HofnaerrchenYour behavior in this matter makes me believe we are just about to find out why AMD drivers are the way they are: Stubborn beta testers that insit on being right even if proven otherwise. If your reporting on findings to your superiors mirrors this conversation I have no doubts to have found the problem. You just became noncredible in my opinion.

LOL I am just pointing out the fact that I wasn't making anything up...I am one the most credible members here especially on this matter. You think I've been here over 15 years and I am someone that spreads BS? :rolleyes:

for the record, having an rx 7900 xt nitro+ for a week. no stability issues since.

using for home office 4k@60 and for gaming 4k@120@10bpc, but TVs are not concurrently powered, thus no idle power consumption issues. (wrote my playing-arounds in other thread reg 23.1.1 driver)

had short-time a rx 6600 and a 1y+ the much loved rx 6900 xt tuf oc before.
had also a rx 5700 and a rx 5500 xt. and also other PCs with 3400g, 4650g, 5600g.
"permanent" black screen had once with the 5500 xt - like a had to plug another monitor on different port to continue.
apart from that, I had no stability issues. that's why I keep buying AMD (for now) because they are not (yet) trying to lock me in into proprietary features. may change in future..

less than expected performance with "SpaceEngine,"

Wow I tried running SpaceEngine 2 days ago and had ass performance and noted that the developers were blaming drivers but that AMD was aware and would update it.
And now they've fixed it (presumably), great!

Well that's a bust. This update completely breaks my computer forcing me to revert and install .1 again. Damnit AMD.

strange that no one create a poll for this XD

Vya DomusExcept RDNA2 isn't 7 months old, 6000 series was released in 2020. You guys still don't understand how this works, if it's the same architecture then all the optimizations apply to the entire product stack of that generation, the 6950 doesn't need specific optimizations.


Because that GPU arhitecture is actually new, why is this a surprise ?

You are right and I know this very well, but look at that from the consumer point of view- AMD drop game ready support (at least until now) for the very top GPU only 6 month after it release. indeed it is an 'old' arch but the point stand.
Maybe 6950 owner don't really care, and then all is fine :)

AusWolfWhat is "the best possible game experience"? I mean, are those optimizations really so important that you absolutely cannot play X game and have a decent experience without them?

Of course you can, but as an owner of the very best of 6xxx arch (not me, the hypothetical one) I guess you want the best of the best and willing to pay the premium for that.
In return you get a very much functional running game, but not the very best that is clearly available by optimization and that is only 6-7 month from release. It take some of the premium feel, don't you think?

If it wasn't for the very top 6950 I don't think anyone would care that much.
And maybe all 6xxx owner accepting this and OK with that and then nothing to see here, move along.

Dirt ChipYou are right and I know this very well, but look at that from the consumer point of view- AMD drop game ready support (at least until now) for the very top GPU only 6 month after it release. indeed it is an 'old' arch but the point stand.
Maybe 6950 owner don't really care, and then all is fine :)


Of course you can, but as an owner of the very best of 6xxx arch (not me, the hypothetical one) I guess you want the best of the best and willing to pay the premium for that.
In return you get a very much functional running game, but not the very best that is clearly available by optimization and that is only 6-7 month from release. It take some of the premium feel, don't you think?

If it wasn't for the very top 6950 I don't think anyone would care that much.
And maybe all 6xxx owner accepting this and OK with that and then nothing to see here, move along.

I guess I see your point - it just doesn't bother me, even as a 6750 XT owner. :) Not that my opinion is relevant, though, as I rarely ever play the newest releases. :ohwell:

sephiroth117And when you say Nvidia has better driver support for their GPUs you get hammered by AMD fans sometimes.

I like both brands, they both have impressive GPUs, but what I'm reading here is really not acceptable

I've only had experience with 3200G (integrated Vega) and 6700 non-XT (current card replacing 1650 super).
In my experience the GeForce gave me problem none times, in its 2-3 years of service. Chrome/Chromium backend apps, OBS, Afterburner w/ game ran fine at the same time. My card was particularly shitty when compared to OC frequency that any 1650S reviewed by TPU can do, but the game will just quit and I know to revert the OC.

