Is the GTX 970 still a good card for poorfags?
R9 380 is better. amd rules the poorfag market.
No, get a r9 390 in that pricerange
I have a 970, i want to get a 1440p and 144hz monitor, what should i get?
>>52247992
>>52248027
Wait for Pascal, once pascal is out you can get a cheap clearance 980 Ti or a 1080
>>52248027
get a 1080p 144hz monitor instead. the 970 is not powerful enough for 1440p 144hz
>>52247992
wait for 14nm.
if you need a card now, buy something cheap and used.
that way you wouldn't lose too much money.
>>52248062
All my internet life I have witnessed this "wait" culture and quite honestly its bullshit.
It never pays to wait, you wait you get disappointed.
OP buy what you like when you need it. Thats my advice.
>>52248027
Hope you realize it takes an SLI of top tier cards to run demanding games at 1440p 120/144fps.
>>52248108
Yeah, if the release is in 2-3 months you can wait, else buy the thing fits your budget. Eg: people are saying "wait for zen" are total shitheads, it is still a year away.
>>52248140
What about call of duty?
>>52248108
The default should be buy. Waiting sometimes pays off though- for example if the biggest GPU dieshrink of the decade is coming up this year.
GPUs have been 28nm for a long time. The next 14nm step is going to be a fairly big one.
Probably.
Waiting sucks usually because the future is hard to predict. But for GPUs, yeah you should wait- UNLESS you need a GPU now anyway.
If you already have like a 770 then you wait. If you're on a 4870, then don't wait.
>>52248027
970s are poorly suited for resolutions above 1080p because of >3.5
you are better off staying at 1080p and 144hz if u plan to sli
>>52248108
>Anon, don't buy a 560ti. Just save and wait for the gtx 670.
>decide to wait
>not even mad
Gonna wait till pascal and sell the 670 for a bit of money.
>>52248140
It takes only like crossfire 290s. I get 130fps at 1440p when overclocked in BF4.
>>52248148
waiting for zen is not a bad idea if you don't really need it. I for example will wait for zen to replace my i7 3770
>>52248108
>this
In the past,what has been the price drop on the older cards? $30, $40?
Don't mean to piggyback on the thread, but im in a similar situation. Poorfag, currently with a gtx 660 and looking to upgrade. I'm in absolutely no rush, but do you think it would be wiser to wait and save my shekels, or just pickup an AMD card and be done with it?
>>52248432
if you're not in a rush wait until both Nvidia and Amd are out
>mfw 780 Ti
I'm even more fucked than the poor 970 users, aren't I?
>>52247992
>$350
>For poorfags
>>52248057
>Dat false TDP
Gets me every time. AMD cards don't use that much more power than Nvidia cards. It's a difference of 20W or so. Unless the Nvidia card is heavily overclocked, then it might even end up using more power than an AMD card.
>>52248108
It worked for me 8 years ago with
from nvidia 7300 series to 9800 series
from pentium 4 to still going strong Q6600
Im on 750ti with a Q6600, feels good on high settings in most games 60fps
>>52248363
If even that. The margins for cards are razor thin. I haven't seen a discount good enough to jump on previous gen tech for video cards. Maybe 10%? Whatever.
>>52247992
No. If you're a poorfag you should spend less and be willing to turn down settings just a little. The 970 is in the realm of diminished gains for your dollar.
>>52247992
I kind of regret buying my GTX 970, my room is too cold. Should have gotten the R9 390
also
>3.5GB
I've been waiting since GTS 250.
>>52248108
well the past 4 years every new GPU was only marginally improved, so with waiting for next gen you got max. 10% improvement for the same money, so it was not worth waiting
Pascal and CGN 4.0 supposedly bring a huge performance boost tho (almost double), so this time waiting might be worth it
not everything's black and white
>>52250090
>Pascal and CGN 4.0 supposedly bring a huge performance boost tho (almost double)
Knowing Nvidia, I seriously doubt we'll ever see that big of a boost ever again. Maybe the most expensive flagship will be double the power of the 970, that seems reasonable.
Get a 390
>>52248963
NVIDIA LIED, PSUS DIED.
Still on my good ol' 9600GT.
XFX's "XT" version with 680MHz on the core and 512MB RAM.
I was hoping for a GTX 960Ti, but it never came.
Now I might as well wait for the next gen.
>>52250871
In b4 overclocking it to 1ghz for that sweet, sweet performance.
