AMD r9 fury or nvidia 980?
>>53288943 Sapphire R9 Fury Nitro
>>53288943
>3 fans
Are fans just for show now?
Fury, easily.
>jewvidia
>>53288992
Not on AMD cards.
Seems pretty obvious to me, the Fury.
That particular one has a custom PCB, much beefier power delivery, and now that Sapphire Trixx and MSI AB have voltage control working, you can get some pretty decent (for a Fiji chip) OC's to the core and memory.
The card already out-performs the 980 (yes the 980 can also get a whopping big OC usually, but I've seen some pretty big performance increases for that particular Fury card when OC'ed), and the gap will only increase more over time, especially once DX-12 titles start to trickle into the market.
>>53289001
Because they're shitty and overheat? The gtx 970 fans don't start spooling until 60c..
NANO
>>53289082
several low rpm fans are quieter than a single high rpm fan
>>53289082
Neither do the r9 390 or fury cards.
>>53288943
Neither
Wait for AMD Polaris. Now is a terrible time to buy a card.
>>53289082
But it's still a gtx970 you fucking poor person
>>53289145
The 380 is a pretty sweet card
>>53289154
fucking laughed
>>53288943
390, with DX12/Vulkan as well as future driver optimization it'll be as fast or faster than the 980, see the 780 and 7950
>>53288943
>not running dual 980 ti's
I swear to fuckin god m8
>>53289196
>1080p display
I hope this isn't real
>>53289217
Oh it isn't, and neither is the Vive in my living room. ;^)
an OCed 980 will match the performance of a fury and is ~$100 cheaper, $200 cheaper if you go for b-stock. the only way it would outperform a fury is if you paired it with a CPU weaker than an i7 because of the overhead issues AMD drivers have.
>>53289321
>because of the overhead issues AMD drivers have.
Where did this meme come from?
>>53289346
A complete lack of understanding in how drivers work.
>>53289346
it's not a meme, it's a performance destroying issue that cripples AMD cards in dx11 and dx9 games when paired with anything weaker than an extremely high end CPU.
http://forums.guru3d.com/showthread.php?t=398858
>>53289358
But I use a 7850 with a 750k and just finished playing through GTAV at 1440p
>>53289358
If I'm reading this all i think is that I'm losing 5% (2 fps) if i go with an AMD card but if i upgrade my CPU i get an extra 20% perf.
>>53289460
>If I'm reading this all i think is that I'm losing 5% (2 fps) if i go with an AMD card
no, you're losing 30-40% performance.
>but if i upgrade my CPU i get an extra 20% perf.
if you upgrade to a $600 i7 you do, yes. but who is going to buy a weak GPU and then pair it with a $600 CPU? that's retarded as fuck. the fact that this problem doesn't exist on nvidia's side indicates that AMD could fix this too, but refuses to even acknowledge it, probably because they fired a huge number of engineers in 2013 and 2014.
>>53289145
It's always a terrible time to buy a card.
Just get the nearest one to $300 and do that.
>>53289492
i7s aren't $600 and an i5 would be great for $230.
The lowest loss AMD has on low end processors is 25% in one game. Some games it winds regardless of processor. Buying low end gpus is stupid in itself and anyone who gets a computer for games gets an i5
>>53289568
>i7s aren't $600 and an i5 would be great for $230.
you still lose considerable performance with an i5, enough that a 390 will consistently lose out to a 970. https://youtu.be/frNjT5R5XI4?t=8m34s
> Some games it winds regardless of processor.
that's against a 750ti, if this were against a 950 or 960 (which is what you would see in low end builds), AMD would constantly lose out despite biased benchmarks showing cards like the 260x, 270x, 280x, 285/380, etc all performing better than the 950/960.
If you really care about gaming get the 980 I don't see the point of getting an AMD card when it's outperformed by Nvidia in games such as The Witcher 3. I'm not even shilling Nvidia is just pulling some shady practice with ubersampling.
>>53289618
>you still lose considerable performance with an i5, enough that a 390 will consistently lose out to a 970. Is It Time To Upgrade Your Core i5 2500K?
