Hacker News Reader

Comment by satiric | Hacker News Reader

AMD seems to be providing good alternatives. Arguably the 6600XT or the 6700XT are better value than the 4060. And the 6800XT is a good alternative to the 16GB 4060Ti. And AMD's cards are actually purchaseable right now.

View on HN

6750 XT was on sale a few weeks ago for $330 - $20 rebate and came with a copy of The Last of Us.

Guessing it'll be a while before we see similar deals on Nvidia cards since so many people are determined to buy Nvidia over AMD for reasons I don't understand.

Yes the raytracing performance is better, but not enough to justify what they're charging.

Just using the card for gaming? Absolutely go with AMD. But most of the ML libraries and tooling is built on top of CUDA, so getting things to work with an AMD card can be annoying and have worse performance despite better hardware specs on paper.

And yet the Steam hardware survey has Nvidia at 76% compared to AMD at 15%. Most of that isn't because of ML performance.

Yeah, a lot of that is inertia. Most people don't upgrade video cards all that frequently which explains the popularity of the GTX 1650 (2019), GTX 1060 and 1070 (2016), etc. Those cards still work reasonably well for people who don't need bleeding edge performance or ray tracing. I'd expect their market share to improve over the next couple years as some of those cards age out of circulation.

Availability is a huge problem for ati cards. There weren’t that many out there in the last 2 years where nvida vendors at least had a bunch of overpriced options

DLSS, NVENC, CUDA, better drivers(windows) and more. I use a 6700xt, and I enjoy its better support on Linux, but absolutely not how its not suoported by ROCm, while a 3050 is fully supported by Cuda and can run any AI or professional program.

There are many reasons not to get an AMD card.

Is there a power difference?

That's my concern as well. Though if I'm honest I don't game for more than a few hours a week, tops.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com