>Nvidia is the best choice for unmatched performance and quality
>AMD is the choice for budget PCs with decent amount of performance at a compromise
Are these statements correct?
>>338304056
3 Years ago, yes.
>>338304159
> Polaris
> implying
>>338304056
Nvidia is for shabbos goy.
AMD is for everyone else.
>>338304056
False. They're both shit.
Not really. I got a 960 for $150.
>>338305209
How does doom run on intel hd?
>>338304056
https://youtu.be/BdwUsalwBJ8
>>338304056
>Are these statements correct?
Not at all.
AMD every generation are neck and neck in performance with Nvidia, but for a cheaper price.
You'll still hear these dumb cunts meme about no drivers yet drivers haven't been an issue for a decade now.
Then you'll hear them moan about MUH POWER EFFICIENCY, but when you look at the average watt usages between even something like a 290x (which was considered a really power hungry card) and a 970 (Which tech sites sucked Nvidia's dick for the "amazing power efficiency")
you ended up with not more than a 40-50 watt difference at most. Literally like 4$ of electricity a year, yet the 290x was over $80-$100 cheaper.
And now if you look at the DX12 benchmarks you'll see that AMD actually took the time to future proof their cards, while Nvidia skimped as much as they could for a good running present time card, yet shit in the future so people would be forced to upgrade.
Nvidia also happen to be jews, and as they're jews, they use jew tactics.
Including heavily shilling on places like this, to perpetuate this board wide opinion of Nvidia being people's favorites. Stuff like this is very effective in swaying actual people's opinions just so they can feel like they fit in, or believe that because all these "people" say it's good that it must be good, without doing their own critical research.
Nvidia spends most of their time trying to find ways to screw the consumer so they're not the best choice for shit.
only plebs who always make these bitch threads are AMDfags trying to rationalize their poorfag purchase
nvidia is top of the line, no question
AMD is trash
>>338305651
Hi, first of all there is nothing about the new Nvidia GTX 970 that Nvidia has misled customers on.
Second of all I find it very offensive to the thousands of hard working engineers that have put so much love into this exceptional hardware.
It's obvious that the GPU performs very well in all api OpenGL and DX12.
AMD is not good they are always slower it is not the fault of Nvidia.
So i've flagged this topic to be deleted by a moderator.
Thank you my friend.
Have a nice day.
Nvidia is for people who have at least some grasp on how to build a computer
AMD is for people who pretend they do
Nvidia gets better frametime and better FPS but they gimp their previous generation cards, so Nvidia is best bought frequently, like every year if you can afford it.
I've never built or used a pc for gaming before but a dude is offering to build it for me and sell me a 970 for "well below market price"
should I go for it? I've got some money saved up but I know jackshit about anything pc related
No
>>338304056
Just got a GTX 950M and I'm playing the best new games at top HD speeds. NVidia all the way. Cheers!
>>338306001
You have to be LITERALLY retarded to buy a 970 in this moment and I say this as a Nvidia user, tell that guy to fuck himself
i've been using Nvidia GPUs since i was a teenager playing Counter-Strike and back then, you went AMD processor. that was the choice for gamers for a long time.
>>338306203
oh fuck off
>>338306203
actually.. it depends how low of a price are we talking about? about 100$? Then that's a bargain. If it's more than 150$ then yeah, it's a shitty offer.
>>338306203
Why? I told you I don't know anything about this shit but the 970 looks like a good gpu and I'm getting a lucky deal
Explain yourself
>>338306203
>you have to be LITERALLY retarded to buy a 970 in THE CURRENT YEAR
Literally can play every game on 1080p, which is the only non meme resolution, perfectly.
>>338306376
looking it up it's ~$300 new
how is around half price a shitty offer?
http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2016/04/amd-polaris-will-be-a-mainstream-gpu/
When asked why is AMD trying to offer ‘such a power’ in mainstream segment, Roy Taylor replied:
“If you look at the total install base of a Radeon 290, or a GTX 970 or above [the minimum specs required for VR], it’s around 7.5 million units, but the issue is that if a publisher wants to sell a £40/$50 VR game, there’s not a big enough market to justify that yet. We’ve got to prime the pumps, which means somebody has got to start writing cheques to big games publishers. Or we’ve got to increase the install TAM [total addressable market].”
Taylor also added:
“The reason Polaris is a big deal, is because I believe we will be able to grow that TAM significantly. I don’t think Nvidia is going to do anything to increase the TAM, because according to everything we’ve seen around Pascal, it’s a high-end part. I don’t know what the price is gonna be, but let’s say it’s as low as £500/$600 and as high as £800/$1000. That price range is not going to expand the TAM for VR. We’re going on the record right now to say Polaris will expand the TAM. Full stop.”
>>338306473
Because he only plays at 4k, 144hz, 20 cm away from his monitor and a 970 isn't enough for that, if he would play on 1080 he would be able to count the pixels from that distance.
>>338305861
> first of all there is nothing about the new Nvidia GTX 970 that Nvidia has misled customers on.
