|
Q_res posted:Yep, it's you, you're the exact person Coredump was talking about. Not really? I was calling out AMD fanboys for their CPUs in a post earlier about a guy I met who was balls out excited for Bulldozer because of all the cores  . I don't have an opinion either way about AMD GPU users except that they were undeniably the smarter ones when the R300 launched. (I did buy a X700 for my P4 box I think)For drivers, AMD/ATI drivers wasted a lot of my time back in the day (subjective and me being bitter I admit), the Linux support is terrible (I don't care that nvidia delivers binary blobs, because they work). Didn't AMD not have drivers ready at launch for BF3, Rage, etc? I would have been pretty angry if I couldn't fly jets into the ground on launch day. I guess I missed all the lovely nvidia card + driver combos, I went from a 6800GT->7900GT->8800GTS->GTX 460 only really upgrading because eVGA RMA'd me a newer card. So, I don't know anything about drivers murdering cards or whatnot.  And lastly I need CUDA, which is probably only the second objective point in this post aside from AMD drivers sucking on Linux and having "issues" at launch of AAA titles. e: I'm usually a midrange card buyer too, so $500 is a bit much for me anyways. Also top-of-page, yell at me more for being mean to AMD 
movax fucked around with this message at 20:34 on Feb 9, 2012 |
#
?
Feb 9, 2012 20:31
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 11:04 |
|
|
I'm really looking forward to not having to look at texture shimmering anymore when I finally upgrade to a 7000-series card. I just wish they weren't releasing the 7800-series last, by the time they're out I'll be sufficiently employed to just buy a 7970.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2012 20:33
|
|
|
Alereon posted:I'm really looking forward to not having to look at texture shimmering anymore when I finally upgrade to a 7000-series card. I just wish they weren't releasing the 7800-series last, by the time they're out I'll be sufficiently employed to just buy a 7970. Article posted:For Southern Islands AMD has changed the kernel weights of their anisotropic filtering mechanism in order to further reduce shimmering of high frequency textures. The algorithm itself remains unchanged and as does performance, but image quality is otherwise improved. Admittedly these AF changes seem to be targeting increasingly esoteric scenarios – we haven’t seen any real game where the shimmering matches the tunnel test – but we’ll gladly take any IQ improvements we can get. So is this the driver setting specific registers in the GPU or some kind of hard-coded values? Seems like the former would make more sense and mean it can change independent of silicon.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2012 20:36
|
|
|
frumpsnake posted:Or if you wanted to run Rage, BF3, or Batman last year at launch. BF3 was a far bigger debacle for nvidia (talk to any sap with a 560ti) and batman still doesn't work for poo poo on anyone's hardware because apparently the developers are worthless.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2012 20:49
|
|
|
VorpalFish posted:BF3 was a far bigger debacle for nvidia (talk to any sap with a 560ti) and batman still doesn't work for poo poo on anyone's hardware because apparently the developers are worthless.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2012 21:05
|
|
|
It is pretty horrible, but you can fiddle with it to get it playable. Well, on at least a 570, don't know about anything less than that.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2012 21:17
|
|
|
VorpalFish posted:BF3 was a far bigger debacle for nvidia (talk to any sap with a 560ti) and batman still doesn't work for poo poo on anyone's hardware because apparently the developers are worthless. It ran awesome on my 460, old hardware supremacy I guess  I do remember people in #pcgaming complaining with 560 Tis and black-screens though. I wonder how these things escape QA sometimes (they got rushed through/QA was non-existent  )I did buy Arkham City, but haven't finished Asylum yet, so good to know I have problems awaiting, wooooo 
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2012 23:24
|
|
|
Don't run it in DX11 mode and you'll have nothing to worry about
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2012 23:57
|
|
|
DX11 mode is a hambeast but it scales well. It's completely playable and almost entirely buttery smooth on CF 6850s, even where "as much GPU" in a single card apparently still drops to single digits. The biggest performance driver there is tessellation. I don't use much of it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2012 01:33
|
|
|
movax posted:It ran awesome on my 460, old hardware supremacy I guess I don't think the problem with GTX560Ti blackscreening were the drivers, problem was that some vendors like Gigabyte overclocked the cards without increasing the voltage so when the cards were really running at 100% they black screened. I had the problem and updating firmware on the card that increased the default voltage fixed it, no black screens since.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2012 01:43
|
|
|
tijag posted:The midrange is very much stagnated. Some are excited about 7970/7950 but the rest of us midrange users are indifferent to both, because we judging from the price/performance we know anything from AMD below $300 is not going to be a worthy upgrade from the old 5870/5850/GTX 460 we bought a looooong time ago or the $150 6870s we have now. That said, now I'm pretty  about that $120 GTX 460 1GB I snagged last year...
