Totally agree with the above however it's largely irrelevant why or what makes one card faster or better than the other.

As we're all aware AMD have had the better technology and hardware implementation in recent years but the problem is as gamers we can only play what the developers have implemented and regardless of whether Nvidia are using dirty tricks or throwing their money around it has meant that Nvidia has edged peformance.

Buying a GPU at this moment in time means for me at least with VR as I've already mentioned was not a difficult decision, simply because AMD isn't competing. I do find from some of the posts in this thread there is almost a 'hope' that developers switch from the Nvidia collaborations over to AMD based on market share of the audience or the association of current consoles using the same APIs and libraries but until that happens Nvidia still have that performance edge and in my opinion it's a bit of gamble assuming that AMD will actually pull this off.

We can only go on current games at the moment, and there are nowhere near enough DX12 or gaming utilising Async Compute to determine that AMD are or have closed the performance gap. What if the devs that have used Hairworks etc in the past continue to do so?....it will mean that regardless of AMD still having these quality GPUs are still going to be struggling to match performance within games.



I think the quote above is probably key, but the problem is that Nvidia are prepared to do whatever it takes to ensure they have the best performer regardless of how they get there.

Competition is most definitely good and desperately needed for us as consumers.