3.5 says hi
>>338306650
because it's a gimped card. Games are already using more than 3GB of VRAM even on 1080p due to high resolution textures. This is the reason why he also wants to get rid of it.
>>338305861
Nice b8 m8
POLARIS ANNOUNCEMENT CONFIRMED FOR JUNE 1
HERE WE FUCKING GOOOO
http://ir.amd.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=74093&p=irol-newsArticle&ID=2170028
>>338306473
>>338306581
>>338306835
three and half
>>338305447
Hey at least intel have working drivers
>>338307228
but looking it up it says it has 4 gigs of memory
>>338307602
what the fuck does that even mean
>>338307742
>He doesn't know
>>338304056
What is the general consensus on AMD processors?
>Nvidia is the best choice for highest end GPUs
>AMD is the best choice for anything else
Fixed.
>>338307896
Absolutely terrible. Terrible for games, terrible for emulation, terrible for everything.
>>338307896
You don't have to pay to overclock them.
>>338307896
not worth it
amd gpus are p good but their processors are shit at least right now
>>338307878
I already fucking told you I don't know jack shit about this pc garbage
All this confusing fucking hardware nonsense and people with shit attitudes like you who don't tell me anything are what turn people off from this autistic nonsense to buy a fucking console instead
>>338307896
Cheap but outdated.
The others say they are slow but its not like intel has made any significance improvements to theirs in years
>>338308193
>I already fucking told you I don't know jack shit about this pc garbage
Then why are you in this thread?
>>338308193
If I were to lick my screen where your post is it would taste like salt.
>>338308219
Let's say you want to build a budget machine to play small games and stuff running on UT3 max.
Would AMD do the job?
>>338308347
same here senpai but that's just because i have a cumstain there
>>338308219
>The others say they are slow but its not like intel has made any significance improvements to theirs in years
You're right, but that's precisely because they have literally no reason to try harder.
I got a 290x and a 980ti. AMD had really stepped up their game on drivers. Doom was the first game in as long as I can remeber that didn't just work on launch. AMD had a new driver before the end of the day to fix it.
Had nVidia shit it's self on on 2 occasions where the new driver was broken when it launched and I had to roll back.
The 290x had horrible coil whine but I did get it second hand from a miner so it's kinda hard to judge it.
I think they are fairly even
>>338308465
Anon that's gross what the fuck.
>>338307742
I'll assume you're not trolling and you really don't know, so i'll be a good guy and explain it to you nice and simple:
the gtx 970 technically has 4 gigs of vram, but only 3.5GB works as intended. The last 512 mb unit is significantly slower. So if a game tries to use more than 3.5GB vram the slower vram joins in the party and ruins it for everyone which means your fps will drop faster than nintendo stocks after last year's e3.
>>338305861
hello pajeet, how's the shitting street
I don't anymore man. I'm just waiting for budget cards from either company so I can upgrade from my 660 ti
>>338307896
Keep in mind they are still using 5 year old architecture. Until Zen they are not worth it
>>338308261
maybe because I'm interested in building or buying a pc and learning a fucking thing or two
fuck all this shit I'm buying a ps4 if none of you niggers are going to help with anything
>>338308465
Posts like these are why I still come to this shithole.
>>338308193
It's got 4gb of memory but 0.5gb of that memory is way slower than the other 3.5gb so when it has to dip into that last 0.5gb there might be performance issues
>>338308812
>I'm gonna gimp my experience because people were being pricks to me in a thread on an anonymous imageboard
You literally don't deserve to be on PC.
Building my first pc. Does this look good?
http://pcpartpicker.com/p/NdXjjX
gonna get the 1080 when it releases.
>>338307896
Current ones are worse compared to Intel even though I bought one (bought into the myth that Nex gen consoles would mean future games would be more optimized for PC) even if they're cheap.
Future ones (Zen and beyond) might make AMD great again depending on a ton of factors.
>>338308812
anon, /v/ isn't the place you go to learn about computers.
that's the best advice i can give.
either that or go into a burgerland nighttime thread that doesn't start about nvidia and amd
>>338309130
>OS
>Blu Ray drive
>Wireless adapter
>Acer monitor
>Shitty M+KB
Anon why are you doing this?
>>338305749
Good goy
>>338309130
Aside from the shitty everything you've picked, you can add custom parts and just price what Nvidia says they're going to release at.
http://pcpartpicker.com/p/nWVZBm
Like this.
>>338308641
Then what's the alternative?
Nobody want 3.5
So you either go up to 980 wich is way too expensive or get a 390?
380 or 960?
so many question and yet no way I get that shitty 970
what ya think anon?
>>338309665
Get a 390. It works better on most games that don't use Gameworks.
>>338307896
Athlon X4 860k (APU with the integrated graphics removed) is a viable budget quad-core. FX line is old and can't compete, new Zen processors are one the way, we'll see what happens with them.
