|
Rosoboronexport posted:Got my EVGA 1060 SC friday to replace the current GTX 670. PCB sizes are similar but the cooler is more simple and smaller tue to 50 W less TDP. Ahhh I hope you don't mean you set it to that. Cause when it hits that it will throttle immediately the fans will try to fly out of the case lol
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2016 09:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 11, 2024 06:41 |
|
|
People really complain about the RX470 being overpriced compared to the 4GB 480, but are these FPS differences really worth it? The other reviewers that panned the card seemed to get models that run too hot. Performance-wise I'd do best to buy this OCed 1060, but the 3GB makes me think the bottleneck will be felt before three years, and I'm kind of leaning AMD for an eventual FreeSync monitor at the cost of performance.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2016 10:26
|
|
|
THE DOG HOUSE posted:Ahhh I hope you don't mean you set it to that. Cause when it hits that it will throttle immediately the fans will try to fly out of the case lol he is trying to make a bomb and the fan blades are the shrapnel obviously
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2016 10:41
|
|
|
THE DOG HOUSE posted:Ahhh I hope you don't mean you set it to that. Cause when it hits that it will throttle immediately the fans will try to fly out of the case lol That's what not the 0dB BIOS does lol. It's the same "fan off when <60 C" setting the other cards have, it just wasn't set that way on the first batch of cards. Currently the highest I've got it is 83 C and it boosts to 1923 MHz.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2016 10:56
|
|
|
Grog posted:Is there a consensus on which of the GTX 1060 6GB and RX 480 is the overall better option if you're stuck at 1080p60 and like most settings cranked up? If you play older games a lot, or if you mostly play competitive online games (games whose developers try really hard to appeal to a wide range of players), get the Nvidia card. It seems to generally perform better in those games. Developers that want to target the maximum number of potential players will continue to develop for DX11 for a while, since DX12 is only supported in Windows 10. Vulkan exists, but only three games run in Vulkan, and two of them (Dota 2 and Talos Principle) perform better in OpenGL on all cards. AMD dominance in Vulkan also appears to depend on having a pretty beefy CPU. If you have a weak CPU, Nvidia might be the better choice. If you play brand-new AAA single player games most of the time (and have a strong CPU), the performance benefits of AMD cards in DX12 and Vulkan might mean something to you. I looked at Steam stats for the top 100 most popular games right now (hours played). The following list contains the first ten titles that regularly appear in benchmarks in hardware reviews. Games like Overwatch, that are not tracked on Steam, are missing. There many games between these titles in the list that I can't recall seeing benchmarks for lately. Dota 2 CS:GO TF2 GTA V Skyrim Rocket League Fallout 4 Witcher 3 Total Warhammer Black Ops 3 In this list, I think only Total Warhammer and Black Ops 3 show any affinity towards AMD cards.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2016 16:53
|
|
|
Craptacular! posted:People really complain about the RX470 being overpriced compared to the 4GB 480, but are these FPS differences really worth it? The other reviewers that panned the card seemed to get models that run too hot. Test methodology in the Eurogamer article is lacking. What was their test platform (APU? Skylake? X99?). They were testing a factory OC RX 470, but the author does not say if the RX 480 is reference clock, or OC. What about the R9 390 and the Nvidia cards? It appears to be pretty easy to tilt things to fit a viewpoint. Other reviews (with more detailed test methods) are showing a bigger difference between RX 470 and RX 480. I could probably test a bunch of cards with a Core 2 Duo E6300 (1.86GHz) and show that GTX 1080 shows little performance improvement compared to RX 460. PBCrunch fucked around with this message at 17:02 on Aug 21, 2016 |
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2016 16:59
|
|
|
What is about ASUS and GIGABYTE's aftermarket 1080/70 cards that have landed them a bad rep? I've seen the great Gainward/Palit benchmarks, but not heard too much about ASUS and GIGABYTE.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2016 17:03
|
|
|
PBCrunch posted:Test methodology in the Eurogamer article is lacking. What was their test platform (APU? Skylake? X99?). They were testing a factory OC RX 470, but the author does not say if the RX 480 is reference clock, or OC. What about the R9 390 and the Nvidia cards? They're running with an overclocked i7-6700K, I think it's at 4.6GHz, but you're right, they should state it clearly every time. Digital Foundry's methodology is usually pretty solid, and their videos extremely informative. That said, the suggestion to make sure they detail the test set-up every time is a useful one.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2016 17:10
|
|
|
Craptacular! posted:People really complain about the RX470 being overpriced compared to the 4GB 480, but are these FPS differences really worth it? The other reviewers that panned the card seemed to get models that run too hot. Problem is AMD overpromised and underdelivered which is something people hate. People were promised the RX480 for $200 but it turns out that card doesn't exist so now they still have to pay $200 but for 5% less performance. But it doesn't seem to hurt them with the RX480 still selling as many as they can build.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2016 17:25
|
|
|
Hi gents, I just picked up a new 144hz freesync monitor (AOC G2460PF) to go along my new RX 470. I was experiencing constant flickering on the desktop at 144hz, but not at 120hz. A solution appears to be to use a programme called ClockBlocker that stops the card from going into a power-saving mode. It's working fine now, but I'm wondering if there are any consequences for running my card with higher GPU core / memory clocks constantly?
