Let's be honest here. If you need anything more powerful than an RX 480, you are wasting your money.
got 2 gtx 1080 so i can play everything on ultra in 4k.
stay mad
>>55209460
>got 2 gtx 1080 so i can play everything on ultra in 4k.
>stay mad
4k vs QHD is not worth the extra $1200. Also, you are delusional if you think you can play dx12 games in 4k with SLI 1080s.
>>55209483
who said anything about the 13 dx12 games at 4k.
im playing shit just fine at 4k 60fps with the 2 1080.
yet again stay mad. or just reply to this post with a shitpost about Ashes of the Singularity.
>>55209554
>>>55209483 (You)
>who said anything about the 13 dx12 games at 4k.
>im playing shit just fine at 4k 60fps with the 2 1080.
>yet again stay mad. or just reply to this post with a shitpost about Ashes of the Singularity.
Every Xbox port will be dx12 only. That is like 50% of AAA games next year for pc
>>55209554
Look we found yet another "im the one that always gets to work with sli and it scales so perfect that i can play 60 fps smoothly on 4k"
meanwhile literally everyone else are having trouble with it even on 260p..
>>55209597
So Forza? i already play Forza Motorsport 6 in ultra at 60 in 4k. to bad the bitch doesn't have wheel support.
Forza Horizon 3 will be the same. I still don't see the problem here.
But we're only a few years off of 4k.
>>55209425
why get a gpu that performs on last gen levels
>people have different needs/wants/finances/etc.
Who cares, just worry about yourself and stop proselytizing.
>>55209712
why get a 1080 that perform only 8% faster than the best amd card on dx12?
>>55209731
dx12 is irrelevant
>>55209731
Because they have the money t o shrug off the offset for the added benefit.
Why are poorfags so obsessed with what everyone else gets?
>>55209425
By that you mean anything after that is severe diminishing returns, right?
>>55209425
>*mom's money
>>55209597
>Every Xbox port
Games are developed for the PS4 first most of the time because that is what absolutely dominates the market right now. Only the Xbox exclusives that come to PC will require DX12.
>>55205526
>How big is the Android partition on that thing?
>What bootloader does it come with?
>How do you select the OS when you boot? Is there always some OS picker or is there a default OS and if you wish to boot the other one you have to push some button while booting, or what?
>>55209712
>>>55209425 (OP)
>why get a gpu that performs on last gen levels
Why get a GPU that only performs well on last gen games?
I wouldnt be surprised if the 480 beats out the 1080 years from now. We've seen it time and time again with Nvidia cards, they only last a year.
Spending $200 for 3 years on new GPUs is still $100 cheaper than getting the 1080.
my intel x4500hd is powerful enough for me, fags
stay mad
pc hardware has always had massively diminishing returns after a certain point.
Why do PC gamers complain about consoles holding back the industry, yet berate people for buying anything above a low end graphics card? Games will become more demanding as the average graphics card becomes more powerful.
>>55209811
poorfags are jealous, it's nothing new.
>>55209758
yeap i guess
sony ms amd ea samsung nintendo intel even ibm are wrong
and you are right
quite obvious since this is 4chan
>>55209811
>Why do PC gamers complain about consoles holding back the industry, yet berate people for buying anything above a low end graphics card? Games will become more demanding as the average graphics card becomes more powerful.
The 480 is not low end. Its in the sweet spot, aka the average graphics card.
>>55209425
>Let's be honest here. If you need anything more X than Y, you're memeing
please include the word AMD, nvidia, or RX480 (without the space) in your OP next time so my shitpost filter catches it
>>55209771
you know why? a damn 295x2 cant hit 60 fps on 4k and x2 1080 that are slower on a dx12 game (forza) will?especially on ultra? yeah
its like saying that he has a 970 that can play the mirrors edge hyper setting while it needs 7+gb..
>>55209827
look up adoption history of dx9, dx10, and dx11.
>>55209840
>The 480 is not low end.
Yes, it is. It's the lowest bracket of this generation.
700 bucks is not that much really. I blow way more on my other hobbies
>>55209920
No, it isn't. The RX 470 and 460 are lower.
>>55209425
>just found a GTX 1070 (GIGABYTE G1) for 480€
AYYYMD on suicide watch, goodbye poorfags.
>60 fps
enjoy input lag, no 144hz and half the fps in 2 years when your low end trash becomes obsolete
>>55209883
well at 980ti can do forza on ultra what the fuck are you going on about.
6700k 980ti put msaa to x2 instead of 4 boom 60 at 4k without sli.
dumbass.
>>55209952
>>60 fps
>enjoy input lag, no 144hz and half the fps in 2 years when your low end trash becomes obsolete
144hz is a useless. I had one.
Lightboost2d is nice though.
Also, only Nvidia cards are useless after two years.
4 year old 290s are still relevant.
>>55209425
How good is RX 480 and how much it cost in aus? I got a 750ti right now. Worth an upgrade?
>>55209896
you obviously dont even know what you are talking about if you think history has anything to do with it...
how many games dx11 had on the first year?
how many games dx10 had on the first year?
how many games already dx12 has and will have this year?