>1080 comes out 27th
>1070 june 10th
FUCKING NVIDIA
>>338306060
>950M
>M
>>338309665
390 is pretty good. Alternatively, you could wait until June when the new GPUs drop and take your pick then. Even if you go for the older GPUs, they should be cheaper for a little while.
>>338309780
Was FX even good at the time?
>>338309851
I have a 6990M and it's still working fairly well.
>>338309984
Nope.
>>338309665
>Then what's the alternative?
Waiting for AMD's new midrange Polaris announcement on the 1st of June, then seeing what happens with card's performance vs. the current gen's price drops.
>>338305861
Kys
>>338306037
where is the 390?
>>338309130
Honestly pretty bad, at least from a economic view. You could save like $400 if you just got some of your peripherals 2nd hand/dropped the 'gamer asthetic' crap. I got my 2nd monitor at a garage sale for like $5 and its 23" 60hz. Decent keyboards are also easy to find 2nd hand, just need to clean them out and they should be good to go. Mouse you might want to buy new but you can get a decent wired mouse for like $25 unless you want macro keys or some crap like that.
You can buy a windows 7 key on reddit for like $5 and get a free upgrade to win 10. Also not sure why you want/need a blu-ray player in your PC. And I'm hoping you're going to wait til at least some of that shit is on sale or see if theres decent alternatives for a better price cus just from eyeballing it looks like you're spending way more than you need to.
>>338309780
Isn't a FX-6300 like only 20$ more than a 860k? I'd only jump all the way to a 8320 or not bother at all with AMD. At least until they release something good
>>338307896
Budget/cheap processors are just not worth it for gaming, buy an i5 or better or don't waste the money at all
>>338304056
I will always buy Nvidia™ because I only play games The Way It's Meant to be Played™. Nvidia also pioneers innovative new technologies like PhysX™, Gameworks™ and the highest quality driver to ever grace Windows.
When I boot up with a brand new Nvidia™ Geforce™, I can experience the game just like it's mean to be played. Nvidia™ also delivers a far more silkysmooth experience.
Nvidia is also very power efficient. A graphic card is the most power hungry device in your house. Refrigerators, air conditioners, water heaters, dish washers, lights, etc all use significantly less power than a graphic card. Which is why Nvidia™ puts gamers first by ensuring that their gaming experience is of the highest quality while looking out for gamers by giving them the most value in their electrical bill.
At this point in time, there's really no reasons to consider an AMD graphic card at all. I tried one one time, it caused so much heat that it exploded. It also consumed so much power that it gave on an EMP and destroyed the rest of my computer.
Nvidia™ also pioneered how useless GPGPU is with CUDA™. Years ago, everyone thought GPGPU, CUDA™, and OpenCL were the future. Now, Nvidia™ has removed those useless features from their GPUs and increased efficiency. Now you can save thousands a year in electricity thanks to Nvidia™ ensuring that useless features like GPGPU are "optimized" for gamers.
It's quite clear that OP's an AMD shill trying to convince you to settle on something less than The Way It's Mean to be Played™. Nvidia™ is the only real way to play games. We have seen recently that they offer incredible libraries for software developers like Nvidia Gameworks. He is probably too poor to afford the Nvidia Geforce Experience and can not afford to play any games The Way It's Mean To be Played™.
Don't be a poor gamer with bad drivers and a huge power bill. Play games with the Geforce™ Experience™: The Way It's Mean To Be Played™
>>338304056
nvidia gtx 970
3.5 gigs of nvidia ram power
>>338304056
Considering the most powerful GPU in the market is the Radeon Pro Duo, no, that statement is not correct.
>>338310963
>0.1 ml of an african american's semen has been deposited onto your wife's pussy
>>338310885
alright thanks for the info i'll keep doing my research.
Would a HDD bottleneck a 6700K GTX 1080 Rig?
I can't afford an SSD.
>>338305861
this pasta gets me every time
>>338312782
That's a good question.
>>338312782
It will bottleneck the speed and performance of your Operating System and load times. You computer could load things faster and feel much faster with an SSD. I'd save for one in your budget.
Also boot times.
>>338313550
>>338313590
I'm really worried about texture pop-in. I'll eventually buy a large capacity SSD a few months later. I don't care about boot times and I don't really do much on my PC besides shitpost and play games. I can deal with longer loading times.
>>338310078
>Polaris announcement on the 1st of June
how long does it take to come that cards in 3rd world country market? let's say russia
>>338304714
AMD has R&D centers in Israel too you fucking annoying cunt
The time has come to send my current PC (from 2009 or 2010) into retirement and get a new one. I also want a new monitor. From 19 inch to 21-22 inch.
So far I'm only sure about the CPU. Unless of course one of you can tell me why it's a bad choice. Intel i5-6600.
The GPU I've been eyeing is the MSI GeForce GTX 970 Gaming 4G, but $350 is killing me.
RAM-wise I want to go from 4gb to 8gb, ot should I get even more than 8? Something good from Corsair?
What's left is the mainboard and an SSD.
Any recommendations?