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2016 17:52
|
|
|
Smarf posted:Hi gents, The newest hotfix driver supposedly has a fix for this exact scenario. Are you running the very latest driver (16.8.2)? (With a Freesync supported display and Freesync enabled, some users may experience flickering on desktop during system idle.)
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2016 18:04
|
|
|
HalloKitty posted:The newest hotfix driver supposedly has a fix for this exact scenario. Are you running the very latest driver (16.8.2)? Just tried it with the drivers you linked and still getting the flicker at 144hz, not at 120hz.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2016 18:18
|
|
|
Are there any GTX 1080's that are shorter than 10.5" (267mm)? It seems like there are a few 9.5" 1070's, and of course the mini-ITX 6.5" 1070. A 9.5" 1080 wouldn't be unreasonable I'd think. My case (Rosewill U3-B) takes 260mm max and I'm hesitant to try to stretch in those last 7 mm.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2016 18:47
|
|
|
Smarf posted:Just tried it with the drivers you linked and still getting the flicker at 144hz, not at 120hz.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2016 19:01
|
|
|
ufarn posted:You could try the Display Driver Uninstaller and reinstall, and see if it helps. (Uninstall driver -> Don't reboot -> Use DDU and boot into Safe Mode -> Remove stuff -> Reinstall drivers. Believe that's the flow.) I tried removing them in safe mode with DDU, then installing the drivers that were linked above. Still no change. The one thing I've found that seems to work is running Clockblocker, but I'm not certain it's safe for the card to not enter a low-power mode. Smarf fucked around with this message at 19:33 on Aug 21, 2016 |
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2016 19:26
|
|
|
Smarf posted:I tried removing them in safe mode with DDU, then installing the drivers that were linked above. Still no change. The one thing I've found that seems to work is running Clockblocker, but I'm not certain it's safe for the card to not enter a low-power mode. It'll just run at a middle clock level and use a bit more power. My HD6970 won't clock down with 2 monitors attached so I just deal with it because 2 monitors is too nice
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2016 19:35
|
|
|
Haquer posted:It'll just run at a middle clock level and use a bit more power. What software do you use? Using Clockblocker it shows my Memory and Core clock maxed on GPU-Z, though the overall card load is low.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2016 19:40
|
|
|
PBCrunch posted:To me, it depends on whether you play brand new AAA games all the time, or if you buy things on Steam sale and play a lot of competitive online games. This is fine logic comparing relative performance differences and improvements within the same brand, but unfortunately when you just look at raw numbers it doesn't look that way. There is no real reason to buy a current AMD card except for freesync.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2016 19:46
|
|
|
THE DOG HOUSE posted:This is fine logic comparing relative performance differences and improvements within the same brand, but unfortunately when you just look at raw numbers it doesn't look that way. There is no real reason to buy a current AMD card except for freesync. I'd agree. I had the exact same question as the OP, and in the end I chose the 1060. Now I was upgrading from a R9270, so the difference to me is like night and day, but I swapped sides for a couple of reasons. AMD at the moment are edging ahead in DX12, but only on a handful of titles, and once Nvidia wrap their heads around it, you'll see that advantage disappear. AMD also seem like a company in complete disarray, as seen in the whole RX480 4gb/8gb thing, and can also be seen in their Driver support. It's better, but in all honesty, nowhere near as good as Nvidias. Also the fact that this card uses less power, and the fans barely every kick in is surreal to me. AMD just always seem to be playing catchup. They drop the RX480, and Nvidia casually toss the 1060 into the mix as a response. The fact that aftermarket RX480's have only now just started to appear for sale is indicative of how badly run AMD actually is as a company. Here's a product which for once gives them a competitive edge over their main rivals, and instead of flooding the market, and ensuring their partners had enough product to be able to flood the market with their own cooler designs, they basically sat on it, and hosed around with a 4gb version that doesnt really exist. A big part of the reason I went with the 1060 was that I could actually buy the drat thing. I didn't want a reference RX480, because pretty much every review said the same thing. It's loud and runs hot. When you can only find these for sale on pretty much every major site in the UK, thats a problem.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2016 20:09
|
|
|
