|
Well doom runs flawlessly ... Except when you first start it with an nvidia card 
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2016 03:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 06:32 |
|
|
I'd expect 490 and 2 Fast 2 Fury to be Vega 11 and 10. Although maybe they'll give different names to the Polaris and Pascal half-generations. Also, makes sense that AMD's optimizing their arch for power/performance, after all that's how you win through all of mobile and high end desktop, and they don't need to move to catch games, games are coming to them.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2016 03:55
|
|
|
Given Koduri's quote talking about bang vs buck I would expect performance of the 480 to be 980ti to 980-ish but for a "good" price. "Good" is in scare quotes both because its a relative term and we still don't the price points AMD is going to release at here. If its for around $200-250 then they'll sell a bazillion of them. If the die size (230mm²) and memory (256bit GDDR5 at moderate to high clocks) rumors are correct that price point might be doable. That level of performance is still pretty good today and the low power means you can slap it into a system with a crappy PSU and it'll still work. If the price is closer to $300 then I'd expect them to do OK, maybe even good, but not great. Particularly if Pascal ends up being faster for only a little more power and/or cost. They need great sales if they want to get back lots of market share from nV.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2016 04:04
|
|
|
THE DOG HOUSE posted:Well doom runs flawlessly Sucks, but it wasn't as bad as the warning made it sound. Looked at a blank screen for a minute, Bethesda logo was choppy, then it was fine.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2016 04:10
|
|
|
PC LOAD LETTER posted:Given Koduri's quote talking about bang vs buck I would expect performance of the 480 to be 980ti to 980-ish but for a "good" price. "Good" is in scare quotes both because its a relative term and we still don't the price points AMD is going to release at here. Full P10 should go for 250-270$ IMHO, even if it hurts bottom lines a bit compared to 300-325$, because marketshare equals mindshare equals getting AMDs software and techniques adopted. Cut P10 should be 200-250$, and for further price/perf shenanigans, offer P10s with 4GB memory that'll run off the bus at below 200$ prices. Basically make the blowout 290 a part of the new lineup for perf/price.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2016 04:34
|
|
|
FaustianQ posted:Full P10 should go for 250-270$ IMHO, even if it hurts bottom lines a bit compared to 300-325$, because marketshare equals mindshare equals getting AMDs software and techniques adopted. Cut P10 should be 200-250$, and for further price/perf shenanigans, offer P10s with 4GB memory that'll run off the bus at below 200$ prices. Basically make the blowout 290 a part of the new lineup for perf/price. Make up the lower margins in mobile because they can actually target mobile if they hit those numbers.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2016 04:37
|
|
|
FaustianQ posted:Full P10 should go for 250-270$ IMHO, xthetenth posted:Make up the lower margins in mobile because they can actually target mobile if they hit those numbers.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2016 04:45
|
|
|
xthetenth posted:Make up the lower margins in mobile because they can actually target mobile if they hit those numbers. I dunno, AMD is selling Bristol+Polaris mobile and Bristol may be unattractive for prospective buyers; Hope they have some good Intel based design wins as well. Also may indicate that Bristol has Polaris iGPU for HXCF, which would be nuts. But I think they can hit those numbers with P10, there is a Bonaire card with a 50W TDP, I can envision a softlocked P10 as purely bus powered. The power limits would end up enforcing the softlock well, although I'm sure some enterprising idiot would unlock it though and promptly brick it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2016 04:48
|
|
|
980Ti levels of performance for under $300 would be amazing 2and pretty much the best I could've hoped to get from the Polaris/Pascal updates. Hopefully NV will have something to show off at Computex, because their Tesla stuff looked quite promising.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2016 07:23
|
|
|
mobby_6kl posted:980Ti levels of performance for under $300 would be amazing That would destroy their business. They want a balance between selling a decent amount of new cards, but continue to sell older cards too. Now's a good time to hunt for deals on current models. I just got a brand new Nano for 399 euros. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2016 10:21
|
|
|
Panty Saluter posted:Sucks, but it wasn't as bad as the warning made it sound. Looked at a blank screen for a minute, Bethesda logo was choppy, then it was fine. Will be nice once you can get into the advanced menu. Even at 1440p my card is running 20 degrees under peak
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2016 10:54
|
|
|
Metanaut posted:That would destroy their business. Isn't this exactly what happened with the 780 Ti and 970? Their business doesn't look destroyed from where I'm standing.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2016 11:13
|
|
|
AMDs cards sounds incredibly attractive and I'm tired of monstrous large power consuming cards. Computex is still a month away...