>>338314276
> MSI GeForce GTX 970 Gaming 4G
are you fucking baiting us, son? did you read the thread?
>>338314606
What? No why? I didn't read the thread. What's wrong with the card? I read several reviews online and they all sounded very positive.
>>338314180
Goodest goy vs good goy then
>>338304056
AMD is identical to NVIDIA for your average end user. NVIDIA is a far worse company, but unlike AMD, they actually make money. That's the only difference at this point.
Nvidia has PhysX. Check mate AMD.
>>338314829
Nothing is wrong with it, but it's a bad time to buy Maxwell right now.
>>338315084
So what do you think I should do?
>>338315084
>Nothing is wrong with it
3.5, son, 3.5
>>338314916
It doesn't matter. Either way, the Jews have all your shekels .
>>338315346
Literally a meme.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GNE_P-g_-Ts
>>338315595
>linear corridor shooter
>using vram at all
yeah meme, sure. 3.5 shekels has been sent to your account
>he doesn't own a 390
I feel sorry for you, since you have something worse or got something overpriced as fuck
>>338315595
>Read description
>UPDATE: Overnight, AMD has issued a hotfix for Radeon performance on Doom. Check out our updated analysis here:
>>338314276
If $350 for a GPU is killing you, drop the CPU to the i5-6500. Only 100mhz lower clock, save $20.
Also, patience. Use your old GPU or the integrated one on the i5. Wait for non-reference GTX 1070 and for Polaris to hit the market, and for prices on the 970 and 390 to drop. Use this time to save up more for your GPU budget, then ask again which GPU you should go for.
>>338315808
>>338315921
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z1yk4FwMdec
Literally a meme
Nvidia tends to work. ATIMD not so much.
>>338316206
You do know that the 970 is like the most popular card on the market, right? Whether it is fantastic or not so good, games are made with it in mind.
>>338308379
Sure, its not like games are CPU bound anyway, no matter what intel want you to believe. Especially with DX12 and vulkan coming out. AMD motherboards are a bit outdated though.
You could just wait until zen release in a "few months"
You should also look at unlocked pentium CPU's.
>>338316206
even a shitty 6870 from 2011 can deal with doom's vram usage retard. post open world games.
>>338315595
>still using the outdated-within-24-hours benchmark
>still trying to convince others and himself that the vram issue is just lies created by AMD shills
>>338306037
Where do AMDfags find these benchmarks?
>>338305651
poorfag defending his purchase. ATI drivers are constantly shit and definitely not worth the grief they cause if you can afford a superior brand.
>>338304056
why would anybody buy a nvijew shitty GC when you can have a god tier R9 390 ???
>>338316875
>trying to prove a point by posting contradicting benchmarks
Good job, anon. Not to mention how shit F4's optimization is on both sides
>>338317136
I posted a compliation of the first 5 benches I found when googling "Fallout 4 benches". AMDfags always manage to find some random and obscure benches when the reality simply is not the case
>>338316817
But the segmented VRAM isn't an issue, that's a lie perpetuated by insecure AMD drones.
>>338317221
the reality is that nvishit is absolute trash and garbage.
>>338317221
but the one on the right gives an advantage to the 390, so results vary
>>338315084
Why is it a bad time right now?
>>338317221
>>338317414
I mean, in terms of 390 vs 970, we all know 980s are amazing (ly expensive)
>>338306339
fuck no. amd processors had annoying bugs with most games that caused physics problems like floaty jumps (which generally got you banned)
>>338317464
Because you can buy Pascal in one week.
Speaking of processors, how many cores to games use now? I don't keep up with this shit. I remember in 2011 everything still only needing a speedy dual core. Are quad cores put to good use finally? What about hex cores?
i'm sure it's coincidence but i've never owned an amd card I didn't have to take back to the store.
all of my nvidia cards still work to this day in the computers of friends and family.
>>338317534
but pascal technology is absolutely useless right now, no games uses all the capacity of the actual GC, who is going to be stupid enough to buy pascal shit???
>>338317360
Looks fine to me
Yes.
>>338305365
I doubt that. $170, maybe. $150 would be a significant discount, and the 2GB version.
Not to say the 960 is a bad pick, but it's not better than AMD for its price.
>>338317624
I believe that theres a couple that use more than two cores but the majority still use dual cores.
>>338317635
Only Nvidia card I owned was a EVGA GTX 460. It died within weeks. Good warranty from EVGA though.
>>338317661
and? what are you trying to do? classic nvidrone faggot post. dont forget to pay extra money for a shitty card when you could have buy a superior AMD GC.
>>338317643
as opposed to spending the same amount of money on a weaker card? LOL?
>>338317661
>stats about watts
It's 2016, people
>>338317643
Well, yeah if you only play at 1080p60 then you probably won't find much benefit, but you're also spending $300 on obsolete tech.
>>338317624
2-4 cores on most games.
Even if it's only 2, the quadcore is still put to decent use, given that "everything else" still needs some processing power.
Hex or more, unless you know you need it, you don't.
