Official Thread #051: The "Glories Long Past" Edition
By popular demand.
I'M BACK MOTHERFUCKERS!
This thread is to consolidate graphics card and display technologies discussion to reduce unnecessary thread clutter on /g/. Let's also keep the shilling to a minimum, no-one fucking cares. Your favorite brand does not win points here from your advocacy.
Direct any and all questions regarding Graphics Cards and Display Adapters here first, including purchase and sale questions:
Use >>>/g/gcg/
For non-related questions, link to find the stupid questions thread:
Use >>>/g/sqt
Support questions should be directed to >>>/wsr/, as per /g/'s sticky. Or just fucking Google it instead of shitposting.
In the news:
>AMD's new Polaris 10 GPU to perform close to a GTX 980Ti and Fury X, despite its 'mainstream' target. Announcements soon:
http://www.tweaktown.com/news/51814/amd-polaris-10-gpu-performs-close-to-nvidia-geforce-gtx-980-ti/index.html
http://www.game-debate.com/news/?news=20006
>Benchmark Leaks for the Radeon Pro Duo. Maybe taken with a pinch of salt. Looks like a screamer:
http://www.kitguru.net/components/graphic-cards/matthew-wilson/amd-radeon-pro-duo-benchmark-results-leak-ahead-of-launch/
http://wccftech.com/amd-radeon-pro-duo-benchmark-results-leaked/
I fucking hate WCCurryFtech
If you find any news, post it below! Try to get at least two sources first!
Budget crown:No idea. Discuss Below
Performance crown:Nvidia GeForce GTX 980Ti
/GCG/'s ChoiceAMD RTG Radeon R9 390
Buyer Guides:
www.logicalincrements.com
www.pcpartpicker.com
I'll work on a pastebin for monitors. Suggestions are welcome.
Logical Increments happily accepts suggestions, comments, and criticisms.
Drivers:
http://support.amd.com/en-us/download
http://www.nvidia.com/Download/index.aspx
Thankyou.
first for nvidia housefires
Who here /gtx770/?.
Every 9xx card is a meme and people who "upgraded" to a 970, 980, or even 980ti will look like total plebs when the next series of cards come out.
>>54230430
Alot of my friends got the 770 when it was released. They're mostly still pleased with them, though they too have noticed and suffered the abandonment of Kepler.
Most of the upgraded to 970's.
>>54230430
>GTX780Ti
They get gimped but I don't play the new shit anyway
Performs the same in BF4 4K
Will upgrade to a 1070 for 2 Displayports and go for the 1080Ti later
>>54230218
HD5770 crossfire here. My cards are faster than a 5870 but slower than an r7 260x. Is it vram bottleneck?
Should I wait for r7 460x?
>>54230218
>Budget crown
Used 290X.
980Ti is the best price/performance ratio on Nvidia btw
>>54230430
threw a build together with an msi twin frozer or whatever the fuck 770 i got for a reasonable price last year, going strong, silent as shit and runs pretty cool.
>buying nvidia
>buying into planned obsolescence
>>54230587
>Should I wait for r7 460x?
Yes
>>54230594
>Used 290X.
I'll consider it. Its meant to be new cards only, as the cost of used cards varies greatly.
>>54230587
I know a guy who still runs a 5850, and yes the VRAM is a huge bottleneck. But these cards are still decent entry gaming cards.
>>54230648
Polaris will be powerful, if you can wait do it. The 290X will be obsolete soon and they need 300+W, the only plus point is the 200 € you're going to spend for one.
>>54230600
I wanted to get the 750 Twin Frozr as a holdoff for my new build until Pascal. Mind elaborating on your experience? Did you try OCing? Opinions on what separates the 770/750?
Any promising news on Pascal? Preferably reliable sources.
>>54230686
GTX 750 is a entry level card, the 770 should have 2x the performance. But Maxwell 1.0 is more power efficient. Clock it on 1300-1400.
>>54230731
There is no news from any reliable source. WCCFTech posted a pic of a GP104 (1080) and the design all but confirmed GDDR5/X. But WCCFTech is cancer, so just wait for Nvidia announcements.
>>54230682
It still runs gta v on low settings with some things turned up like aa and tessellation, 60 fps 1080p, so it's still good enough for me for a few more months.
I need a video card right now. As in buying it today. Would I be better off with an R9 390 now and upgrading with Polaris or R9 Fury now and upgrading with whatever comes after Polaris? Only AMD because I'm an autistic piece of shit and should kill myself.
>>54230218
>AMD's new Polaris 10 GPU to perform close to a GTX 980Ti and Fury X, despite its 'mainstream' target. Announcements soon
don't kill yourselves 980 TI owners you can still get a partial refund if you act quickly.
>>54231021
If you just need something to hold you over for current titles and can bear to turn down a few settings + run at 1080p, then get a 370/380.
Since Polaris is aimed at a "mainstream" and not high end audience, if I'm building a PC and want to play games at 1440p high-ish setting at 60fps, should I go with Nvidia's new cards or will AMD's new mid range cards be enough?
>>54231021
you could always get whatever's best in your budget now, then flip it when there's a new GPU you like, or it comes down to a good price
>>54231107
>to perform close to a GTX 980Ti and Fury X
>1440p high-ish setting at 60fps
Gee I dunno anon.
>>54231107
A 390 or 390x using Vulkan/DX12
my linux broke and now icant connect to the internet and im only left with a cli
any way to boot into a gui or use the internet
>>54230218
I'd lose my mind if Polaris had Fiji and big Maxwell performance. Are we looking at a $400 price point? Also, there's no way they're doing that, r-right?
>>54230218
Hey guys,
I haven't kept up with graphics cards.
What's the best deal in terms of performance for a card under $100?
>>54231199
fugg
wrong thread
>>54230430
You dumbass, 770 was refreshed 680. The best buy from recent time was definitely the 7970, it has aged fantastically. Hawaii is probably the next Tahiti.