The 6700 right now? Stock everything, crashes my games sometimes between alt tabbing, and after which there may be an unrecoverable crash forcing to to hard reset. Search for the error, go to AMD reddit, response consists of
- "NVidia has crashes with this too"(that I have no experienced on 1650s?! albeit I'm not on ampere)
- oh I just use version <some 6-12 month old driver that precedes major feature releases>
- fuck Microsoft (blaming MPO, MultiPanel Overlay. ok? fuck some feature built into windows since 8.1???)
- people who says they have the same problem and has moved to NV.
- people waiting indefinitely for next driver update bug fix.

but the worst thing is probably that I still don't even know what causes the crashes, let alone fix it, and I don't even think AMD is planning on doing anything about it...
The next upgrade I make which will probably be in 5 years time, I will probably just buy a overpriced (charge a premium, sure, but the 3060ti cost 200$ more than my 479$ 6700 at the same performance) NV. I don't have much hope for Intel, they will probably rather form a triopoly of the market rather than bring real competition to the bottom lines. Or maybe "fine wine" kicks in at some point but I expect 0 from AMD.

Both have issues sometimes, however, with 25+ years of exprience with GPUs, I can say that Nvidia simply has the better drivers. Especially when you leave the most popular titles and especially if you play early access titles. Nvidia cards are often waaaaay better here.

ATi drivers worked good at some point. When AMD bought ATi drivers sucked for a long time. They are in a better place now, still think Nvidia is better tho (driver-wise, launch drivers, features). AMD is cheaper for a reason. When AMD actually have been competitive in performance and features, you always got to pay for it. I remember buying 7970 on release, it was not cheap. Same with Ryzen 5000 series and now 7000 series, not cheap.

Ryzen 1000 and 2000 series = Very cheap because they had to be.

Post Nut ClairvoyanceStock everything, crashes my games sometimes between alt tabbing, and after which there may be an unrecoverable crash forcing to to hard reset.
...
I still don't even know what causes the crashes
...

so it seems it is not for sure the AMD graphics driver is causing you the problem.
you could try to borrow your card to a friend and check if he/she is having same issue.

aktpuSource on that? Maaaaybe if you only look at the biggest AAA-titles, maybe

Why do you need a source, it's pretty much fact, if you have experience with both brands. I have 3080 Ti and 5700XT (living room pc, full amd setup) and drivers have been terrible for the AMD card for the first 6-9 months if not more, and there have been no drivers for 5000-6000 series in 50 days now, alot of games came out in this timeframe. So don't really need any sources, Nvidia have new drivers available all the time, even for less popular titles. I lacked drivers on launch for so many games on the 5700XT. There were graphical errors in way more games on the 5700XT. My 3080 Ti have had drivers ready before launch every single time, sometimes beta, but mostly WHQL. Pretty much zero issues on the 3080 Ti.

Nvidia sits on 75-80% of the market, AMD and Intel has the remaining 20-25%, no wonder game dev's wants the games to run well on Nvidia and Nvidia software team is simply in another league compared to AMDs. This is one of the reasons why Nvidia is more expensive; Features, support and better drivers in general.

I am considering 7900 XTX but I am sceptical about the drivers again. I want 4080, 4080 Ti or 7900 XTX next.

Post Nut ClairvoyanceI've only had experience with 3200G (integrated Vega) and 6700 non-XT (current card replacing 1650 super).
In my experience the GeForce gave me problem none times, in its 2-3 years of service. Chrome/Chromium backend apps, OBS, Afterburner w/ game ran fine at the same time. My card was particularly shitty when compared to OC frequency that any 1650S reviewed by TPU can do, but the game will just quit and I know to revert the OC.

