I'm not trying to start yet another AMD-vs-NVidia bash. Many people fervently support Red Team or Green Team, and that's okay, but that's not what this thread is meant to be about.
AMD and NVidia GPUs have different architectures - different design choices, strengths, weaknesses, and tradeoffs. It's difficult to make direct technical comparisons because while both companies build components to perform the same tasks they each approach things in substantially different ways. Complicated by the fact that many software/game titles are optimized for one or the other.
But I keep encountering persistent internet claims that an AMD platform somehow runs AMD GPUs faster and better than it will run NVidia GPUs. And it doesn't seem entirely unreasonable (to me) to expect AMD engineers to build AMD components which perform best when used in pure-AMD platforms. It does seem entirely unreasonable (to me) that AMD would deliberately design their systems to somehow cripple compatibility/performance when paired with the competition.
This seems easy enough to test: 1 AMD processor+motherboard, 1 Intel processor+motherboard, 1 AMD GPU, 1 NVidia GPU. Otherwise use the exact same hardware and software (just swap it around) across all four combinations. Run tests, benchmarks, games. Measure and compare real results, fps, and performance. Not to determine whether this card or that card or this mobo or that mobo is better than the other - to determine whether AMD/AMD vs AMD/NVidia vs Intel/AMD vs Intel/NVidia combinations produce consistent or varying results.
Has anyone actually done this sort of testing? I've combed the search engines but couldn't find any objective tests of this sort.
"All opinions are not equal. Some are a very great deal more robust, sophisticated and well supported in logic and argument than others." - Douglas Adams
[/Korth]
