AMD or NVIDIA? (non-fanboy responses please!)

Home Forums General vorpX Discussion AMD or NVIDIA? (non-fanboy responses please!)

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 17 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #185832
    mr_spongeworthy
    Participant

    TLDR: Are there any specific technologies that, as a newbie to VR (but not to the performance impact stereoscopy has, see below) I should take into consideration between these two options now that performance/price/power seems really close to on-par?

    Details: After something like 10 years of traditional stereoscopic gaming I’m planning to pull the trigger and get a VR rig (Pimax 5K probably, unless something better comes along before Fall – I want the wide FOV as I find other HMDs to be far too narrow).

    I have historically used AMD cards because they supported industry-standard HDMI 3D modes (including frame-packing, so really high fidelity), where NVIDIA had their own system. So it was easy to put together a projector that supported my PS3 and PC, plus any other industry standard 3D sources.

    Was fully planning to make the move to NVIDIA, but now the NAVI cards are here and I always try to get the best bang for the buck. It looks like these are really giving NVIDIA some competition.

    Thanks in advance!

    #185834
    zig11727
    Participant

    I own both NVidia cards are faster but very pricey AMD new line up seems very reasonable.

    The other reason I have purchased NVidia cards was for 3D Vision since NVidia doesn’t support 3D Vision my next video card will be Amd.

    #185841
    mr_spongeworthy
    Participant

    Thanks, but I’m also looking for any brand-specific features I might otherwise be unaware of. For example, there are various frame rate amplification technologies, that try to help achieve that magic 90fps minimum for VR.

    Just thinking that there might be some real advantages to one brand over the other in VR, even if the cards otherwise perform more or less the same.

    #185849
    benzoylperoxide
    Participant

    What is the industry standard 3D that AMD support?

    I’ve been using a 1080 for a long time and it works fine for most games
    For tradition VR games its always been overkill because most are designed to run on a 970 at 90fps.

    but Vorpx is pushing it’s limits. Everything is playable but I’m starting to feel it. I think a 2080ti should get the job done.

    I should mention that I’m also using a Vive which has a lower native resolution. Higher resolution headsets may require more GPU.

    #185852
    moadepth
    Participant

    Everything is playable but I’m starting to feel it. I think a 2080ti should get the job done.

    We need some benchmarks to confirm that, maybe AMD cards outperform Nvidia in VorpX nobody really knows?

    #185853
    Ralf
    Keymaster

    Just to add another aspect to the discussion I’d like to mention that at least as far as Oculus users are concerned AMD’s market share is below 10%. See the Oculus hardware survey here: https://developer.oculus.com/hardware-report/pc/

    This is worth considering when you make a choice because VR devs spend more development time with cards the vast majority of their users have, so those are typically better tested. Shouldn’t be your main reason to decide for or against a GPU vendor, but it’s worth to be factored into your decision making.

    #185855
    moadepth
    Participant

    Hi Ralf, Vr devs aside whats good for VorpX has it alot Cpu usage or do need a good amount of Vram ? Is it 1:1 comparable with 2d performance ? Only you know. As for the benchmark we could use the Unity benchmark (dont know the name yet) posting 2d and 3d results for a first rough comparison.

    #185857
    Ralf
    Keymaster

    There is no single benchmark that you could use to determine how well vorpX works as that depends heavily on individual games. In a nutshell: old games run typically better than the latest, more demanding, ones and both GPU and CPU performance are important. Impossible to say anything more specific due to the vast amount of entirely different situations you may want to use vorpX in.

    #185875
    zeveral
    Participant

    Getting back to the original questrion, there are no specific features from either AMD or nvidia that give you better performance in VR vs. normal rendering.

    #185881
    mr_spongeworthy
    Participant

    Getting back to the original question, there are no specific features from either AMD or nvidia that give you better performance in VR vs. normal rendering.

    OK, that’s more or less what I’ve been reading, but it’s always good to get feedback from people actually doing it.

    I’m currently leaning towards the Radeon 5700 XT at this point as they currently appear to be neck-and-neck or outrunning the 2070-super by small amounts in many real-world benchmarks and is a bit cheaper. I can invest the difference in a liquid-cooling adapter (I currently run an r9 390 with an adapter designed for Corsair coolers; a budget solution yes, but it dramatically reduces fan noise). I’m also really liking what I’m seeing with AMDs new driver-level upscale-with-sharpen features.

    #185933
    zig11727
    Participant

    @mr_spongeworthy

    Do you still play 3D games on your monitor ?

    If so NVidia has 100’s of community fixed 3D Vision games and hacks before making a decision I would check the NVidia forums.

    IMO this would get you the best of both worlds. VorpX and 3D Vision.

    #185939
    mr_spongeworthy
    Participant

    @mr_spongeworthy

    Do you still play 3D games on your monitor ?

    If so NVidia has 100’s of community fixed 3D Vision games and hacks before making a decision I would check the NVidia forums.

    IMO this would get you the best of both worlds. VorpX and 3D Vision.

    Yeah, I considered that, but NVIDIA is dropping 3D Vision support completely a the driver level, so that’s not really a consideration any longer. Can’t believe they are doing that, it’s nuts.

    It’s also another reason that vorpX should consider support traditional 3D modes instead of just VR equipment, IMHO.

    #186094
    dborosev
    Participant

    Although I have nvidia now, I really like the stuff that AMD is doing.

    #186806
    neodraig
    Participant

    Sorry I’m late to the party but using a nVidia card might be better with vorpX.
    If your card is powerful enough and you want to use higher resolutions with vorpX, with a AMD card you will be limited to the native resolution of your monitor and won’t be able to go higher. If you’re using a 4K monitor it’s not a problem, but if it is a 1080p display then it will be.
    You can partially address this problem by using VSR, but if you’re aiming for for the highest resolution, then games like Half-Life 2 or Portal will keep flickering as vorpX prefers square resolutions.
    With nVidia cards you don’t have that problem as you can create any virtual resolutions you want (not limited by the resolution of your monitor).

    I used to have an AMD card (I’m rather an ATI AMD guy), but now that I have a nVidia card, it’s easier tu use vorpX.

    On the other hand I now have Samsung Qled TV set that has VRR but nVidia cards don’t support VRR over HDMI, AMD cards do.

    #186815
    Ralf
    Keymaster

    As someone pointed out some time ago, there seeems to be a way to add custom resolutions higher than your monitor allows for AMD cards. It’s too hacky though to include in the official instructions. Not for the faint at heart.

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 17 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.