Where are the new AMD GPU's?

[miagisan]

I am gonna fucking shit all of you.

The R9 290X KEEPS UP WITH THE DAMN 970.

WHY THE HECK DO YOU GUYS CARE IF THE THING IS NEW OR NOT?

This is actually a funny but true post. People rag on the "old" amd tech but either fail to realize it or blatantly ignore that idea.

[SlaughterSmurf]

As to why Nvidia is being cocky about things like the GTX 970's ram issue.  They know team red has nothing that can touch it.  I think they owe everyone who bought it thinking it has 4 full gb of ram needs to be given like $50 back.

 

Instead they're giving people copies of the Witcher 3 so if AMD's 390 is something good, then Nvidia will just lower the prices of their gpus and those who payed full priced won't bitch too much since they were given a free game.

lol $50? You aren't getting 7/8 of the performance you were expecting, try $20. And at that point it isn't even worth it.

[SlaughterSmurf]

I am gonna fucking shit all of you.

The R9 290X KEEPS UP WITH THE DAMN 970.

WHY THE HECK DO YOU GUYS CARE IF THE THING IS NEW OR NOT?

Because it keeps up, while using way more power, while PRODUCING more heat (Not necessarily runnng hotter), and the 970 is the 3rd best new Nvidia card, about to be the 4th.

[CoolaxGaming]

Because it keeps up, while using way more power, while PRODUCING more heat (Not necessarily runnng hotter), and the 970 is the 3rd best new Nvidia card, about to be the 4th.

Wayy more?

GTX 970 - Average of 175 Watts

R9 290X - Average of 225 watts?

50 watts is wayy more power?

And the 290x is cheaper...

Plus in games like Titanfall where the 3.5 gig is exceeded the 290x can have 1.5x the performance

[Razzaa]

Sigh, we went over this... The charts are ok, we ALL get it, no one is retarded. But fact is, they lied about ROPs, they lied about L2 and they lied about RAM speed, they are OBLIGED to tell the customers that. They DID scam customers and that is not OK, they should get sued and rekt for it. It's not acceptable.

That doesn't make the 970 a bad card, it just makes Nvidia a bunch of assholes.

 

Let me put it this way.

You buy a 100HP car, it works fine 95% of the time, but when you push the RPM towards it's limit, the car stalls. And later on you find out it's not actually 100HP, it's more like 90HP. But the company advertised and sold you a 100HP car. And now you are saying that the company doesn't lie, it can hit 100km/h in the time they advertised... That doesn't change the fact that it stalls and has less power... And to make up for it, they offer you 4 new tires...

Not exactly the best example but you get the picture, you've been scammed.

But that is how cars are advertised...............Ram said my truck was 410hp, when i did a dyno run it was closer to 300hp. Did they give everyone in NA refunds? Nope.

[Guest Kloaked]

Wayy more?

GTX 970 - Average of 175 Watts

R9 290X - Average of 225 watts?

50 watts is wayy more power?

And the 290x is cheaper...

Plus in games like Titanfall where the 3.5 gig is exceeded the 290x can have 1.5x the performance

 

Actually the cards are in the same price bracket, give or take a few bucks. At least in America anyways.

 

The 3.5 gig thing is a joke and always has been; it's beating a dead horse because so many people have tested the thing and there is no issue with the card at all. Jay even made a video about it yet, showed the results yet people are still bitching about it?

 

I have a 980 now. I get momentary lags in Shadow of Mordor while using the texture pack just like the 970 does in that game. I don't know how many times all of this has to be said to lay that to rest.

[CoolaxGaming]

Actually the cards are in the same price bracket, give or take a few bucks. At least in America anyways.

 

The 3.5 gig thing is a joke and always has been; it's beating a dead horse because so many people have tested the thing and there is no issue with the card at all. Jay even made a video about it yet, showed the results yet people are still bitching about it?

 

I have a 980 now. I get momentary lags in Shadow of Mordor while using the texture pack just like the 970 does in that game. I don't know how many times all of this has to be said to lay that to rest.

M8, the 3.5gb thing was meant to be sarcastic. I forgot to add a /s in there

[sgloux3470]

 

 

I have a 980 now. I get momentary lags in Shadow of Mordor while using the texture pack just like the 970 does in that game. I don't know how many times all of this has to be said to lay that to rest.

That's because no one should be using the ultra texture pack.  It's meant for 6+ GB cards and offers zero visual improvement.

 

A better example would be battlefield 4 at 4K, which will stutter on a 970 but not a 980 as it uses approximately 3.6 GB of VRAM.

[Razzaa]

Wayy more?

GTX 970 - Average of 175 Watts

R9 290X - Average of 225 watts?

50 watts is wayy more power?

And the 290x is cheaper...