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2016 11:18
|
|
|
Tab8715 posted:AMDs cards sounds incredibly attractive and I'm tired of monstrous large power consuming cards. Same. Given how bad Nvidia's support has been lately and how games are starting to perform better on AMD, I'm thinking of jumping ship to them come upgrade time if the price and performance is right.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2016 11:26
|
|
|
Mr. Fortitude posted:Same. Given how bad Nvidia's support has been lately and how games are starting to perform better on AMD, I'm thinking of jumping ship to them come upgrade time if the price and performance is right. I've started to consider switching back to AMD for the first time on a GPU in 14 years but the historic side still puts me off and the additional little features Nvidia do like Physx and stuff. I'd need to see what Pascal brings as well as the price difference. That said I have a 980Ti so that will probably keep me good until Nvidia catch up/get ahead.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2016 12:06
|
|
|
Nvidia is rumored to be bumping up their launch to an event pre-Computex. I guess Nvidia tips their hand first.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2016 12:18
|
|
|
SwissArmyDruid posted:Nvidia is rumored to be bumping up their launch to an event pre-Computex. I guess Nvidia tips their hand first. Sounds like Nvidia is concerned Polaris might overshadow their stuff.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2016 12:23
|
|
|
Mr. Fortitude posted:Same. Given how bad Nvidia's support has been lately and how games are starting to perform better on AMD, I'm thinking of jumping ship to them come upgrade time if the price and performance is right. Good they need your money FaustianQ posted:Sounds like Nvidia is concerned Polaris might overshadow their stuff. Would be important, I know this is a broken record with AMD but I dont see how they would survive a bad release at this point. penus penus penus fucked around with this message at 12:28 on Apr 15, 2016 |
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2016 12:24
|
|
|
THE DOG HOUSE posted:Good they need your money Wrong, if they earn your money, they earn your money. Brand loyalty, it is the stupid.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2016 12:49
|
|
|
SwissArmyDruid posted:Wrong, if they earn your money, they earn your money. Brand loyalty, it is the stupid. True, but there was the important ifs in there
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2016 12:55
|
|
|
SwissArmyDruid posted:Wrong, if they earn your money, they earn your money. Brand loyalty, it is the stupid. Nobody said anything about earning your money. But they sure as hell need it 
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2016 13:04
|
|
|
afkmacro posted:Looks like retailers are liquidating stock Is that a typo, I can't find that deal anywhere on the site? I even got the email and don't see the $135 each bit. EDIT: Nevermind. The whole thing reads "$319.99: EVGA GeForce GTX 970 4GB FTW+ ▪ Only $135 Each When You Buy 2: WD Red 4TB NAS HDD". The $135 each is referring the WD 4TB drive. Escape_GOAT fucked around with this message at 13:09 on Apr 15, 2016 |
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2016 13:06
|
|
|
SwissArmyDruid posted:Wrong, if they earn your money, they earn your money. Brand loyalty, it is the stupid. I agree brand loyalty is stupid, but monopoly is only beneficial for nvidia and if you look at how the GTX 970 and R9 390 are price/performance wise (that is, very much on par with arguably the AMD card being the better deal) and the real world sales numbers probably being 5 to 1 for the nvidia card it's a drat shame that nvidia has such a firm grip on consumers.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2016 13:13
|
|
|
FaustianQ posted:Sounds like Nvidia is concerned Polaris might overshadow their stuff.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2016 13:14
|
|
|
SwissArmyDruid posted:Wrong, if they earn your money, they earn your money. Brand loyalty, it is the stupid. Absolutely, however it is probably worth a slight fudge factor in AMD's favor as a hedge against monopoly. I have a feeling they'll be competitive cards at a competitive price though, they aren't size limited in the same way as Fury so they won't have to put out a crippled chip, and they need the sales. Overall though, there haven't been that many cards that haven't earned at least some consideration. Even the Titans have a reason to exist for people who will pay a huge markup to get that full big chip performance and get it much sooner than the Ti crowd, and price/perf outliers like the 960 2 GB at launch are still graphics cards that work and might be worth considering if you need a graphics card right then and are PSU limited, even though the 4 GB and much cheaper 950 are considerably more compelling now, which just shows how if you time things right both brands usually have a high point in their stack somewhere near your performance target.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2016 13:32
|
|
|
So I know this is very much tea-leaf reading at this point, but assuming Nvidia pips AMD to the post is it going to be worth holding off until the AMD release in order to see a bit of price competition, or is it going to be the case that the initial prices are very much the prices they will always be?
