@Chaniyth
AMD is cheaper yes. And the current gen is unfortunately less efficient, at least for now. Of course there are always some titles that run better on Radeon as well, like recent Tomb Raider + TressFX.
As for cost issues (from a gamer's perspective. For CAD/CAM/3DCC, NVIDIA/Quadro vs AMD/FirePro, why not do your research too, but I'm sure you already know. CUDA-specific program users will also have different perspective, obviously.) :
1) If you're a wealthy mature being, you wouldn't call yourself "idiot" for spending money in whatever way pleases you. 😉
2) If you're feeling less than wealthy (a matter of perspective really), you can wait a few years and/or buy used. Meanwhile, go buy the most cost-effective thing on the market today, if you really have to play today (yeah, I know multiplayer trends don't wait). Refrain from stupid immature internet comments/forums, if you haven't already. Enjoy whatever you have now and be proud of it.
3) Back to being wealthy/unlimited-perspective again, yes, you can use both NVIDIA and AMD.
See, opinions can be expressed in more mature ways. 😀
@bakkud and whoever cares
Now getting back to that driver I linked before. There's a difference unfortunately, in the 344.11 release for windows XP (32-bit and 64-bit), there is no mention of GTX 980/970, though GTX 750/Ti (GM107) is still supported. So if you're gonna use 970/980 on XP, maybe some hacking is in order.
For me it's enough that's the 750 Ti (~GTX480/295 performance iirc, at 75W TDP or less) is still supported though, since I'm gonna put it on a separate XP rig anyway, replacing my much-hungrier GTX470.
"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic."—Arthur C. Clarke
"No way. Installing the drivers on these things always gives me a headache."—Guybrush Threepwood (on cutting-edge voodoo technology)