>>55209965
im sorry someone here said forza 6 on ultra at 4k didnt it? yes it id.. so no 980ti it struggles to get 65 on 2k on everything ultra if we are talking about lowering spec sure most cards will reach that no doubt about that
>>55210006
>>>55209425 (OP)
>How good is RX 480 and how much it cost in aus? I got a 750ti right now. Worth an upgrade?
What do you play? I have both a 750ti laptop and a 290x so I can compare them easily for you.
>>55209920
>>55209935
and so will be the 1060 and 1050.
>8gb of ram on the 480
>4 times as much as last years low end
>r480 lowest bracket of this generation
>being this retarded
>>55210005
>Also, only Nvidia cards are useless after two years.
current nvidia drivers support back to the 8000/200 series (10 years ago). current AMD drivers only support back to hd7000, which was released 3 1/2 years ago.
>4 year old 290s are still relevant.
since when? AMD lost the majority of their market share and cards like the 970 destroy the 290 and it's rebrands in price, performance and perf/watt.
>>55209935
I said bracket for a reason. There's a lot of cards above the 480, there's only two below it. The 480 is below the middle of the generation by a lot. You just have to look at how everybody is comparing this card to last generation cards instead of current generation cards to know that this card is not competing on performance, because it is low end.
If the leaks are right, the 1060 will be 480 tier, the 1060 ti will be above the 480, the 1070 is above the 480, the 1080 is above the 480, the 1080 ti will be above the 480, and then there will likely be a card or two above the 1080 ti. We have to use Nvidia because AMD doesn't have their full lineup out for a long time yet, but that's 5-6 cards above the 480, and only two below it. That seems to be on the low end to me.
>>55209933
>1080
>4095 mb
>lolwut
>>55210036
What is low end is not determined by its performance relative to last generation cards. What determines if it is low end is its performance relative to current generation cards.
>>55210053
>two cards above 1080ti
And those two cards would be..?
>>55210052
show me a current nvidia driver that supports(actively NOT legacy) those cards...
lol
>>55209800
This is a very good argument.
Kind of how I rationalized going with 6600k over i7 even though it's "only 100 more." I figure that 100 could go toward buying a better CPU down the road, even if it doesn't last quite as long as the i7.
Still on the fence about which GPU because I don't know if I want to do 1440 or just 1080, haven't even gone so far as looking at monitors either.
My shit rig:
http://pcpartpicker.com/list/TtQxr7
>>55210089
I said one to two because sometimes Nvidia has one card above the x80 ti, sometimes they have more than one card above the x80 ti. Even with one card above the 1080 ti, then there are 5 cards above the 480, and only two below it. That's thoroughly low end.
>>55210053
>If the leaks are right, the 1060 will be 480 tier, the 1060 ti will be above the 480,
Those cards don't exist and won't exist for months.
> the 1080 ti will be above the 480, and then there will likely be a card or two above the 1080 ti.
Same as above.
There's also several benchmarks where the 1070 comes in below last gen's flagship cards.
The RX 480 is square in the middle of performance for "new gen" GPUs.
>>55210052
>>>55210005 (You)
>>Also, only Nvidia cards are useless after two years.
>current nvidia drivers support back to the 8000/200 series (10 years ago). current AMD drivers only support back to hd7000, which was released 3 1/2 years ago.
>>4 year old 290s are still relevant.
>since when? AMD lost the majority of their market share and cards like the 970 destroy the 290 and it's rebrands in price, performance and perf/watt.
>Nerfed drivers
7000 series was 5 years ago, and the 7970 is still competitive.
And market share has nothing to do with how good a card is. The 970 doesn't have much of a life span left.
>>55210112
so you base your theory not on the raw perf of a card but the numbers of cards that might be above it? and literally without knowing the full capabilities of it?
....
>>55210057
Speccy is not a great program for showing system specs, not sure why it's become the thing to post on 4chan
>>55210140
its good they probably havent updated it yet to measure the quad width of gddr5x thats why you see half of it
>>55210170
>>>55210140
>its good they probably havent updated it yet to measure the quad width of gddr5x thats why you see half of it
Why is it not called qdr if its quad width?
>>55210053
>ignoring pricing
>>55210194
because putting an X on everything makes it better i guess who knows..
>>55210135
>but the numbers of cards that might be above it?
Are you aware of the definition of middle? Because if there are more cards above the 480 than there are below it, it is not a mid range card.
>>55210094
it's literally the latest WHQL driver that still supports these 10 year old cards
>>55210125
>still believing the driver gimping meme
>thinks hd7000 was 5 years ago
2012 =/= 5 years ago.
>And market share has nothing to do with how good a card is.
i never said it did, it's just an objective fact that AMD puts out shit products. that's why they lost so much market share.
>The 970 doesn't have much of a life span left.
it's the most sold GPU in history, you should be much more worried about the AMD trash not having much life left considering they've been rebranded 3-4 times by now and devs aren't going out of their way to optimize for their architecture any longer because of it. just look at what happened to games like rise of the tomb raider and doom.