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2012 01:59
|
|
|
movax posted:Didn't AMD not have drivers ready at launch for BF3, Rage, etc? I would have been pretty angry if I couldn't fly jets into the ground on launch day. Seriously? No, you could play BF3 just fine at release with an AMD card. When somebody says AMD "didn't have drivers ready", they don't mean people with Radeon cards were sitting around waiting for AMD to push out drivers that would allow them to play the game. They're saying that a set of drivers specifically made to improve performance in BF3 hadn't been released yet. *edit* Sorry about dogpiling and all but that was a pretty big piece of misinformation BEAR GRYLLZ fucked around with this message at 02:30 on Feb 10, 2012 |
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2012 02:27
|
|
|
AMD's coming out all-guns-blazing with a 7990 for Q1 2012: http://vr-zone.com/articles/radeon-hd-7990-coming-in-q1-sports-6gb-of-gddr5/14341.html  Also, GPUReview just added leaked 6XX specs to their site's card comparisons. It's alot of best-guesses, but they've been correct repeatedly in the past with these kinds of things (given the pushed-back release this is clearly all speculation). Yields could certainly affect it, but the pixel fillrate/memory bandwidth of the "680" looks fairly impressive: http://www.gpureview.com/show_cards.php?card1=663&card2=667 If the "690" is anywhere close to this at release though it'll certainly win back the performance crown while costing a small fortune: http://www.gpureview.com/show_cards.php?card1=663&card2=668 e: Max Power Draw: 700 W future ghost fucked around with this message at 04:06 on Feb 10, 2012 |
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2012 03:56
|
|
|
What happened to all that stuff from a while back where nvidia was disabling part of the Fermi core in order to meet the PCI-E power draw spec? 700W 
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2012 04:31
|
|
|
MeramJert posted:What happened to all that stuff from a while back where nvidia was disabling part of the Fermi core in order to meet the PCI-E power draw spec? 700W
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2012 04:39
|
|
|
LooKMaN posted:I don't think the problem with GTX560Ti blackscreening were the drivers, problem was that some vendors like Gigabyte overclocked the cards without increasing the voltage so when the cards were really running at 100% they black screened. I had the problem and updating firmware on the card that increased the default voltage fixed it, no black screens since. I'm not even talking about blackscreening, there was horrific triangular artifacting happening primarily on 560tis, even at stock clocks for months after the release of BF3.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2012 05:06
|
|
|
MeramJert posted:What happened to all that stuff from a while back where nvidia was disabling part of the Fermi core in order to meet the PCI-E power draw spec? 700W Do you actually believe that number? A GTX590 draws around 550W so something around that number sounds much more realistic.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2012 05:16
|
|
|
BEAR GRYLLZ posted:Seriously? No, you could play BF3 just fine at release with an AMD card. When somebody says AMD "didn't have drivers ready", they don't mean people with Radeon cards were sitting around waiting for AMD to push out drivers that would allow them to play the game. They're saying that a set of drivers specifically made to improve performance in BF3 hadn't been released yet. Nah, it's cool, thanks for setting me straight. e: ^^ I had horrible triangles on my 460 as well, dropping textures to High fixed it
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2012 05:22
|
|
|
LiftAuff posted:Do you actually believe that number? A GTX590 draws around 550W so something around that number sounds much more realistic. No, I knew it was just an estimate but still, the fact that people can estimate it being potentially that high is ridiculous. 550W is crazy too
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2012 06:04
|
|
|
MeramJert posted:No, I knew it was just an estimate but still, the fact that people can estimate it being potentially that high is ridiculous. 550W is crazy too Actually that estimate sounds like it got pulled out of his rear end. He took the total system power draw guesstimate for a GTX680 and just doubled it which is just dumb. AMD Radeon 6990 (~490W) vs Nvidia GTX590 (~550)
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2012 06:30
|
|
|
7700 started showing up for preorder http://www.excaliberpc.com/612645/asus-radeon-hd-7770-1gb.html 7770 specs displayed in GPU-Z http://news.softpedia.com/news/AMD-Radeon-HD-7770-Specs-Confirmed-by-GPU-Z-Screenshot-252488.shtml GRINDCORE MEGGIDO fucked around with this message at 04:47 on Feb 14, 2012 |
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2012 04:41
|
|
|