The 6700 right now? Stock everything, crashes my games sometimes between alt tabbing, and after which there may be an unrecoverable crash forcing to to hard reset. Search for the error, go to AMD reddit, response consists of
- "NVidia has crashes with this too"(that I have no experienced on 1650s?! albeit I'm not on ampere)
- oh I just use version <some 6-12 month old driver that precedes major feature releases>
- fuck Microsoft (blaming MPO, MultiPanel Overlay. ok? fuck some feature built into windows since 8.1???)
- people who says they have the same problem and has moved to NV.
- people waiting indefinitely for next driver update bug fix.

but the worst thing is probably that I still don't even know what causes the crashes, let alone fix it, and I don't even think AMD is planning on doing anything about it...
The next upgrade I make which will probably be in 5 years time, I will probably just buy a overpriced (charge a premium, sure, but the 3060ti cost 200$ more than my 479$ 6700 at the same performance) NV. I don't have much hope for Intel, they will probably rather form a triopoly of the market rather than bring real competition to the bottom lines. Or maybe "fine wine" kicks in at some point but I expect 0 from AMD.

I don't know what's going on with AMD cards, to be honest.

1. I had the same issues with the 5700 XT as you're describing - game crashes, driver timeout errors, freezes, etc. It was a bit of a mess. A workable mess, but still a mess.
2. My 6500 XT is great! It struggles a bit coming back from Chrome/Chromium and video hardware acceleration in general (Windows starts to stutter, but the video doesn't), but no problems otherwise. Turning off hardware acceleration in the web browser and video player programs solves the issue. Funny enough, I also tried a 6400 that doesn't have this issue (I'm sort of a PC masochist, I know).
3. My 6750 XT works perfectly! It gives me the same stable experience as using a GeForce card, except that the driver control panel looks way more modern.

AusWolfWhat is "the best possible game experience"? I mean, are those optimizations really so important that you absolutely cannot play X game and have a decent experience without them?

Nope, almost never, in fact most times you'll struggle to see any FPS differences bigger than margin of error.

But when there are glaring bugs from the driver end, you do need one.

lasWhy do you need a source, it's pretty much fact, if you have experience with both brands. I have 3080 Ti and 5700XT (living room pc, full amd setup) and drivers have been terrible for the AMD card for the first 6-9 months if not more, and there have been no drivers for 5000-6000 series in 50 days now, alot of games came out in this timeframe. So don't really need any sources, Nvidia have new drivers available all the time, even for less popular titles. I lacked drivers on launch for so many games on the 5700XT. There were graphical errors in way more games on the 5700XT. My 3080 Ti have had drivers ready before launch every single time, sometimes beta, but mostly WHQL. Pretty much zero issues on the 3080 Ti.

Nvidia sits on 75-80% of the market, AMD and Intel has the remaining 20-25%, no wonder game dev's wants the games to run well on Nvidia and Nvidia software team is simply in another league compared to AMDs. This is one of the reasons why Nvidia is more expensive; Features, support and better drivers in general.

I am considering 7900 XTX but I am sceptical about the drivers again. I want 4080, 4080 Ti or 7900 XTX next.

No its not. The vast majority of games never gets a game-ready driver, in fact, most game ready drivers are just marketing. That's why you always see the more mainstream titles return, unless a non mainstream title gets big, or unless the game has a known issue. And that's why you (and I) could run for example Darktide just fine on my GTX 1080 and never saw a single change going to newer drivers in the game, despite them being 'recommended'. I ran a driver at least a year old there.

Nvidia's drivers are not 'game' ready, they're 'make the new GPU gen ready'-drivers.

Vayra86Nope, almost never, in fact most times you'll struggle to see any FPS differences bigger than margin of error.

But when there are glaring bugs from the driver end, you do need one.


No its not. The vast majority of games never gets a game-ready driver, in fact, most game ready drivers are just marketing. That's why you always see the more mainstream titles return, unless a non mainstream title gets big, or unless the game has a known issue. And that's why you (and I) could run for example Darktide just fine on my GTX 1080 and never saw a single change going to newer drivers in the game, despite them being 'recommended'. I ran a driver at least a year old there.