That aside refresh my memory, thats one of the first cards with unified shaders right?
>>52247992
Do not buy a new card now, it's by far the most retarded thing you could do.
Buy it second hand if you really have to.
Wait 6 months. When the first Pascal cards come everything will drop in price. Then you'll be able to choose freely and waste less money.
>>52251071
Wikipedia says that the 8 series (8xxx models) was the first.
I don't think an OC would do anything at this point.
Modern games are either simple enough to be run by this card, or complicated enough to make my card shit itself.
It runs GTA 4, but I don't even want to try 5.
Not only is it a 60GB install, but I have a feeling it won't be running all that great.
>>52248756
>fucked with a 780 ti
Not even close.
I'm running 2 GTX 680s in SLI. Should I upgrade to R9?
>>52251270
I don't think you understand the issue (see pic).
>>52251292
Given lel kepler I guess (don't know) that a Fury is faster.
>>52251329
Nice, so the 780 ti is basically a 970 in gaming, and a 980 in rendering.
what a comfy card
>>52251534
I'd be more worried about the 280x nipping at its heelings. The 7970 is what, 4 years old?
Then again, the 7970 is the godmachine of the gpu world.
>>52251569
>Then again, the 7970 is the godmachine of the gpu world.
My 7970 died couple months back.
Got a 950 as replacement. Pretty much same FPS in every game at the same resolution.
I shits out a bit while I'm doing some stuff in Unreal Engine with physics though. Can't wait to get a Pascal next year.
>>52247992
I don't think you know what poor is buddy.
If you're "poor" you sure as hell can't spend $300 or more on a card so you can waste time playing video games instead of working.
Wake up, its the real world calling.
>tfw OP is probably older than me and I have to teach them how life works
baka story of my life desu pham
>>52252088
>not figuring out how to making money without moving an inch...
>>52249345
at what? 700p windowed mode in your games?
>>52251569
It frustrates me that Nvidia is gimping such a potentially powerful card. I own one myself, and while it still holds up relatively well, it could be so much better.
Also I paid $500 for this card which makes it even more frustrating that a 980, which iirc is under $500, performs that much better, and the 280X ($~250) almost matches its performance.
>>52247992
I hope your a troll the 970 is the card for anyone who can afford it it will do every game at ultra
>>52253673
While black ops is an extreme example the 780ti has fallen from grace given the 290x (its main competitor at the time) is generally fighting a 980.
>>52250784
Delete this!
>>52254352
I think not Huang.
I got a 780 Ti same price as 970...not one fucking regret!
>>52247992
>still
it was never good.
>>52249398
Right before the r9 3xx came out, I bought a 290 for $200. Sometimes waiting is worth
>>52254662
>it was never good
>>52254584
Please delete these pictures now...
Don't be a freaking dick, dude
>>52254796
I could delete them, or post another one.
>>52254861
Let me add some
>>52254728
I got a gently used Sapphire R9 290 Tri-X for $180
Stay mad
i bought a 980ti thinking it would be great.
tfw i have no idea how to put it to its full potential.
>too lazy to realvision skyrim with enb
>gta5 on enb was mehh
>witcher 3 wasnt as impressive as i thought
also im only using a 22inch LED 60hz monitor with DVI-D input. how mad are you right now
>>52254861
>43c idle
>70c load
Jesus rapist christ...
>>52255204
Eh, not mad. My friend bought two 980Ti's to SLI along with an i7-5820k... Uses it all to power his single LG ultrawide (The 1080 version; not 1440) and doesn't even game or do any kind of intensive stuff.
>>52247992
OP get the 390 or 390x its a beast. Also it will run on par if not better than nvida cards with DX12
>>52255639
Temps under 100°C do not matter
>>52255894
You know what happens when you have your face over something hot?
Having a hot GPU raise the temp in the case and the heat goes upwards the CPU.
$300 is not a poorfag card by any stretch of the imagination.
>>52255943
So?
>€350 card
>for poorfags
>>52255943
Passive heat radiation via convection with air, otherwise called "the tendency for heat to rise", is completely insignificant in comparison to any active cooling solution.
Learn a little thermodynamics before you talk, you're at the peak of mount stupid right now.
Case fans are extremely slow, and yet just a few of them can cycle the entire air inside of an ATX case in a matter of minutes.
>>52255824
>FUCK
this made me mad. i saved up my money for japan and christmas just to buy it.
cadfag here so i paid around $1000.
