And it seems like it's literally a 980 ti with 20% less cuda cores/TU/ROPs but is over clocked 60%
How did they manage to get it to overclock so much?
>>54678949
By letting it burn down your house
Massive process shrink. The architecture is literally the same though.
Is 1070 benchmark out yet?
>>54678984
Count percents for clock cuda cores/bus, rops etc between 1080 and 1070. Take average = 1070 performance. It will scale down perfectly clock by clock.
Since bus is narrow GDDR5x vs GDDR5 is not a huge factor.
>>54678949
I have a 980, shouls i get a good aftermarket ti when the price drops or see if amd has anything
>>54678949
By removing the extra bulky cuda cores and using a stealthy radar-deflecting body it allows the card to overclock without the 980 ti finding out.
>>54679544
Top kek
>>54679465
No real reason to upgrade unless you wanna do 4K or 1440p @144hz.
>>54678949
See >>54678972
New processing node. Previously they were using 22nm, and now they're using 16nm. The smaller the processing node, the more power efficient silicon gets. I think Intel's down to 10nm these days or something.
>>54678949
>How did they manage to get it to overclock so much?
die shrink
then they'll roll out the big pascal at even higher price with a big jump in performance and stock clocks
>>54678949
By gimping the already gimped 980 ti, Nvidia can deliver groundbreaking improvements over last generation cards, every single generation!
Anyone think the new cooler design looks shit and edgy and prefer the 980 design better? Because look how edgy that motherfucker is, I dunno if I should overclock it or give it a box a tissues and tell it to stop thinking no one understands it.
>>54679975
But anon, don't you love having more polygons? Don't you like being invisible to radar?
>>54679988
Nvidia keep fucking shit up recently with design choices and drivers, this is why I stick with AMD now.
>>54680003
>nvidia keeps fucking up with design choices and drivers that's why I stick with AMD
>design choices and drivers
>stick with AMD
>>54679628
>New processing node. Previously they were using 22nm, and now they're using 16nm. The smaller the processing node, the more power efficient silicon gets. I think Intel's down to 10nm these days or something.
22nm ->28nm
10nm ->14nm
>>54678949
Premium components and craftsmanship
More transistors of smaller size allows a much higher effective memory clock rate and thus, much higher memory bandwidth with much higher performance per Watt. Clock it faster until it overheats.
>>54679628
They were using 28 nm, not 22 nm.
Only Intel got access to 22 nm, no discrete GPU did it.
>>54680130
Pascal is built on 16 nm, not 14 nm.
Polaris is the one that will be 14 nm.
>>54680386
My mistake, sorry.
>>54680386
>Pascal is built on 16 nm, not 14 nm.
>Polaris is the one that will be 14 nm.
I didn't say anything about 16nm.
I corrected him on 22nm and 10nm.
>>54680027
>nvidia drivers kill GPUs in three occasions since fermi
>nvidia drivers caused crashes on chrome that went unresolved for 8 months
>nvidia drivers failed to support some GPUs for over a month after the release on windows 10... and those were expensive current gen GPUs, not old ones
>nvidia drivers gimp performance of older gen cards, nvidia cards that previously beat the competition now soundly lose to them
>"GUISE, AMD DRIVERS ARE BAD, AMIRITE? XD"
Why are there less cores? What limits the amount of cores a GPU can have?
>>54680786
Maybe the 16 multi-projection view ports (15 more than anything else) took up some extra transistors that were laying around.
>>54680432
>all these made up bullshit memes made by AMD fanboiis
Haha okay kid.
>>54680786
>Why are there less cores?
You mean "fewer".
There are fewer cores because this is GP104, and you're comparing it to GM200, which is larger. You should be comparing it to GM204 (the chip used on the 970 and 980), and in that case it has more cores as expected.
The question you should be asking is why did Nvidia decide to cuck their customers and offer the smaller GP104 for the prices they should be offering the larger GP100 for, and still got praise for fucking their customers over.
Just for comparison, the GM204-based 970 launched at $330. It's replacement, the GP104-based 1070, will launch at $450. That's $120 more for the same class of card.
>>54680837
So much denial, it's hilarious.
>killing GPUs
2010: http://betanews.com/2010/03/18/nvidia-admits-geforce-drivers-responsible-for-fan-problems-issues-updates/
2013: http://modcrash.com/nvidia-display-driver-damaging-gpus/
2016: http://wccftech.com/nvidias-latest-game-ready-driver-allegedly-killing-gpus-plagued-issues/
There was even another one that ahppened to some 800M series GPUs as well, but I can't seem to find mentions anymore, but the three listed should suffice.
>chrome crashes
Documented here in march 2014, first mention I could quickly find: https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=350547
But if you weren't such a newfag you'd have seen starting early 2015 that every week there would be at least one thread here of people complaining about this.