>>55209425
>if you buy things i dont like, your wasting your money
What GPU should I get for 1440p/120hz gaming?
>>55210275
1070 for now, 1080 if you want to be really future proof.
>>55210215
lol
so if 480 is actually on r9 nano level and that means 10-12% slower than a 980ti that makes it lower end?
by your definition then 470 and 460 is antartic level below the hell level...
>>55210222
i think i asked for you to tell me if they actively support it as far as everyone knows they are all LEGACY http://www.nvidia.com/page/legacy.html
When's the next big leap like back then of gtx 7000 series to the 8800 cards.
It was the biggest jump, nowadays that 1 year of jump is worth 7 years of waiting
>>55210025
Sc2, and then just whatever new games come out that look alright like dark souls 3
>>55210290
>so if 480 is actually on r9 nano level and that means 10-12% slower than a 980ti that makes it lower end?
the 480 is 970 performance, not anywhere near the gtx980 or nano.
>>55210290
Stop comparing it to last gen cards. You're only proving my point when you do that dipshit. For the 480 to be a mid range card, it has to be equidistant from the most powerful and least powerful cards OF THIS GENERATION. Stop trying to change the definition of middle.
>>55210340
well hate to tell you but as far as the graphics score on the firestrike goes.. its above 980...and that means nano level of perf...
and if that oc well as the korean guy showed..well its going to be 2008 all over again..
>>55210339
Starcraft 2 alone can play in a shitty gt 630 of mine at 60 fps @1080p
Not Dark Soul tho even 1, just get the Rx480
>>55210341
yes because for the past 20 years everyone was comparing the new cards with the new cards not the past one to showcase their improvements..
oh wait
THAT NEVER HAPPENED instead we have a company that goes so low to even use games of 2013 to increase their overall average fps
Best 3rd party Nvidia vendors?
>>55210372
>well hate to tell you but as far as the graphics score on the firestrike goes.. its above 980...and that means nano level of perf...
the firestrike stores are public. go look it up. the leaked score was slower than a factory OCed 970.
>>55210372
>and if that oc well as the korean guy showed..well its going to be 2008 all over again..
not really, 4870 was a great card because AMD had an architecture that was extremely simple and allowed them to get equal gaming performance on dies that were 1/2 - 1/3 the size of nvidia's. AMD won't ever be able to replicate that with an architecture as complex as GCN.
>>55210462
the graphics score THE GRAPHICS score
also pretty sure they already have done that since the last major update to the gcn was on 2013... and those rebrands are well ahead from their counterparts back then
not to mention they are ahead even now from the maxwell 2.0 competitors in most cases
fact is like it or not gcn ages like x10 better than anything serial nvidia has made..
there is a reason as to why an 780ti on aots is literally ahead of 980 till 2k
that card is literally the only thing that shows how well dx12 works on a superscala design instead on a serial one..
>>55210415
>to showcase their improvements
Irrelevant. That would only be relevant if we're talking about how improved these cards are compared to last generation. We are talking about a COMPLETELY separate topic, which is the cards relative performance to other current generation cards.
>>55210541
>not to mention they are ahead even now from the maxwell 2.0 competitors in most cases
what? the 290 and 290x have REGRESSED in performance. they launched as $700 cards and now get outperformed by a $200 970.
>fact is like it or not gcn ages like x10 better than anything serial nvidia has made..
GCN is extremely far behind, actually... it's nearly half the perf/watt of NVIDIA's architectures. AMD has less than 25% of the gaming market and 0% of the GPGPU compute market because of how hard it has flopped.
>that card is literally the only thing that shows how well dx12 works on a superscala design instead on a serial one..
you must be trolling or retarded, both amd and nvidia's gpu architectures are superscalar.
>>55210626
>>55210462
put your trip back on so I don't have to read your nonsense
>>55210626
>>>55210541
>>not to mention they are ahead even now from the maxwell 2.0 competitors in most cases
>what? the 290 and 290x have REGRESSED in performance. they launched as $700 cards and now get outperformed by a $200 970.
>>fact is like it or not gcn ages like x10 better than anything serial nvidia has made..
>GCN is extremely far behind, actually... it's nearly half the perf/watt of NVIDIA's architectures. AMD has less than 25% of the gaming market and 0% of the GPGPU compute market because of how hard it has flopped.
>>that card is literally the only thing that shows how well dx12 works on a superscala design instead on a serial one..
>you must be trolling or retarded, both amd and nvidia's gpu architectures are superscalar.
290x reference was $550 day one. And it is competing against a card 2 generations ahead of it.
Market share means nothing, gamers are easily influenced by marketing.
>>55210626
>they launched as $700
>>55210705
>And it is competing against a card 2 generations ahead of it.
it's competing against midrange and lowend cards 2 generations ahead of it, exactly how you'd expect any old flagship card to perform. how exaclty is that noteworthy or commendable on AMD's part?
>Market share means nothing, gamers are easily influenced by marketing.
nice excuse, if that meme was true then nobody would be producing new GPUs and would instead be spending their billions on marketing budgets.