>>54231210
Reading the links, rumors point to a $300 price point.
Though 100% rumors. Would be pretty nice if they were true. And considering the 'mainstream' confirmation from AMD, it could well be a reality.
>>54231199
>>>/g/sqt/
>>54231223
Used 750Ti?
.
>>54231223
Used hd7950
>>54231247
>$300 price point
Shit man, don't make me upgrade early. I can live with the 970 for another year. I can wait for Vega. Fuuuuuuck.
>>54230218
isn't the 380/380x budget crown worthy?
>>54231021
Split the difference with a 390X and upgrade whenever the fuck you need to.
>>54231271
I wasn't too sure with all the driver and game changes recently. Haven't put up a /gcg/ in a few months, and didn't want to trigger the reddit autist invaders.
I'll probably put it back up though.
>>54230218
Hasn't fury x overtaken 980 ti as performance crown thanks to drivers?
Or better yet, the Titan x? Or 295x2?
>>54231308
AMD fucked up somewhere with Fiji. I don't think we are going to see another Tahiti/Hawaii fine wine in the future with Fiji. This is from an anonymous non-shitposter, so take that as you will.
>>54231271
Nope, a 4GB 960 with a high OC will annihilate a 380 and a 380X for $20 less.
It's the clear budget king. That or a 970 on sale for under $300, of which there are several.
>>54231359
So you're saying that for performance crown, you're factoring in overclocking? Because that's the only significant flaw of the fury x.
Then why not 295x2 or Titan x?
>>54231359
I imagine they'll start pumping out cards with hbm2 as the years go by, so get a card with hbm2 and you're set for another 10 years
>>54231308
>>54231383
Dual chip cards are ineligible. They are not cost efficient nor practical, as the power requirements and extra fittings for the 295X2 make them 'meme' cards
TitanX does not perform better versus a boosted 980Ti
980Ti is still the crown, as the majority of games out today are DX11 and before. And the majority of the market is 1080p. In summary, the crown is still within the bailiwick of sensibility.
But it wouldn't be a bad choice buying either the Fury X or 980Ti
>>54231382
dx11 or dx12 and vulkan games
this is important
>>54231124
Sorry, I'm really out of the loop.
>>54231408
A 960 will definitely hold its own in DX12 and Vulkan. It's a superior architecture with much lower power consumption and better overclocking potential. Any properly optimized DX12 title will show very little difference between the 960 4GB and the 380X.
>>54231436
>lower power consumption
Not this shit again.
>>54231457
Prove me wrong, AMDrone
>>54231477
wow you save 2 jewros per year, too bad you have to buy a new card to play newest gamecuckworks games
>>54231247
>750Ti
>>54231255
>hd7950
Thanks friends.
>>54231382
>>54231436
>4GB 960
>Will annihilate the 380x
Lying on the internet? For shame anon.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A-I7Nm3a1Nc
>970
Simbly epin
>Superior Architecture
Async says otherwise. Ashes of the Singularity gets a 30% boost from Async over Nvidia cards. And Nvidia said that 'it wasn't a compeling technology'. Not to mention they pounce with GayWerks on any developer that even shows a sliver of interest in DX12.
The only thing the 960 has going for it over the 380/X is the lower power consumption. A valid point for poorfags who are allergic to $5 on their power bill.
Does AMD have anything better at $230?
>>54231382
what about a 380/380X with a high OC? :^)
>>54231535
>AMD shit
>overclocking at all
Top jej, can't even go a 100MHz over its stock speed without shitting the fan or needing an insane amount of voltage
>>54230430
>>54230528
780 sli here, i know this feel
thinking about switching back to the 7970s in my other pc
>>54231533
>buying zotac ever
enjoy your non-existent customer support and cherry picked image though, you're going to buy it, right?
>>54231648
I have never needed customer support in my life
>muh gimp meme
Looks like the AMD Internet Defense Force has arrived in full force tonight
>>54231685
It's literally the only thing stopping me from buying an nvidia card
>>54231533
>3.5
>>54231685
You're calling it a meme so you think it's not true? lol
>>54231648
Zotac and Sapphire is owned by the same company.
Funny how you're getting angry though.
>>54231680
You'll need it with Zotac
>>54231021
Buy a 390 now and start saving your money for Vega.
>>54231680
by all means buy the 970 and then hate yourself when polaris shits all over its performance for the same price...
do it, you're an nvidia fanboy don't ever pretend you wold consider AMD.
>>54231697
A 970 should be able to outperform a 780 by all rights. A 980 should outperform a 780 Ti.
It's only natural.
A 1070 will outperform a 980. A 1080 will do the same to a 980 Ti. It's not gimping, it's progress.
>>54231723
It's not. There are significant advances between each generation which makes them outperform their predecessor with each generation. AMD is just buying time with better optimizations for their cards, but there is a limit to how much they can do.
Would you rather buy a proper, highly efficient GPU that will last you a good two-three years, or would you buy a hot, inefficient, sold-gimp GPU with poor driver support from a dying company?
>>54231757
>A 1070 will outperform a 980. A 1080 will do the same to a 980 Ti. It's not gimping, it's progress.
Thats not what the gimp meme is lad. 7970 is 4 years old and is still going strong. the 290X is a last gen card, and people still rave for it. Whereas buying a 780Ti would be considered retarded today.
Kepler has disproportionately poor performance compared to the 7000 and R9 200 series. The R9 290X was stomped by the 780Ti at one point, now look at it. It beats the Titan now.
>>54231746
I'll consider AMD once they stop rebranding 4 year old shit. What can you buy for $230? A 4 year old rebranded 285?
>>54231793
>people want to buy literal housefire vacuum cleaners
No one is falling for that meme.
Actual buyers keep their cards and buy new cards when it's time to upgrade. A 780 Ti is still a good card, but no one in their right mind should even consider buying one used. Or a 290X for that matter.