Fixed only in june 2015, over a year after they first found the issue on chromium: http://techreport.com/news/28551/nvidia-353-38-hotfix-driver-fixes-chrome-crashes-g-sync-lag
>windows 10 support issue
http://techfrag.com/2015/07/25/nvidia-geforce-gtx-980-ti-owners-unable-to-get-windows-10/
>gimping
>>54679367
Conveniently shown on another thread here
>>54680849
They're pretending that there won't be a consumer GP100 card.
Which is bullshit, of course. The 1080 Ti and/or Titan XN or whatever will have it.
>>54681020
Rekt
Which of the 1080 and 1070 will have the best value for money? I neither want to be a cheapskate nor a spendthrift
>>54681020
You forgot about the recent cases of laptop screens getting rekt caused by the nVidia drivers wrecking the EDID data in monitors
http://forum.notebookreview.com/threads/windows-10-nvidia-whql-drivers-are-killing-alienware-and-clevo-lcd-panels.779449/
>>54681200
Thanks, anon.
I forgot a bunch of stuff actually. Did you remember when Nvidia promised people overclockable laptop GPUs, people both them, and after getting their sweet sweet cash Nvidia just went "lol, JK, this new driver will take the overclocking you paid for away from you!"
>>54681173
Also have this question.
>>54681251
Yes, and the backlash that was involved. Good times.
>>54681332
>Good times.
And of course the 3.5 GB disaster. It was absolutely beautiful to see all the buttblasted 970 owners here bitching endlessly about their shit cards. Having a selection of at least 12 "970 3.5 nvidia fucked me over I'm so mad" threads at any given time to pick from and go laugh at nvidiots. Specially the ones that after being caught in the worst GPU launch disaster ever, still wanted to go give Nvidia even more money (almost $200 difference) to upgrade to the 980.
I think the only event more polarazing than that in recent history was the 7x1. I sure hope Nvidia fucks up again this time so we can relive that.
>mfw even after all this there were still retards unironically suggesting others buy that piece of shit 970 3.5 GB stutterfest edition
>>54678949
its a failure
>>54678949
i was going to get one of these, but, looking at reviews it seems i might have to wait a little while longer
why?
well from what i've seen and read this thing will heat your room up to unbearable levels (it's summer guys) then theirs the heat getting trapped in the backplate,
then one thing someone mentioned, which has put me off buying a founders edition is the vrm, apparently someone said nvdia skimpt out on it
so i'm going to wait a few months to see how many die or start getting artifacts, crashes and other problems
i'm in no hurry desu
vid related
>>54681020
We should really have an Nvidia shitlist with sources. This is a good start.
To add:
- ridiculous tessellation
- woodscrews
- housefires
- 3.5
>>54681173
to be honest, if i were you, i would wait until they bring out the cards with after market coolers (and potentially better vrm's for overclocking
>>54681020
>4 gpu's get killed by drivers
>literally millions of people have Nvidia cards.
>all the broken down AMD cards are not counted
AMemeDrones at it again
>>54681020
FURY X MASTERRACE
>>54681998
But I kind of need one now. Will the resale value on the 1070 be decent enough that I can roll with it for a while do you think?
Or I could get a second hand card of an older generation for the time being perhaps.
>>54679628
>Previously they were using 22nm, and now they're using 16nm.
16nm FinFET as far as I'm aware, which has a massive advantage for power efficiency above and beyond the process shrink, so they can push the clocks much higher and still keep the same thermal profile.
There's a few architectural design updates, but the new process is the biggest difference.
>>54678949
The reality is Maxwell was a very efficient architecture for 28nm.
If you look at per watt efficiency compared to other 28nm chips, it was the best design on that process.
After Maxwell released Nvidia was more worried about their own chips competing with their next generation than anything AMD could feasibly offer within the year.
If you paid close attention to Nvidia's statements and behavior you would realize that the leap to 16nm was very rough and did not get launched on time with their expectations.
>The "paper launch" fiasco, and them taping out Pascal months later than they had planned.
Maxwell was released with very low clockspeeds compared to what was possible with the architecture because Nvidia was uncertain about their timeline for 16nm products and AMD had no competitive offerings when it was released.
The bizarre range of factory speeds on Maxwell made it apparent the cards were scaled back.
The cards for the 980ti in particular varied from a reference of 1076MHz boost speed, all the way to more than 1300MHz for partner boards.
The 950 chips showed this, since they were Maxwell chips running at 1350MHz+ from the factory which was done because AMD had competitive offerings in that price range.
If you look at the competitive overclocking benchmarks for Maxwell it becomes apparent that the chips could have been released at much higher speeds, but weren't.
Competitive benchmarks were commonly stable at 1.6GHz to 1.8GHz, and up to 2.2GHz was possible.
However, with Pascal, Nvidia is actually expecting performance against AMD's offerings to be close and the early attempts at overclocking are leaving the cards at much closer to factory speeds than Maxwell on release.