Nvidia's drivers are not 'game' ready, they're 'make the new GPU gen ready'-drivers.

Well I highly doubt Nvidia has much focus on 1000 series. It's old tech. They have 99% focus on RTX cards. GTX is pretty much dead.

I have seen noticable performance increases with game ready drivers, numerous times, however I always stick to newest or 2nd newest architechture.

Older GPUs tend to have mediocre performance regardless of driver. Zero focus or testing from Nvidia/AMD or dev's. That is probably the reason you don't see improvements. Just because a model is listed under supported GPUs does not mean AMD/Nvidia did anything for that card specifically. They always focus and prioritize newest stuff; Current gen + Last gen, the rest might or might not get any improvements.

AusWolfI don't know what's going on with AMD cards, to be honest.

1. I had the same issues with the 5700 XT as you're describing - game crashes, driver timeout errors, freezes, etc. It was a bit of a mess. A workable mess, but still a mess.
2. My 6500 XT is great! It struggles a bit coming back from Chrome/Chromium and video hardware acceleration in general (Windows starts to stutter, but the video doesn't), but no problems otherwise. Turning off hardware acceleration in the web browser and video player programs solves the issue. Funny enough, I also tried a 6400 that doesn't have this issue (I'm sort of a PC masochist, I know).
3. My 6750 XT works perfectly! It gives me the same stable experience as using a GeForce card, except that the driver control panel looks way more modern.

Yeah I had a 5700XT I avoided most of the worst of it but it would still bite me. I was testing betas and giving absolutely every amount of feedback I could get at the time from my own testing to issues reported here trying to get that card in good shape. I know to this day some still have issue that were supposed to squashed a long time ago, the card was just so "fragile" for lack of a better description. Roll onto the "Big Fix" driver I believe it was the first of the new year, I dunno if anyone actually noticed or not but along with it being a decent stable driver for it we all got a 10mhz boost thrown in too.

INSTG8RYeah I had a 5700XT I avoided most of the worst of it but it would still bite me. I was testing betas and giving absolutely every amount of feedback I could get at the time from my own testing to issues reported here trying to get that card in good shape. I know to this day some still have issue that were supposed to squashed a long time ago, the card was just so "fragile" for lack of a better description. Roll onto the "Big Fix" driver I believe it was the first of the new year, I dunno if anyone actually noticed or not but along with it being a decent stable driver for it we all got a 10mhz boost thrown in too.

Yep - fragile is probably the best word to describe it.

Not to mention that my Asus Strix suffered from bad hotspot, VRM and VRAM temperatures because Asus couldn't be asked to redesign the mounting system for AMD cards.

A high hotspot temperature is the only bad thing I can say about my 6750 XT (it's a reference model), but it doesn't hold it back in any way.

AusWolfYep - fragile is probably the best word to describe it.

Not to mention that my Asus Strix suffered from bad hotspot, VRM and VRAM temperatures because Asus couldn't be asked to redesign the mounting system for AMD cards.

A high hotspot temperature is the only bad thing I can say about my 6750 XT (it's a reference model), but it doesn't hold it back in any way.

somehow it's also just luck. for me, I jumped on RDNA1 rather late, so I did not have the initial issues, with Sapphire Pulse Radeon RX 5500 XT 8G.
the perf I wanted then after having bought 4k monitor, was not enough, after half a year I changed to PowerColor Radeon RX 5700 Red Dragon and played usually custom 3200x1800 resolutions.
once the crypto hype broke out, I sold my RX 5700 for double price I bought and bought outrageously expensive ASUS TUF Gaming Radeon RX 6900 XT OC and used it for more than a year
before the crypto hype ended, I sold it for almost the purchase price, haven't been gaming for some months, until I bought the Sapphire Pulse Radeon RX 6600 and played the "the old games" like deus exes and mass effect legendary which was 4k@120 no problem. now the RX 6600 goes to my son's pc (stumble guys, portal, and co.) and I got myself the Sapphire Nitro+ Radeon RX 7900 XT, after 23.1.1 came out.
many problems I read here and there I haven't had. so must have been very very lucky. OR there are other reasons. which would those be?
granted, the idle power draw issue I bypassed by having 4Ks and only one powered to a time.

ir_cowAfter owning both cards (first ATI) for a number of years (20+) and doing some GPU launch reviews as well, I can confidently say NVIDIA hands down has better drivers overall.

