Can't decide between the GTX 980 TI & R9 390X
My old gaming computer (2008 HP, Q8200 4x 2,3GHZ, 4GB, 1TB, Windows fucking Vista, HD 5770) is starting to grow old. It was able to run everything up to GTA 5 and BF4.
Now i want to build a new one that will last me another 7 years. Best would be if i can, when it starts to get a bit old, buy the same card and go SLI/Crossfire
I7 6700K skylake
8 GB DDR 4
1TB WD Black
500GB SSD 850 Evo
So which one would be bettter for my new build?
980Ti.
>>51259874
Is this a joke? Two 390x barely compete with a 980 ti.
>>51259874
awwww babys first troll attempt
fuck off kid
>>51259920
If OP was trying to troll it seems it worked because you fell for it dumbass.
>>51259901
Two 290x beat it, you retard
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/1437?vs=1496
>>51259901
How do you mean? For the same price as an GTX980 TI i could go crossfire R9 390x?
>>51259920
I'm not even trolling?
I only know the bare minimum of PCs. I'm not like the majority of /g/ that knows how to build a server and perform autopsy on a linux computer
Memelake fucking stick to lga 1150
>>51259941
No one has a PSU that could handle that, family.
>>51259944
Just buy the 980Ti, its the strongest single GPU in the market right now.
>>51259951
I have a 1250w psu, I can handle 4 of them
>>51259920
What are you here, 20min? Piss right off. Let's bring more legit discussion to /v/, it could be great.
>>51259960
You could handle the whole classroom you big slut.
>>51259944
Just buy the 295x2, costs as much if not less and it's more powerful.
I want to start off with one card, and after a couple of years go crossfire/SLI.
I also read shit about the Fury X. Is that something to consider?
I also don't have a 4K screen or anything fancy. I have a standard 19 INCH Ilyama screen that costed 110 bucks 6 years ago.
Gonna upgrade that to a 23 inch screen (i don't like them too big) with HD or whatever.
Let's just get this out of the way, if you plan on using Linux in any shape of form go with 980 ti
>>51260001
With a 980Ti you should be fine at 1440p 144hz for a while now, 4K is a meme resolution (for now) since you need 2x980ti to even get 60FPS.
>>51260001
Fury X is something to consider. It's about the same as a 980ti with potential to be better later on.
With 295x2 you can just go 4 way crossfire later with another one if you really wanna do that later.
>>51259951
lolwut i've got a 1300 watt psu for crossfire and tons of headroom.
if dx12 ends up being worth a damn i'll be running as many cards as i can.
I've played with GTX 780 Ti, 970 and 980. Also played with AMD 380, 390x and Fury. Personally I believe AMD to run a lot of things "smoother". Frames look about the same but it's more constant.
>>51260031
Ty
>>51260035
I guess going 4way crossfire is too complicated for me.
I only know the basics about CPU and Graphics card. I don't even know what motherboard i should get (that has enough space to go SLI/Crossfire) later on
>>51260175
>I guess going 4way crossfire is too complicated for me.
It's literally the same as 2 way because it's just 2 cards with a dual gpu card
>>51260146
Less frame time variance or whatever it is
I'm now checking some sites to steal some ideas of.
Would copying a build like this: https://www.dragoncomputers.eu/monsterPCs/intel-monster/Intel-Core-i7-6700K-GTX-980-Ti-OC-240GB-SSD-500GB-HDD-8GB-DDR4-extreem-gamer-PC
be good?
I think the case is a bit too small to fit 1HDD 2 SSDs (1 now and 1 in a couple of years) and 2 GPU's (1 now and 1 in a couple of years)
How about the motherboard?
>this thread
>>51260003
Not anymore senpai. The new open source drivers for AMD are getting alot better. AMD also shares info with the open source community. Nvidia's proprietary drivers don't even support the latest xorg version.
Obviously get the 980ti..
buying nvidia is unethical
>>51259874
390X is best choice for 4K and directx12
>>51259976
10/10 would read again
Guys ive been thinking. Is the GTX 980 TI really worth it? The 300 bucks extra?
>>51261154
Only a fucking retard would buy a 28nm card for that money when we're months away from the biggest jump in GPU technology in half a decade.
>>51261154
Not unless you want to replace it with a gtx 1080ti (or whatever). Nvidia stops caring about their older cards as soon as a new batch is released.
>>51261182
Whut?
>>51261263
basically waitfag the post
pascal isn't even worth waiting for, because who the fuck will buy it when the ti version will arrive a little later with massive improvements.
taking the ti version into account it's ay least 1.5 years away. That's Q1 2017.
2017. Let that sink in.
>>51261295
That's why you buy a 390x
>>51261314
>buying 2.5 year old rebrand
Nope.