>TLDR
Maxwell was the best 28nm design.
Nvidia actually released Maxwell gimped because they didn't have competition.
A new release has to beat their own generation in performance (980ti).
Pascal is running close to it's real limits (before big Pascal) already to achieve this.
>>54681020
Fucking rekt famalam
>>54681420
>4 fucking fps more
>$400 fucking dollarydoos
kek
>>54682799
Even better its only against a moderately clocked 980ti - most 980ti's go to around 1450mhz which would close the gap even further.
>>54682711
>amd not competitive with the 950
r7 370 and you are retarded if you think amd isn't competitive at the midrage and low end
>>54683697
>which was done because AMD had competitive offerings in that price range.
Reading comprehension.
>>54680432
Ironically that's only considered bad when you don't compare it to AMD.
I'm hijacking this thread.
I just read that Total War Warhammer is going to have DirectX 12 support.
I'm currently using a GTX 780 and according to what i've read its supposed to support DirectX 12, atleast partially.
I'm wondering if i'm going to be able to see any sort of performance boost from using DirectX 12 with my GTX 780, or if i should just stay with Windows 8. I only use windows for games so i dont care about botnet etc.
>>54684061
no the 780 is gimped just get polaris or wait for vega
>>54682391
>Or I could get a second hand card of an older generation for the time being perhaps.
considering the 1080 and 1070 memecards will be sold out for months go get a 980ti used
>>54684061
>GTX 780
getting a old 290X would be a substantial upgrade even more so in directx 12
>>54684203
see >>54684210
>Implying that the 980ti wont get gimped too
>>54684228
there is literally no need to go to newer drivers
>>54684210
Is NVIDIA getting worse or AMD getting better? Or both?
>>54684146
>>54684210
>get a new card
I will in time, but i own a 780 and i'm asking about the 780.
>>54678949
you forgot its 3x hotter
nvidia will still make billions off brainless nvidicucks despite every benchmark showing NO change in FPS
That is impressive, only Nvidia can put gamers first!
>>54684257
Both
>>54684270
The only benefit a 780 is likely to see from DX12 is the reduced cpu overhead - something that is particularly crucial for a game like total war.
>>54684257
both
>>54684270
The thing has almost no DX12 support, no async, ect. so you will not get shit out of DX12
Would a jump to pascal from a gtx 980 ti be good if the only thing I use it for is adobe premiere pro? Currently I'm having trouble online editing more than 2 layers of 4k 24fps at a time.
>>54684417
Might as well because nvidia is just going to gimp the 980 ti like they did the 780 ti or just get polaris.
>>54684452
Open cl for Adobe is super buggy so far, I actually switched from amd to nvidia for that reason. Fucking 4k is a meme right now tbqh but thats what everyone wants. So that's what I have to use.
>>54679616
yeah because nobody wants to game at higher resolutions with high framerates
If amd drops the ball with Vega we are going to be fucked
Nvidia will be like Intel, giving us 10% upgrades for the next 5 years
>>54684210
>290X
>upgrade over a 780
Why would someone do that, just go on the internet and tell lies?
>>54684578
Because they're not. The 290x is a better card in more games than the 780. There is no way to dispute this. The 290x also scales better at 1440p.
780ti you MIGHT have a point, but the 780 is completely irrelevant
>>54678949
gddr5x in combination with process shrink.
>>54684630
even the 780ti has fallen 10-15% behind the r9 290x
>>54684578
>>54684630
>>54684675
https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/NVIDIA/GeForce_GTX_1080/26.html
Make your choices /g/ents.
>>54684691
The shocking part of that is the 780's closest competitor from AMD is the 280x (aka 7970 ghz) - a card meant to compete against the 680/770.
>>54684691
Damn even the nvidia shill sites dont even hide how far behind the 780 and 780 ti have fallen
>>54684735
Or the fact that the 970 is basically slower than hawaii across the board.
>>54684725
>a collage of nvidia shilling sites
is amd ever going to overcome the popular perception of them as manufacturing inferior, unreliable products? :(
>>54684916
The board partners that make them just don't put as much effort and quality parts into them as they do Nvidia stuff because the market for them is much smaller.
>>54682799
>>54682903
>>54681420
Not only that, it throttles after 4-10 minutes into gaming. These OC clocks of 1800s goes down to 1500-1600s
Its pretty hilarious.
How long will it be before the non founders edition hits the market?
>>54685056
"""""June""""""
>>54681394
Ya I am one of those people that got lied to about the 970. I'll been waiting to see if amd has something comparable.
>>54685609
If you mean performance then the 390 is better then the 970 and polaris will be as well
>>54679616
The 1080 doesn't do that though. I'd say wait for 1080Ti or Greenland.
970 is THE card for 1080p
>>54686172
Yeah which is unfortunate when you consider the 390 is a really good 1440p card.