Would love to see this presented with some data !! Not the statement in general, but related to this news topic of game-ready drivers or the lack thereof :)
Judging by the number of comments and subjective/emotional replies, we could say an investigation will be of public interest !
What is the importance and impact of game-ready drivers ? Does it benefit all users, or typically newer hardware ?

I'm dreaming of a test that included 2/3 generations of graphics cards (AMD+NVIDIA), and they are tested in a couple of games, with 2 drivers: 1 'older' driver from before the games were released, and 1 newer driver that has been released as game-ready for the latest game in the list (or more recent).

For example:

• some games released during 2nd half of 2022
• 'older' driver from 06/2022 + more 'recent' driver (more recent than the latest released game on the list)
• AMD: vega xx, 5x00, 6x00
• NVIDIA: 10x0, 20x0, 30x0

AusWolfI don't know what's going on with AMD cards, to be honest.

1. I had the same issues with the 5700 XT as you're describing - game crashes, driver timeout errors, freezes, etc. It was a bit of a mess. A workable mess, but still a mess.
2. My 6500 XT is great! It struggles a bit coming back from Chrome/Chromium and video hardware acceleration in general (Windows starts to stutter, but the video doesn't), but no problems otherwise. Turning off hardware acceleration in the web browser and video player programs solves the issue. Funny enough, I also tried a 6400 that doesn't have this issue (I'm sort of a PC masochist, I know).
3. My 6750 XT works perfectly! It gives me the same stable experience as using a GeForce card, except that the driver control panel looks way more modern.

2. I was about to say "6500XT has encoder" and then realized it does have decoder. And yea, not stable.
3. I have my suspicions that 6750XT has something about it that AMD learnt from past products, that makes it less unstable.
On topic of drivers, I actually quite dislike AMD's approach to driver software.
- I hate chromium backend GUI apps that is otherwise light in system usage, or is a lower-level software component. e.g. balena etcher vs rufus. And while driver software is no driver in terms of being low level, it is something that comes with every PC that has to run a display, barely optional (for those who installs "driver" portion only).
- (subjective) usability of NV control panel is just good. NV separates what a driver software should do into the control panel and the geforce experience app. AMD puts both in Radeon software.

For example the NV control panel has 3 sections and 13 items in total, all can be seen at the same time on a 1080p display: seeking for game controlling setting or display controlling setting in here is like cutting through snow with a laser sword.


And in Radeon software there is simply too many things on the screen to look at. Seeking game or display control setting here is like grasping at straws.

Why is there an AMD button top left, but also a Home label (should be a button?) on the same horizontal?
why is there no visual separation of navigation action (AMD button, back forward button, Home label) with specific label like Gaming or performance?
why is "stress test" "discard changes" and "apply changes" clumped together, at the same horizontal as feature labels? In the first place "stress test" should be a label component of tuning page, or right next to advisors.
and so on...

I hate modernity if it means just disregard of GUI practices, and make a air plane control ass looking 2D surface with way too much animation and 50ms+ induced delay AHHHHHHHHHH

It's like "hey guys lets go with chromium so we get maximum GUI design flexibility" and proceeding to make the most detracting UI.

Oh and they have previously wattman in here too, understandably, as Afterburner's frequency and power control fucks with some models hard, although for the purpose of monitoring, I do not at all use AMD package, the Afterburner OSD is just GOAT.