>>55210626
what? WHAT? in what universe a 290/x aka a 390/x is behind a 970? on gameworks infested games? probably and only on day one
yeah like we dont know why the whole async fiasco started back in august of 15...we learned quite a lot as to how nvidia manage to achieve such a tdp on their cards...basicly emulating everything and unable to have any sort of hardware scheduler lead to the massive flop on dx12 while its good for them as a company turned out that maxwell 1.0 and 2.0 are already obsolete while the whole 2xx and 3xx rebrands have some years left of perf on them..
really? please show me a link that has any PROOF that maxwell and paxwell is SUPERSCALAR
>>55210755
So what about the 780? You seem to talk a lot of shit against 290's but what happened to kepler?
>>55210755
>>>55210705 (You)
>>And it is competing against a card 2 generations ahead of it.
>it's competing against midrange and lowend cards 2 generations ahead of it, exactly how you'd expect any old flagship card to perform. how exaclty is that noteworthy or commendable on AMD's part?
>>Market share means nothing, gamers are easily influenced by marketing.
>nice excuse, if that meme was true then nobody would be producing new GPUs and would instead be spending their billions on marketing budgets.
$350 is a low range card? Obvious troll.
>>55210782
How come a 290 beats the 780 to pulp these days then?
>>55210782
>what? WHAT? in what universe a 290/x aka a 390/x is behind a 970? on gameworks infested games?
it's always been behind. have you been living under a rock? a stock 970 beats a stock 290x, an OCed 970 will also beat an OCed 290x (aka a 390x).
>>55210840
>>>55210782
>>what? WHAT? in what universe a 290/x aka a 390/x is behind a 970? on gameworks infested games?
>it's always been behind. have you been living under a rock? a stock 970 beats a stock 290x, an OCed 970 will also beat an OCed 290x (aka a 390x).
>4 fps in a game works game.
Lmfao
>>55210840
>1.01% difference in cherrypicked slide
>beats clearly
what a fucking retard
>>55210837
since when does it 'beat it to a pulp'? the 290 was slightly ahead of the 780 performance wise when it launched, and the gap between the two is still pretty much the same.
>>55210840
being so desperate to bring a gameworks game to showcase a 2% win whats next? gonna post project cars benchmarks ?
>>55210840
try harder
>>55210889
>>>55210837
>since when does it 'beat it to a pulp'? the 290 was slightly ahead of the 780 performance wise when it launched, and the gap between the two is still pretty much the same.
Outdated charts.
This is the IQ of the typical nvidia consumer.
![2560[1].png](https://i.imgur.com/tbvl53w.png "2560[1].png")
>>55210889
>>55210875
>cherrypicked
the 970 is the undeniably superior card. making up excuses won't change that fact.
>>55209425
I kind of agree unless you want to get on 1440p on 60fps. Buying a 1080 is absolutely retarded when it can;t bring 120fps on 1440p or 60fps on 4k.
posting nvidia infested games as a proof dont really help your thesis
also im still waiting on your proof of nvidia cards being superscalar instead of pipelined
>>55210931
looks fine to me? the 780ti is now faster than an OCed 290x at stock clocks. yet AMD fanboys continue the parrot the gimping meme, lmao.
>>55210942
>ZOTAC AMP EXTREME
>against reference models
from that chart you could assume the 970 beats the 980!
>>55210889
>>55210931
that translates to close to 50% framerate difference between the 290X over the 780 since you're mentally challenged
>>55209483
Dx12 is a meme just like dx10
>>55210973
>>against reference models
there are no reference 390/390x, they're OCed versions of the 290 and 290x.
>from that chart you could assume the 970 beats the 980!
an OCed 970 does beat a stock 980, that's why it was an amazing value when it launched and why it sold so well.
3.5 meme aside the 970 and 980ti will be relavent for years and are comparable in value and longevity to the 2500k and 2600k. we're not getting another die shrink for 3-4 years and the performance boost we got from 14nm was minimal.
>>55210971
What are you talking about, the 780 TI was almost 200$ more expensive than the 290X when it came out, Yet it gets beaten in DOOM and Rise of the Shitraider
>>55209554
post a screenshot of you ingame? maybe with FPS counter?
not hard, I have plenty
unless of course you're going on the internet... and telling lies??
>>55210942
>the 970 is the undeniably superior card.
More like obsolete trash.