>>54231793
Isn't Kepler a new architecture compared to Maxwell? Wouldn't it make sense for Nvidia to forget about old shit and just focus on new from a business perspective?
The 7000s and r9 200s are similar architecture as the r9 300s right now except with the 300s having improved power consumption and are already overclocked, right?
>>54231809
>August 23, 2014
Thats one serious 4 year gap.
>>54231824
is it really all that necessary to have a card with 8+ gb vram?
>>54231824
Kepler is the old architecture, Maxwell is it's replacement. Pascal is the next generation after Maxwell:
>GK100
>GM200
>GP100
>>54231860
No, but it sure is nice.
>>54231860
It was necessary to sell more cards.
>>54231860
I don't know, that's why I'm asking why Kepler vs Maxwell and why r9 200s vs r9 300s. Why can AMD afford to support old arch and not Nvidia?
Since this is a gpu thread, what's the extra vram good for?
>>54231809
>What can you buy for $230? A 4 year old rebranded 285?
it's $240 i'm worry your rounding is completely fucked. and i wouldn't be doing any buying now just to cuck myself when we're on the brink of a die-shrink. maxwell is already shitting the bed in DX12 titles and it's only going to get worse with nvidias planned obsolescence.
go buy your 970 i i want to laugh at your during polaris' launch.
>>54231757
first paragraph irrelevant
>good two-three years
>good
Where does this thinking come from? I know Apple's devices rate themselves around that time (3-4 years)..so everybody should be okay with that? Consider the PS3 which came out 10 years ago. Imagine buying a piece of tech that can play games for 10 years. Sure PC's are not consoles but contracting the life of an expensive GPU (more expensive than an entire console) to a "good 2-3 years" is really pitiful. The consumer shooting themselves in the foot.
Also, it's not a good indication if my "sold-gimp" GPU is more powerful (price/perf-wise) than the ""not-gimped"" nvidia equal. When I was talking about gimping I'm referring to how Nvidia has crippled the performance of 4xx/5xx series cards with newer drivers. It's happening all the time, people in Dark Souls 3 gaining 20fps when reverting to a much older driver. Some of these people are out of luck by upgrading to W10 where they can't install these drivers. This is planned obsolescence and you are supporting it with your money.
>>54231902
>Why can AMD afford to support old arch
kek, the irony in that statement
The obvious reason why they rebranded all of their old cards is because they are literally too poor to design new architecture. Even Fiji was a refresh of Hawaii with extra Stream Processors.
Fuck, even Polaris and Vega will be refresh of the same GCN cores as a fucking 290X, just with more pointless features and a die shrink.
>>54231913
Stop trying to justify your shitty purchasing decision that made you buy an inferior AMD product.
Do you get paid by the word or something?
>>54231904
could've just said no and that amd products are overpriced outdated shit
I mean let's be honest here the only thing amd had was the poorfag thing and now even poorfags are buying Nvidia cards because it's a better value. I'm really worried for them especially with the currynigger in charge.
>>54231529
>Ashes of the Singularity gets a 30% boost from Async over Nvidia cards.
It's a special case I think because of the nature of the game - vast numbers of tiny units on screen and a lot of shit going on that can be run on extra cpu cores or offloaded to the gpu.
For the usual first/third-person stuff it's probably a lot harder to find ways to make async really useful. The DX12 advantage then is just sidestepping driver overheads and making better use of the raw processing power that newer cards have
>>54231933
I was hoping the extent of your rhetoric would be greater to allow an intelligible discussion on Nvidia & AMD, but I guess my expectations were too high?
My AMD GPU is almost 3 years old and it's still working fine despite the very hot temps. That's past the """good""" 2-3 years you expect from your GPU which would now be dead in the water.
How long until you pull the wool from your eyes?
>>54231970
less cpu overhead apparently makes at least one emulator run really fucking well, there was a massive fps gain when running the dolphin emulator on win10 and dx12
760 is budget crown
>>54231223
7870
7950
Or the Tahiti LE (7870 > 7930)
>>54231970
Mfw AMDtards realize that their cards will be obsolete when this will ever matter
They get 30 instead of 25 FPS - Thats improvement, but not enough to get it playable
Apparently the pro duo runs on pure magic - look at these power draw numbers compared to the fury x and 980ti.
>>54232548
It's detecting that its running FurMark and throttling its power delivery to keep the power consumption low. I think the Nano did something like that to trick reviewers into believing that it was more efficient than it really is.
Don't trust it.
>>54232593
I wouldn't focus on the furmark numbers - the heaven numbers are far more interesting. A 991mhz dual fiji chip is pulling only 21 more watts than a 980ti. For performance vs watt the pro duo annihilates the 980ti.
>>54232684
>For performance vs watt the pro duo annihilates the 980ti.
But the price to performance...
$1500 for two sub-Fury X performance and a spare dead GPU.
Or
$1300 for two superior 980 Tis in SLI
>>54232966
But SLI scales like shit senpai.
>>54232966
Well, that is the nature of high end dual gpus. The last dual gpu Nvbidia made was one of the worst ever created (lel titan z).
Besides (and somewhat into shitposting territory) I thought performance per watt was the only metric that mattered now that maxwell is A Thing™.
>>54232548
it's a pair of nanos on the one card
>>54232593
nano has a hard 175w tdp limit iirc, so it throttles hard on shit like furmark
>>54233014
>The last dual gpu Nvbidia made was one of the worst ever created (lel titan z).
Then why is the Titan Z still selling for thousands of dollars used, while the r9 295x2 sells for less than half its original value?
>>54233090
>while the r9 295x2 sells for less than half its original value?
You pay the difference in fire cover for your home insurance
>>54233090
because titan z is the last nvidia card that actually does supercomputer things well and those people buy titans instead of tesla/quadros to be cheap on compute, titan x/quadro M series is a tire fire for that
Just finished my GTX 950 rig and ran a couple of benchmarks via Unigine Valley. How are these numbers?