>>51261368
> buying a refresh
FIFY
>>51259944
>I'm not even trolling?
you should probably get the fuck off of /g/ then because it's not your tech support
>>51261380
sapphire 8gb 290x were selling for $360 before they recalled all stock, slapped a new fake carbon fiber sticker on it and shipped it back out for $440
You could've literally had 390x performance in 2013
Is this a Joke?
The 980 Ti is a much better card than the 390x, but is more expensive.
>>51261196
>Nvidia stops caring about their older cards as soon as a new batch is released.
You AMD shills are hard at work this early in the morning.
>>51261418
Meanwhile at AMD.
>>51261154
The flagship cards are never "worth it" if you care about performance per dollar. Only get one if you absolutely need the best you can get.
>>51259874
Fury X or 980Ti.
>>51261401
Exactly. I recommend some people to buy 290X 8 GB cheap if they don't have much money. Impressive against the 970, but when it comes to the 980Ti and Fury I would always choose Nvidia. HBM is good, but 4 GB isn't, not for a card that is meant to drive 4K.
>>51259874
>last me another 7 years
DO NOT UPGRADE THIS GEN!
Futureproofing is a bad idea in general, but definitely wait for the next die shrink then. Manufacturing process is the single most important characteristic for GPU performance as it determines the transistor budget. The current 28 nm process has been used since GTX 580, they're beating a dead horse of old tech.
Next generation GPUs will use 16 nm FinFET, vastly expanding the transistor budget and in turn vastly increasing Nvidia Pascal and AMD Greenland performance potential.
I'd suggest getting at least 16gb of ram, 8gb is just the bare minimum. Why get the newest i7 and Nvidia or AMD's flagship, but only 8gb ram? It's underwhelming and unbalanced.
>>51261509
This. Wait 2 more years.
>>51261509
Well the problem is. Howmuch can i keep beating my dead horse?
Intel Q8200 quad core 2,33ghz, HD 5770 1GB, 1TB HDD, 4GB RAM, faggoty Windows Vista. Games like Left 4 Dead 2, CSGO and BF 3 still run like a charm. But i can hear it's having problems. Starting up takes 15 minutes, with minimal stress the fan sounds like a jet engine and it only blows out really really hot air.
Turning it off takes 15 minutes again
>>51261558
Just buy a 980Ti m8, it would run great with a 1440p monitor, while Pascal might bring a shitload of performance don't expected Nvidia releasing something that would beat a 980Ti at reasonable prices.
>>51261558
Just do a clean Windows 7 install and wait.
>>51261577
futureproofing
>Nvidia
futureproofing
>SLI
nice meme, m8
>>51261598
yeah im sure buying a card that would only be slightly faster than a 980ti by a few FPs would be sooo future proofing.
>>51261598
Sli has been shit for years but maxwell only shows up the poor scaling it gets.
>>51261617
Note how those are all amd affliated titles (some even from 2011) and amd still loses.
>>51261558
>15 min
Your main problem is the lack of an SSD. Thermals and thus noise has only gotten worse today. You need to carefully select quiet components. Check out SPCR: http://www.silentpcreview.com
Feel free to upgrade the rest of the system (I'd get at least 16 GB RAM, it's cheap), but either give up on the futureproofing madness or hold on to your 5770 until next gen.
>>51261636
>implying amd affliated titles means anything
It just means that it doesnt nerf their competition deliberately.
>>51261672
No, it means the benchmark can't be taken seriously if they can't use modern games.
They can't use new games because 99% of the time crossfire won't work on it due to gameworks affiliation. And all games coming out nowadays are gameworks affliated.
>>51261707
So what, the chart doesn't count because its not stacked in your favour?
>>51261558
>>51261587
>>51261667
Yes, also definitely install at least Windows 7. Vista does not even have TRIM for SSDs.
Sadly, future gaming needs will require at least Windows 10 for WDDM2 and DX12.
>>51261720
Can't you read? Because it's not a valid interpretation of modern day performance.
>>51261558
SSD. It will decrease your loading time even without SATA3.
I'm running a Phenom II / 4 GB DDR2 / GT 530 build with a 840 120 GB, loading times are fine. I can load maps in BF4 faster than all the Russians and HDD using friends. The game itself runs at 40 FPS on 720p low.
You should upgrade your platform, new CPU, board, RAM, keep the 5770 or buy a USED GPU like a GTX 670/80. If you can live with a 5770 this will get you through until next year, then buy a fat screen and a Pascal GPU.
>>51261721
But there are no DX12 games out yet. You're safe with 7 or 8.1 until 2017, if you want to avoid the full botnet. These OS will also boot up faster.
