|
Daeno posted:
I can't find a simple chart showing where current cards do on firestrike, what's the equivalent to these right now? I've seen everybody betting that the 290X ~= the GTX 780, is the 270X about as fast as a 7970 or something?
|
#
¿
Sep 25, 2013 21:44
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 15, 2024 22:30 |
|
|
Daeno posted:Here's one for Nvidia's current lineup + a MSI Lightning 7970 So those crazy motherfuckers at AMD are claiming their $200 card is faster than a GTX 780? They must have pulled one hell of a driver optimization for Firestrike out of their rear end.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 25, 2013 21:53
|
|
|
Lolcano Eruption posted:Yes but currently there are no IPS panels that can do 120/144Hz. Unless this tech can somehow boost their inherently slower response times. My interest isn't in this to push 120 or 144 FPS, but so that I could have synchronized frames at 40-60 FPS where I tend to run most stuff as someone who coasts on a mid-high GPU for 4 years at a time. If your machine ever drops below 60FPS Vsync can be a pretty terrible experience, it'd be great to not have to deal with tearing just because I'm at 50fps.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 19, 2013 21:15
|
|
|
lllllllllllllllllll posted:Hi thread, I'm a bit confused about various models like SC, GTI and TI. Which one would I want if I wanted a reasonably good card (Nvidia 660)? I'm more concerned about stability and noise than performance. Thanks. You also probably don't want to buy a GTX 660 right now, the 760 or AMD 7950 are significantly better options at the moment.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 20, 2013 18:37
|
|
|
Sidesaddle Cavalry posted:I basically did a 180-degree opinion turn in regards to what my next planned card would be down the road when I read about this the other day. I was set on picking up a dirt cheap 7950 to replace my 5850 that's getting long in the tooth, but I'm going to keep coasting a while and wait and see. Between this and shadowplay nVidia is putting together quite the package of GPU fringe benefits.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 21, 2013 23:02
|
|
|
Ozz81 posted:Which makes me wonder how many of their other mid-to-low range cards will be rebranded 7000 series GPUs, maybe just cherry-picked ones that are guaranteed to run at higher clocks with better stability. Like, will the 270x be a rebranded 7950 or perhaps a 7870 GHz edition? We already know that every card but the 290 and 290x are rebranded 7xxx cards. The 270x is a rebranded 7870.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 23, 2013 02:29
|
|
|
Josh Lyman posted:This is probably a stupid question, but with both the PS4 and Xbone using Radeon graphics, should we expect desktop Radeons to give us better performance for the next half dozen years? Doesn't matter at all, PC hardware doesn't have a lot to do with consoles. The APIs are different, the hardware is different, and the console GPUs will become antiquated just like the ATI X1600 variant in the Xbox 360 did. Nvidia doesn't really have a performance lead right now. As they always have before, the two manufacturers are using cutthroat pricing so that both parties have good bang-for-buck cards.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 15, 2013 18:32
|
|
|
Palladium posted:$250 now makes my over 1 year old $210 7950B looks fantastically good in hindsight. It's like Sandy Bridge deja vu again. That was an anomalously low price before bitcoin miners drove up the price like crazy. I saw those 7950 Boosts hanging around $200-ish, and then two weeks later they were $350. A buddy of mine managed to get a 7850 for $100, told me to get the same thing and it was very very gone the next week.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 25, 2014 16:16
|
|
|
Radio Talmudist posted:I've been looking for a good 250$ card and the 285 seems perfect. My GTX 465 is very long in the tooth. Good, buy a 280X, it's cheaper and significantly faster than the 285, with an extra GB of RAM to boot. http://pcpartpicker.com/parts/video-card/#c=148&sort=a8
|
|
#
¿
Sep 2, 2014 19:13
|
|
|
1gnoirents posted:I've been in and out of the game countless times but I've never expected the next gen to be much better than the previous higher model from the last year (for gpus, as opposed to cpus). I'm holding my tongue though until there are real numbers. I remember things moving much, much faster from say, 7850GT -> 8800GTS, or TNT2 -> Geforce. All I know is that I used to be pretty much required to upgrade GPUs every 3 years or games wouldn't even boot because of how fast hardware features were moving. I remember going from a Geforce 2 Ti, and then HL2 wouldn't work so an X800 XT, then Bioshock wouldn't even launch so an 8800GTS. Now I'm coasting on a 5 year old 5870 and everything seems to be running acceptably, even well.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 8, 2014 17:55
|
|
|
spasticColon posted:I'm hoping a fool's hope that the 970 is at least on par with the R9 290 and isn't more than $400 at launch. If not I'll just get an R9 290 instead because I want something that will blow my 660ti out of the water and move the card over to my Skylake build next year if Skylake drops next year that is. For the last couple generations, the best bang for buck has come on old-stock last generation cards being cleared out as their replacements come onto the market. Look for a post-mining R9 290 or maybe even a GTX 780 getting cheaper. If you're after pure bang for buck, the GTX 770 is trickling down to $280-ish, and will probably get cheaper. Get two!