Quality: Medium
FPS: 66.8
Score: 2795
Min FPS: 13.8
Max FPS: 109.5
Quality: High
FPS: 58.6
Score: 2449
Min FPS: 16.9
Max FPS: 101.8
Are these numbers acceptable? The only wrench in these numbers is the resolution. I have no real monitor yet and am resorting to an old 720p TV for now. Hell, the mode was 1260x708 (windowed).
>>54231970
Lol async is a massive meme. Shills like adoredtv keep talking about it like it's the holy grail of gpu technology when devs have already come out saying they don't want to waste time with that shit lmao.
>>54231271
No, the 390x is a glorified 290x and the 290x has gone up in price. Got mine new for 220 pounds, cheapest now is 320.
>>54231902
4gb is the sweet spot, 8gb us useless
>>54233440
yeah, it sounds a lot like a solution looking for a problem at the moment
might make more sense if you're offloading a ton of non-render work to the gpu (iirc this is what ashes does with some of its ai/physics stuff) but no way anyone is going to use it without amd bankrolling the dev resources and telling them how to use it
the only 'holy grail' thing i really got out of his videos was the idea of building on the hbm idea and combining multiple gpu dies on an interposer so you didn't get bottlenecked by pcie bandwidth (and maybe there's some way to share vram so shit can scale wildly without expensive, low-yield horrorshow of huge-die parts like fiji)
>>54231913
There are people playing just fine on 6 year old 460s and 5850s. My 4 year old 2GB 7850 plays new games on medium at 1080p quite well.
Even the 8800GTX is still capable as a low end gpu.
You need to realize that the Cell processor in the PS3 can and does supplement it's (gimped) 7600GT-esque GPU using the vector capabilities of the 6 SPEs, GPUs are glorified vector units in the first place.
In any case the PS3 had a 7 year life span. PS4 released Nov '13
>>54233440
>when devs have already come out saying they don't want to waste time with that shit lmao.
You mean Nvidia said it was a waste of time.
Stardock was amazed at how much more performance they got from Ashes of the Singularity.
>>54233775
>stardock
>amd affiliated
Of course they'll say it's 'amazing' because they're all literally being paid by amds sponsorship for their game. The only other game to use it was hitman and the devs even said that it was "super hard to tune" and that all that work only gave them 5-10% performance increase. They only did it because amd made them since hitman was sold using amds as a promoter (just like gameworks are implemented into games promoted by nvidia). All other devs have said they won't use it for the same reason as the hitman devs stated. It way too fucking hard and time consuming to implement. Asking devs to release every game with async support is like asking them to optimize for hyperthreading. It just won't happen no matter how much you delude yourself or listen to adoredtv.
I was looking at a firepro w4100 to use on Linux. I don't need gaming performance (as I have a virtual machine with its own GPU for that) but things like driver support and other potential pitfalls would be important to know of.
Also, where can I check if it supports 4 WQUXGA monitors at once trough the 4 displayport ports? Not I have any, no one does.
> April 2016
> Buying a GTX 900 series or Radeon 200/300 series graphics card
Goddamn /v/ is so fucking stupid it makes my head hurt.
>>>/v/335554550
>>54233974
>Buying a GTX 900 series card ever
>>54231809
I fucking hate when people get butthurt because of AMD's rebrands. The rebrands compete well with NVidia's cards in their respective price points. If AMD sucks so badly and is falling behind because of rebrands, then why do their rebranded cards benchmark as high or higher than the NVidia counterparts?
If you look at a 390 and 970 and buy the 970 only because "muh rebrand," you are a retard. Look at the benchmarks, power consumption, VRAM, temps, DX12 support, and whatever other specs are relevant to you. If the rebranded card comes out ahead, it's still the better card.
How much performance will HBM2 bring? Is it worth to wait for it?
>new technologies are bad!!
>i-it's not like we needed async, it's obsolete tech
Kek, nvidiafags in full damage control.
>>54234068
I bought a 970 simply because it was cheaper. It also over clocks like a dream whilst keeping temps and fan speed low and also power consumption. I can run an oc 4670k and oc 970 on a 500w psu whereas if I went with a 390 I would have to buy a new psu since it can use very close to 500w (system power draw) at just stock. I didn't want to run things that close. Just like you said I bought the card that came out ahead for me.
>>54234179
But Pascal has improved async.
>>54234080
For gayming? Pretty minimal. The main point of HBM2 is to increase one of HBM1's biggest flaw which was the fact it had a maximum storage capacity of 4 gigabytes. With HBM2, you get 16 gigabytes instead and a bit more bandwidth ransfer speed, that's it. Not really a huge improvement, unless all the games you play are unoptimized pieces of garbage which hog all of your computer's bandwidth (aka 90% of newly released AAA titles).
>>54234179
>new technologies are bad!!
>i-it's not like we need new architectures, I enjoy my 5 year old rebranded amd cards
Kek, amdrones in full retard mode.
>>54233997
I'm still glad they're not here.
>>54234205
Source?
>>54234229
http://wccftech.com/nvidia-pascal-specs/
>>54234240
Nice. Even though I'm pro AMD I'm actually impressed. I thought it'd take a couple more years till volta for nvidia to play catch up and finally work with directx 12.
>>54234212
>maximum storage capacity of 4 gigabytes
So, how did Nvidia managed to squeeze 8GB GDDR5 in GTX 1070? Two separate chips?
>>54234282
HBM1 =/= GDDR5
>>54234282
It should be illegal to post here without any prior knowledge of the actual fucking discussion.
Don't get your info from adoredtv though. He talks out of his ass.
>>54234312
>>54234295
Well, pardon me, I'll go read more about this shit.
>>54234282
As the other guy posted, HBM1 is nothing like GDDR5, I don't know how did you come up with that conclusion. GDDR5 has a bigger maximum capacity, but its max transfer rate is 300 gb/s as far as I know. HBM1 can reach to 500 gb/s, while HBM2 is rumoured to reach 1 terabyte/s (just a rumour, no actual stats or benchmarks are released yet).