>>55211007
This
Actual boost is 1478. In games it is stable at +250 Core but crashes in Firestrike. Probably can push the memory more. Max temp is 65 with ambient around 28
>>55211007
I don't think anyone is denying that the 970 isn't good value for money. It's just that the older AMD cards have aged better than keppler, 290(x) outperforming 780(ti) and 280X outperforming the 770 easily these days.
yeap so amazing https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bm5ZCJah-FY oh wait
>>55211072
Retard me forgot the picture
>>55211092
nice one show the graphics score so we can all have a laugh here
>>55211091
Show some benches with Fury X on Hyper settings. AMDiscount fag
>>55211111
im sorry fury x by your standars is below low level i guess so it doesnt matter since there are 3 cards above it
>>55211110
Sure kiddo
http://www.3dmark.com/fs/8776950
>>55211091
>game riddled with AMD shit
>unoptimized as fuck
Yeah ofcourse nvidia loses, they don't rely on 8GB VRAM gimmicks in order to look better to kids.
low tier nvidiot trolling
>>55211177
game being dx12
game doesnt have amd tech
game being running on api nvidia is shit
game=shit
typica nvidiot
>>55211006
What the fuck are you talking about
It improved all AMD cards
Its making me consider switching to amd on my next upgrade
>>55211217
well you know
whatever nvidia is shit its not worth
thats how they keep the industry behind
meanwhile today we learned that a chip launched back in 2013 is still competing today is shit because after 3 years there is a card that beats it
>>55211177
the damage control is real
>>55211289
>>55211214
I was just joking, I had a 770 myself and I sold it because my friends 7970GHz edition is beating it consistently across all games (even nvidia games like the witcher 3).
>>55209483
Who the fuck are you to say what something is worth to somebody? Can you see how you are so self centered and oblivious to others usage needs or even personal preferences and choices that may not align to your own? Guess what fucktard, you do as you do, we will do as we do.
Enjoy your AMD's man.
>>55209460
I hope you're a true richfag, or else you're a moron.
Anybody without unlimited funding and half a brain would have just waited for 1080Ti/Vega in Q1'17.
>>55211217
Crysis is over tessellated
>Hurr durr, Nvidia sucks ass
In reality AMD got beaten in their own game
Oxide created game that strongly favors AMD hardware
>Hurr durr, Nvidia sucks ass
In reality AotS is a game that abuses a-sync computing to fuck up with Nvidia hardware and yet in every other DX12 title the results are opposite
>>55210005
>4 year old 290s are still relevant.
this
my 10% overclocked 290x keeps the Witcher 3 at 1440p 60fps high settings
>>55209425
gulp
>>55210931
that's a launch-day test, check it now
I really don't get gaming its nothing productive.
>>55210052
How else would they continue gimping their old cards?
>>55210840
>>55210931
>>55210942
>my old card was a 760
>i could get a 960 and have a 50% boost in frame rates and be completely happy because i dont play any new games
Good to know.
>>55211367
Chill the fuck out
I didn't say anything about nvidia sucking ass I'm running 2 780's right now and they are working just fine
![ebfbb18c45[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/TWOU1Pb.jpg "ebfbb18c45[1].jpg")
>>55211152
that's a decent score anon! But It's not even close to a 390 or 390x... or beat a single 290 OC...
shit I have a reference 290 that can beat that score
http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1467959
>>55209425
Alright /v/
What card's should I buy this year to get ~100fps on this monitor at full resolution?
>>55211475
Don't forget that your CPU is running 1 GHz faster than mine
>>55209425
>Below the 980
AHAHAHAHAHAHAH
>posts a fps benchmark without the 480
>b-but the bs benchmarks showed it close to the 980
nope and besides 1060 will be the better card yet again .
>>55211482
If that's a 4K ultrawide, there isn't one. we're still waiting on the big cards to be announced.
>>55211482
Fuck off /v/. No single card can do it. Fat Pascal or Vega if you're lucky.
>>55211509
>gtx980= 400+ $
AHAHAHAHAH
>>55211505
>graphics score
>CPU running faster
>you have a xeon
pajeet I think you've been fooled again
>>55211516
>Let's wait another 6 months for the 1080, and another 6 months after that for yields to become high enought that we can actually buy one!
I'm well aware of this meme. Will not be fooled into waiting for nvidia products again after the 1080/1070 debacle.
>>55211539
>Thinking that CPU speed doesn't affect Graphics score
>Falling for the non-K i7 meme
>>55210125
>970 life span is at an end
I still rock a 760 4gb without issue at 1080. Why the hell should I even care about 4k when I wear glasses because of my shit eyes
>Muh top resolution
Who gives a damn? I may go to a 2k display but that would be my endgame until UHD gets to a more normie price point. Do I need an upgrade? Sure, but it will wait until the Ti is released or Titan. If I want to play a AAA title, barring advanced water graphics in GTA V, it runs fine.
>>55209425
>""""Ultra"""""
Let me guess, 90 FOV?