>>52256065
Aren't you a retarded one?
Where the hell do you think the CPU fan gets it's air from? The fucking air inside the case, that has been heated up.
>in a matter of minutes.
Minutes of hot air that is constantly being made from the frying pan in the PCI-E slot.
>>52256120
Do you seriously think that the air has been saturated to the point that it can't accept more heat?
Do you even know what component of air absorbs that heat the most?
You couldn't get air "hot" like you described unless you lived in a fucking desert, that's how effective the moisture in the air is at absorbing heat.
>>52256077
This is why I go with budget builds. Currently rocking an old Sapphire HD6950 with a G3258 @ 3.8GHz.
>>52256150
>Do you seriously think that the air has been saturated to the point that it can't accept more heat?
Do you seriously think every case have 3+ fans in the front and 3+ fans the back that keeps a direct flow in the case?
Every degree matters.
3c extra while idle does not mean 3c extra at load.
The overall system temps lowers when putting a better GPU cooler on making it possible to overclock the CPU further without hitting crazy high temps like 75-80c.
>>52256321
>overall system temperatures
>high temperatures
Do you seriously think that these actually matter?
Low system temperatures are nothing more than e-penis points for those who want to show off their "sick temps" to other morons with poor financial sense.
The only people who should care about low system temperatures are the ones that operate their computers 24/7. Those people use four Delta fans screaming fast enough to cut carrots and shrouds to direct air directly to the cooler, and that's only because they have much less air to work with, being blocked by all kinds of components.
As long as the ambient temperature of the case remains well within the operating temperature of every component of the case, absolutely nothing wrong is going on.
>>52256474
>Doesn't know anything about overclocking.
>Delta fans screaming
Okay, now I know you're either retarded or trolling.
Get a proper radiator and you don't need more than 500-600RPM fans.
>>52256520
>overclocking
Again something done only by people who want their e-penis points. Anyone who actually gives a damn about performance buys a Xeon that fits their needs and a bunch of blower-type GPUs in SLI because of the high static pressure that blower cards have.
Not only that, the bottleneck in overclocking is not the ambient air, but the cooler itself.
How quickly the cooler can dump air from the processor to the air is the only thing that matters in overclocking.
>>52256584
Clearly doesn't know shit about computers.
Tell me then, how do a 3.4GHz Xeon perform in a game that uses 1-4 cores against a 5GHz quad with the same architecture?
>>52256628
>in a game
Yeah who gives a shit, it's single threaded.
You're telling me that you "care about performance" for a video game to the extent that you would buy a specialized Xeon for it?
You're a joke.
Video games aren't CPU bounded except by the decompression speed of assets, the transfer rate from regular memory to VRAM over the bus, and the computation of postprocessing effects.
>>52256688
Furthermore, anyone who knows anything about CPU architecture realizes that it's the algorithms that are the most important thing.
You can't expect a fast CPU to hold over your garbage algorithms anymore.
>>52256584
are you fucking with me m8?
I overclock my hardware once it starts to get dated so it can still keep up with newer hardware. ram overclocking is pretty stupid though, still did it anyway
>>52256719
You don't care about stability though.
Overclocking is not done by people with new hardware if they care about stability.
People who do expect to buy the new processor every year or so.
>>52256688
>>52256713
Clearly retarded, almost to a level that it should be made illegal.
>CPU overclocking is only for e-peen, not for the performance gains
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FosFhtOZqBg
>>52256740
My i7 2700K is still running at a moderate 4.8GHz fully stable.
>>52256899
>this game that uses assloads of postprocessing effects receives a benefit of 10% because I overclocked it.
Whereas you could just get the proper CPU if you *actually cared about performance* and run it at 60fps at all times.
>>52257006
>Whereas you could just get the proper CPU
And overclock that for further performance since not everyone uses a 60Hz monitor.
390 is cheaper than a 970 on newegg right now
>>52256800
is that a tv commercial
>>52256899
then please espouse your magical beliefs as to why you believe that people who run render farms and other 24/7 operations don't use overclocked CPUs.
Because they don't. They use Xeons. Because they care about performance. Because they run multithreaded applications.
And yet they think that having this Xeon is a much better tradeoff than having a consumer CPU that overclocks.
This is because they care about performance. They have superior algorithms that operate on every single core on their 8-core or 16-core Xeon, with possibly over 95% parallelization. Because they care about performance.