Post Nut ClairvoyanceAnd in Radeon software there is simply too many things on the screen to look at. Seeking game or display control setting here is like grasping at straws.

Why is there an AMD button top left, but also a Home label (should be a button?) on the same horizontal?
why is there no visual separation of navigation action (AMD button, back forward button, Home label) with specific label like Gaming or performance?
why is "stress test" "discard changes" and "apply changes" clumped together, at the same horizontal as feature labels? In the first place "stress test" should be a label component of tuning page, or right next to advisors.
and so on...

Oh and they have previously wattman in here too, understandably, as Afterburner's frequency and power control fucks with some models hard, although for the purpose of monitoring, I do not at all use AMD package, the Afterburner OSD is just GOAT.

I have many a bone to pick with Radeon Software, but the Tuning screen is not one of them. It works fine, you'll get used to it if you do enough UV/OC. Load/save profiles recalls the exact settings you put in last time.

Undervolting in Afterburner is a fucking nightmare. 10, 20 and 30 series UV done via Ctrl+F V-F curve, but half the time it has a mind of its own when you hit apply, the other half of the time it surreptitiously changes the curve upon a reboot to whatever it wants ± what you set. And 5% of the time it doesn't even remember apply on boot.

That said, one look at the dumpster fire that is the Global Graphics/Global Display/per-game Graphics soup, and the 100% unnecessary "Home" screen tells all about Radeon Software's design disaster.

lasWhy do you need a source, it's pretty much fact, if you have experience with both brands. I have 3080 Ti and 5700XT (living room pc, full amd setup) and drivers have been terrible for the AMD card for the first 6-9 months if not more, and there have been no drivers for 5000-6000 series in 50 days now, alot of games came out in this timeframe. So don't really need any sources, Nvidia have new drivers available all the time, even for less popular titles. I lacked drivers on launch for so many games on the 5700XT. There were graphical errors in way more games on the 5700XT. My 3080 Ti have had drivers ready before launch every single time, sometimes beta, but mostly WHQL. Pretty much zero issues on the 3080 Ti.

Nvidia sits on 75-80% of the market, AMD and Intel has the remaining 20-25%, no wonder game dev's wants the games to run well on Nvidia and Nvidia software team is simply in another league compared to AMDs. This is one of the reasons why Nvidia is more expensive; Features, support and better drivers in general.

I am considering 7900 XTX but I am sceptical about the drivers again. I want 4080, 4080 Ti or 7900 XTX next.

If you asked me in 2021, I would have stubbornly believed that Nvidia is always right on when it comes to launch day drivers and optimizations.

Then MW2 happened, and it took 3 "Game Ready" drivers before Nvidia was "Game Ready".

A company that prides itself on excellent drivers......dealing with a AAA game that had beta release a month prior AND campaign early access...... wasn't ready until what, a month later?

I'm under no illusions as to Radeon drivers - I'm in that hellhole right now. Geforce in 2023 just doesn't give me much reason to prefer them anymore.

Post Nut Clairvoyance2. I was about to say "6500XT has encoder" and then realized it does have decoder. And yea, not stable.
3. I have my suspicions that 6750XT has something about it that AMD learnt from past products, that makes it less unstable.
On topic of drivers, I actually quite dislike AMD's approach to driver software.
- I hate chromium backend GUI apps that is otherwise light in system usage, or is a lower-level software component. e.g. balena etcher vs rufus. And while driver software is no driver in terms of being low level, it is something that comes with every PC that has to run a display, barely optional (for those who installs "driver" portion only).
- (subjective) usability of NV control panel is just good. NV separates what a driver software should do into the control panel and the geforce experience app. AMD puts both in Radeon software.

For example the NV control panel has 3 sections and 13 items in total, all can be seen at the same time on a 1080p display: seeking for game controlling setting or display controlling setting in here is like cutting through snow with a laser sword.


And in Radeon software there is simply too many things on the screen to look at. Seeking game or display control setting here is like grasping at straws.

