• Steve Dice@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          Well, that’s just not true. I’ve been using AMD exclusively for 10 years now and they haven’t had a proper competitor to NVIDIA’s high end in since then. I’m willing to settle for less performance to avoid a shitty company but some people aren’t. It can’t make “less and less sense” to go with NVIDIA if they’re the only ones making the product you want to buy. More importantly, though: it doesn’t matter. The point is that people wanting performance above a 4080 are screwed because NVIDIA shat the bed with the 5000 series and AMD just doesn’t exist at that price point so the comment I’m replying to makes no sense.

            • Steve Dice@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              4 months ago

              Welp. That’s another lie. Until very recently, if you wanted performance over NVIDIA’s 60-tier on AMD, your only options were the Vega 56, 64 or the Radeon VII, which were all trash. It wasn’t until the 6000 series that AMD was able to come close to NVIDIA’s 80-tier and they’ve come out and said they’re not doing that anymore, so we have a grand total of TWO high end Radeon cards. Your assertion that AMD has covered every price point below $3000 is pure fantasy.

      • omarfw@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        4 months ago

        Very few people actually need or more make use of the power that nvidia’s high end cards provide