>AMD releases budget-oriented GPU that is excellent at 1080p
>/g/ shits all over it
>NVIDIA releases a similar performing card for $100 more
>/g/ praises the fuck out of it
holy shit guys, how much does nvidia pay you to shill on a korean orbital basket weaving forum?
>>55337075
/g/ is not a monolith. If you cannot sift the wheat from the chaff, that is your problem.
>>55337117
>tripfag literally tells me to filter him
there's a overwhelming amount of shitting on AMD
>>55337147
Hatred from the opposition proves that you are doing something right.
>>55337117
>>55337147
>>55336430
>>55336805
>>55332779
>>55330037
>>55333435
>>55336726
>>55337148
this is what I'm talking about
this never happens when nvidia releases anything
>>55337075
I'm also confused. And I've come to the conclusion that /g/ either wants AMD to fail (or at least feel like they did) or really believed we would receive 1070 performance for 200 Dollars.
There is also the possibility that most people here are 16 year old stupid/trolling kids
>>55337175
It was much worse in the 2 days leading to launch, as shown in pic related. But you are mistaken when you say "this never happens when nvidia releases anything". You should have been here when nVidia released the 470/480!
That said, /g/ does need more moderation. Too much shilling, way too much.
>>55337226
>Stop talking about technology on the technology board
>>55337226
>You should have been here when nVidia released the 470/480!
I was only a lad back then
>That said, /g/ does need more moderation. Too much shilling, way too much.
I'd gladly do some janitoring if I ever bothered to put in a application
we could use a mod giving people a very public banhammering though
>>55337250
>we could use a mod giving people a very public banhammering though
I support having post ID, at the very least during major product launches. That will curb a lot of the
>I waited for AMD, and I regret it
>Me too!
>Me too!
>Me too!
>Me too!
>>55337075
I don't spend my time making shit threads on /g/, but I have a FreeSync monitor and expected better performing cards from AMD. Their decision to only release a card that is as fast as their own shit from 2013 is extremely disappointing to say the least.
>>55337321
aside from the fury, they haven't really improved drastically from 2013
>>55337321
"only"
it's like saying nVidia "only" released the 1070 and 1080 so there won't ever be a 1060
A reliable monkey told me the new amd was a flop
Sapphire's model looking fucking slick as always.
>>55337209
>>55337075
when confronted with the fact that if AMD fails, completely leaving the field to Nvidia which means monopoly and an stupid prices they STILL want AMD to fail.
this and the way a lot of these behave tells you a lot who actually posts this shit
>>55337331
Fury was also pretty disappointing because of the crap OC potential and only 4GB VRAM for me.
>>55337385
According to AMD's latest released roadmap we're not getting anything until Vega, which is scheduled for early 2017. By the time custom models are available that's more than half a year from now. I'm looking to upgrade now and I'm not going to wait until Q1 2017. So yeah, AMD "only" released a card with 2013's performance.
>>55337385
amd's new cards have performance/watt similar to maxwell. Graphics cards crap out around 300 watts. Therefore, they are going to be limited to around 980ti performance with this architecture.
So it is likely that they just won't match the gtx 1070 for a while.
>>55337331
AMD have made more progress than Nvidia in the mid-range sector. The GTX 960 was an absolute joke that barely outperformed the GTX 760 from 2013, and the GTX 1060 is going to offer no better performance than the RX 480 whilst also costing more and having less memory.
We might just as well say the mid-range sector is fucking dead if the RX 480 is such a disaster, because there's no better alternative.
>>55337445
>with this architecture
Vega is a different architecture, the Polaris we got is the biggest Polaris we're ever going to get. Still, the efficiency does look quite bad.
>>55337453
>and the GTX 1060 is going to offer no better performance than the RX 480 whilst also costing more and having less memory.
Afaik the 1060 will be a 50% cut of GP104 so it will perform like a 980. Will probably cost $300 though.
>>55337172
kek true. If AMD really was dogshit as everyone says then nobody would be talking about it.
>>55337075
>pajeet trying to damage control
>>55337075
goys.
where's poolaris 11?
i need to replace my dead 7570.
>>55337209
>or really believed we would receive 1070
we were promissed
>low termals
>low power draw
>preformance between gtx970 and 980 with rx480 almost matching 980 in dx12
>price of 200$
we got none of that
>low termals
90c
>low power draw
200W
>preformance between gtx970 and 980 with rx480 almost matching 980 in dx12
in fact in crushing majority of test it come short not of 980 but of 970
>price of 200$
its 229$ and not even that real price in shoops is higher
200$ 4gb model has slower ram with further takes out 5-10% from its already shitty preformance
they promised us a savior and all we got is a turd as smelly as the other turd we already had
>>55337486
This meme doesn't really work when facts are against you. Just makes you look like a crying butthurt nvidia shill.
It's pretty sad that this ~$200 card is able to compete with a ~$500 card from nvidia.
>90c on stock blower cooler
>200w is typical of most gpu's
it's not up to the hype, but it's not complete disaster
>>55337513
Thank you pajeet, 10 cents have beeb deposited into your nvidia positivity account.
>>55337411
I thought they said the cheese grater design was fake? This is exactly the same as the leak, just black. Whatever, I still like it.
>>55337548
hitman is heavily biased towards AMD cards
I don't get it, why does everyone think the max spikes on the power draw are bad? Doesn't every card do this?
~160 watts average power draw while being under 100% load seems pretty good power efficiency for a 5+ TFLOPS card.
I own a GTX 970 btw but I respect AMD for having done a good job with this card. Sure the stock blower fan sucks but all reference cards suck ass to be honest, even nvidia ones.
>>55337472
>Afaik the 1060 will be a 50% cut of GP104 so it will perform like a 980
No, that's bullshit. A 970 offers 55% of the performance of a 1080, so the 1060 will actually likely be worse than a 970, just like the 960 was worse than a 770. Remember that it also has a gimped memory bus and much slower memory than a 1080 too, meaning it could even be less than half the performance. Either way, it won't be troubling the 980.
>>55337445
But the 1070 barely performs than the 980ti. Significantly worse once overclocking comes into play. So if they're on 980ti levels of performance, they're already matching the 1070 if not beating it.
>>55337645
except the 1060 will have 192 bit bus, not 128. It wont he HALF performance, more like 60ish
>>55337585
C'mon pajeet, you gotta be more subtle than that. Are you gonna say Rainbow Six Siege is biased toward AMD cards as well?
>>55337075
Dude, /cgc/ exists for a reason. No need to make a shitty bait thread just for responses, it's not going to improve your life in the slightest.
>>55337966