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2016 13:36
|
|
|
snuff posted:I agree brand loyalty is stupid, but monopoly is only beneficial for nvidia and if you look at how the GTX 970 and R9 390 are price/performance wise (that is, very much on par with arguably the AMD card being the better deal) and the real world sales numbers probably being 5 to 1 for the nvidia card it's a drat shame that nvidia has such a firm grip on consumers. Isn't the 970 vastly more power efficient than the 390? All things being equal why buy the card that uses 100W more power to do the same job?
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2016 13:38
|
|
|
Naffer posted:Isn't the 970 vastly more power efficient than the 390? All things being equal why buy the card that uses 100W more power to do the same job? With newer dx12 titles the 390 holds a comfortable lead, and the gap only seems to get bigger, power efficiency is a thing but considering the life expentancy of GPUs and the typical usage of most people, unless you game for 8 hours a day I don't really see the issue.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2016 13:53
|
|
|
That and a lot of the power efficiency goes away once you start overclocking the 970. The gap between the two greatly diminishes.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2016 13:58
|
|
|
snuff posted:I agree brand loyalty is stupid, but monopoly is only beneficial for nvidia and if you look at how the GTX 970 and R9 390 are price/performance wise (that is, very much on par with arguably the AMD card being the better deal) and the real world sales numbers probably being 5 to 1 for the nvidia card it's a drat shame that nvidia has such a firm grip on consumers. No it is not surprising at all, only until recently has the 390 ever seemed appealing and solely through DX12 promise. The shame is firmly on AMD for not releasing anything worth mentioning since 2013 (which would be the 290, or 390). Then after being silent months after the 970 stole massive market share they released a straight rebrand across the board with a at best lame attempt to spin it as worthwhile. A straight rebrand (or worse!) across an entire lineup was hard to stomach and unheard of, but as a very late response to heavy competition? Combine that with the shady as hell marketing (review unit fiasco and literal journalism bullying) and AMD has done nothing right on a significant scale in a very long time. Nvidia "firm grip" is a result of simply having products. There is plenty to say for and against either company but AMD made its own bed here. They are surviving on an old card because it is good, but that doesn't change anything else. Polaris must be competitive at the very least, but its much more important than usual for it to be the best this time around.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2016 14:28
|
|
|
AMD needs to release The Fury 9700 Pro Edition.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2016 14:38
|
|
|
snuff posted:I agree brand loyalty is stupid, but monopoly is only beneficial for nvidia and if you look at how the GTX 970 and R9 390 are price/performance wise (that is, very much on par with arguably the AMD card being the better deal) and the real world sales numbers probably being 5 to 1 for the nvidia card it's a drat shame that nvidia has such a firm grip on consumers. To be fair to customers, the 970 did most of its sales going up against the 290. It launched against a 290 that was way more than half again the price. Even after the price drop, it was still the 290, and that means that even for people who look at benchmarks, they'd see the 290 as it launched with the damned hair dryer for a "cooler". That's how we got the screaming buy 290, people thought it was screaming loud and only performed as well as if it were throttling up to 200 MHz. Some people in the know snapped up aftermarket cards since they were cool and quiet, but when I had to go to hardware.fr and pcgameshardware.de for good aftermarket comparisons I can't blame people for not doing that much legwork. Note how quickly AMD could raise prices and how they actually got mindshare after the 390 launch, especially after games with DX 12 started dropping, but before then it took some good research or skilled tea leaf reading to know. And I'm a giant 290 fan, I much prefer it to the 970 I had (and broke even flipping for the 290). That's not getting into that NV does actually have a bigger group of brand loyal buyers, but they had a drat good reason to get a lot of sales from the agnostic buyers. AMD really ought to have done a refresh of the 290 that was only aftermarket coolers way sooner. I have a higher opinion of the 390 rebrand than dog house, since it got the performance of the 290 as it was getting sold out in benchmarks, but the only reason that room existed is because AMD shot themselves in the foot with that cooler and refused to stop the bleeding by doing something like an aftermarket cooler only 290 GHz type thing. Naffer posted:Isn't the 970 vastly more power efficient than the 390? All things being equal why buy the card that uses 100W more power to do the same job? 100W is a generous estimate in my experience with factory OC cards, but even then the going price on saving 100W is an LED lightbulb that will last multiple times as long as a GPU and can be had for the near side of $10.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2016 14:53
|
|
|
Joke aside, the R300 and R350 were loving legendary.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2016 14:54