Why is there an AMD button top left, but also a Home label (should be a button?) on the same horizontal?
why is there no visual separation of navigation action (AMD button, back forward button, Home label) with specific label like Gaming or performance?
why is "stress test" "discard changes" and "apply changes" clumped together, at the same horizontal as feature labels? In the first place "stress test" should be a label component of tuning page, or right next to advisors.
and so on...

I hate modernity if it means just disregard of GUI practices, and make a air plane control ass looking 2D surface with way too much animation and 50ms+ induced delay AHHHHHHHHHH

It's like "hey guys lets go with chromium so we get maximum GUI design flexibility" and proceeding to make the most detracting UI.

Oh and they have previously wattman in here too, understandably, as Afterburner's frequency and power control fucks with some models hard, although for the purpose of monitoring, I do not at all use AMD package, the Afterburner OSD is just GOAT.

I think both AMD and Nvidia's drivers are good and bad for various reasons.

Nvidia:
+ Simple.
+ Works.
- No overclocking / tuning options.
- 13 menus, only about 2 are used for anything these days.
- "3D Settings" menu filled with a million options, the rest of the menus are basically empty.
- Menus all crammed onto the left, with huge amounts of unused space on the right.
- (Subjective) Looks like garbage.
- GeForce Experience needs an online login (and is pretty useless, imo).

AMD:
+ Looks modern.
+ The tuning tool / Wattmam works great.
- Menu structure isn't the most logical with lots of similar options scattered in different menus.
- Some menus are a bit cluttered.
- Online stuff (ads).

I have gripes against both, but if I had to pick, I'd give the point to AMD, if not for anything else, then at least for the overclocking tool.

As for Afterburner, I've never really liked it, nor do I like the idea that I need a 3rd party tuning tool because the GPU driver doesn't have one. The best monitoring tool will always be Task Manager + GPU-Z (and HWinfo in extreme cases) on a 7" secondary display. :D

P4-630That's some great :nutkick:....

I've had no issue with the XFX 6800XT paired with the 5800x3d playing any games.. Just saying.. :rockout:

tabascosauzI have many a bone to pick with Radeon Software, but the Tuning screen is not one of them. It works fine, you'll get used to it if you do enough UV/OC. Load/save profiles recalls the exact settings you put in last time.

Undervolting in Afterburner is a fucking nightmare. 10, 20 and 30 series UV done via Ctrl+F V-F curve, but half the time it has a mind of its own when you hit apply, the other half of the time it surreptitiously changes the curve upon a reboot to whatever it wants ± what you set. And 5% of the time it doesn't even remember apply on boot.

That said, one look at the dumpster fire that is the Global Graphics/Global Display/per-game Graphics soup, and the 100% unnecessary "Home" screen tells all about Radeon Software's design disaster.



If you asked me in 2021, I would have stubbornly believed that Nvidia is always right on when it comes to launch day drivers and optimizations.

Then MW2 happened, and it took 3 "Game Ready" drivers before Nvidia was "Game Ready".

A company that prides itself on excellent drivers......dealing with a AAA game that had beta release a month prior AND campaign early access...... wasn't ready until what, a month later?

I'm under no illusions as to Radeon drivers - I'm in that hellhole right now. Geforce in 2023 just doesn't give me much reason to prefer them anymore.

Couldn't be more right.


Another point I would make, valid to this and the Polaris no worky in one game on one OS thread.

Wtaf do people really think AMD and Nvidia are doing changes to their driver's at this point.
Little and rarely.

There's the argument that they're optimised and very stable at this point.

Which coincidentally kept my Vega 64 in the game because it didn't get updates for any of these games either yet mostly just worked.

You don't mess with what wasn't broken and in 2016 dx12_1 wasn't a thing, I'm ok with a company Not seeing seven years ahead.

Planned obsolescence.

These are computational devices that haven't escaped Moore's law yet despite Huang's BS, the last six years put the performance of Polaris and the 1060 below the acceptable threshold in some games.
It's there time soon, my 5870, Htx460x2 were also loved, powerful and useful.