>>338318002
I forgot power is free in 2016, and rooms don't heat up anymore.
>>338317512
what game are you talking about?
>>338317228
>But the segmented VRAM isn't an issue
if a part of vram is much slower than others, it's an issue, moron
Nvidia for when you want something good now with worthless gimmicks that ultimately are not worth buying an entire card over, then gimps your hardware a year or two after release to boost sales for the next generation of cards.
AMD for open source gimmicks and other tech that everyone can use, decent price/performance and no gimping of your hardware down the line.
>>338318179
Wrong.
>>338318142
$4 per year faggot. it's nothing
>>338307896
6300 and 8300 are great but show their age.
8350 here able to run games at max no problem also encode lots of files.
Keeping an eye on Zen since it looks promising.
AMD cards have superior hardware, this is common knowledge, it's just that the software sometimes can't keep up.
why is that? because if Nvidia works with a developer, one of the stipulations of their contract is that they can't work with AMD as well hence why team red cards have worse performance in some games on launch. this was the case for FO4 but AMD now molests Nvidia since they've released driver updates to address their issues.
here's recent benches across FIFTEEN games (Ashes of the Singularity, Batman: Arkham Origins, The Division, Doom (2016), Fallout 4, Far Cry Primal, GTAV, Hitman (2016), Hitman: Absolution, Metro: Last Light, Middle-Earth: Shadow of Mordor, Rise of the Tomb Raider, The Talos Principle, Tomb Raider 2013, and The Witcher 3)
this bench was done with the most recent drivers from both sides and the latest game versions
AMD wins at every price bracket except for the very top end where the xx80 cards are, best card on the market for price-performance is undoubtedly the 390 which rivals the 980 for 200 dollars less than it
Nvidia cards will "win" for the first few months or so but if you're patient it usually turns around where as Nvidia cards tend to get worse with subsequent WHQL releases
>>338319135
http://www.pcgamer.com/why-nvidias-gtx-970-slows-down-using-more-than-35gb-vram/
>>338317624
2 to 4. It's part of the reason why Intel has continued to kick AMD's ass. No one wants to bother programming their shit to take equal advantage of 8 cores.
>>338319307
The software, at least in the new open source stack seems to be in good shape and just seems to keep getting better.
>>338319307
>this is common knowledge
The average PC player barely even knows AMD exists.
>>338319479
Especially if they aren't real cores anyways.
>nvidia
Not even once.
>>338307694
From 5 years ago
>everyone also says AMD are better than Nvidia 'for the price'
>the prices are almost exactly the same
>the vast majority of benchmarks place AMD lower than Nvidia
>almost never see benchmarks that say otherwise
Can someone explain this?
>>338319940
How about >>338319307 ?
>>338309665
Real talk senpai. If you are playing games at 1080p and somebody is selling you a 970 for 100-230 dollars you would be an idiot not to get it.
I got a 390 and I play in 1440p. No games use more than 4 gigs of vram at this resolution sans a few, and even those don't at 1080p.
For this entire generation 3.5 gigs will be enough.
No, you shouldn't buy it for the same price as the objectively better r9 390, but it's stupid not to get it if you have a large discount. It's not like you are supporting Nvidia anyway, it's second hand.
Only thing 8 gigs of VRam has been good for in my case is rendering so unless you plan on doing that buy it.
>>338314963
AMD makes money too you know. I mean if they were still raking in losses I don't see why they would still be making GPU and CPU's nor be in both the PS4 and XB1.
Kinda irrelevant to be honest.
>>338317221
Fallout 4 was shit on release and fixed approximately a week later, after all the benchmarks had been run.
>>338319820
Intel's drivers are improving now as well, they finally picked up OpenGL 4 support moing on from 3.3 where they've been stuck for the last several years. Though they're still behind the AMD driver which has both 4.3 support and much faster performance.
>>338319307
nice meme, especially vendor politics
>>338320019
That shows nvidia cards outperforming AMD cards though on every level. Am I just being a tard?
>>338319479
Saying "they don't want to bother" is a little misleading. Everything in a game needs to be kept in sync so after a while multithreading it you get diminishing returns, and every thread you add also greatly increases the complexity of the code.
Games are already broken pieces of shit, if they tried to use 8 cores they would never run.
I can't help but feel like Nvidia's basic monopoly over the market goes against the pc concept of choice.
>>338320175
>You didn't have money to buy a bunch of amd stock when it was 1.7 dollars.
>It's almost 4 dollars now
FUCK ME.
>>338320281
>Fury and Nano beating 980
>390 beating 970
>380 beating 960
Yes, you are.
>>338313741
>cant afford
You don't need a large SSD, just buy a 120gb SSD for $40 and install just the OS on it and everything else on the HDD D:/
>>338319390
Does this ever play a role for 1080p? If it's only for super high resolutions I still might get it because 1080p is what I have.
>>338320391
For all the choice in the PC market the vast majority of people totally buy into monopolies. That's why there are three that are currently fucking over the market. Intel with CPUs, Nvidia with GPUs, and Microsoft with operating systems.