|
|
#
¿
Sep 11, 2014 18:57
|
|
|
gently caress them posted:I'm only gaming in 1080p but I want to absolutely max out ultra everything if possible. I'm now running a 7950 and wonder what would be a worthwhile jump for it. Looks like a GTX 770 or a R9 280x is my best bet - is there any reason to go for nVidia vs AMD besides who is cheaper when I go looking or if I care about heat/noise? I also wonder if either of those cards is going to be bigger than the 7950; it's already "A goddamn flux capacitor" to my non-techie gf when she saw me pull that monolith from 2001 out and put it in. What game are you experiencing issues in? A 7950 should be very comfortable at 1080p. You may have a bottleneck elsewhere.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 12, 2014 19:28
|
|
|
Biggest human being Ever posted:I would like to play games at 1080p, 60fps and ultra settings (incl. high AA+AF), with a lot of recent games my GTX 670 wasn't enough for that. I think even at 1080p high end cards aren't entirely unreasonable. As I understand it, the 7950 with a moderate overclock is a closer equivalent to a GTX 770 or 680. It's still a bad position to upgrade from unless you can sell the 7950 to a sucker for more than its worth and trade up to a R9-290.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 12, 2014 21:07
|
|
|
Geemer posted:Which ones of the R-cards is the HD7870's equal again? R9-270 = 7850 R9-270X = 7870 R9-280 = 7950 R9-280X = 7970 Way to go with the rebrands, AMD.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 12, 2014 21:16
|
|
|
HalloKitty posted:Nah, not at all. The 270 is a 270X clocked lower so it only needs one PCIe power connector. Wow, I lost track of this in the mess, thanks for correcting me. I got confused because all 4 of them are the same GPU, Pitcairn. http://www.anandtech.com/show/7503/the-amd-radeon-r9-270x-270-review-feat-asus-his
|
|
#
¿
Sep 12, 2014 21:26
|
|
|
balakadaka posted:So by this metric, what is the R9-285? My impression is that it's new silicon and not just a rebrand, but I'm not sure if that's true You're entirely right! The R9-285 is entirely new silicon with all of the nice new features that came on the R9-290. However, at the moment it looks like street prices are higher than a 280X and it is about the same speed as a 280, so wait and see unless you specifically need high performance per watt.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 16, 2014 15:15
|
|
|
Liu posted:I haven't been keeping up with graphics card stuff since I bought my 7950 ages ago, I feel like I'm missing something here but I was wondering why the 290X is £100 cheaper than the 780 Ti even though in benchmarks they seem to have a similar performance The 290X is hotter and usually louder. You're entirely right that AMD has a huge edge on pricing right now with the 280X vs 770, 290 vs 780, and 290X vs 780 Ti.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 16, 2014 19:25
|
|
|
Liu posted:Well Shadowplay does seem pretty sweet, and temperature and noise are issues for me (PC won't be in a great location but very awkward to move it somewhere else), I'll be playing at 1080 so I wouldn't want to overkill that and get nothing but noise and heat for my troubles. Maybe I'll just get a standard 780. You're at 1080? Grab a 280X at the highest, they've been as low as $220 lately.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 16, 2014 20:30
|
|
|
Agreed posted:god knows what AMD is really doing Whatever it is, it's going to be hot: http://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-radeon-390x-liquid-asetek,27665.html
|
|
#
¿
Sep 16, 2014 21:34
|
|
|