Until they weren't.

So on point, WTAF Tpu, you call AMD out for shit 7900Xt/X driver's despite few real deal-breaker issues (I own one) typically, and few with any experience of them.
Then when AMD focus on what matters in that moment they're shit for a game being suboptimal and no driver's for older generations.
Chill your struddle they're not a software company but they are on all these issues, which are pitifully minor in most cases, shit people in this realm are spoiled these days, even RT has gone easier then the Glide, DX transition.

As for the idea Nvidia are better, again as a user, I don't see that.

Nvidia are putting little effort into the driver's for my 2060, if at all.

TheoneandonlyMrKCouldn't be more right.


Another point I would make, valid to this and the Polaris no worky in one game on one OS thread.

Wtaf do people really think AMD and Nvidia are doing changes to their driver's at this point.
Little and rarely.

There's the argument that they're optimised and very stable at this point.

Which coincidentally kept my Vega 64 in the game because it didn't get updates for any of these games either yet mostly just worked.

You don't mess with what wasn't broken and in 2016 dx12_1 wasn't a thing, I'm ok with a company Not seeing seven years ahead.

Planned obsolescence.

These are computational devices that haven't escaped Moore's law yet despite Huang's BS, the last six years put the performance of Polaris and the 1060 below the acceptable threshold in some games.
It's there time soon, my 5870, Htx460x2 were also loved, powerful and useful.

Until they weren't.

So on point, WTAF Tpu, you call AMD out for shit 7900Xt/X driver's despite few real deal-breaker issues (I own one) typically, and few with any experience of them.
Then when AMD focus on what matters in that moment they're shit for a game being suboptimal and no driver's for older generations.
Chill your struddle they're not a software company but they are on all these issues, which are pitifully minor in most cases, shit people in this realm are spoiled these days, even RT has gone easier then the Glide, DX transition.

As for the idea Nvidia are better, again as a user, I don't see that.

Nvidia are putting little effort into the driver's for my 2060, if at all.

Nvidia has been re-using the same driver that mostly just works (because it's bare bones). AMD has been trying to gain an edge that sometimes works, sometimes doesn't, but issues get ironed out with time, which people seem to forget.

As for game ready drivers, I'm extremely upset that my 6750 XT is losing maybe 0.5% performance in the Dead Space remake that I haven't even bought, yet, because most games are freakin' expensive at launch. :roll:

On a serious note, don't be 1st world spoiled brats, people. Use what you have, and have fun gaming. :) 5% more performance will never make you happy because there's always another 5% after that.

AusWolfNvidia has been re-using the same driver that mostly just works (because it's bare bones). AMD has been trying to gain an edge that sometimes works, sometimes doesn't, but issues get ironed out with time, which people seem to forget.

As for game ready drivers, I'm extremely upset that my 6750 XT is losing maybe 0.5% performance in the Dead Space remake that I haven't even bought, yet, because most games are freakin' expensive at launch. :roll:

On a serious note, don't be 1st world spoiled brats, people. Use what you have, and have fun gaming. :) 5% more performance will never make you happy because there's always another 5% after that.

Gotta catch as many of those percentages as I can without magic smoke emotions even on a steamdeck, I'll be looking into a Linus beating cooling solution for that at some point, like a 1000watt chiller funneled down to 4 inches output, owe cold hands though hmmn rethink.

kapone32Are you serious? Have you seen AMD's software package? I have a 3060 and felt surreal when I opened Geforce that it looked the exact same as it did when I had my GTS450......There were more features (I think) but it was still very much Windows XP.

Glitter and glamor but not quality is what I see in AMDs drivers, honestly.

Super Firm TofuRDNA2 is absolutely outstanding using amdgpu and Mesa under Linux. In fact, The Uncharted Collection is totally broken on both AMD and NVIDIA in Windows but it plays perfectly in Linux.

It's ironic that AMD is regularly outperformed by their OSS driver teammates.