>>51261434
>>51261418
http://forums.cdprojektred.com/threads/38733-The-Witcher-3-Kepler-GPU
https://forums.geforce.com/default/topic/831639/geforce-700-600-series/nvidia-is-deliberately-downgrading-kepler-gpus-performance-in-favor-of-maxwell-/
https://forums.geforce.com/default/topic/835446/geforce-700-600-series/amd-cards-getting-better-performance-in-gameworks-than-700-series-/
https://forums.geforce.com/default/topic/833016/geforce-700-600-series/gtx-780-possible-fail-as-performance-in-the-witcher-3-wild-hunt-/
>>51261759
I don't think adding an SSD will make me play GTA 5, BF4 or Fallout 4.
I can live with the loading times, and huge noise. I'm just mentioning that the PC is in bad shape and living 2 more years with it is barely do-able.
I could install W7, but even then i won't be able to play GTA 5 or play Cities Skyline with more than 20 FPS.
Are those Pascal GPU's so important?
The plan is to survive the next 3/4 years with a single GPU (390X or 980 TI) and the 3/4 years after that with a double GPU.
I can also imagine that the new GPU's will cost around $1,2K
With futureproofing i mean that in case GTA 6 and Battlefield 5 come out, that i can still run those games on Ultra settings.
>>51261850
Looks to me it's a bunch of sheltered Nvidia users who always got their shit optimized for them got s little taste of AMD tier optimization for the first time.
Nvidia was busy working on the newly released Maxwell during that time and the Kepler optimization arrived shortly after.
AMD cards still runs like shit though and most users have to nigger rig some patches to play on low.
Oh btw i'm a graphics whore. So i really like to play my games on Ultra.
>>51261915
>dat graph
Nvidia(TM) hairworks, no wonder amd is shit at it
>>51261894
Yes, you still can't play these games. Your GPU is a huge bottleneck, the CPU also if you didn't OC it. BF4 runs horrible on 4 GB RAM... For the it is noticable when I go on a 32 instead of 64 player server.
4 years is a lot for a GPU. The next GPU generation will feature a new process node, just look for the performance gain that happened on the 500-600 series transition. More shaders less power consumption. Plus HBM or at least GDDR5X memory.
>>51261915
The Kepler cards have been losing relative performance not only when compared with the 900s but against it's natural competitor the AMD 200s. It used to be that 780(Ti) was treading blows with the 290(X), whereas in most new games it's starting to fall short by a widening gap. This can't be explained by your new architecture theory, since we're talking about cards that are the same age and have been out for almost 2 years.
http://www.overclock.net/t/1528827/techspot-the-crew-benchmarked[1]
http://www.overclock.net/t/1529108/are-nvidia-neglecting-kepler-optimization-since-maxwell-release[2]
"Pre Maxwell games : Battlefield 3 and 4, Crysis 3, GRID2, Tomb Raider, Batman Arkham Origins, Bioshock Infinite, Metro Last Light, Dead Rising 3
R9 290: 100%
GTX 780: 93.73%
R9 280x: 79.93%
GTX 770: 78.39 %
GTX 960: 65.54%
Games tested from post Maxwell : Alien Isolation, Call of Duty Advanced Warfare, Civilization BE, Dragon Age Inquisition, Ryse Son of Rome, Shadow of Mordor.
R9 290: 100%
GTX 780: 82.88%
R9 280x: 80.06%
GTX 770: 68.72 %
GTX 960: 65.34 %
In the newer games you can see the GTX 960 is just 3% off GTX 770, similarly to the Techspot numbers the 780 and 280x are almost on a par these days in the tested newer games, according to TechPowerUp.
Most interesting to note how the performance of the GTX 960 is almost unchanged on average pre and post."
>>51259874
390x because it is not made by a disgusting liar company.
>>51262023
Both have chinese ceos
>>51259874
980
you like drivers that work and cheaper electricity bills and houses that arn't on fire right?
>>51262039
do your research before posting, housefire meme started when nvidia gpus started housefires all over US
>>51262074
don't think so tim. If nvidia cards did that, why are they atributed to mad?
I rest my case.
Try arguing otherwise. Noone gives a shit.
>>51261915
Remember Nvidia originally said tessellation didn't matter when ATI was better at than them. Since Nvidia has improved performance dramatically its now the definnig factor of synthetic gpu performance. Even today a 290x will bench below a 780 at stock driver settings in benchmarks like firestrike and whatnot yes this does not play out in actual game performance (where a 290x is usually picking a fight with a 980).
http://www.pcworld.com/article/2955182/tablets/88000-nvidia-shield-tablets-recalled-due-to-heat-risk.html
https://www.cpsc.gov/en/Recalls/2015/NVIDIA-Recalls-Tablet-Computers/
>>51262087
>hasn't heard of fermi
Its okay to be underage b&, just lurk more. We at /g/ seek to educate the unwashed masses.