1070 is THE card for 1440p
>>54686172
>>54686255
they both belong in THE trash
>>54686172
>>54686255
I see where this is going. For 4K it's best to wait for 1170 instead of paying the early adopter tax for the 1080 Ti.
So, 1080ti when?
>>54686377
Sticking with the x70 series for whatever applicable monitor resolution you are using is the most logical way to upgrade.
I just want a 700 series card that will not to expensive because it's not as recent. Should I just go 780?
>>54686450
No.
>>54686450
Have a 780, take my advice and stay FAR away from it.
>>54686492
>>54686492
>stay FAR away from it.
why?
>>54681738
I need context of this webm. What would give the right for someone to brandish a weapon on someone that is debilitated by a door?
>>54686450
Did you read the above posts. x70 is for you if you want the most bang for buck.
>>54686515
Probably because it performs closer to a 280x than the 290 it should be rivalling.
>>54686531
I need a Kepler card. What's a decent Kepler?
>>54686517
I don't think this justifies the batoning, but just in case, did you notice that he tried to take someone's purse?
>>54686562
GTX 770 4GB
>>54686578
Alright, I'll check it out. Thanks
>>54678949
>How did they manage to get it to overclock so much?
16nm FinFet
>>54686595
Get the Gigabyte one with the Windforce cooler. It's the best.
>>54681020
>chrome crashes
Still not fixed, it's less frequent now but it still crashes from time to time and it's annoying as fuck. I'll buy AMD next time.
>>54680786
>Why are there less cores?
My guess would be that the cores are now bigger and higher performance. The fact that a GPU is using the same basic architecture doesn't mean they can't upgrade the architecture as time goes on. The first GPUs based on the CUDA architecture was the GTX 8800 and the basic architecture has since then gone trough some pretty big upgrades and as a result the cores are much bigger and have better performance.
>What limits the amount of cores a GPU can have?
Mostly the amount of transistors you can have. The amount of transistors is usually dictated by the combination of die size and process used to make that die. Then there's also self inflicted damage (i.e destroying part of the silicon) to sell the same chip as two separate models.
>>54678949
better thermals
better mechanicals
not allowing cards to check their binning privilege
>>54686403
next year
>>54686578
>>54686616
How expensive was this one on launch?
>>54678949
>How did they manage to get it to overclock so much?
Premium materials (metals, plastics)
All-new vapor chamber Founders' Edition Blower Cooler
New process node (16 nm FinFET)
>>54678949
Maxwell Arch already overclocks massively, carrying it over to the node shrink with new technologies (i.e. fine grained voltage scaling) helps it achieve even higher clocks. Expected is that IPC is about the same but with much higher clocks. The FE cooler is known to throttle unless you play in an open case with your AC set to "house fire DEFCON 1 mode".
Where's AMD???
>>54686789
~$400 I believe
>>54686900
>Where's AMD???
At computex.
>>54678949
Tick tock they are on a shrink right now. Go ahead and look at the intel wiki article there is a tick tock section which was their strategy for cpus for years.
>>54686812
I don't know how much that janky ass OEM cooler is helping the OC potential.
>>54686928
Ok, thank you. I was asking because it doesn't seem to have gone down much in price.
>>54687029
I was just kidding. The thing is sure to throttle.
>>54687061
Why the hell would you want a Kepler card. Outdated as fuck at the moment and the SLI market pretty much ensures that prices don't drop much.
>>54686172
>wait for Polaris
>get a 970 now and live with 3.5 meme
>get a 290 or 290x but need to upgrade my psu to oil tanker levels
FUCK
>>54687144
Just get the 970. AMD always fucks up their software.
>>54687154
Worst advice ever. Don't get sucked into the meme.
>>54687144
Don't waste your money on a modular PSU, it'll save you a lot of money when upgrading.
>>54687200
Listen to this guy. It's not worth the extra 50 dollars to have a card that actually works.
>>54687144
>need to upgrade my psu
I should have saved that image of the madman running an FX chip with a 290x on 400W, you definitely don't need to upgrade your PSU. Fucking reviewers have brainwashed everyone.
>>54687144
>>get a 290 or 290x but need to upgrade my psu to oil tanker levels
I don't get this meme
my whole system, with a 290 tri-x clocked at 1200/1600, draws ~430W at max load, including an overclocked 2500k (not exactly power efficient either)
I don't know what kind of PSUs you guys have, but surely you're not thinking of ANY dedicated gpu with less than 550w, right?
>>54686517
>>54686571
brit cockroaches and sissies please vacate this thread. thanks.
>>54686754
I hope not for Nvidia's sake, as Vega will trash anything out right now
>>54680427
Intel would call both of them 20nm.
>>54687313
What sort of offset does that 290 need? My 290x needs a staggering +188mv for 1200/1500.
The card does actually run stable....ish at 1220 core but some games just flatout do not like that and cause it to crash.