Plus in games like Titanfall where the 3.5 gig is exceeded the 290x can have 1.5x the performance

I posted numerous videos of my 970 exceeding 3.5gb and having 0 issues. You can even see the frame times are at a reasonable rate. Making a BS claim that the 290x gets 1.5x performance over a 970 using 3.5gb is the dumbest thing i have heard today lol

[Guest Kloaked]

M8, the 3.5gb thing was meant to be sarcastic. I forgot to add a /s in there

 

I wasn't 100% sure so I responded anyways, ha; I did smell some sarcasm, just wasn't sure.

 

That's because no one should be using the ultra texture pack.  It's meant for 6+ GB cards and offers zero visual improvement.

 

The lag happens for like half a second at most. And there is a difference actually. Not enough to justify the requirement, but there is a difference.

 

EDIT: I should specify that the lag only happens on occasion, so it's not a frequent thing. It's not so often that I expect it to happen all the time.

[CoolaxGaming]

I posted numerous videos of my 970 exceeding 3.5gb and having 0 issues. You can even see the frame times are at a reasonable rate. Making a BS claim that the 290x gets 1.5x performance over a 970 using 3.5gb is the dumbest thing i have heard today.

I dont care what you have tested.

Allocating does  equals not using

IF the 970 exceeds 3.5gb USAGE, then the card dips in performance. That is fact, not opinion, which will give the 290x the edge.

But most games dont exceed that mark so the card doesent dip.

The memory speeds were very low when seeing the last 500mb of mem.

And very low memory speeds are really bad

[Razzaa]

I dont care what you have tested.

Allocating does  equals not using

IF the 970 exceeds 3.5gb USAGE, then the card dips in performance. That is fact, not opinion, which will give the 290x the edge.

But most games dont exceed that mark so the card doesent dip.

The memory speeds were very low when seeing the last 500mb of mem.

And very low memory speeds are really bad

Fact? Prove it. I proved it doesn't.

[Guest Kloaked]

I dont care what you have tested.

Allocating does  equals not using

IF the 970 exceeds 3.5gb USAGE, then the card dips in performance. That is fact, not opinion, which will give the 290x the edge.

But most games dont exceed that mark so the card doesent dip.

The memory speeds were very low when seeing the last 500mb of mem.

And very low memory speeds are really bad

 

I hit 3.8 gigs of usage in Watch Dogs and 3.7 in Metro: Last Light while I had a 970 (used the near 4k DSR setting in GFE) and the only thing that ever happened was a short lag period, maybe half a second, and the lag disappeared. The other thing I noticed was I wasn't getting 60fps (shocker, I know!).

 

So what I learned was that the card isn't for 4k. 1080p and 1440p is fine. The segmented VRAM isn't an issue at all.

[CoolaxGaming]

Fact? Prove it. I proved it doesn't.

"ABOVE the 3.5gb threshold was a nightmare"

[CoolaxGaming]

You know what, lets not discuss this, every thread that turned out like this got locked

[Guest Kloaked]

You know what, lets not discuss this, every thread that turned out like this got locked

 

That was mainly because of some other members who refused to have a discussion and would rather throw out insults instead.

[Razzaa]

"ABOVE the 3.5gb threshold was a nightmare"

Video? Graphs?

[Guest Kloaked]

Video? Graphs?

 

 

"ABOVE the 3.5gb threshold was a nightmare"

 

Yeah what website is that?

[Kinda Bottlenecked]

I think people are just not used to having vram work this way on a high performance card. 970 is totally fine and it's already shown that som and acu with insane setting make the 970 stutter a little. But then again why did Nvidia make the 970's vram work this way when non of the x70 series were like this?

[Razzaa]

I must have been extremely lucky because i never experienced any stuttering or lag when i had the card.

 

 

DL @ 4K almost 4gb vram usage

 

 

AS @ 4k using 4gb of vram

[TheAmazingCookieFromSquare]

Next month

[CoolaxGaming]

Yeah what website is that?

I think it was pcper.com

[Guest Kloaked]

I think people are just not used to having vram work this way on a high performance card. 970 is totally fine and it's already shown that som and acu with insane setting make the 970 stutter a little. But then again why did Nvidia make the 970's vram work this way when non of the x70 series were like this?

 

It's a cut down version of the 980. So most of the 980 chips that didn't make the cut were made into a 970 to save money on production.

[Briggsy]

Lol, people are going to be arguing about the 3.5GB thing long past the 970's usefulness.

[Columbo]

I doubt people will argue that the R9 290x is a very good card. When I started the thread I simply wanted to know when the long delayed AMD GPU's would be released. You Nvidia fanboys cannot expect Nvidia to add a Ti series or updated 970/980 card without real competition.