People who play video games believe they care about performance, but they really don't.
Do you know how I know this? Because their algorithms don't run on every core, and if they did, people would be using Xeons, and "more cores" would be more than a meme.
>>52256800
>people are still posting the webm I made
Feels good man
>>52257095
In reality, video games are a race to be "good enough." If the algorithm runs "good enough" on a current generation CPU, then that's OK. They don't seek to create the best, because performing the best is not the goal of a video game.
>>52257095
Why are you making yourself look so retarded?
For games it's performance per core that matters.
A Xeon is a piece of shit when it comes to performance per $.
Why buy a $1200 Xeon clocked at 3.4GHz when you can get an i5 or i7 for $25-$350 clocked at 3.4GHz when the games doesn't even make use of 8 cores?
The i5 and i7 are also easier to overclock due to having less cores to keep stable.
>>52257114
what is 35
also what happened to 1.9 percent
i feel like you had a great opportunity
to make something and u missed it
what happened
>>52257220
>when the games doesn't even make use of 8 cores?
That's what he's saying. They should, but they don't.
>>52257247
It's a GTX 970 -- 3.5, not 35
>>52257252
Then back to the main topic.
Overclocking is for getting performance, not e-peen.
GTX970 is still a good card.
/Fact.
/Topic.
/Thread.
>>52257220
Because you don't care about performance.
If you cared about performance, you would buy that $1200 Xeon, because it gives you the edge over your competitors. That $1200 Xeon is nothing compared to the contracts you receive that operate on that Xeon. That Xeon might operate 8 or 16 cores, or have incredibly low power usage.
Data centers care about these sorts of things in the long run. Render farms care about these sorts of things in the long run.
You don't. So you pick the monkey model CPU that works "good enough" for your task while seriously believing that you chose the best option for performance.
>>52257303
You're seriously terrible at making arguments.
"Performance" is dictated more than by the speed of the processor, and you would know this if you weren't trying to be an armchair programmer and mechanical engineer all in one.
Overclocking is good for getting performance if your idea of "performance" is running some monkey model algorithm at a speed that you believe is faster than the norm, all without even using the processor to its fullest extent.
>>52257345
>speed of the processor
Yeah, it's called Hz, kHz, MHz, GHz etc.
Which is faster:
5GHz or 3.4GHz
>all without even using the processor to its fullest extent.
Wow... Is this retard for real?
This retard thinks overclocking prevents the CPU to running to it's fullest extent.
I'm gonna try your anal-ogy on my car later.
I'm gonna tune it to 400HP instead of 300HP as it is stock, then it will be much slower and it will lose functions so I can't use the car to it's fullest extent.
Do I lose the cup holder function or is it just the stereo that stopped working?
What if I de-tune it to 200HP instead?
Do I get functions the car wasn't fitted with?
Damn, I'm gonna downclock my CPU right away since it makes it easy to use it to it's full extent that way since overclocking obviously didn't raise the performance of the CPU.
>>52257114
Niggah thanks to you I'm playing besiege now. Also because of this.
>>52252818
1080p fullscreen
>>52248108
This so much. Went apeshit and bought a 980ti for my Dell ultrawide 3440x1440 p. No ragretz. First time in my 15 years of building I didn't fall for the wait meme
Guys I run 2x gtx 690 that I got for free
What am I doing wrong?
>>52258686
>hi
>>52247992
>poor
>gtx 970
Uhh a GTX 960 is a good midrange card. GTX 750 Ti maybe for poorfags. GTX 570 on eBay for around $50 too.
>>52247992
no and it never was
I would get a 390 if I had a 600-650W+ psu. I could have gotten a 390 and psu for around $320-345 at the right time. Instead I already had a 520W so I got a 970 (with game and backplate) for $280.
>>52258686
proove it
>>52247992
It'll never be the 9800 Pro.
>>52254861
>fan profile
35% fan max keeps the GTX 970 at 65°C
>poorfag
>giving 340$ to nvidia
i got a 380x for 170$ and it benches only 15% below the 970
stay poor
>>52248057
I would get 970 based on the energy you are saving. Each hour you run your nvidia card you save 12.70.
>>52260673
I meant $3.29. Fucking calculator...
>>52260700
That depends on your kWh rates
>>52260598
Also uses more energy making the total costs of ownership completely garbage.