>>55211367
what every other ?
rotr dx12 is fucked up even their devs admitted it
hitman is pretty much an amd game
aots is pretty much amd game
on forza i have yet to see anyone benching a fury line card**cough cough**
mirrors edge is pretty much a dx12 heavy on compute game
deus ex is one game that will extremly use compute shaders
star citizen will be the biggest compute shader use of game
but go ahead blame amd because your pathetic company choose to invest on gameshit instead of helping the industry to go further
they lost with samsung
they lost the "gpu" brand
they lost intel
they lost g sync war
they lost hbm war
they are about to loose hbm2 war
they clearly lost gameworks war
they lost all the consoles they once had
they got kicked out of the moblie area because they never delivered
they got ass kicked because they tried to emulate x86 on their arm chip but intel said GTFO
they lost their chipset war because no one fucking likes a closed ecosystem
they lost 2 of their major hpc companies
they lost ibm as a patent source because they abused it
they lost apple because they are greedy mofos
they are about to end the deal with samsung about their patents
literally everything is going south
so south they are about to hit space mexico
>>55211517
damn that's what I thought, looking at all the benchmarks it looks like even with two cards reaching 100+fps is gonna be impossible
>>55211524
>No single card
I didn't ask specifically for a single card
I asked for "card's"
>Fuck off /v/
Yeah my mistake, i didn't realize we were not talking about games and graphics cards made for them
>>55211616
>without issue at 1080
GTX 670 here, you're bullshit and you know it. Tahiti is so far ahead it's not even funny.
>>55211529
kek
>>55211152
>>55211475
>>55211568
again? it´s currently going on
>>55211756
Nice, would you share link
>>55211779
I meant 1060
>>55211819
I didn't save the link, I'd have to run it again which I don't want to right now
>>55211942
>>55211959
trying to argue with an nvidiot..
>>55211618
what´s wrong with a FOV of 90 seems quite standard to me
>>55211959
>>55211997
http://www.3dmark.com/fs/8465919
1080p gaming is standard
>>55209425
Let's be honest here. You worded your post poorly. If you need anything more than an RX 480, that extra money is worth it because you need it.
>>55212046
1080p nowdays is the minimus.. the new gen is going for 1440p thats the sweet spot
>>55211152
>>55211475
>>55211756
970 super overclocked! :^)
>>55212063
that's gay, it not even a real definition like 4K
>>55212080
>getting meme'd 4x
Sorry about your penis
I want 144 fps at 1080 in current gen games
rx480 doesn't seem like it's going to cut it for that
>>55212101
why gaming 4k is the true definition of 4k?
>>55212139
It's accepted, there are no 2K televisions so it is an aberration, a wishy-washy half measure that won't be supported by game developers
>>55211394
Nor is shitposting and yet here you are.
>>55212034
Core at almost 1600 thats really nice. Flashed bios for more voltage or?
>>55211612
The way these scores are weighted is absolutely retarded. 3Dmark really needs to change their shit to something that remotely follows a linear pattern and makes sense.
>>55211618
If your monitor is the correct distance anyways the real FoV between you and the screen is going to be something like 35-40 degrees.
>>55209425
there is literally no excuse for your new product to be weaker than your rival's previous product and even your own. There is not.
>>55209771
1080fags actually care more that people are waiting for ti/vega and/or going for the 480 instead. Maybe it's because they can't scalp their 1080s fast enough before stock improves.
>>55212197
by the truest meaning of accepted no not a single resolution is
vesa said that they are estimating that 8k will be the longest one in duration to be accepted just like 1080
but i guess if the porn industry dont accept it no one will
>>55212125
T-thanks
>>55212252
I actually pushed it to an even 1600mhz or a little higher sometimes and it's still stable
+50mhz voltage on a stock bios. I got a really good chip with an 85% asic quality. Temps stay in the low 70s
http://www.3dmark.com/fs/8674978
>>55209933
Do you wanna be my sugar daddy???
I give amazing blowjobs!
>>55209460
Im buying 4 rx 480's then, fuck you
>>55209460
Do you have a 4k monitor?
>>55209483
>4k vs QHD is not worth the extra $1200
t. poorfag
>>55212406
chinese idiots leaked aots bench of 480 on the benching site...
same cpu same settings is 200 points below a 980...
epic kek
also some 4k on a 470
and also someone leaked on beyond3d that 480 will be able to do OoO executions
man this is getting to good to be true lol
RX480 is too slow to play at 1440p comfortably.
t. GTX 1080 owner.
>>55209425
why would you be looking at opengl benchmarks to make that decision when directx 12 is here
>>55212576
>when directx 12 is here
DX12 has been shit so far and is pretty much broken on the 3 games that use it
Getting really tired of these threads.
Polaris is supposed to carry the next iteration of GCN stream processors targeting a mainstream audience at a range of $100 to $300.
It was never meant to compete in the higher performance range.
The only real, and I type it loosely, benchmark we have of any Polaris card is the RX480 with Raja at Computex. Doing some numbers here and there, we can expect it to compete or maybe even surpass the 390 and the 970 for $200.
Recent events at E3 show the RX470 and the RX460. The former being cut down Polaris 10 judging from the PCB and the RX460 being Polaris 11. In other words, the RX480 is the highest performing card in the Polaris lineup.
Since they mentioned a range of $100-$300, it puts the RX460 at a $100 and the RX470 at about $150. The latter one is very interesting. If you remember, the 7850 was a pretty cute overclocker and it was cut Pitcarn(Pitcarn PRO). If the RX470 follows, then we might have a nice card that can match the RX480 with a little OC and $50 less, making it a killer at its price.
The RX480 on the other hand is definitely within the last generation of lower high end cards, possibly surpassing them. Benchmarks point to above 390x performance, but I'm personally skeptical about it. It will be another amazing price to performance card.