>>54687434
>stable
>crashes
AMD "overclockers"
>>54687482
At 1200mhz its rock solid. I cut the memory clocks down as I saw no gains and it let me reduce the voltage a fair bit.
>>54687504
>12V : 11.50V
lol?
>Nvidia moves pascal forward to compete with AMD
>AMD couldn't care less, continues with the plans laid out 5 years ago
>Nvidia produces a series of housefires with marginal performance gains
>AMD wins because their cards aren't rushed garbage
If only Nvidia spent more money on R&D and less on marketing. No amount of paid internet shills will stop cards from catching on fire.
What's the deal with older Nvidia cards still selling for nearly what they were at launch?
Why does the price never seem to drop?
My GTX 460 died last week so I'm looking for a card to replace it with.
>>54687434
I embellished quite a bit if I'm being honest, since you called me out. my best is an unsatisfying 1150/1675 at I *think* +175mV
I flashed mine to 390 bios, and for some reason my max clocks are actually less, so I run with ~1100/1500 @ 100mV
pic related, 390 vs 290. not clock for clock, but it's pretty obvious the improvement
>>54687606
I'm an AMDpoorfag but I think the 1080 will sort itself out once aftermarket coolers come into play. If 28nm housefires can be kept under wraps with aftermarket designs then I think the 16nm 1080 will be alright. Avoid the FE at all costs though, god damn.
>>54687614
Limited supply of out of production cards and relatively high demand from SLI-fags keeps outdated stuff priced too high.
>>54687666
I'm just surprised you got the memory so high - hawaii's memory controller really isn't designed for those sorts of speeds (let alone the chips themselves).
>>54681394
the 3.5 gig thing didn't happen. that is a lie. it is 4 fucking gigabyte.
>>54687731
Lolno. Kill yourself Nvidiashill. It happened, benchmarks prove that it happened, and even Nvidia themselves admits it happened.
They could have released a much more powerfull card, probably double the performance, but if they do this they have to cut the amount of cards they could sell in the future.
Instead they keep releasing small increments and instead of say, 5 cards, they release 15, its just kikes being kikes, the 1080 is nowhere near the total capabilities of the new tech.
They will keep "revolutionizing" the market with more and more powerful cards so you keep buying them.
TL;DR: kikes
>>54687722
my memory is actually pretty stable, it's the core on mine that's complete shit. I haven't fucked with AUX much since I don't think it's worth it, but I doubt that'd help much
I can go from 1500 to 1625 memory (1625 is max for 390 on AB) without any problems but 1100 to 1110 core can make my card crash
>nvidia
>>54687731
>it's 4 fucking gigabyte
Sure, but that doesn't help if 500MB of it is worthlessly slow. No one is saying NVIDIA didn't physically install 4GB on the card, it's just the implementation was not conducive to actually using the last 500MB.
>>54687956
>comparing a $300 970 to a $450 390x
noice
>>54688082
It doesn't really matter, it still lost 7% total performance over that time relative to that card.
>>54688108
>relative performance
did you measure this yourself?
>>54688133
>200fps only by looking in dark corners
Hmm :)
>>54687956
Shouldn't it be referenced against itself instead of against AMD cards that take years to get perfected drivers?
>>54688160
Yeah sorry it was an old article so I baleted it. All's quiet on the Vulkan front.
>>54687956
here is the full picture
suicide watch
I wish you kids would take your gayming shit to /v/.
>>54688250
nobody gives a fuck what you wish for nigger
>>54688243
>only lost ~55% performance at 400% resolution
what fucking magic is this, AMD?
>>54688243
What the hell
>>54688243
>4 more frames than a 980ti, which is cheaper
What the fuck. Should I just buy one now and stop waiting?
suicide watch exlusive rape edition
>>54688302
>using a broken game for reference
>>54688243
Is this why most 1080 graphs use percentages instead of fps? How small are the fps gains in other games?
>>54688243
>>54688332
who is Computer Base and how much commission do they get back from AMD?
>>54688209
Nvidia gimping at work retard
>>54688332
polaris/vega are going to dominate at dx12/vulkan
nvidia shills btfo
>>54688432
How?
>>54688482
google is your friend anon
>>54688506
>>54688432
Nice misattributed quote there.
>>54688562
>can't even google meme properly
AMD finished and bankrupt
>>54688243
This does not show Vulkan gains yet. In other words. Wait for Vulkan then see.
>>54688332
>New cards beats older card
Yeah OK
>>54688727
Does Vulkan favor the 1080 for some reason?
>>54688719
>$1000 new architecture card beating last gen
??????