movax posted:For drivers, AMD/ATI drivers wasted a lot of my time back in the day (subjective and me being bitter I admit), the Linux support is terrible (I don't care that nvidia delivers binary blobs, because they work). I think we're internet twins in regards to our nvidia cards. Blobs have always worked perfect for me and I bought nearly identical cards and missed the nvidia murder tales.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2012 17:01
|
|
|
The Tech Report just released their review of the new 7770. Basically, it would be a good card if it were priced lower than the 6850.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2012 06:14
|
|
|
At $125 it'd still be a dubious proposition for anybody not running a 1440x900 or below res because the 6850 is the minimum where you start getting pretty decent framerates across the board regardless of resolution and can be overclocked to hit near/at/above 6870 speeds, and a good 6850 can be found for $135 AR. I can't think of a current price right now where this thing could be recommended other than a $110 replacement for the few people that should be picking up a 5770. $160 is absolutely laughable.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2012 06:26
|
|
|
unpronounceable posted:The Tech Report just released their review of the new 7770. Basically, it would be a good card if it were priced lower than the 6850. This is new card with a price/benefit ratio resembling of Bulldozer proportions.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2012 06:55
|
|
|
On the other hand, the Radeon HD 7570 1GB does seem like a pretty good option, given that it's only slightly more expensive than the Radeon HD 6670 1GB GDDR5 and will thoroughly kick its rear end with lower power consumption. It's a decent upgrade option for OEM systems with weak power supplies too.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2012 07:41
|
|
|
Alereon posted:On the other hand, the Radeon HD 7570 1GB does seem like a pretty good option, given that it's only slightly more expensive than the Radeon HD 6670 1GB GDDR5 and will thoroughly kick its rear end with lower power consumption. It's a decent upgrade option for OEM systems with weak power supplies too. True, but then again the market for "I want to play modern games but don't want to buy a PSU bigger than 300" is pretty small, I'd imagine. Nice that something good came out of those cards, but it's not much of a victory.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2012 14:20
|
|
|
Pretty weak performance for such a massive shrink, and not entirely great value. 5770 is on Newegg with a rebate bringing it to $99 right now.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2012 14:45
|
|
|
Are they high with that pricing? I don't wanna get all conspiracy theorist, but I'd hate to think they were planning on phasing out barts so they could sell these unopposed. They have to be aware of how poorly these are positioned in the market space.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2012 19:01
|
|
|
The GPU market is all about price discrimination. Eventually, these will be good buys. At launch, they don't really differentiate from current offerings on performance, so they'll suck money out of people who buy computers and parts with  and enthusiasm for big numbers.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2012 19:04
|
|
|
I can't remember the last time something launched at a price this unattractive relative to its direct competition and eventually became a good buy. The 550ti launched at a bad point, but it's still a bad buy. As did the 450. I guess when the 5770 launched it was SORT of a bad buy since it basically dropped straight into the 4870 price slot with a (at the time) 5% performance deficit, but that's nowhere near this magnitude. Come to think of it, I legitimately can't think of the last time when a card launched with a price tag this inappropriate, period, nevermind whether it ever went on to become good value or not.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2012 19:26
|
|
|
You mean just between ATI and nVidia, right, because overpriced, horseshit performance cards were a staple of the rat race that got us to the big-two situation. And that is kind of analogous to this, or at least there are some contributing factors that are similar - other companies REALLY NEEDED MONEY because their products in general weren't doing so well and they ended up screwed once the necessary cost to the customer for the company to stay in business outran the value of the product to the customer. ATI is part of AMD, AMD needs money like nobody's business, they just hosed the dog in public in the x86 market but when it comes to graphics they're running unopposed by anyone but themselves for the time being and I don't blame them for milking it while they can.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2012 19:50
|
|
|
Well yeah, I guess I should clarify that my memory and understanding of graphics cards only extends back about 4 years. I'm sure there's lots of stuff from before that that could put the 7770 to shame in terms of sheer, unadulterated bad value.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2012 20:09