>>54234219
Async is a new technology, dumbass.
Whats new for you then? Tesselation? Don't make me laugh. Physx? Propritary gpu-bound physics in games?
>>54234325
http://www.technologyx.com/featured/graphics-cards-really-need-know/
Just find a simple guide online like this one I found via a quick Google search. I don't know whether it's good or not but it's a start. Also before you start taking sides like the shills in this thread, try before you buy. Don't start shilling for a company based on some YouTube vids you watched like what is happening with all these 10 year old misinformed amd shills who watch adoredtv. He's like the amd version of xbox's misterxmedia, very deluded.
>>54230218
What about S3 trio 64v ?
>>54234394
You're saying it like amd made async. Async is old and has been known by different names. Just because dx12 calls it 'asynchronous compute' it doesn't mean it's brand spanking new tech no one has even seen or theorised about before.
Also see >>54233819
>>54234481
Doesn't matter if it's new or not. The fact is, AMD's GPU's have it and Nvidia's don't.
>>54230528
fucking nvidia abandoned the the 770 granted its a pretty old card and im getting a 490 soon
>>54230218
stop it with these shitty subreddits
>>54234550
Pascal will have it
People will throw their 970s away anyway
>>54234557
They abandoned all Kepler, and will do that with Maxwell. But I don't care. Look, AMD also discarded their pre-GCN cards, the only reason why the current ones get drivers is because they are literally the same cards as before. Except the 7970/280X, this one gets already gimped, I can't believe how a 380X can be faster.
>7970/280X = 384-bit 2048 Shader
>285/380X = 256-bit 2048 Shader
Look up the bandwith, its a huge difference.
Go back to /v/
Dedicated video gaming hardware is VIDEO GAME discussion and NOT technology
reported
>>54234550
>The fact is, AMD's GPU's have it and Nvidia's don't.
You don't 'have' async. It's not physical. It's either you do or dont support it in the architecture. Nvidia don't need it as much because their cards are already running at near 100% efficiency because of the drivers. Amd cards have slightly better hardware but amd are shit at driver support so the existence of async eliminates the need for amd to release actual good drivers by maximising efficiency via the api. They're making the devs do what they're too incompetent to do in terms of driver side support.
This will all be a non issue in 2 months anyway when the new pascal cards will come out supporting the feature.
>>54234637
Yeah thats horseshit.
I kinda pissed i didnt keep my 290 but it was a loud unstable pos
Commooon 490!
>>54234646
What is the use for this (matrox m9188) ?
>>54234656
There goes nvidiafags with their damage control once again
>we dont need it, our cards perform at 100% EFFECIENCY WITHOUT IT ANYWAY
Can't you guys just admit that there are flaws in your hardware? I'm not saying there aren't flaws in AMD's, but this brand loyalty and fanboyism is just stupid.
>>54234656
> You don't 'have' async. It's not physical. It's either you do or dont support it in the architecture.
It is physical. If it wasn't, Nvidia would already have written their drivers for it.
They haven't because they can't, even though they lied and said they would.
>>54234893
Yes, and there's no guarantee they'll actually support this time around, considering nvidia lied about a ton of things in the past. They'll probably ruse people into buying their cards once more and it still won't support async.
>>54234893
It's not physical you fucking spastic. If it was physical they could just stick in some hardware which acts like compute engines. But it's not fucking physical. It's based on the architecture supporting it.
>>54234940
It is physical. They supported directx 12 and all of its features on a software level, but the hardware couldn't handle it without relying on older techniques, which really slowed the nvidia cards down. It doesn't matter now anyway, nvidia (hopefully) designed a new architecture with pascal that can actually handle directx 12. If they just rebrand maxwell with pascal then they're dumb and I'm going AMD this year.
>>54234672
Which model did you have?
>>54234940
> It's not physical you fucking spastic. If it was physical they could just stick in some hardware which acts like compute engines. But it's not fucking physical. It's based on the architecture supporting it.
You're not making any sense whatsoever.
How can it not be physical if it's based on the architecture?
The architecture IS physical, and definitely cannot be changed after the fact.
The only way to change the architecture is by making a new fucking GPU.
>>54234940
>lithography isn't physical
>>54234712
>all those ports
insanely expensive display walls
sort of want
I'm new to the scene so I don't quite know what the timeline is.
If the new shit is unveiled in early June, how soon will cards be available? With EVGA, Gigabyte, etc have their shit out right away or will it be a wait?
>>54234985
The maxwell architecture doesn't support it. If it was strictly a physical problem, like a missing piece of hardware, then that would have been an easy issue to resolve. But we know it's not strictly a hardware problem.
>>54235098
What the fuck do you think an architecture is? Software?
>>54235005
Matrox was the leader of the graphic cards market back in the 90's with S3....
They now are shit expensive useless tier stuffs..
>>54235121
they were always expensive and somewhat useless
but their thing was having lots of outputs for certain power/pro users long before amd and nvidia could handle 3+ monitors
if you wanted to tile a wall with like 16 screens you probably don't have many other options
>>54235117
A blueprint for hardware.
>>54235171
In other words, the architecture is physical.
And no, you can't just change the architecture after it's already been manufactured. You have to manufacture a new GPU with a different architecture.
This is a leaked gp104 chip without hbm2 memories
Sheeeiiit
>>54235714
Only the 1080ti and titan will have hbm2.
The same goes for the next version of the fury line up
All the midrange cards from both sides will have gddr5(x)
>>54230218
GTX 950 FOR THE BUDGET CROWN. EVERYTHING ABOVE IT IS PLACEBO.
>>54235925
>cards that can run high fps at 1080p are placebo
>>54234968
regular understressed 290 with a aftermarket cooler cant remember the brand but it was expensive 4gb card this was back in 2013
>>54235887
So is it worth getting a polaris fury or wait for thw 2017 models?