|
|
|
xthetenth posted:And I'm a giant 290 fan This explains why yours functions so well.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2016 15:05
|
|
|
xthetenth posted:100W is a generous estimate in my experience with factory OC cards
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2016 15:13
|
|
|
FaustianQ posted:This explains why yours functions so well. I laughed too much at this thanks  Seamonster posted:Joke aside, the R300 and R350 were loving legendary. We rarely see 50% performance gaps these days, especially when moving UP in resolution and AA.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2016 15:22
|
|
|
PC LOAD LETTER posted:An OC'd 290/390 vs a stock 970 yeah, you could easily see a 100w+ difference. At stock clocks for a 290 vs a 970 its usually a 50-60w difference. Depends on the game, a few made the 290 use lots more power. If you OC that 970 though all the power savings go away and it quickly turns as power hungry as the 290. Yeah, my experience has less to do with the Vapor-X 290 I'm running than the 970 G1 Gaming that it replaced being hungry compared to stock.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2016 15:27
|
|
|
I can't say for a 290 specifically but I know my MSI 390 can run at the OEM spec 1GHz with a 100mv undervolt (max allowable in afterburner) and its around 200W on furmark. In fact, once I get around to upgrading from this 2500k, I'll probably move the whole mobo/cpu/ram/gpu combo over to another case and run the 390 in that undervolted spec.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2016 15:33
|
|
|
Reading this thread recently has me wondering about the coming generation of GPUs, DX12's cleaner/austere framework design and sunk costs. I purchased my new desktop/gaming machine in May 2015, including a GTX 970. Due to a combination of laziness, age and being slammed at work I haven't spent any time gaming on it. If my Steam backlog (and probable future purchases) mostly consists of "older" games1 would I find any benefit from a newer, more-capable DX12 GPU or would my 970 serve me better as I understand it performs better in DX11 and prior? 1 Mass Effect 3, Dragon Age 2/Inquisition, Witcher 2 and 3, new XCOM, RPGs from a few years ago, etc.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2016 15:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 06:32 |
|
|
xthetenth posted:To be fair to customers, the 970 did most of its sales going up against the 290. It launched against a 290 that was way more than half again the price. Even after the price drop, it was still the 290, and that means that even for people who look at benchmarks, they'd see the 290 as it launched with the damned hair dryer for a "cooler". That's how we got the screaming buy 290, people thought it was screaming loud and only performed as well as if it were throttling up to 200 MHz. Some people in the know snapped up aftermarket cards since they were cool and quiet, but when I had to go to hardware.fr and pcgameshardware.de for good aftermarket comparisons I can't blame people for not doing that much legwork. Note how quickly AMD could raise prices and how they actually got mindshare after the 390 launch, especially after games with DX 12 started dropping, but before then it took some good research or skilled tea leaf reading to know. I am indeed harsh on the 390, but I dont want to come across as saying anything about the card's performance itself. On its own without any context it performs well, exactly as well as it should for the money pretty much. And I understand the rebrand dilemma here because while typically you'd expect a rebrand to knock the models down a model number over the previous generation for GPU's, in this case there'd be nothing to fill the 390 slot as the Furies were already set in stone. And plus doing so pretty much implies adopting the lower price brackets as well which wouldn't have been possible here for various reasons, but namely because the 290(x) prices were cut so dramatically to compete previous to this. In one sense, what was AMD to do really? release new cards On the other side of the fence the 970 was an unexpectedly great card, and then to top it off they reduced the price 20% over the 770. In fact it was such an aggressive card launch in the price/performance sense that there was high expectation that it perhaps a preemptive strike to something AMD was about to release. When the weeks dragged into months there were honest to god complaints that nVidia should be sued for predatory pricing. Most of my hostility comes from everything in the previous post, but significant practical problems I had with 390 recommendations is that 1) it was more expensive than a 290 for no actual gain, and 2) the 970 outperformed it for the same money. I got into a pretty heated argument here in fact about this and had to dig up a bunch of benchmarks to prove it. But now that DX12 is here and things are getting shaken up I can not longer say "do not buy that card" with the same certainty and my dislike of the 390 goes back to mere annoyance that it exists at all. I did a *little* looking into it and I saw some confusing results from DX12, but it is obvious that AMD's architecture is in the position to gain from it, I'm just not super sure that nvidia cards aren't. However I have a feeling before DX12 gets fleshed out everybody will have released new cards and how Maxwell and 290's/390's perform will be somewhat on a backburner.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2016 15:45
|
|