If you're running anything on or above the 970 or the 390, then I would be waiting for something like Vega or fatter Pascal. The truth is that while the 1070 is an amazing card for its price, it doesn't deliver all of the high frames at 1440p or 60fps on 4K. This lineup of Pascal is very disappointing and it feels like nothing new. Look at the true Pascal line, they're monstrous chips with HBM and all that good shit. We are stuck with these chips that aren't really anything new except a little better than the 980Ti.
Also, reminder that you should WAIT FOR BENCHMARKS.
>>55212597
3?
lets see
gow
rotrs
aots
hitman
forza 6
mirrors edge..
>>55212022
It's not enough for me. I could get 2560x1080@60fps on D44M with my 780 if I played at that FOV, which makes these kinds of charts utterly useless for me.
>>55212271
At around 50~70cm away from the screen -at which I am- anything below 100 is too little for me to not get dizzy.
I need Fury performance for the optimum 2560x1440 experience in my vidya.
>>55212620
And DX12 performance is mediocre at best in all of them. Where are the magic performance improvements that have been touted all this time?
>>55212669
they were all just a ploy to get idiots to upgrade to windows 10
>>55212683
Still waiting on Vulkan as well
>>55212669
on games that has both of them
well only aots so far the gains are massive to the cards with async
and not so massive when the async is on compared to when its off on others..
on every other game you cant tell the difference also what did you expect? it is suppose to remove the strain of the cpu and put more into the gpu this is its job not to give you 1000000 fps more
>>55209425
im rich and can buy whatever the fuck i want to you poor shit faggot.
>>55209460
>>55212729
/thread
>>55212714
>it is suppose to remove the strain of the cpu and put more into the gpu
No, it's supposed to use the cpu more to compliment the gpu and remove some of the gpu bottleneck, not use the cpu less
>>55209425
>OpenGoyL games
>>55212802
gpu only gets bottlenecked because of the cpu....not the other way around...
dx12 removes most of the workload of the cpu into the gpu and spreads the remaining workloads that cant be offloaded into all cores
not like some 3rd party api from a certain company that was multicore at the start and then became single core hammering down some other cards..
I'll be swapping out my 660Ti for it, I play at 1080p144 where I can, 120 or 60hz otherwise. Getting a stable 120fps @1080p in Overwatch with settings at Low, cant quite push a stable 144 tho
Only problem is Doom is best case scenario. It runs fucking great on my 380 but there are plenty of games where it struggles.
>>55212888
If a gpu is at 99% load and a cpu is at 20% load what's the bottleneck?
>>55213064
i cant even wait..no nope im out
that logic is beyond me thinking that a gpu can bottleneck a cpu is just well lol the only case on this is if you use any pre geforce 256 card lets say a tnt 2 or a voodoo other than that no cant happen
>>55212636
Oh i totally understand, I dont play anything with a FoV below 70 either, it's just realistically you're getting a warped and squashed view of the game world unless you use triple monitors or an ultrawide.
HE DOES IT FOR FREE
>>55213779
>>>stupid questions thread
>>55213735
feces ?
>>55210626
New 970s go for $280+
290x launched at $550
290 launched at $399
New 390s (8 gig 290 rebrand that matches 970 in performance) go for $270+
The 970 gave us R9 290 performance for $330 at launch. At worst the 480 will give us that level of performance for $200 undercutting the 970's current price as much as it did the 290s launch price. That's not bad for the next card down on a new generation. At best the 480 will beat the 980s performance (980 launched at $550).
>>55210942
>290 beats 290x
Nice graph
>>55209425
every resolution up to 1440p which 99% of gamers use. At 4K resolutions on Ultra the current gen of graphics is still not good enough to support VR.
>>55214294
while 970 is basically the favorite graphics card of last gen gaming its really going to underperform on even the slightest VR. With the RX480 it promises to bring VR more in line with gaming budged gpus typically 2-300 dollars which consists of 80% of the market share. Anything more is less then 12 percent of enthusiast card but Nvidia is really trying to price gouge with the average card costing $500 its amazes me how they think their gpus are that superior to justify the prices.
>>55213064
25% load on a quad core could be one core full load and the others idle
>>55211063
rofl. saved.
>taking game benchmarks on cards not open to the public seriously
>taking AMD shill numbers seriously
Kappa
>>55210917
Not the one you replying to, but I thought tom's hardware was not liked on /g/ because they are known to be extremly chill to whoever pays them atm.
>>55209460
I'm getting 2x 1070 for that because I'm poor.
How poor do you have to be to get the rx480 instead of a gtx1070? I'm a poorfag and I can still afford 2 1070s...
>>55215490
>I just had to eat out of a trashcan for 2 months!
>>55215567
Fun fact. Cooking your own meals at home instead of binging at mcdonalds will save you a lot of money, and you won't be a fat fuck!
>>55211367
here's the difference
>Crysis is over tessellated
ok
>Oxide created game that strongly favors AMD hardware
how? What tricks are pulled that gimp nvidia hardware? what proprietary technology is being used that harms nvidia? what is being done in that game that nvidia can't do well simply by choice?