|
|
|
How stupid would I be to go out and purchase a 6850? The pricing for the AMD stuff lately is extremely confusing. I really only care about being able to play BF3 at 1920x1080 round about 60 FPS or so.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2012 20:47
|
|
|
Goon Matchmaker posted:How stupid would I be to go out and purchase a 6850? The pricing for the AMD stuff lately is extremely confusing. I really only care about being able to play BF3 at 1920x1080 round about 60 FPS or so. BF3 is one of the most graphically demanding games on the market today. Two 6850s could do it if you don't do dopey stuff like use the MSAA (because it's a total hog in that game, it's unconventional for MSAA and acts more like FSAA - use the FXAA option if you turn settings up). FXAA looks just about as good and has a fraction of the performance hit. 1080p is not low resolution. It's not SUPER high resolution, but that's where you start needing to bring some real power to bear in order to get good framerates with pretty stuff turned on. A single 6850 is a pretty good value choice if you don't mind turning down graphical settings to get more FPS. Two of them is one of the better price:performance choices at the moment, offering performance similar to a GTX 580 (minus PhysX, of course) for a lot less money because of excellent crossfire scaling. You won't be playing Metro at its highest settings at a constant 60 but neither will most people.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2012 20:57
|
|
|
Agreed posted:Two of them is one of the better price:performance choices at the moment, offering performance similar to a GTX 580 On that note, if I were dropping $300 on graphics cards all at once, and doing so today, an overclockable GeForce 560 Ti-448 would be my preference. No CrossFire headaches, similar performance, slightly lower power consumption plus you get PhysX for your troubles.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2012 21:00
|
|
|
Alereon posted:On the other hand, the Radeon HD 7570 1GB does seem like a pretty good option, given that it's only slightly more expensive than the Radeon HD 6670 1GB GDDR5 and will thoroughly kick its rear end with lower power consumption. It's a decent upgrade option for OEM systems with weak power supplies too. In addition it's looking like the switch to GCN is a smart one over VLIW-5. http://ht4u.net/reviews/2012/amd_radeon_hd_7700_test/index4.php With 7770 at 5770 clocks, it has a 25% less theoretical GFLOP's than the 5770 does. Even with that, it generally outperforms or is the same performance than the 5770. GCN looks really good, but the pricing for these products is off. Eventually I suspect the 68xx's will all be sold out and this card can settle down in price. Probably 115-120 for the 7770.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2012 21:03
|
|
|
Factory Factory posted:On that note, if I were dropping $300 on graphics cards all at once, and doing so today, an overclockable GeForce 560 Ti-448 would be my preference. No CrossFire headaches, similar performance, slightly lower power consumption plus you get PhysX for your troubles. And for those who don't know, FF is using two 6850s in crossfire now - the 448 is a good competitive product on the nVidia side, and as it turns out a surprisingly good overclocker, too, if you buy from a non-poo poo brand. Never -count- on great overclocking, but people have reported good results from Zotac, EVGA, MSI, and Asus using the 560Ti 448. But spending $300 on graphics cards at this exact moment is something to do only if you really have to, since the next gen is dropping now and we haven't seen the price:performance champs of it (and likely won't until nVidia gets in the game with their 28nm process based cards). $300 is a lot of money for a stopgap, but if you need a card right now, there's always the best-value choices of the moment regardless. Just avoid the 7700s from ATI and don't buy a GTX 580 if you're going all-in, the 7970 eats its lunch for about the same price.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2012 21:08
|
|
|
Goon Matchmaker posted:How stupid would I be to go out and purchase a 6850? The pricing for the AMD stuff lately is extremely confusing. I really only care about being able to play BF3 at 1920x1080 round about 60 FPS or so. If you are okay with medium settings it should be do able. I can double check, I normally am find with 45FPS though, so I tune my settings around that not 60 and I'm fine with a 6850 in BF3. I think I have a mix of mid and high and maybe 1 ultra or something that's low intensity.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2012 22:31
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 11:04 |
|
|
The difference between 1920 Battlefield 3 at 30 versus 60 frames is, unfortunately, a lot of money.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2012 23:05
|
|