>>52258502
Not him but I've got the same card. You'll get 60fps with some games, as in, the ones that are on current consoles at the same fps. Let's not fool ourselves though, you aren't getting 60fps on high at 1080 with something like fallout 4 or the witcher 3
>>52260792
>buy nvidia
>beacuse i can barely pay the power bill
P O O R F A G S
O
O
R
F
A
G
S
>>52260777
You are pissing money away not buying nvidia. If it is 45% on the amd energy use, then buying the nvidia would then have a lower TCO making it use less money to run, at least until it dies.
>>52260822
fallout 4 and witcher 3 of course not cause those are unoptimized games anyway
>>52260872
You know exactly what I mean
>>52260777
Not to also say that it would require cooling systems due to the extra energy consumption.
You can calculate what your computers needs to keep other chips cooled from what the amd card produces in heat.
>>52260841
>be 3rd world
>highest rate in region
>hot country
being nvidiafag in justifiable
>>52260841
Mate, I am not a retard. I think logically. Heat production implies more energy use.
>More energy use means higher power bill
>Higher power bill means less sustainable product
Breaking the above two implies
>You're retarded since you have no research for better and cost effective products.
As for the power bill statement. I am not a retard who enjoys rising my energy bill just because I am not willing to invest an extra $7 into my graphics card...
>>52260872
I've got a 750 ti but Witcher 3 doesn't seem so bad, it maintains a pretty solid 30 fps at some higher settings which is pretty good for a card that cost me $100. Fallout 4 on the other hand is horribly optimised and jumps around all the time even though it fps counter displays 60
>>52260841
Tell me that in 10 years of running your shit.
You will find the TCO is fucked on your end but much lower on my end.
1)Power bill poor?
2)Smarter product choice?
>here's a hint. It is number 2)
>>52260954
you are rationalizing shitty nvidia products, you are poor get over it.
>>52247992
All of you're are retarded gamer dickheads.
Get a real job.
>Fast food employee is not one of them.
>>52260996
I dont run my shit for 10 years because im not poor and can afford upgrade every 2-3 years
>>52261048
Hey if amd was lower in running costs I would then be on amd's side.
Stop calling me a poorfag. I am bringing valid points on why the nvidia option is cheaper to run. Not to also say if you were to overclock the nvidia card, you would then still have a faster card and a lower energy consumption.
>I guess logic here means poorfag.
One day I shill amd. When they don't eat energy pussy like a black cunt.
>>52261067
Then why not buy a card that is worth $100 over the shitty amd/nvidia card.
>Just brought a 980
>2 years had past
>Fuck this slow piece of shit
>Pisses money into amd
>Sad 4 life
It's not that you can afford it, it's more about if you are money smart or simply retarded.
>>52261115
live in a first world country
problem solved
>>52261198
I do.
I also advise large companies to switch from independent servers to virtualised systems.
What this implies is that AMD is never chosen since it does in fact use more energy.
I don't plain to buy a system which require replacement every 2 years. That is a terrible way to even spend money.
Just buy top of the line shit and stop buying poor shit that is "budget".
what resolution and games do you play
960 is enough for 1080/60
>>52261323
I dont use one.
My I7 and in board graphics allow me to play csgo on 60fps.
>>52248008
This, the 4GB version is pretty nice
>>52261253
if your complaining about power consumption you don't panjeet
So, 960 is best poorfag NVIDIA card?
>>52247992
If you have a pretty strong PSU (600w+), go for the R9 390. It's a better card for the money. If you have a weaker PSU, the 970 is a safer bet
>>52261768
easily, especially if you want something quiet with extremely low power draw
>>52261768
If your definition of poorfag involves paying $200 for a computer accessory then yes.
>>52261835
EVGA Superclocked 2GB is $185.
>>52248057
>4096mb
>>52261912
Okay?
~$200
You happy?
>>52248008
>>52261573
I can't take AMD seriously after trying DMC3 on a mates i7+AMD PC and watching the framerate drop to sub 20 fps when a certain particle effect appears.
Doesn't happen on my Nvidia 285 gtx.
>>52262163
Well, then you can stay with Nvidia, we don't really care.
>>52257304
>Xeons give you the edge over your competitor in games
>I have no clue what I'm talking about
Seriously though, we are talking about fucking games not extremely multi threaded workloads. You will always get better performance with an i7 over a Xeon of the same architecture and lower clock speed.
>but Muh 6 gorrilian cores
Games use fucking 8 cores at the most, even then that's in like 2 of them. Stop being a fucking autist.