>>51260031
Was tempted to get a 980ti for 144hz but the huge power consumtion made me ditch that idea and go with a 290X/144hz freesync display instead.
>>51259874
>>51262029
>>51262023
One has propper Directx 12, enough
R9 390x
>>51262113
oh loooool look at the wonderful photoshop job there,
stay MAD.
>>51262131
>"i-i-it must be a shoop!"
http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/nvidia-geforce-gtx-titan-x-gm200-maxwell,review-33151-6.html
>>51262098
>Remember Nvidia originally said tessellation didn't matter when ATI was better at than them
....No?
Fermi raped Cypress/XT at tess.
Kepler raped GCN.
Maxwell is still waiting for AMD to release something new.
need to repost this again
>>51262125
Hawaii only supports DX 12_0
>>51262168
Not really, emulated state via drivers atm, and Radeon does that better due its a compute card to begin with, nshittia does not equal good
>>51262155
You need to go even further back yo.
>>51262168
>>51262125
You both need to shut the fuck up and lrn2 DX12.
http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/207598-demystifying-directx-12-support-what-amd-intel-and-nvidia-do-and-dont-deliver
>>51262194
AMD does what Nvidon't ;^)
>>51259874
Then your dumb
>>51262194
>You need to go even further back yo.
No I don't. Nvidia was the one that bought tess back into gaming with the release of Fermi. Tess was one of the major features. It's also the same time where heaven benchmark got released.
Everyone knows the 5000/6000 seris is awful at tess.
>>51262167
stop with the shit posting properGAYnda. You're showing your spagboll
>>51260604
well said f4m
AMD beats nvidia at every price point now except for one use case, pushing 144hz at 1080p. Get a 980ti for that.
Otherwise the only other reason to pay that much for a GPU is if you're at 4k, where 390x / furys would be better. And all nvidia cards below the 980ti are outclassed by their AMD counterpoints at the same price.
>>51262147
>Titan X
>Reference cooler
To be fair, we count the 90+ degrees on a reference 290 then?
>>51261845
He's still using Vista now and presumably won't change OS on the new one either. If I were to reinstall today I would lean towards W10 because convenience.
>>51262309
We do - but the 290/x would throttle to stop it going over 95c on the core. The titan x is hitting over 100c on the memory chips.
>>51259874
Next gen 16 nm process offers a 200% increase in transistor density over current 28 nm.
You could triple the amount of cores within the same die area! Going from 40 nm to 28 nm was massive even though it was "only" a 100% increase, this will be much better.
Don't blow your budget on old tech.
It's not fair to compare a 980 ti with an r9 390x. They're priced completely different and not meant to be similar GPUS in terms of power. Contrasting a 980 vs a 390x would make more sense. If you want something that's closer to power and price you're better off with a fury or a fury x. But most people know that the best card you can get is the 980 ti. Nobody is dumb enough to buy a titan when the performance gains over a 980 ti are miniscule.
>>51262435
Lies. They ARE meant to be similar in terms of power, AMD just fucked up and had to lower the price accordingly.
>>51262364
Why are you comparing memory to the core?
The Fury X easily hits 104c on the vrms.
>>51262486
>compute architecture vs gaming one
There is a reason why in other worklaods hawaii slaughters maxwell.
>>51262486
Then why weren't r9 290x and 780 ti comparable? Because those are previous iterations. how can a card that's 200 to 300 dollars cheaper compare with a 980 ti? It's impossible.
>>51262539
>impossible he says
>>51262519
That is no secret but off topic, OP like most people is looking for a gaming card. AMD got BTFO this gen and can't jew as hard.
>>51262546
>dx12
Get this shit out of here. No games support this yet. If we're talking about raw performance with CURRENT specs the 980 ti blows r9 AMD cards out of the water. You can argue it's better than the fury iterations as well.
I own an r9 390 btw. I'm an advocate for AMD so don't try and tell me I'm a fan boy. It's just painfully obvious that the 980 ti is the best card on the market.
>>51262587
See: >>51261720
>>51262621
>cod
Kill yourself back to /v/
>>51262539
>how can a card that's 200 to 300 dollars cheaper compare with a 980 ti?
LOL. 390x is NOT 200 to 300 dollars cheaper to manufacture retard. 390x has much higher power consumption. AMD just can't jew as hard when their product sucks.
>>51262621
>bases all performance off a single game
Cool.
>>51262650
>same price to manufacture
>no source
I guess I'll just take your word for it, anon.
>>51262671
He definitely didn't say same price to manufacture, and where is your source...
>>51262650
Well, of course not. Because the manufacturing costs jack and shit and the vast majority of the cost is because the R&D costs a fuckton. Really, I'd be surprised if the actual parts cost $100 to produce.