Smarf posted:Hi gents, I have the exact same problem as you (same monitor except that in my case I'm running a RX480). Flickering at 144hz but not at 120.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2016 20:17
|
|
|
Billa posted:I have the exact same problem as you (same monitor except that in my case I'm running a RX480). Flickering at 144hz but not at 120. I don't have a freesync/gsync monitor so I don't know: but can't you just set it to 120Hz at the desktop and still have freesync work in games? It seems irritating to some small degree, but I doubt anyone will see the difference between 120 and 144Hz.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2016 21:31
|
|
|
Billa posted:I have the exact same problem as you (same monitor except that in my case I'm running a RX480). Flickering at 144hz but not at 120. What driver are you using on the monitor? At this stage I'm guessing it's more of a Crimson driver issue than anything. HalloKitty posted:I don't have a freesync/gsync monitor so I don't know: but can't you just set it to 120Hz at the desktop and still have freesync work in games? It seems irritating to some small degree, but I doubt anyone will see the difference between 120 and 144Hz. You can, I just want to make sure its not a monitor issue whilst I'm still able to get a full refund. Also considering that the latest drivers were meant to fix it but doesn't seem to work for either of us.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2016 21:33
|
|
|
lorddazron posted:AMD just always seem to be playing catchup. They drop the RX480, and Nvidia casually toss the 1060 into the mix as a response. The fact that aftermarket RX480's have only now just started to appear for sale is indicative of how badly run AMD actually is as a company. Here's a product which for once gives them a competitive edge over their main rivals, and instead of flooding the market, and ensuring their partners had enough product to be able to flood the market with their own cooler designs, they basically sat on it, and hosed around with a 4gb version that doesnt really exist. I think you might be exhibiting some selective memory. It took Nvidia HOW long to stabilize supplies of GTX 1080 and GTX 1070, especially reasonably priced AIB cards?
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2016 21:35
|
|
|
Wow, here in  we're getting shafted even harder than usual on hardware prices. The RX480 and GTX1060 are meant to be, what, $250-ish? In practice they're both $400-$450 depending on which manufacturer you get them from -- assuming you can find them for sale at all, which you probably can't.Even with shipping, customs, and the exchange rate, it might actually be cheaper for me to order a card from the US.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2016 21:40
|
|
|
lorddazron posted:AMD at the moment are edging ahead in DX12, but only on a handful of titles, and once Nvidia wrap their heads around it, you'll see that advantage disappear. NV getting good at DX12 for the 11 series cards won't do your 1060 much good, if they do get good at it without making sacrifices.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2016 21:40
|
|
|
ToxicFrog posted:Wow, here in GTX 1060s are priced mostly around $330-400 canadian as you can see here http://pcpartpicker.com/products/video-card/#sort=a8&page=1&c=373 Pretty much exactly the same pricing going by the exchange rate. At the current exchange, 330 canadian is about 255 usd. This "canadian hardware prices suck" meme needs to die. Now it's true that basically nothing is in stock anywhere and that part sucks and is frustrating. But taking a quick look through some links from US pcpartpicker, it seems like stock is very very limited in the US also, with the reasonably priced options mostly being out of stock there as well. You're not seeing a canadian pricing issue or any kind of canada-specific issue, you're seeing a low supply issue.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2016 21:57
|
|
|
xthetenth posted:NV getting good at DX12 for the 11 series cards won't do your 1060 much good, if they do get good at it without making sacrifices. This was more of the point I wanted to make but didn't say. Clearly AMD better utilizes DX12, and frankly I don't see Nvidia making any sort of fundamental leap with it with the tech thats on the market (and on the same vein I don't see AMD making any leaps with it either on the current tech). But... Nvidia counterparts to AMD cards still either run the same or still run better in the same benchmarks. Then they simply do better overall in all the other games. I know this is basically a dead horse by now but its just a tad strange to see the strong sales of what seem to me to be overpriced cards. But, honestly, good for them I guess. Live on to maybe not disappoint another day.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2016 22:14
|
|
|
The shitload of tax that gets added on to purchases in Canada -- even online ones -- is why the "canadian hardware prices suck" thing continues. Newegg doesn't charge sales tax in most states, but in Canada, they charge both federal and provincial sales taxes.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2016 22:14