1gnoirents posted:I've never heard anybody who has ever used both crossfire and SLI actually say that crossfire was better. At best it was comparable, especially with r9 290s +, at worst it was unusable garbage. Early SLI was complete dogshit. A close friend of mine has only had 1 experience with each, and SLI 6800 GTs was a complete nightmare while Crossfire 4850s worked really well. My anecdotal experience is that AMD frequently has hosed drivers that produce bad performance, missing textures, and bizarre behavior, while Nvidia frequently has hosed drivers that bring the entire loving system to a halt, especially early Vista drivers in 2007: http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/27/nvidia-drivers-responsible-for-nearly-30-of-vista-crashes-in-20/ Both of them are a clusterfuck and I've always bought pure performance / $.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 17, 2014 16:02
|
|
|
Knifegrab posted:So wait, the 900's will be worse than the 780ti? What the hell? We knew this, this isn't news. There's no die shrink and Maxwell is an architecture focused primarily on performance per watt. The >$400 part of the GPU market is such a tiny amount, if they're able to bring more performance into the $200-400 space it's going to be a good lineup for nVidia. I'm sure at some point they will do a really fast 980 Ti or Titan Obsidian based on the architecture for people who want something faster than 780 Ti.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 17, 2014 20:24
|
|
|
Shouldn't we be seeing a 20nm die shrink of Maxwell at some point in the next year? As I recall, nVidia wanted this launch to be 20nm but the foundries weren't there yet.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 17, 2014 21:03
|
|
|
everythingWasBees posted:If all that's true, I'm starting to reconsider that GTX 760. That seems like quite a jump for a $100 or so difference. If you're after performance / $, AMD has got that market locked up right now. The 280X, which performs very closely to a GTX770 is in the $240 range all day long. Hopefully this Maxwell launch will bring things back in line, I don't think AMD even has to make anything much cheaper to keep it competitive.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 17, 2014 23:24
|
|
|
everythingWasBees posted:I've had bad experience with their drivers in the past, so I'm hesitant to purchase anything from them. This is a bad reason to swear off an entire brand, but probably why nVidia can get away with selling the GTX 770 for $80 more than the Radeon 280X.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 18, 2014 02:20
|
|
|
1gnoirents posted:If for instance I was hitting a vram bottleneck with 770 SLI where a 780ti played better when pushed, perhaps 4gb SLI 970's won't have that particular issue. On paper, it looks like the 970 / 980 will be worse than the 780 series at high resolutions just because of the lesser memory bandwidth. As ATI proved with the r9-285, memory compression exists and can overcome narrow buses. We will see.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 18, 2014 15:55
|
|
|
1gnoirents posted:Yeah. Maybe someone here knows, but is it even possible to have more than a 256 bit bus with 8 physical memory chips? That always seems to be an issue when thinking about memory. Yeah, you could do a 512-bit bus. 
|
|
#
¿
Sep 18, 2014 16:37
|
|
|
JG_Plissken posted:Would it be better to use a dual link DVI or Displayport if the card makes both available. Use displayport whenever you can.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 18, 2014 19:58
|
|
|
If those number are in line, I'd expect the 970 @ $399 and the 980 @ $549 or so. I see an R9-290 on Newegg for $340 right now, so AMD may not have to adjust at all.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 18, 2014 20:05
|
|
|
ClassH posted:It said in the wccftech article that the 970 would be $329 and 980 $549 Now if that's true and the performance specs accurate as well, the 970 is a knockout deal.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 18, 2014 20:09
|
|
|
spasticColon posted:Will the 970 be available with custom coolers at launch or will they only be available with the lovely reference cooler for a while? I thought that the GTX 770+ reference coolers were fine? Didn't people really like the Titan reference cooler?
