clstirens

@vackillers: Good points! I think I poorly worded my Subject, as it was really shorthand for "Is Nvidia allowing AMD too much leeway, and also focusing less on the hardcore pc market, such that they may lose their complete market dominance?" But not lose outright.

That being said, i can completely see a future where AMD's management basically fudges up the company DESPITE their deals with console makers, AND their extensive support from laptop manufacturers. All of this because of bad business practices and poor market decisions.

@tarsier: Yeah, the question was a bit skewed in a way. It really should have said "Is Nvidia losing too much ground by allowing AMD to own the console market this gen"

@extomar: Pretty much. ACTUALLY, I've noticed quite a few of the games i struggled with when I had AMD were "amd optimized"

A quick look at support forums are waves of angry amd users with issues, and very little nvidia users with issues.

@wasabicurry: I thought the PS3 was based on an Nvidia chipset? EDIT: Just looked, RSX is co developed by nvidia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RSX_'Reality_Synthesizer'

@mellotronrules: Good point, I guess if AMD ends up on top, there's no reason NOT to buy the more utilized, less expensive vendor.

So after issues, time and time again, with AMD hardware/drivers and a non-trivial amount of games, I decided to go Nvidia. Games like Rage, Saints Row: The Third, etc, ran more consistently than they had before, so I was fairly relieved.

I had, for a long time, been a huge fan of AMD. They've consistently been the inexpensive solution for gamers, with performance that was pretty competitive. Yet after one too many weird driver problems, and one too many games that ran like garbage on even low, I made the switch.

Fast forward to today, where Nvidia has nothing to say about future PC hardware plans, I made an observation. From what we know, both new consoles will run AMD hardware. If this generation is even close to the last one, most games will be built to utilize the console hardware features, and then have a few bells and whistles for pc. Basically this cuts out PhysX, and cuda support (to be fair, those things were hardly used as it is.).

I guess where I'm coming from, is that Games will be built best on AMD now, and there will be little reason to do anything Nvidia related for multi-platform. Nvidia has gone to the point of not talking about PC hardware at all, AND Battlefield 4 (aka, Frostbite in general) is AMD focused. I guess this is all great news for AMD users, and to some degree all gamers. I'm just wondering if my decision to go Nvidia has been swiftly nullified.

@gazzum: Good to hear! Like @wasabicurry said, we need to find out why your clock speeds aren't correct. 203 and 405 are way, way wrong. You should be playing starcraft on Medium with 60 fps

Line Rider

Spent hours of my Keyboarding and Computer science classes on Line Rider

You use Firefox as your main browser, don't you?

Turn off hardware acceleration in Firefox http://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/forum-response-disable-hardware-acceleration

This was causing my GPU (and a number of other users) to underclock from 750mhz, down to 405mhz during BF3

For me, the Jury is out. I've not seen a city builder that truly sparked my interest since SC4 hit the scene. I am hopeful, granted, just kinda waiting for some positive buzz

Looks like something bungie would do, Probably Destiny related.