>>54688175
the point remains, though. Nvidia cards get worse while AMD gets better. whether this is because AMD sorts their drivers after a year or because Nvidia gimps theirs, it's clear that AMD is better long-term
source: me and my 290x, bought 3 years ago, beating 970 cucks
>>54688758
Vulkan favors whichever card performs best. So 1080 should run up to 200fps @ 1080 based on the beta showing. We have not had any announcement from team red yet (if ever) on what they will or will not be releasing. Lots of rumors about them not going head to head with the 1080. But basically just that. Rumors. No hard facts. The 1080 is a great card for the hardcore gamer to buy and yes it will blow AMD's older cards away because IT'S A NEW FUCKING CARD BOZO's!
Trying to make AMD fans salty like that is so thinly veiled nobody should be taking the bait. Including me.
>>54688807
599$ card
Math is not your strength AMDrone I can tell
>>54688807
>AMD sorts their drivers after a year
it took them literally two and a half years, anon.
>>54684916
>inferior
yeah
>unreliable
What?
In terms of physically not kicking the bucket, AMD cards will outlast NVIDIA ones every time (irrelevant because you wouldn't want to keep a graphics card long enough for that to happen anyways), and they're a lot more temperature-resistant, so idiots who think they can overclock actually don't blow themselves up.
>>54688841
I was going off Canadian prices, Nvidiot. and since when is stating a number 'math'?
>>54688847
well, 290x was never meant to compete with 970, it was meant for 780. that fact it's not only as good as but better than a 970 is amazing. the card did what it was supposed to do. quite honestly it's impressive AMD even managed to get that much performance out of the card, even if it took 2 years
>>54688807
what psu do you have
seriously considering getting a 290/x but my psu is only 450 watt
>>54688719
forgot to mention single GPU 1080 GTX
Some who got their hands on the new SLI bridge apparently get over 100 frames in 4K
Now when SLI bridge will be avaible wordwide you can imagine couple interesting things to happen
>>54688921
>I was going off Canadian prices, Nvidiot.
Sucks to you. I get the GPU for 599$ or less doesn't matter the country.
>>54688921
>buy gpu now, it will perform optimally in 2 years
That doesn't sound very enticing
Would AMD please hurry up with Vega so we can get 1080 Ti to pound it into the dirt.
>>54688961
mine is an Antec EW 750w, but that was only because when I built my pc, it was only ~$60. I think 450w would be really pushing it. I'm sure at stock clocks, you'd be more than fine, but that being said, I'd say at least 550w to make it worth it, since those cards OC well and it'd be a shame not to OC it. I'd probably get a 970 if I were you, since their prices will drop soon and the power draw will be more appealing
>>54688807
>source: me and my 290x, bought 3 years ago, beating 970 cucks
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v8FegvUMvQs
In your wet dreams maybe
>>54689082
>buy a 780-competitor video card in 2013
>over 3 years, AMD puts out new drivers which continually improve the card, giving you performance on par to current high-end cards (for all intents and purposes, 970 is high end. mid range seems unfair)
>Nvidiots consider this free performance gain a bad thing
>>54689097
>2 year old video
alright bud
>>54689097
>970
>>54689148
a gtx 770 gets 50fps on average? unexpectedly decent performance.
>>54689158
>290x
>>54689085
P sure thats 2017 and it will destroy the 1080ti cuz HBM2 and 4096bit bus, not this 256 bit baby shit nvidia keeps making
>>54689148
DF found test
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S5aPkZFnVYU
raping your 290x as it never existed
how does it feel to get shit on by a single meme card like the 970 ?
>>54682396
I thought it was harder to get higher clocks as the process becomes more dense?
>>54689246
290x performance is more or less equal to a 390x best case and 390 worst case, so use the 390 in its place
>>54689285
>2 year old video
I literally don't even care lol
>dieshrink
>same performance as 980ti
>costs more
>plus its a literal housefire
how did they manage to make zero achievements in a so called upgrade?
complete and total, disaster!
I do like how /g/ hailed Nvidia's "wonder driver" as the second coming but when AMD improves their drivers but an equal (or more) degree (albeit it over a longer term) this is suddenly a bad thing.
I bought a 290x in early 2014 as a competitor to the 780 (the 780ti cost waaay too much at the time). These days my card is now competing against a 970/980 in modern titles - I have had effectively an entire tier of performance upgrade for free.
>>54689370
and now nvidicuck drivers are regularly bricking GPUs or not even working with games on launch for weeks
Sad!
>>54689327
>>2 year old video
>I literally don't even care lol
30 seconds ago you were claiming something else?
Glorious. Entire statement denied with a single video. Keep chewing shit then.
>>54689393
>literally dozens of tests FROM THIS YEAR
>keeps posting videos from 2 years ago
here you go, 1 day ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Aqli3ezlQ_o
>>54689370
AMD will abandon older GCN cards with the release of Polaris.
>>54689427
>290x
Autistic or actually brain damaged ?
>>54689387
>bricking
I dont think you know what that word means. The drivers do not flash or otherwise alter the software of the gfx card
>>54689439
Unlikely. For all of the improvements polaris is likely to bring the underlying design is still the same GCN.