|
|
#
¿
Sep 18, 2014 21:54
|
|
|
I'm on a 5850, but wanting to move to a bigger monitor. I've held out for 5 long years, I can hold out for 20nm Maxwell if it's going to be cheaper and faster, but the GTX 970 is going to really tempt me.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 18, 2014 22:00
|
|
|
Gwaihir posted:Man, if you still have a 5850, the 970 is going to be a mindblowingly huge upgrade. It's not worth waiting for 20nm now. I used to wait until games were 100% slideshow / not even launching to upgrade, which took me down the Geforce 2 Ti -> X800 Pro -> 8800GT path, but then system requirements completely stagnated and my 5850 seemed to be doing fine on modern games like Wolfenstein: New Order and CoH 2 without even turning down the graphics much. I remember back in 2007 when my barely 3 year old X800 Pro was unable to even launch Bioshock, which required shader model 3.0. Now the first game that has even made me think about reducing detail from the High with moderate AA area is War Thunder on a 5 year old GPU. It's DX11 and has gotten absolutely massive performance improvements from driver updates, and for some reason people forget that the 5850 was the same speed as the 6870 and overclocked higher. Twerk from Home fucked around with this message at 22:30 on Sep 18, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Sep 18, 2014 22:28
|
|
|
Do any of the first wave of GTX 970s have 2 display port on them? It's really frustrating how nVidia partners refuse to put 2-3 miniDP on cards instead of a 2nd DVI or an HDMI.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 20, 2014 01:53
|
|
|
Meanwhile, I'm trying to figure out if I should replace my 5 year old 5850 with a newly-cheap 280X or 285, or if the GTX 970 is worth the stretch and figure I'm doing a monitor upgrade to more than my current 1920x1200 next year.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 22, 2014 15:29
|
|
|
Rastor posted:To make your decision more difficult, there are already rumors that nVidia will release a GTX 960 in time for holiday shopping in the R9 285 price/performance bracket. I know for sure that I'm going to have a 2560x1440 monitor within the year, it looks like the GTX 970 wouldn't be wasted on that for sure. I'll hold out until 970 prices and availability shakes out though, and I really want a card with at least 2 displayport so my choices are very limited.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 22, 2014 16:12
|
|
|
tijag posted:If it was the 'full' Tonga, that still wouldn't compete with the 980. Might compete favorably with the 970 though? At least on a pure performance metric? If the 285 had some clock headroom and some modules disabled, a 285X might be able to get in the same ballpark GTX 970. However, this would leave the R9-290 really high and dry as such a card would have to be spitting distance to the R9-290, while also costing $300 or less. Edit: I just looked at a lot of GTX 970 review roundups. The GTX970 is faster than the R9-290X in about half of games somehow, despite lower synthetic benchmarks and theoretical performance. By "faster" I mean "higher average fps and higher minimum FPS". I don't see what AMD's going to do, given that the 290X is officially still a $500 card that seems comparable now to a $330 one. Twerk from Home fucked around with this message at 21:16 on Sep 23, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Sep 23, 2014 21:01
|
|
|
Hace posted:No I totally agree, Bionic Commando drawing like 1000FPS and maxing out my 770 by default is really lovely, but I was just saying that there's almost never a case where limiting to 60FPS has resolved screen tearing. I thought that non-vsync framerate limiting tended to make tearing worse? I know that I've seen games hard-coded to be locked at 60fps and if I run them without VSync, I'll get a tear that hangs out in one place on the screen and is way more annoying than an intermittent / rolling tear.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 24, 2014 00:02
|
|
|
Duck and burger posted:P.S. Anyone know if that FX8xxx really is a bottleneck? Yes. For gaming, you're better off with a $60 Intel than any AMD CPU. The AMDs are nice at edge cases like video transcoding and stuff that is perfectly multithreaded, but cannot compete at single threaded speed.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 24, 2014 15:20
|
|
|
AirRaid posted:All these people worrying that their i7s will bottleneck them. I'm still running an i5 2500k (stock clock). Pretty sure I'll hit a bottleneck in most stuff. If you overclock that 2500K, it will be in the same ballpark as a 4690K.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 25, 2014 15:42
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 15, 2024 22:30 |
|
|
Berious posted:Would it be foolish to buy a GTX 770 right now? I don't need the latest and greatest, but I would like an upgrade from my 550 TI as games are starting to struggle even on low settings. I'm thinking timing mainly, already see them discounted on Amazon but are they likely to come down significantly with the 970 out? I was about to weigh in that it would be very silly to buy a GTX 770, then I checked PCPartPicker and saw they're going for $235 after rebate. I think the only thing it's silly to buy right now is a 760. The 770 and 280X have gotten so cheap, and if you want more performance theres the 970. All 3 of those are absolutely crazy performance / $ right now. $235 GTX 770? Go for it.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 26, 2014 16:06
|
|