I was really disappointed for HBM2 to be delayed and I needed a new gpu for my vive, which is hopefully here on April 4th or 5th.
I was thinking about getting some second hand 390x or something (I run my games in VM and AMD works better with virtualization), but then I came across R9 nano for $450.
Does anyone here have R9 nano? Are you satisfied with it?
>tfw last year you were told "don't bother getting a HBM1 card there will be HBM2 next year!"
You might want to consider waiting for the dieshrink. HBM is just a meme, but the dieshrink is coming and it's serious.
>>53589127
>muh dieshrink
>>53589013
Fury X owner here and I love mine.
Fury Nano is X chip but air cooled and slightly throttled, so you're not gonna get the same performance, but hey.
The real deciding factor will be how well optimised VR games are. If they're hungry assholes like current AAA titles, I don't think ANY hardware on the GPU side is ready to pull it off on a single card.
Fury Pro will be the first card that can have any hope.
>>53589127
Already ordered, though. I kinda need a gpu for the vive, which lands in a few weeks.
This nano will end up in my htpc box later if some polaris/pascal will be worth buying in $500-700 category.
>>53589202
>I don't think ANY hardware on the GPU side is ready to pull it off on a single card
Well minimum card for oculus rift is 970, so I'm pretty sure any 970+ card will do on some level. Fidelity will decrease, but for $450 I'm ok with it until 14/16nm hits.
>>53589279
On some level, yes. But obviously you didn't read my post properly, it seems.
I said if developers don't properly optimise games - and that means making sure they don't also add god knows what extra like they do for normal games, there's no way today's cards are going to be able to pull it off solo.
Tell me, can a solo card pull off 2560x1440~90+ right now?
In older games, sure. In most current AAA games? Not with high settings.
Now imagine that demand anywhere from 1.5x to 2x the stress on the GPU.
>>53589104
anyone who told you to hold off due to memory was a fucking retard.
>>53589013
>I needed a new gpu for my viv
No you don't. There's no actual reason to be using a vive right now.
>>53589332
I hope that nausea will be incentive enough for developers to make sure their games run well enough. That being said, if you've look what kind of graphics VR offers currently, they are far away from being even few years old AAA game looking. Battlefield 4 level graphics are not going be a thing for close future in VR.
>>53589369
>There's no actual reason to be using a vive right now.
Well if no one buys gabegoggles or cockbook rift there won't be second or third generation of VR in coming years.
I kinda look forward to playing games on giant screen in space or budget cuts. I've waited for vr for 20 years now.