>980Ti performance
Don't you play with me, I want Vega. I-I don't want to upgrade every year.
>>54235983
I don't know. I'm getting a pascal card.
>>54235925
>Cards than can barely run 4K are placebo
>>54235983
>polaris fury
There isn't going to be a Fury replacement on Polaris just like there isn't a Titan replacement for early Pascal.
>>54236277
I feel bad for the people that bought 28nm cards for 4k.
>>54236295
Don't worry, I bought a used 780Ti and will use it until something comes that maxed 4K.
Today I found out it runs 1300 MHz, I can Ultra BF4 without MSAA.
>>54236159
No you're not. Even if you want to, you won't be able to buy it.
> 1.7% yields
>>54236295
People that willingly bought 28nm cards this close to the launch of Polaris/Pascal are idiots.
>>54236309
>without any AA
Still nice. There isn't a single GPU that can run UHD at at least 60fps. Vega and big Pascal will change this.
>>54236331
Yes, AA is nice on 4K but its still better than noAA on FHD.
2 Titan X can reach 45-50FPS in newer titles with heavy OC, far from being stable.
>>54236323
Buying a card for 1080p is fine since both the 390 and 970 run it at high refreshes. A 380/960 is fine too since it's a good compromised card. I don't understand the idiots that bought higher end cards. They can't run 1440p at 120fps, they can't run UHD at 60fps, and they're expensive.
>>54236285
Fuck
Im not waiting for another goddamn gen of cards ill just have to get a polaris something
>>54236323
radeon pro duo will be a beast in 4k, and i dont think any card will outmatch it in the next 10 years.
>>54236385
>dual gpu
>$1500
Even more retarded.
>>54236385
> radeon pro duo will be a beast in 4k, and i dont think any card will outmatch it in the next 10 years.
You're an idiot.
Polaris will beat it while using less power.
>>54236396
you forgot
>dual gpu in one card
which brings a number of benefits, space for example. it's also powerful enough to be used for things other than gayming.
>>54236428
>polaris will beat 2 fury x's
>one gddr5 card thats aimed for laptops will beat 2 hbm fury x's
this is bait right?
>>54236432
The Pro Duo doesn't make sense to me at all. I could maybe fit it into an ITX case, but I don't want to deal with the issues of having two GPUs. Its price is also extremely high. Also, the only thing I do with my GPU aside from gaymen and NNEDI placebo is encode with NVENC, that's about it.
>>54236428
Now now, Polaris is projected to match the Fury X. This is just speculation, not something factual.
Now, about release dates. Nvidia will probably release in June, can we expect a similar date with AMD?
>>54236458
Fury X is about as fast as 980 Ti
They already said Polaris 10 will match the 980 Ti, and that's with a tiny die size and tiny power consumption.
And they are going to make multi GPU Polaris cards, just like they have with every fucking generation.
And just think about the overclocking headroom it has with its tiny power consumption and the driver improvements that are yet to be made for it.
>>54236532
>polaris will be as fast as fury x
>on a worse memory standard, half the processors, half the price
nigga stop dreaming. even if polaris was as fast as fury x, it wouldnt be faster. you have a point about overclocking. vega is what will beat fury x.
I have a virus on Windows 10, how do I remove it?
It's not my PC before you preach Gnu/linux, I'm removing it for a classmate
>>54236532
So hyperthetically if i can get a Fury X for cheap should i? Looks like the Nano will run rings around the 490
Figured this would be a good place to look for help.
I've had bad experiences with loud/really hot running PC's and I've had enough. Going to start fresh and get a build which is focused on running cool and quiet. Still would want something around GTX 980 tier but not really sure about the rest of it.
Can someone give me suggestions, willing to spend a decent amount of $$ but not an exorbanent amount. Would be cool to fit everything in a mini-itx case or something but if that compromises cooling/sound then just a nice sleek black case would be fine. Used to know a fair bit about what was the best/worst but it all changes so fast, need some help
>>54236467
it's two nanos on a single board
might as well buy two nanos if you don't have the space constraints
>490 will perform close to 980Ti
>Vega, or the Fury equivalent will be even better
Glad I waited now.
>>54236726
Fresh install you dumbass.
>>54236768
Won't that lose all data? I don't have Windows 10 install disks either
I built a rig last year with FX-6300, 8 gigs of RAM, and Palit 750Ti. I'm thinking about a GPU upgrade to 960/380/something else?
I'm currenly using 450w corsair PSU, will it be able to support these cards?
>>54236702
> nigga stop dreaming. even if polaris was as fast as fury x, it wouldnt be faster
Nigga, this is Polaris 10 we're talking about, with a 232mm die size.
You really think that's the biggest Polaris will get?
Fuck no this is not the end of the line for Polaris. This is just the fucking start.
A 2.5x performance per watt increase and you think they're not going to release a faster GPU?
If you really think that, you're a fucking retard.
>>54236774
Of course it will. See, once you're infected, you are inherently fucked.
>>54236798
>You really think that's the biggest Polaris will get?
I don't think AMD will be releasing a "high end" Polaris GPU. That's Vega's job.
Shit, gaymen laptops might start to make sense. If Polaris 10 can get 980Ti performance, then what can Polaris 11 do? Having 970/390 performance on a small factor sounds pretty nice, not that I'd dish out that much money for one anyway.
Also, APUs with these new GPU cores are making me really turned on.
Summer can't come soon enough, my wallet is ready.
>>54234256
>>54234240
>>54234229
That article makes no mention of async as it has been implemented in DX12. Nvidia is still using a method that will require them to release drivers for every game.
Anyway, that article isn't talking about the consumer chip. If you think Nvidia is going to release a 610mm chip to consumers this early on a new node, you're a moron. Those chips are for the professional market and will cost an arm and a leg.