>>52262481
Pretty rude t︂b︂︂h f︂︂a︂m, s︂︂m︂h
>>52262598
Is the filter kill?
Smh desu senpai
>>52262598
I'm sorry, I love you
Can I suck your dick?
>>52262722
You can do whatever you want to me bae
>>52248871
> 350$ for a GTX 970
> Can get an R9 390 for under 300$
Since this is a GPU thread, is there ANY reason to buy a Fury X vs a 980ti? Besides HBM and small form factor that is.
>>52263361
The 980 ti will be nerfed after pascal and the 980ti fags don't wan to admit it.
How long will my gtx 760 last me? Or should I start looking at a mobo upgrade to one with sli support?
>>52261835
The definition of a poorfag is a guy who's not willing to pay for performance.
The 960 is the ultimate cop-out card for poorfags who are pretending they're not poorfags.
>>52263953
>980ti fags
The 980ti will be faster/comparable to:
- Pascal-1060 (4gb edition)
- Pascal-1070 (6gb edition).
No need to fall for the nvidia hype, you peasant.
>>52264097
actually poorfags are shit with money, thats why they are poor
960 has the best cost to performance value at 1080 by far
>>52248057
>using raw spec comparison instead of benchmark
just look up benchmarks for the games you play most for cards in said price range then pick what works for you
remember that most benchmarks are done on top of the line rigs so they are best case scenario
>>52263361
>>52263361
1080p plebtier hd you go for 980ti
4k ultrahd you go fury x because you acutaly need a good card not one who pretends to be good
>>52248167
Wow, why haven't they kept pace with CPUs? That's a huge leap...
>>52264171
>960 has the best cost to performance value at 1080 by far
It literally and figuratively isn't the best bang for 1080p. That's the 970 which can go 1080p at Ultra.
960 poorfags can go 1080p but can't max out at that resolution. It's basically buying a crippled card for only $100 less.
>>52263953
why nerfed?
>>52264239
please tell me what games can't ultra at 1080 with a 960
witcher 3 is the only thing that comes to mind
Shopping for a mid tier card to play some mid tier games on.
Then I saw this on Tom's. Is the Iris Pro really comparable to an R7 2/360? If that's true then I don't really need a graphics card, just a latest processor.
>>52264213
Well because intel got 14nm first and the rest of the fabbing industry is just playing catchup.
>>52264204
Doesn't the 980ti still outperform at 1440p? Neither card seems powerful enough for 4k if you want games like witcher 3.
>>52264171
I have a 960. It's... ok. It does the job at 1080 for sure, but some games it chugs pretty bad. I kinda wish I bought a 380. My main game is World of Wacraft, so obviously it's not a problem for that, but If I play more demanding games, it only gets about 55 fps, and some BAD frame drops. It's pretty stable in Fallout 4 though, surprisingly.
Inb4 shill. I just called the fury x shit and the 380 good in the same post.
>>52264306
so what games
>>52264275
But there were a lot of die shrinks between those two sizes... I mean, 22nm came out in like 2012 right? Something along those lines.
>>52264322
Not gonna lie, the only demanding games I've thrown at it are Witcher 3 Shadows of Mordor, and GtaV. The frame drops I mentioned are worst in Shadows of Mordor, but show up in gtaV. Witcher frame drops don't happen so much as just a low framerate without lower settings.
But the games I play most often, world of warcraft, fallout, ect do run well on it.
>>52264515
>but show up in gtaV
confirmed bullshit
>>52264158
keep telling yourself that
>>52248164
BLOPs 3?
4790k/2x Crossfired 390x's utilizing 5GB+ of vram getting anywhere from 85-160fps. No motion blur, ambient occlusion, or anti aliasing.
BLOPs II, 100% maxed everything 144minimum using one of the 390x's.
Paired with a XG270HU 1440p/144hz freesync
>>52264409
They were planning on doing a 22nm dieshrink, but it fell through since the manufacturers couldn't actually get the process to work. That's why the AMD 200/300 series sucks, they're still on designs that were 28nm designs since their new designs were for a dieshrink and the dieshrink fell through. So instead they just pushed 28nm as far as it would go
>>52264990
If Nvidia hadn't ripped the compute related gubbins out of maxwell (compared to kepler) the titan x would be borderline impossible to cool. Well, it already is given the speed and desnity of its vram chips.
>>52264265
GTA V, fallout 4, the list goes one but i don't care to look through benchmarks. also 380 beats the 960 in most games.