>>338320409
It's the stock market, there's always an inherent risk. That's why it's the way to make a lot of money fast, but it's just as easy to lose everything.
>>338304056
>these threads are made by insecure fags with buyer's remorse regardless if it was an AMD or Nvidia product
Is this statement correct?
>>338315258
you should read the thread. As many anons pointed out ahead of your post that graphics card only gets 3.5.
>what does 3.5 mean
it means out of the 4gb of VRAM (thats Video Random Access Memory) of that card, 3.5gb works like it should and .5 is slower. When video games use more than 3.5 VRAM and delve into that .5 on that graphics card, it poops out slower load times and less fps. Please just read the thread next time, because now everyone hates you.
How does this make you feel?
>>338320537
>Does this ever play a role for 1080p?
99% of the time, no.
What should I upgrade next? Trading the 970 for a 1070 when third-party cards come out.
>>338320618
There is a risk, sure, but smart investing is like instead of gambling thinking AMD is going to take off, any retard could realize considering they have a very strong lineup of products, are diversifying themselves, got renewed deals with Apple and the success of the PS4 that the company was not going to go under, meaning 1.6 was definitely a steal.
Now that the market is done shitting itself and retards realize this the stock is coming back just like I knew it was going to be but I didn't have any significant amount of cash to pump into them so I'm not getting my megabux.
It's amazing how the stock-market behaves just like /v/ with it's doom saying and bullshit analysis of things except it actually cost people millions of dollars.
>>338306339
AMD 64 was the shit for gaming until Intel won the throne back forever with Conroe.
ATi was also kicking Nvidia's ass until PCI Express came.
>>338320828
To the surprise of absolutely no one, most people don't have high end cards.
>>338320896
Is that CPU under load or what are you doing to that poor chip?
>>338320828
>Intel HD is #2
People need to stop doing this survey with their garbage laptops.
>>338320896
>1080p, 60hz
>I'M GETTING A 1070 WHEN IT COMES OUT
Damn you are fucking stupid. It's guaranteed you don't even play games and just keep upgrading your PC and shit post about how consoles are terrible between queuing for DotA 2.
>>338321028
I'm playing SMITE
>>338320896
>24GB ram
why
>>338321114
>poorfag has to project to make something feel better about himself
>>338321138
had to get a new motherboard and got more ina deal.
Not really.
Nvidia is better at lower resolution (1080p) in DX11, but by better we're talking 90 FPS instead of 70. If you're running 60Hz (like most people) who gives a shit. Nvidia makes the most sense for high refresh rate gaming at 1080p, but you pay a premium for that.
AMD is better at high resolution and multiGPU. (Cheaper card but they also scale a lot better up to 4K and CF scales better than SLI) They have better multimonitor support as well, so they should be the definitive choice for people using multimonitor or 1440p+ resolution.
For most mid range gamers, AMD offers better value. A 380 will cost you about the same as 960 but will generally perform slightly better. AMD also scales way better into the future.
>>338305651
This man is spot on.
>>338320828
I wonder if r9 300 shows up as 200 series in this survey.
>>338320896
Upgrade your monitor to a 1440p or a 144hz.
>>338316668
Do you faggots who defend AMD-processors only play console-ports?
>>338321404
Most likely.
>>338321331
Buy a better monitor before you buy a new GPU you stupid fuck.
What are you going to do with a 1070 that a 970 can't already achieve?
>>338321331
>My computer is a higher spec than yours
>You are calling me a poorfag
Holy shit you are a retard.
>>338321332
You are a retard. There is no 20 fps difference between Nvidia and AMD at 1080p and something like the r9 390 beats the 970 by 1-3 fps, not fucking 20. Just kill yourself.
>>338319307
>15 game average
>980 neck and neck with $50-100 more expensive cards that can't overclock for shit (whereas the 980 is essentially a 980ti with a basic OC)
>980ti, Titan X and 1080 dominating the chart
Sooooo Nvidia is better then?
What video card should I get in the next 1-2 months if I only have a 1080p monitor?
>>338321802
I'm specifically talking about the FuryX vs 980Ti, which has a large delta framerate at 1080p while at 4K they perform nearly identically.
The 390 is very closely matched to the 970 though.
>>338321854
>Nvidia cards only beat their rival in the enthusiast tier
>Sooooo Nvidia is better then?
No, not really.
>>338320434
>Fury and Nano beating 980
The Fury and Nano are more expensive than the 980 and can't overclock half as well (in fact, they can't really overclock at all)
The 980 is the better purchase compared to the Fury/Nano. The 390 and 380 are better than the 970 and 960 tho.
>>338321858
What is your current card? If you're like that one fuck who has a 970 at 1080p, it's unlikely you need a new card.
>>338322003
You're right, I forgot about these cards' price.
>>338321990
I would hardly call the 980 enthusiast. It's definitely high end, but not enthusiast.
>>338322102
Well, 500 bucks is a lot of money.