>>55215629
>TFW cook my shoes for food
>The raccoons gave me cancer
goddamn it
>>55215660
not previous anon, but async compute post-processing inherently favors AMD, since Maxwell can't do it, and even Pascal only has finer-grained global preemption.
It's a minor but good technology to have that Nvidia *should* add at some point, but we probably won't see it in Volta till 2018 or so.
>>55211529
>$7gg
im getting an rx460 2gb because i dont need anything anywhere near that powerful to play terraria in 720p
>>55214294
>New 970s go for $280+
970s have been $250 for over a year now m8
>The 970 gave us R9 290 performance for $330 at launch.
the 970 outperforms the 290, 290x and 390. it trades blows with the 390x (pic related).
>At worst the 480 will give us that level of performance for $200 undercutting the 970's current price as much as it did the 290s launch price. That's not bad for the next card down on a new generation. At best the 480 will beat the 980s performance (980 launched at $550).
we already saw from the 3dmark scores that the stock 480 is slower than the 970, the only hope AMD has is if the 480 has some insane OC headroom.
Just bought a 1080 and the only game inplay is csgo! Fuck me up senpai
>>55209944
>480 yuropoor money for a upper midrange card
wew lad
>>55215795
Just play it with onboard fool
>>55215841
>cherry picking the benchmark
use a relative performance benchmark next time
>>55215841
>we already saw from the 3dmark scores that the stock 480 is slower than the 970
dumbass
>>55215841
>970s have been $250 for over a year now m8
That's a lie and you know it. Most new 970s stayed at their usual price range.
>>55215975
>techpowerup
>relative performance
TPU are AMD shills, no surprise to see them falsifying data like this.
>>55215999
those benchmarks were proven fake idiot, the only valid ones we know of is the dumb reviewer who accidently uploaded his 3dmark result and AMD's official AotS benchmark they showed in their presentation.
>>55210072
1070 is the lowest bracket then.
in DX11:
1080 > 480 > 1070
in OpenGL
1080 > 480/1070
In DX12
480 >>> 1080 >> 1070
1070 is currently the lowend card.
Wait for AMD or get a gtx 980ti for 350 bucks?
>>55209425
I dont accept any rumor or leaked statistics and comparisons
Ill just wait for the release and the official numbers
>>55216043
1070 destroys the 480.
>>55209425
Let's be really honest here OP; you're a stupid fucking faggot.
>>55216148
In a single synthetic benchmark which it's known nvidia cheats on and has been since 2000.
So nothing then?
>>55215490
>Im getting two 1070s because Im poor
>Im paying $800 for 1080ti performance half of the time now instead of waiting for the $800 1080ti
Things like this are why you are poor.
>>55216027
I have actually seen a stock 480 OC to get 3500 on fire strike ultra. That puts it in the r9 Fury (non-x) performance range.
Yes, that's not amazing but it's more than a 970 can do. The stock clock of the 480 puts it just behind the 980 in most games(-1-5%). You'll be able to stop making up numbers when you see the benchmarks yourself :P
For 230$, it's a very interesting card. The 1060 will also be an interesting card in the 200-300$ range, But we won't see that for a few months.
Likewise, anyone waiting for high-end AMD cards, you'll have to wait (if you're lucky) until november
>>55216213
Sorry, but there's just no way the 480 can go up against the 1070. That doesn't make the 480 a bad card though.
The 1070 is cut 300mm+ size die, the 480 is a 200mm+ size die.
You should expect to see the 1070 beat the 480 by 15-20% due to the difference in transistor count alone.
The 480 of couse is 50% cheaper than the 1070. Which puts it in prime position to win AMD marketshare. And believe it or not, AMD getting marketshare will help their higher end cards get higher performance as developers will be more likely to take the time to get to know the architecture a bit better!
The Vega chips will come, they will beat the 1080/1070 for a better price to boot, it's just going to take some time.
>>55217334
>they will beat the 1080/1070 for a better price to boot, it's just going to take some time.
The 1080 for sure since it's at a retarded price, but don't count on Vega being any less than $600. We know it's carrying HBM2 and that is both scarce and expensive. The cards to look out for are any of the Polaris cards and the 1070 for a higher end card since the combination of these deprecate the entire GPU lineup. If Vega can run UHD at 60fps of 144p at 120fps then it's a card well deserved to be looked at.
>>55212354
Huh, mine is locked to only +37mV and 120% power target. What brand is yours?
>>55218363
MSI 4G
I can go up to like +80mv but the power limit tops out at 110%
>>55218397
Maybe I will flash the bios of mine when the warranty is gone.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814150770
Should I go xfx for the warranty, or get a sapphire? Also, visiontek is a decent brand too, but which 480 should I get?
>>55209425
How am i wasting my money if i NEED it? If I NEED it then it fullfils it purpouse. Question is rather, DO you need it?
RX 480 is enough for this generation of VR content, but probably not the next, which will come pretty fast (think just 2-3 years from now)
