMD in this case is represented by adapters of the R9 370 or R9 280 series. But such solutions are no longer relevant, and it is unacceptable to use them when assembling a new computer. Their level of performance is significantly lower, and energy consumption is overestimated.
NVidia has recently introduced the 10XX series accelerators, and so far its new developments are not advertised. Essentially, she is waiting for her opponent’s response. In May 2017, AMD will introduce RX 5XX series video cards that will duplicate its current products. The difference will be only in the increased frequencies and the new manufacturing process.
Also, during 2017 AMD plans to update the line of video cards and introduce completely new Vega series products. After that, the question of whether AMD or NVidia is better will arise with renewed vigor.
Summary
If there is a choice between NVidia or AMD, then the solutions of the first company will be preferable. Most of them support virtual reality technology and at comparable cost have higher performance.
RX 470 is kept separately in this list. This accelerator belongs to entry-level solutions and bypasses competing solutions in terms of speed. If you plan to assemble a budget or office computer, then AMD chips are preferable from the position of the graphics subsystem.
If priority is given to higher processor speed, it is better to choose Intel products.