>>54689460
One Nvidia driver was actually bricking laptop displays.
https://forums.geforce.com/default/topic/862417/geforce-drivers/windows-10-geforce-drivers-are-killing-samsung-and-lg-notebook-lcd-display-panels/
>>54689427
290x =/= 390
degenerate AMD faggot
>>54689427
970 wins even vs 390
top kek can't defend this
>>54689427
I only watched the first few seconds, so I didn't realize the 390 got cucked later on. but as you can see from the comments, it's not very optimized
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FwfVnj0t8zc
>>54689439
I rather be abandoned that outright gimped
>>54689482
prove it
>>54689505
and not even overclocked.
>>54678949
................
>>54689473
Briefly reading that thread ,nothing is pointing to nvidia drivers being the problem,as it is isolated directly to 2 resellers devices.
>>54689539
>prove it
They are two different GPUs with different specs and this mongrel wants proof over it. The amount faggotry is just unreal. Go fucking hang yourself you illiterate.
>>54686517
He just assaulted another passenger and attempted to steal her purse. Would the appropriate action be to ask him nicely to stop breaking the law?
>>54689749
lmao you fucking faggot
the 390x and 290x are based on the exact same architecture with marginally improved hardware. the 290 and 290x are the exact same architecture with some features enabled/disabled
the sum of this means that a 290x will perform better than a 290 but worse than a 390x, ie in the 390 ballpark
>>54679616
/thread
>>54689827
the 390x is literally a 290x but with more useless vram
it's like claiming an i5 system is faster because you upgraded the ram to 128gb. at the end of the day it's still a fucking mid range i5 with an unnecessary amount of ram it can't take advantage of.
>>54678949
1080 worth getting if I still have a 770?
>>54689827
>this is what AMDrone thinks
No fucking wonder AMD didn't proivde drivers that long. You are fucking retards. You don't deserve shit.
>>54689906
deffo. you'd see large gains in fps.
>>54689924
hey retard, go look at any benchmark with a 290x and 390, you'll see their performance is similar
>>54689888
More RAM
Faster RAM
Faster core clocks
Also I've seen more than 4GB of VRAM used in GTA V on a R9 390 so it's clearly not pointless.
>>54689971
>More RAM
useless
>Faster RAM
>Faster core clocks
easily achievable with a 290x
>Also I've seen more than 4GB of VRAM used in GTA V on a R9 390 so it's clearly not pointless.
yeah if you want to play in fucking 4k 20fps with a 390
>>54690050
You can oc a 390x better. The 290x with the exception of the tri-x coooler are thermally limited.
Not that it is worth the extra money.
>>54690050
>easily achievable with a 290x
290x can't even come close to 390x VRAM clocks
390x also OC higher on core clocks
>yeah if you want to play in fucking 4k 20fps with a 390
At 2560x1440 without AA at 50-60fps. Pretty sure it's the extended distance scaling that does it.
>>54690330
>290x can't even come close to 390x VRAM clocks
It really can - just depends on which memory you have.
>>54690356
>1550MHz
pretty sure some 390Xs are higher than that out of the box
nice core OC though
>>54690356
>This one golden sample
390x start out at 1500MHz stock and go to 1600-1700MHz. They are generally better overclockers than 290x
>>54688018
This.
>It's a feature!
why the fuck is this $699 when the 980 was $549
>>54688243
So what are the 1% lows by comparison? Average fps isn't even half the picture.
>>54682780
>laggy 800kb version of the webm
what the fuck, anon
>>54679544
>>54690453
http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2016/05/18/amds-bet-on-mainstream-graphics-could-backfire.aspx
>AMD's plan to focus on the mainstream GPU market comes at a time when the market is clearly shifting toward the high end. NVIDIA was able to pull PC gamers to higher price points in 2015 with the GTX 970, and the company is looking to do it again with the GTX 1070 this year.
https://youtu.be/myDYnofz_JE
https://youtu.be/MzpQuGIDvwQ
>it barely beats an aftermarket 980ti
>can't beat a Titan
>a contrived sidegrade architecture that's just a faster Maxwell that overclocks like shit
>they actually had the gall to say it was going to be a massive jump in performance knowing the architecture was barely changed
>this whole architecture "leap" is just a cashgrab to lure Nvidiots until Vega hence the paper launch
>>54690799
my mistake I meant Volta* not Vega
What should I get 390X / FuryX / 980ti when the prices drop after the 1080 official hits?
Upgrading from sli 760s
don't need max settings for games but am playing at 2560x1080
>>54690799
It's based Scottish ARKETEXTURE man.
>>54690799
I enjoy reviews that tell me my 980 Ti isn't cucked and dislike the ones that say it is.
>>54690799
His opinion is irrelevant to me. All his anti Nvidia bias is obviously to run his channel and get views. Can't stand his fucking accent anyways. There are tons of reiviews already out that contradict him entirely.