>>54234656
Pascal does not have, and will not be getting async. Nvidia is on record saying this.
>>54236739
Shameless bump for a little assistance from you tech guru's
>>54236840
>Buying during tax return time, not during christmas holiday deals.
>>54236933
>falling for the Holiday sale memes
They have been getting worse every single year, I'm not going to wait for that.
>>54236813
Vega is the same generation as Polaris.
And here you were saying there won't be a faster card for 10 years, when we already know there will be a faster card in the coming generation.
>>54236798
I think AMD will focus on making Polaris as energy efficient and cool as possible before making it faster. I believe they want to take over the mobile market with powerful GPUs. Imagine normies walking into Best Buy to get a laptop and a salesman saying "yeah, any of these AMD laptops will play PS4 and Xbox One games."
As well, imagine talking to a sales rep about buying a console, but you mention that you have a bunch of Steam games. "Oh, well you could buy this Steam box. It's about the size of a shoe box and can play basically any game you want, thanks to the AMD GPU."
I mean, AMD really is cornering the gaming market. Their GPUs are gonna be in everything
>>54236992
I never talked about generation. AMD themselves put Vega as a different architecture, even if they're based on the same process.
>>54236992
vega just has more bandwidth and runs on a better, more power effeceint. 1 vega still isn't going to beat 2 fury x's, which is what the radeon pro duo is. The radeon pro duo is going to be futureproof for a good 10 years because no card as of yet can really match the performance of two gpus.
>>54236797
which one should I choose?
is PSU enough?
>>54236797
>>54237715
You can run a 290x with a bulldozer chip on that amount of wattage. It's fine.
>which one should I choose?
Do your research. I'd pick the 380.
>>54237055
Vega is literally just Polaris with HBM2 and more shaders added.
>>54237555
Fucking Polaris 10 is at least a match for Fury. Vega WILL beat the Radeon Pro Duo.
>>54237801
I did some research, and 960 had lower power consumption and 380 had more raw power in GPU intesive scenarios, but in tests demanding more from CPU it had worse use of system resources and that brought it to level of 960 or in some cases lower.
Then there's software, 960 has whole Nvidia expirience which I use often, but ASUS manufactured ATI cards have xsplit and other crap that level the playing field again.
I always had Nvidia graphics, except my first ancient PC that had VooDoo 2. I think 380 is better card for the money, but I'm not sure, that's why I'm asking.
>>54238072
Yeah, cpu overhead is a serious issue with amd cards. I definitely don't recommend a 380 especially with a bulldozer cpu.
Get the 960 because it sounds like you'll use the high profile HEVC encoding/decoding. It's the only product on the market that can do it btw, not even the $1000 Titan X or 5960x is capable.
why am I getting terrible frametime with 970/i5-2400?? could it be because i fell for the thinkcentre meme?
So, what could happen if you were to just, dunno, take out a resistor from a GPU?
Heard somewhere that it doesn't kill a card and in some cases might be necessary (for instance, take the R17 resistor out so 280x doesn't get stuck on PCIe 1.1 on a mac Pro).
I know this sounds really fucking weird but I'm dead curious.
Anyone else getting this with 16.4.2? What the fuck? The "update" is a downgrade.
>>54238571
No its not a downgrade, its just that they've fucked up in actually updating their update servers.
It happens regularly; they release an update and initially forget to roll out that information across all of their bits.
>>54230613
Both AMD and nVidia practice planned obsolesence.
>>54238668
I'm anally devastated I didn't wait for the 7970 to restock. Tahiti is the GOAT.
>>54238695
I have a 280x and no it ain't no fucking GOAT. Performance on anything that's not windows is quite terrible.
>>54238728
Then write your own drivers you histrionic faggot
>>54236503
Pretty much confirmed. Computex is gonna be sweet this year. I predict reviews for both brands in the middle of E3 too.
>>54238147
2 gig or 4?
>>54238949
They stopped making the 2gb versions because it was in a weird price point. A little too cheap and powerful in some situations and a little too shit for the little extra the 4gb version costs depending on what you do.
>>54238828
Oh yeah that's the solution to every problem. Hardware doesn't work well? I guess I'll spend 2 years making it work rather than getting something with better support.
Bet my ass you're one of those faggot apologists who read an unfavorable review on rotten tomatoes and go "oh yeah? W-well try making something better yourself"
Best 27" monitor for a three-monitor setup? 4K would be nice, maybe even 5K. I'd also like good color quality, so IPS maybe?
Will it be possible to run 4K 144fps on new games maxed with a single GPU this summer?
I'll only upgrade if this is achievable.
>>54239469
Nowhere even close. Where the fuck do you even get these delusions?
We can't even play 2k (2560x1440) at 144hz on new games with two cards, let alone 4k.
You'll be waiting a good 4 - 5 years easy.
>>54239503
Actually, I take that back. Make it eight years.
You've got an 8+ year wait before you can achieve 4k@144hz on a single card.
Even then, it won't be a single GPU card, it'll be 2 or perhaps even 3 dies to a PCB.
>>54239503
>We can't even play 2k (2560x1440) at 144hz on new games with two cards
What are you talking about? The 980Ti is very close to 120fps at 1440p.
>>54239469
Not happening anytime soon. Vega and big Pascal will run UHD at 60fps. If you want even higher refresh rates, then wait for Volta or Navi.
>>54239574
Go play Fallout 4, Ashes of the Singularity, GTAV, or anything else that takes more resources than a GTX950's worth to play well.
Not even the highest OC'd 980ti can handle any of those on highest settings (no MSAA necessary) 2560x1440
If you're not going for the ultra settings when you do the benchmark, you're doing it wrong.
Got a refund on my 290x cause of overheating, should I go for 980 or 390x now?
>>54240478
390x
>>54240478
Couldn't possibly say boss.
>>54240478
>980
That's probably the worst Nvidia Maxwell buy.