Two gameworks games lose to nvidia, oh wait AMD beats it in project cars of all things. Also did you even watch the video? he literally says the cpu inst the limiting factor.
>>53289621
Enjoy your dx12 support with the 980. And then in three years the fury is going to blow it out of the water becasue nvida has shit support cards over time. I mean dude the fucking 680 gets blown out the water by the 7970 these days and even gets beat by the 7950. Its fucking amazing
Never buy nvidia unless you want to buy a card every year.
>>53289688
3 years is still a long time, possibly worth an upgrade at that point.
I have had this 980 for a couple of months and it's pretty good. I sort of regret getting it just because of the price.
>>53289731
3 years is only long if you want to max new games out at 4k. people with 7970s are still doing great at 1080p, and can only get better with new apis
>>53289731
>>53289798
Yeah 3-5 years is when you are going to be upgrading but that means 3 years of superior performance
get a 390 instead :)
>>53288981
this
once you go red you never come back :^)
![12650999_1080626828626628_6906438412780251636_n[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/1IP4Kuf.jpg "12650999_1080626828626628_6906438412780251636_n[1].jpg")
Fans on the 980TI Strix are off till 60C+
>>53288943
Sapphire R9 Fury Nitro
>>53289376
Did everything look like jaggy polygons at 5fps? I seriously doubt you were playing anything above med-low, to minimim settings with that hardware. I have an OC 4690k and gtx 770 and can't go past medium high for 60fps at 1080p
>>53288943
go with sapphire r9 fury
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_OH1IE67ndg
>>53288943
The 980 is slower than the R9 390 in Directx 12 games. The Fury offers at least 20% more performance than an R9 390.
Get the Fury. Or wait and get big Polaris.
>>53291889
>strix
Garbage
>have to build a pc next weeks
>budget is 1500 or so yuropoor money
shill me your gpu
>>53297336
aight, this is what you do: buy gtx 980 ti because it's the best high end card. then you wait 1-2 months until first tests of polaris and pascal come out and show huge improvements in performance.
at this point you go into full denial mode and try to ignore all the shill threads and news but when the cards come out another 2 months later your heart is filled with regret and you finally kill yourself.
gl
>>53297336
Build everything else and get a used GTX 480 on ebay for 40 our so burger bux.Wait for big Polaris.
>>53289082
>trying to apply the fermi meme to AMD
fuck off kid
> gtx 980 500$
> performs worst than 350$ r9 390
>>53289014
What about non-overclockers?
>>53297436
Life of an Nvidiot by Anon
>>53288943
Wait until the Rx 400 series comes out. Fiji will be kept in the line-up as a $200-$300 card (probably as the R9 470 or 480, depending on if they go back to their original numbering scheme).
>>53289101
the correct answer
>>53289196
>SLI over Crossfire
>EVER
kek
>>53288992
I would say they are there to keep the gpu cool, idk tho, I'm not an engineer.
>>53288943
get a titan-x It's a beast
>>53297614
that should be self explainitory
Wait fags are the worse, pascal,polaris or whatever shit they are making until a full year passes will be shit and full of cheeseholes
>>53288943
IMO Fury. It is one tier higher GPU, it will last you longer than a GTX 980 (speaking in the horizon of dunno, 2 years?). It's soon time for GM204 to get a Pascal replacement and based on how Kepler fared, that is when Nvidia stops optimizing and the relative performance in the coming games goes to shit.
>tfw current card was fine since i only played shit that didn't require much power
>friends start getting me into other games
>all of a sudden need a better card
i swear this happened at the worst time. i don't want to wait but i don't want to be full of regret.
>>53298617
m8, Polaris 10 is expected to have 95% of the performance of the R9 390X at half the cost and 60% of the power consumption. I'd buy a R9 380 now for $180 and sell it once the smaller Polaris launches for roughly the same price.
>>53289358
>dx11
>dx9
So it doesn't matter for games in the very near future? Cool thanks for sharing
>>53289196
>2047 MB
>>53293644
my friend runs it at 1080p with 35-50 fps at medium on a Q8300 and 2gb 7850
figure your shit out nigger