Basicly some AMDrone with nothing else but this wannabe e-celeb youtuber to point at.
Desperate and on suicide watch since poolooris won't bring anything but pathetic mid range GPUs with old standard gddr5 and low power consumption. AMD Zen will be cores on cores with brutality trash performance lower as i5 as AIDA already leaked.
To sum it up for you. Get shit on from every possible angle.
>>54690941
Get ready to get cucked by gimped driver support.
>>54690799
The Founders Edition is extremely limited by power limits and bad cooling. Basically the opposite of what Nvidia advertised the Founders Edition to be.
How custom models OC has yet to be seen.
>>54691040
>All his anti Nvidia bias is obviously to run his channel and get views
fucking this, it's full of amd pandering
>amdrones are underaged
>inherently poor and feels oppressed
>needs to tell EVERYONE how evil intel and nvidia are
>basically the vegetarians of the hardware world
easy $$$$$ all you gotta do is regurgitate the same things over and over and comfort your userbase about how right they are and what they are doing is just and for the good cause
>>54690799
you can literally hear out of his fucking voice that he is triggered as fuck. Mentioning shit like "might", "could", "probably", "would" in every fucking sentence. a fucking joke holy shit its like hitlers private AMD shill channel.
>>54691274
its not bias when its the truth you cuck.
>>54691302
eat shit you AMDrone what truth are talking about here ?
>>54678949
1080 was so fucking over-hyped.
I mean for the price it surely is an upgrade but removing cuda cores (which for me play a big part but still, i'm no vdya faggot) and muh X.5Gb Vram meme.
Also for those freqs(Over-hyped again, most of benchs don't and wouldn't hit those freqs unless water-cooled) and VRAM, ~10% FPS improvements in most of the games doesn't seem like much. But then again one could argue that the games are not optimized ( which sounds BS)
>>54691274
thats actually smartas fuck. Tell your suicidal AMDrone viewers how they want it and comfort them with anti Nvidia shill propaganda.
To bad that there 100 other reviewers who say otherwise. Top KEK.
>>54691336
basically every one of his videos
>nvidia is evil
>here are the "facts"
>your current amd gpu is still perfect, my wonderful little sunshine!
>>54690799
see
>>54688719
>>54688332
>>54688243
opinion discarded
>>54691508
you're argument is basically "well AMD chips suck" which is irrelevant because you can buy an aftermarket 980ti and have 98% the performance of your shitty $700 house fire, Nvidia straight up lied plain and simple
>>54691336
its not bias when its the truth you cuck.
>>54691422
And how is that not the truth?
>>54691577
but the cards cost only 599$. And 80C under load is far away from a house fire my little AMDrone. Don't let me pull up the temperatures from AMD and crossfires. You would cut your throat immediately.
As said before. Your opinion and this e-celebs opinion is irrelevant as fuck. He has no confirmation on his "facts" and therefore useless. There is and won't be a single GPU by AMD until 2018 or longer that beats the 1080. And the 1080 Ti is the nail in the coffin.
AMD is completely fucked, even if Polaris 10 comes out better than expected.
The 1080 just killed any chance that the Fury X had of recovering sales. Both it and the 1070 have no competitors in this market space and it's highly unlikely that Vega 10 will be better than, and dubious if it can even match the 1080 Ti at its price point.
The 1060/Ti will murder Polaris 10 and rape the resulting rape-baby because it's based on the same GM104 as the 1080, but only ~60% less cores, but retaining the same overclocking prowess as the full GM104. Polaris 10 is still based off of GCN, which can not overclock the same way Maxwell and Polaris can simply because it wasn't designed to; Polaris 10 is power efficiency optimized, which means lower clock speeds and less variability with the voltages you can put through it. If the 1060/Ti costs under $300, then why the fuck would anyone buy a Polaris 10 card? The 1060/Ti might be faster at stock speed and will definitely pull away once overclocked and probably pull the same amount of power that Polaris 10 allegedly will. Even the 1080 has a better power-to-performance ratio than the Polaris 11 demo they unveiled last year.
There is no reason to buy Polaris or Vega. AMD is completely and utterly fucked out of the dGPU market.
By a die-shrunk Maxwell.
>Literally just a die shrunk GTX980 with moar rams
>$799
>Muh 3.0bagirrbirrion dorras r&d
Yeah my ass
Sure it clocks nice but its still weaker clock for clock its crap
I hope the people arguing amd vs nvidia here are under the age of 20.
You guys are truly pathetic.
>>54691720
It wasn't that hard, either.
>>54691720
saving this for later when you get proved utterly wrong.
>>54691815
Just take the 1080's performance and multiply if by .65 and give a leeway of roughly 5%. Then compare that performance to the 390X, which the full Polaris 10 will match in performance.
Go ahead, run the numbers.
