does AMD cards really offer better colors than Nvidia ?

I have read this like everywhere and I have an old AMD PC and now my laptop has an Nvidia GPU but I really didnt know about this maybe coz i wasn't gaming a lot on it until I saw the comparison between AMD and the pascal gpu's so this is true ? coz im planning to buy the new alienware 17 and I was wondering should i wait for Vega to be in laptops and I like the much higher performance gains of amd in dx12 better than the so little gain for nvidia , what i really think is that amd will be a more futureproof card than nvidia i believe thanks to the async ? and besides kaby lake will be launched on laptops maybe like in 4months or so , so what do u guys think about all of this ?

 

I have never noticed the color differences to be honest. Nor are they washed out (my desktop panel is calibrated to cover 99% SRGB by the way).

Pascal has Async but a different implmentation. It is just that AMD is quite poor when it comes to DX11. Thats why they gain more from DX12 and Vulkan. Nvidia always had its drivers perfect for DX11. Now a bit less for DX12. Once developers start to learn how to use pre-emption, Nvidia cards will receive bigger gains.

Anyway I stay with the Nvidia camp. For laptops in my experience AMD gpu's where terrible and for my desktop I use a Gsync setup.

 

that makes sense thank you , but how can u calibrate your monitor ?

 

Do not even think about buying mobile GPU from AMD. They doesn't exist here, in high-end.

About colors, it's not visible until you get professional tools.

You can calibrate your monitor using professional hardware, look in your town, someone should calibrate it for you.