>>338322102
>A 550-600 dollars graphics card is not enthusiast
Are you really this dumb? The card alone cost more than a PS4 and a Wii U together used.
It's most certainly enthusiast. Even the 970 and r9 390 are. They are not "mid range" Mid range is 150-200 dollars and they both cost 340 dollars when released.
>>338322085
Fair enough, easy mistake. They're around $40-60 more expensive on average. AMD really shat the bed with the Fury series, the 390 is the only worthwhile card from their recent lineup and its admittedly a REALLY worthwhile card.
It's essentially the best price>performance card on the market but man, the Fury series was a disaster.
>>338322069
MSI N460GTX Cyclone
It's a pretty old setup.
>>338320828
It shows how Nvidia marketing managed to upsell their customers and increase GPU prices over the years.
In previous generations it was the $150-$250 GPUs that sold the best.
With the 900 series they managed to bump up the price of the most popular card to beyond $300.
With the 1000 series they are attempting to move it closer to $400.
Genius marketing to sell overpriced products.
>>338322275
>960
>performing as well as a 390x
JUST
U
S
T
>>338322275
There's >>338319307 that shows AMD's lower-end cards hold their own as well.
Should I stick with a 970 for my first gaming PC or should I get one of the new 1080s/1070s/whatever?
I'm trying to balance a relatively low cost with decent performance.
>>338322385
Yeah, AMD has always sucked cocks when it comes to OGL.
I'm interested in how performance will evolve once the Vulkan patch rolls out.
>>338304056
It's a rollercoaster. Better to just buy cheap shit and not care about the manufacturer. First it was nvidia, then they were shit compared to AMD, then it swung back,then it swung again. Now its Nvidia again I think? Who cares.
>>338322102
Anything over $300 is generally classified as an enthusiast level card by both AMD or Nvidia. A 980 was a flagship card for several months even. It's absolutely an enthusiast card you dipshit.
>>338321627
I'm trading the 970 for a 1070 because they're almost the same price. You just call Amazon and say that it's defective and they give a full refund.
>>338321698
Then stop acting like one faggot.
>>338322414
Do people really argue that though? AMD has always dominated the budget market with Nvidia standing alone at the top.
It's literally always been like this
>>338304056
The only valid statement is that you buy what performs best for your budget.
>>338322327
I'd either wait to see what AMD is releasing or for NVIDIA's new cards. Even if you were to grab a 970 or 390, you'd probably be able to get them cheaper after the new cards come out in June.
>>338322003
The Nano and the 980 are not even the same use case.
>>338322593
I've seen a lot of threads and posts recently that claim 100% of AMD cards are garbage.
>>338322275
>40fps difference between the 970 and 390x
This is literally Project Cars times a million
>>338322385
>>338322480
This was patched the next day retards.
>>338322692
Not garbage, just budget tier as always. Their CPUs are complete dogshit tho.
I
>>338322806
Anon daijobu?
>>338322668
Cool. Thank you.
>>338322780
You're right. They're still a bit behind though.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WvWaE-3Aseg
>>338321416
I'll do it eventually. Kind of like the 1080p resolution, but 144hz is interesting to me.
>>338322275
>OpenGL Doom
>Before the driver patch
fuck off, shill.
ID and Nvidia are intentionally holding back the Vulkan version of Doom because they know AMD would win. They will only release it after Pascal is out.
>>338322695
it's already fixed and in a couple days all OpenGL benchmarks are obsolete because it will run on Vulkan.
>>338323053
do we even have vulkan benchmarks for cards yet
>>338323053
Its possible that Zenimax is involved in this mess too, they've been extremely against Linux and cross-platform technologies like Vulkan that would enable Linux support. Its no accident that the Alpha for Doom worked easily with compatibility software thanks to its use of largely cross-platform technology but Zenimax fucked up the release with a single-platform anti-piracy solution.
Gone are the days of an independent Id that could use the best technology as they saw fit or that would release game engines under open licenses to allow for long term preservation of their games.
>>338323280
There's only the footage of the game running on a 1080 with Vulkan, getting somewhere between 150 and 200fps on average.
>>338323053
>980
>neck and neck with the Fury X
>""""""""""""""fixed""""""""""""
Somebody got triggered
>>338322438
Do a price comparison. $100+ means not worth it.
>>338323280
On Doom? Not that I'm aware of. Talos Principle has had its Vulkan version available for a while though and the results are pretty positive at least for PC platforms as compared to tablet platforms.
>>338323053
>ID and Nvidia are intentionally holding back the Vulkan version of Doom because they know AMD would win
That conspiracy, top kek. AMD have shit tier GPL support, always have and always will. That's AMDs fault, nobody elses.
>>338320743
yes, this is /v/. nobody actually likes video games here.
>>338304056
they're spot on.
the problem with Geforce/Radeon threads is that there's lots of misinformation from people who simply don't know any better.