|
|
|
Col.Kiwi posted:Not really. Pricing isn't jacked up in canada for those cards, availability is just poo poo right now. $250ish USD is the expected price, really 250 to 300 range as you can see here (US pricing): http://pcpartpicker.com/products/video-card/#sort=a8&page=1&c=373 ...which is a far cry from the $400-$450 cards are actually selling for on Newegg or NCIX. There are cards listed much closer to the $330-$350 I'd expect to see, but all of them are either out of stock or "pre-order only, pricing subject to change". PCPartpicker is just as useless at pricing information as it always has been; it doesn't check stock information, and indeed seems to preferentially use out-of-stock items as its basis for pricing, so all a price listed on PCPP means is "the site claims that, at some point in the past, people may have been able to buy this item at this price". Earlier this year I helped a friend put a new desktop together and I don't a think a single item in PCPP showed a price that actually reflected what is was sold for on the listed sites.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2016 22:17
|
|
|
AVeryLargeRadish posted:A single dual GPU card is still a SLI configuration so two of them is quad-SLI. That's close to the setup I used to Play Crysis the first time. Tri SLI 8800GTX's on a Overclocked E6600. It was playable at ultra until you got to the final boss and it sort of memory leaked all over its face. Even upgraded to a Q9550 that system couldn't quite run it as good as the system I built for myself with a Q9550 also, and a 4870X2. The X2 was able to play it all the way through with ease always above 30FPS lol. Was interesting to see ATI graphics really slap the Nvidia stuff around in Crysis a lot back when.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2016 23:05
|
|
|
ToxicFrog posted:...which is a far cry from the $400-$450 cards are actually selling for on Newegg or NCIX. There are cards listed much closer to the $330-$350 I'd expect to see, but all of them are either out of stock or "pre-order only, pricing subject to change".
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2016 23:06
|
|
|
Yeah, the lack of stock for the decent-priced models is more the issue than anything right now. The ones that are actually available at Newegg.ca, for example, are basically just at the cost they'd be after a currency conversion from the USD price, or they're being sold at $70+ markups from third-party sellers. The cheaper models are out of stock pretty much everywhere both here and in the US.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2016 23:33
|
|
|
Always double check to make sure you're running the most current drivers when you get a new video card  I was having a ton of issues with my new RX 480 to the point I was considering returning it and the monitor I bought when I decided I needed to recheck the drivers I downloaded when I got it a couple of days a go. They were several versions behind... It's running much better now.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2016 01:01
|
|
|
PCIe 4.0 (v.7 of the spec) to have 16 GT/s and 300W from the slot.  http://www.tomshardware.com/news/pcie-4.0-power-speed-express,32525.html edit: forum trimmed the url. SwissArmyDruid fucked around with this message at 01:42 on Aug 22, 2016 |
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2016 01:25
|
|
|
SwissArmyDruid posted:16 GT/s and 300W from the slot. so no more 6 pins or 8 pins yay!
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2016 01:32
|
|
|
wargames posted:so no more 6 pins or 8 pins yay! Now the six pin or eight pin or whatever will plug into the motherboard probably. Instead of adding a better psu to a cheap oem system to allow installation of a high power graphics card, note you might need a whole new motherboard? You know low end systems won't have the extra power connectors on the motherboard. And high power PCIe 4.0 cards won't work in low power legacy boards? PBCrunch fucked around with this message at 01:53 on Aug 22, 2016 |
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2016 01:47
|
|
|
just plug in the entire loving PSU to the mobo
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2016 01:48
|
|
|
Just plug the PSU into the graphics card and let the card power the CPU through the slot, rather than the reverse.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2016 02:22
|
|
|
SwissArmyDruid posted:PCIe 4.0 (v.7 of the spec) to have 16 GT/s and 300W from the slot. Okay I'm not a computer hardware engineer but how is this even possible?
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2016 02:50
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 11, 2024 06:41 |
|
|
spasticColon posted:Okay I'm not a computer hardware engineer but how is this even possible? Doesn't seem hard, just have a power connector on the motherboard and then some fat traces to the PCIe connector. Remember that microwaves, air conditioners, etc. often exceed 1,000 watts.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2016 03:01
|
|
