Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

AMD vs. NVIDIA for UDK, any big showstoppers?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    AMD vs. NVIDIA for UDK, any big showstoppers?

    Greetings all, first of all, thanks to everyone that helped me in my thread about whether or not to use a desktop graphics card or a workstation card for UDK (I have a FirePro V7900 and was asking the question about the begged question of "if we're designing games with UDK then wouldn't I just want to use a desktop graphics card since my FirePro would have a harder time actually *playing* the game I was creating?" -- to which the opinion seemed to be "use a desktop graphics card, most people using UDK don't use workstation cards"). In that thread I indicated that I was thinking about upgrading my GTX 560Ti to possibly a 770 since they were going on sale.

    Well, now I've been reading about these Radeon 290s. Both cards appear to be about the same price point at 4GB so, for me, I think it's coming down to a choice between these two? So my question is whether or not UDK (and I really know nothing about it-just started doing some tutorials) in the current version (and in version 4 whenever that becomes available?) benefits from either of the two architectures or "can't do something" with one card or the other?

    For example, Adobe CC is now starting to finally allow OpenCL acceleration on things. Before that (I do a lot of premiere and after effects) you simply couldn't use AMD cards for work in those programs. You jut couldn't. There were visual effects that took tens-of-minutes with an AMD card that rendered in 20 seconds with CUDA-enabled NVIDIA cards, no exaggeration. Now, with OpenCL you can pretty much use either. So I'm curious if there's something in UDK that is the same way? Like some kind of special "module" or game-design stuff that is only enabled with one brand of card?

    I just want to avoid a situation like having the choice of buying either card before you started using Adobe CS5 and then, after purchasing an AMD card over an NVIDIA card when you could have chosen either, you just shot yourself in the foot because OpenCL wasn't supported and you're spending hours rendering VFX instead of *seconds* like you would be if you had just bought the NVIDIA card.

    Thanks in advance!

    #2
    There is no benefit in using an AMD card in UDK, but there is for Nvidia, mainly for PhysX and Apex

    Comment


      #3
      So, basicly, you have to use a gaming card for sure. Not a workstation one. Also, because of nvidia cuda technology, it's propably a better choice, also nvidia belongs to the integrated partners programm developing ue3. With nvidia cards uyou will benefit of CUDA, because physx, the physics engien in ue3 is accelerated by cuda, and also physical particles.

      Comment


        #4
        Okay cool, that seems pretty definitive

        Comment


          #5
          Originally posted by ironspider View Post
          Greetings all, first of all, thanks to everyone that helped me in my thread about whether or not to use a desktop graphics card or a workstation card for UDK (I have a FirePro V7900 and was asking the question about the begged question of "if we're designing games with UDK then wouldn't I just want to use a desktop graphics card since my FirePro would have a harder time actually *playing* the game I was creating?" -- to which the opinion seemed to be "use a desktop graphics card, most people using UDK don't use workstation cards"). In that thread I indicated that I was thinking about upgrading my GTX 560Ti to possibly a 770 since they were going on sale.

          Well, now I've been reading about these Radeon 290s. Both cards appear to be about the same price point at 4GB so, for me, I think it's coming down to a choice between these two? So my question is whether or not UDK (and I really know nothing about it-just started doing some tutorials) in the current version (and in version 4 whenever that becomes available?) benefits from either of the two architectures or "can't do something" with one card or the other?

          For example, Adobe CC is now starting to finally allow OpenCL acceleration on things. Before that (I do a lot of premiere and after effects) you simply couldn't use AMD cards for work in those programs. You jut couldn't. There were visual effects that took tens-of-minutes with an AMD card that rendered in 20 seconds with CUDA-enabled NVIDIA cards, no exaggeration. Now, with OpenCL you can pretty much use either. So I'm curious if there's something in UDK that is the same way? Like some kind of special "module" or game-design stuff that is only enabled with one brand of card?

          I just want to avoid a situation like having the choice of buying either card before you started using Adobe CS5 and then, after purchasing an AMD card over an NVIDIA card when you could have chosen either, you just shot yourself in the foot because OpenCL wasn't supported and you're spending hours rendering VFX instead of *seconds* like you would be if you had just bought the NVIDIA card.

          Thanks in advance!
          I wouldn't use AMD graphics if they built me a custom graphics card!

          I had nothing but trouble even with their top end cards and now with a moderate Nvidia I can run anything... With dual Titan Nvidia I could run the most complex games at full resolution, without a single issue.

          Comment


            #6
            Thanks gang, I went ahead and ordered a GTX 770 4GB (I probably only needed 2GB but hey, I plan to keep this card for a while) which came with the NVIDIA holiday bundle (Assassin's Creed IV: Black Flag & Splinter Cell Blacklist) and Batman Arkham Origins for free.

            Comment


              #7
              I have the 770 and it's pretty fantastic

              Comment

              Working...
              X