>>52263361
If you go with Sapphire, you can turn a standard Fury into an air-cooled Fury X most of the time, so unless space is an issue where you HAVE to have a CLC and a tiny card, the difference between the two is close enough post-unlock, minus the Fury being $100 cheaper
>>52265100
it runs both of those just fine
380 and 960 are neck and neck with the nod going to the 960 most of the time, there's only a few exception, shadows of mordor being one
![Crysis_03[1].png](https://i.imgur.com/Hay9bte.png "Crysis_03[1].png")
>>52265143
>the nod going to the 960 most of the tim
.
![ACS_01[1].png](https://i.imgur.com/3JrlvNq.png "ACS_01[1].png")
>>52265229
![GTAV_01[1].png](https://i.imgur.com/UtSBkjD.png "GTAV_01[1].png")
>>52265244
look at all these nods to the 960
shit wait.
![1438546916Of29CB4aP6_9_1_l[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/Ek1jF0p.jpg "1438546916Of29CB4aP6_9_1_l[1].jpg")
>>52265259
i love how 2 out of the 3 confirm exactly what i said and all of them confirm that 4 gigs is wasted on midrange cards except for a few outliers
not even cheap for poorfgts
>>52265289
>witcher 3
>literally optimized for nvidia cards
Yeah, we don't care
>>52265417
>3 frames away from the competitors equally priced card
>"optimized"
good joke. 960 owners can't even use their own companies proprietary features without shitting the bed, absolutely embarrassing..
>>52248057
Mfw: my 380 4gB can SSOC to 1068Mhz
970 can only reach 1050Mhz Max on GPU
LOL
there is a reason 970 fags can't post a super clocked R9 380 4GB benchmark
I think 390 can go much higher than my card.
so i'm calling B/S on this Pic
Is HIS a good brand?
Just wondering.
>>52265659
>tfw your 290x is at 1200mhz stable
>>52265707
my previous card was HIS, i didn't care for it, their cooler was total shit so unless thats changed or its a naturally cool card i would look elsewhere
i dunno about their warranty
>>52265726
I heard people praising their IceQ cooler, but I never used a HIS before.
In my country HIS vs Sapphire R9 390 price difference almost reach $100
>>52265764
sapphire is legit for amd but if its that expensive the HIS is the way better purchase, i'm sure its better now, mine was on a 4870 so that was years ago
>>52265793
>Sapphire
So Tri-x or Nitro version?
What's the difference anway?
>>52255198
Why should I be mad? Mine was new and it was a pretty good deal already. Congrats on your buy, anon.
>>52248108
You're a dumbass. Pascal is around the corner.
>>52248027
Dude, even 980ti/Fury X can have trouble with 1440~144hz, you won't even come close with a shitty 970.
>>52257443
I don't think you understand the problem at hand. Merely replacing your car engine won't improve your brakes, exhaust and other stuff. Likewise, merely upping the clock settings won't improve stuff other than CPU freq.
>>52267145
I'd say clock speed is like the displacement of a car engine; sure bigger generally means more power potential but it's not always the case with many other factors contributing to power output
>>52257443
go put a 6th/7th gear on your car, it'll make it more powerful :^)
Yeah. Just beware that it ony has 3.5 gigs of usable VRAM because Nvidia is a shitty evil corporation. But yeah either go for that or a 980TI. Avoid the 980 because its price:performance is terrible.
I won't be surprised when EVGA's Step Up Senpai program will include the 970 in exchange for something with 4 or 6gb.
>tfw HD 7970
when should I upgrade?
>>52265659
>1050 max
Weird, my base 1300 OC on a 970SSC disagrees.
How much are you pulling from wall socket on 970 while stressing with unigine valley on ultra, AA 8x , 1080p ?
>>52267397
16nm cards expected in mid-2016.
>>52267975
just did Nitro R9 390, system has, i5 4690K, 2 SSDs, 2 HDDs, unigine valley, 1920x1200, Ultra, 8xAA = 370 W (from wall socket)
>>52268094
additional watages:
system idle, screen on = 140 W
system idle, screen off = 80 W
>>52247992
>3.5GB
It wasn't good in the first place...
>>52265259
The MSAA is fucked in GTA V so that isn't exactly the best of benchmarks to go off for the 960. I don't even own an Nvidia GPU but I just figured I'd point that out cause im an asshole.