AMD drivers are fine. they just work. thing is, Nvidia goes the extra mile. for some users that's wholly irrelevant but that means marginally better performance and better compatibility with odd games. I still can't get 2008 Alone in the Dark to work properly in Radeon cards.
granted, that's because it's a shit game, but still.
I'm in the middle of slowly buying my computer one bit at a time.
Pic related is my build and what I've bought so far (not including additional peripherals which I've grabbed on sale.
I'm reconsidering the graphics card and the power supply.
The graphics card I'm still weighing up because I've heard the r290 is pretty good as well.
The power supply I'm thinking about trying to find something a bit better and splurge so I'm not fucked over in the future when upgrading components.
I've been looking at benchmarks and reviews myself to try and make an informed decision, I'm also just curious on what /v/ thinks.
I'm saving the power supply and video card until last so I've got time to decide.
For reference, I'm not planning on doing any 4k 120fps gaming, as long as I can get decent 60fps (preferably in 1080 with average settings) in most games I'll be satisfied.
>>338323708
All it took was one driver patch from AMD to get good OpenGL performance in Doom.
The DOOM beta ran fine on AMD, so it was obviously some last minute feature Nvidia pushed into the game that caused the performance problem.
>>338324056
Just don't get a 970.
google should start making gpus and cpus
>>338324056
>black series HDD
Do you get off on overpriced, loud HDDs?
>>338324056
A 8GB 390 will likely enjoy a longer life in a system than a 3.5GB 970 but honestly for 1080p@60 either card is overkill. Keep in mind that mainstream Polaris cards will be out soon and will likely force price drops for the current crop of mainstream cards as we'll likely get a $350 8GB 490 that will outperform both the 390 and the 970.
Should I be fine with a 6600k if I go with the GTX 1080? The 6700k is about $150 more.
>>338324345
Perfectly fine.
>>338324345
You'd be fine with even less than that. CPU has little importance nowadays, as long as it's not ridiculously underpowered.
Nvidia all the way baby!
>>338324198
Google does have their own chips but they're server focused and even if they decided to make something consumer facing in the CPU market at least it wouldn't be useful for PC gaming which is currently locked into x86.
The rumor has always been that Valve's Linux efforts are a stepping stone to bringing PC gaming to more capable ARM chips down the road. So maybe we'll see more hardware competition at some point in the future.
>>338324330
I do not. I'll look into a different hard drive for my secondary storage then, thank you.
>>338324137
>>338324334
Ideally I'd like to have a long life card (and build my computer as soon as possible) so I guess I'll skip the 970 then and either grab a 390 now or wait and see if there's a 490 in the near future. Thank you for your input.
>>338324584
ALL THE WAY
>>338324404
>>338324453
Thx, I give my 3570k rig as a present to a family member. I'm planning to keep the new one for an other 4-5 years.
>>338324584
I love graphs like these so much. SO MUCH!
>>338313792
Usually shop will try to PO it when you buy it, the price gets more expensive tho'
I want to build a PC but here's how the community seems so go:
>build a budget computer
>"it sucks, you could have made it better and cheaper!"
>Go all out and spend $2000
>"it sucks , what a waste of money!"
Nothing you build will ever be accepted or good enough, it's constant berating from people who are likely using their parent's computer. Why is the PC gaming community so salty and unaccepting?
>>338305627
this has gotta be the funniest thing I've ever seen
Emulation performance is mainly impacted by the processor right?
Would an i5 with a decent mid-range graphics card be good enough for Dolphin emulation in 1080p and a stable, accurate framerate?
I'm still new to this.
>>338325247
well my friend, maybe you should ask around and do some research before you find the first thing and buy it without thinking.
>>338325247
>building a PC for it to be accepted by random people on the internet
There should be no reason to post your specs unless you're asking what you should focus on upgrading or need help. Anyone with a brain could understand someone building a budget PC and slowly upgrading it or just building a cheap one because they don't play demanding games.
>>338324705
Couldn't you just get the 1070? It's about the price of a 970 as of current. Don't get the new cards immediately though wait for specifications and reviews to be released.
>>338325507
I do and my friends have also. You know it doesn't matter what anyone picks someone will shit on it. You don't really have the issue with console gamers.
>>338325595
you do have this issue with consoles as consoles are shit period.
>>338325247
I'm not seeing the problem.
In both instances you're being told how to save money without sacrificing perfomance.
Sounds like you're just a bitch.
>>338325496
Yes, but I've been told that, unlike games, there's quite an important gap from one i5 generation to another when it comes to emulation, so you'd have to get a recent one.
>>338325595
You don't have this issue on console because you have exactly 0 choice on consoles. No disparity means no conflict.
>>338325664
>i5 6600k
I can't believe I forgot the most important part of my question.
I feel like a complete moron.
>>338325768
You'll be much more than fine with a 6600K.
>>338325590
>Couldn't you just get the 1070? It's about the price of a 970 as of current.
Wow, I didn't realise it was that cheap.
I'll wait to see some reviews and benchmarksfor the 1070 in that case then. If the consensus is good I'll go the 1070.
Thanks for the helpful advice.