>>54240597
>>54240691
>>54240713
I'll go with 390x then, thanks. Kinda worried about it overheating (especially since my case doesn't have a lot of breathing room) but I guess I can get a couple fans with the difference in price between that and the 980.
Will polaris 300-350€ card perform better than 390x?
I can get 390x for 400€ right now
>>54240797
just leave the panel off
>>54240797
Outside of msi's 390x you'd have to really try to cause a 390x to hit 95c and throttle. The msi 390x gets a special mention due to the balls to the wall voltage it runs at to achieve its 1100mhz out of the box clocks - I swear that card must have a 350w bios.
>>54240848
I'll get this model https://www.asus.com/Graphics-Cards/STRIXR9390XDC3OC8GD5GAMING/ since it's the only 390x the store I can get a discount in has in stock. It's not Msi so it should be fine.
>>54240813
You could get 2 290X for 400 €
I hope you know that
Are you retarded?
post em boys
So when its supposed to arrive the new gen of gpus?
Right now I´m with a 680 but want to upgrade, I just play mainstream AAA games like COD,BF4,Titanfall and Overwatch at 1080p/60hz while having a second display with OBS
Should I wait for this new generation or buy a 970/390?
>>54230594
this is true if you do due diligence and make sure some inbred fuck didn't kill it with extreme OCs and then reflow it to recoup shekels
>>54231223
7990 or 750Ti
>>54231734
I actually own a 3 year old Xfx card, I don't know them by name, are they as bad?
>>54230430
I had a 660, figured i would upgrade to a 970, literally get double FPS in games, and have had it for nearly a year. Worth it imo...
>>54231040
>1440p60fps
>Most directx12 games
>Most
My 970 does that.. My 970 does 4k90FPS in bf4...
>>54233188
You have a 950, i dont know what you expect. Its a very low end gpu.
>>54231743
Shit, that's a good plan. Thanks, anon, like really thanks.
>>54231529
>Ashes of the Singularity gets a 30% boost from Async
"PC gamers may have heard of asynchronous compute already, and Hitman demonstrates the best implementation of this exciting technology yet."
- AMD
"On the other hand, it’s quite surprising to read that even AMD cards merely got a 5-10% performance boost, especially after AMD endorsed HITMAN’s implementation as the best one yet."
- WCCF (I know yuck)
>>54246427
>gimped in a year
>3.49
i dont normally shitpost here but i couldn't resist
>>54246577
>gimped
It's not so much "gimped" as they just aren't optimized as much later in their lifespan. Performance still improves over time. Hell, you could say AMD cards are simply unoptimized at release and improved over time. You see the same thing with consoles. Devs squeezed better graphics over time because of proprietary hardware, now that consoles are all x86 we've maxed out both the Xbone and PS4 in 3 years and things won't improve.
What's the most powerful graphic card a i5 3550 can handle with 0 bottlenecks?
I know it's not entirely /gcg/ i just need some enlightment on this.
>>54231824
>Isn't Kepler a new architecture compared to Maxwell
No.
>The 7000s and r9 200s are similar architecture as the r9 300s right now except with the 300s having improved power consumption and are already overclocked, right?
Not really, all GCN but different versions
>>54231860
If the card has 8GB, it'll be fast. NVIDIA and AMD won't put 8GB on a shitty card. Currently only 290(x) and 390(x) have 8GB. 1070 will have 8GB.
PS4 and XB1 have 8GB VRAM though, so IMO an 8GB card will run games very well for a long time (at least for the PS4 NEO's lifetime).
>>54233188
Usually windowed results in less performance (or maybe that's just borderless windowed mode). I don't know how that benchmark works, but your minimums seem low relative to your average.
>>54233508
Nien, 8GB is the future
>>54234637
>Except the 7970/280X, this one gets already gimped, I can't believe how a 380X can be faster.
>7970/280X = 384-bit 2048 Shader
>285/380X = 256-bit 2048 Shader
I have a 280x. I'm probably getting rid of it soon to get a card with at least 4GB VRAM, and because I'm worried about gimp. 3GB is the absolute minimum for new games on high at 1080p IMO.
Even the 380 is as good as the 280x in a very few NEW game benchmarks. Whether these are accurate, or reflect mature performance, I don't know. The big difference is that the 380(x) is one of the latest architecture (Tonga?), very similar to the Fury(x). So you can expect some improvement in the stream processors.
>>54234656
>new pascal cards will come out supporting the feature.
Nope, but the async gain isn't big yet, so who cares
>>54234940
legit retard her, you have no clue what you are talking about.
>tfw 1600p 60Hz 980ti master race
>>54236503
>Polaris is projected to match the Fury X. This is just speculation, not something factual.
Doubt it. But Fury isn't that far ahead of 390. Polaris will have at least 390 potential.
>>54236797
4GB 380 if you OC that FX 6300 to 4.0GHz, otherwise possibly 4gb 960, but look at benchmarks that use your CPU.
>>54236840
>Shit, gaymen laptops might start to make sense
Yep
>>54239526
Probably not eight years but quite a while. Four to six, considering GPUs are going to get rapidly more powerful and you'll be playing console ports
>novidya still has no async compute
>internship with nvidia this summer
holy shit the salt and drama will be fucking hilarious from the inside.
>>54246700
Any GPU will bottleneck your CPU in most games.
I'm terrible with building computers and selecting graphics cards as I get paniced over it. Someone please look at my specs and recommend me what to upgrade. [spoiler]And if you really want, recommend me what I should replace said thing with[/spoiler]
>>54246700
>>54247077
Rude awakening, /g/ doesn't use spoilers.
Get a 4GB 380 or 4GB 960 if you have to upgrade now. If you want to get spendy then grab a 390 or wait for AMD's/NVIDIA's next cards
Also get a 250GB SSD for OS and games if you're prepared to upgrade/reinstall your OS.
>>54247107
Holy shit, didn't know my CPU was that good. Many thanks, anon.
