Why make new GPUs with little to no performance gain?

[BustinJustin]

I was looking into a graphics card upgrade in anticipation of some games coming out this year (2015) such as The Witcher 3, which I would like to run at 1080p the highest settings, willing to compromise with AA or maybe Vsync. 

 

Since my current card, a reference 7950, has some trouble with The Witcher 2 at the highest settings with Ubersampling off, I looked into the direct upgrade path from the current gen from AMD. Turns out the r9 280 is it. But...

 

Looking at specs and benchmarks, it is either the same as or just barely better than the 7950. Granted, it is a lot cheaper new than the 7950 was when I bought it. 

 

But why are you putting out new GPUs that have almost no performance gains over the previous generation? 

 

I'm now looking into getting another 7950 for crossfire and skipping this gen of GPUs in hopes of actual performance gains from AMD in the next one.  

 

I know, I know.  I could go Nvidia but I'm still left with a single gpu at the cost of a new one with little performance gain.

[Altecice]

270-280's are rebrands of 7000 series cards. Only the 290/290x are new (I think)

[jnmbhj]

AMD needed something to fill the gap between the new 290x and the 260x so they brought in some older cards 

[jnmbhj]

Nvidia did the same thing with their gtx 770 (rebranded 680) 

[Wiflare]

270-280's are rebrands of 7000 series cards. Only the 290/290x are new (I think)

yup.

[LukaP]

1. the 240-280x never were new GPUs

if you want a better card go 970

GPU makers will always bring out a new card that is just barely more powerful than the last so they can squeeze as much money as they can out of the architecture

[terrytek]

Come go the Green side. We have cookies and GTX 980s.

[BustinJustin]

 

1. the 240-280x never were new GPUs
2. if you want a better card go 970
3. GPU makers will always bring out a new card that is just barely more powerful than the last so they can squeeze as much money as they can out of the architecture

 

My problem with going brand new top of the line with an upgrade now is that the rest of my rig is behind even my 7950. I'm rocking an ASUS Crosshair IV Formula and a Phenom II x6 1100t. I feel like throwing something like a 970 in there would be spending too much money on something not worth is. I may be completely wrong, though.

[Speedbird]

Rebrands. Look at my signature.

[Bene]

You said it: it is cheaper. So, it is for different group of people. 

[LukaP]

My problem with going brand new top of the line with an upgrade now is that the rest of my rig is behind even my 7950. I'm rocking an ASUS Crosshair IV Formula and a Phenom II x6 1100t. I feel like throwing something like a 970 in there would be spending too much money on something not worth is. I may be completely wrong, though.

you are. get a 970, and start slowly saving up. that phenom is still faster than a 6300 from AMD  

 

then save up for something like a Skylake i5 and a motherboard, and youll be golden. youll be able to reuse the ram as well (if its DDR3)

[dlf]

I'm waiting until serious 4k ready GPU's - single cards (7970 like) can pump 60 fps in most games I want to play. Secondly I just build my computer in April of 2013, my GPU is a 7970, I should be fine for a while longer.

[BustinJustin]

you are. get a 970, and start slowly saving up. that phenom is still faster than a 6300 from AMD

 

then save up for something like a Skylake i5 and a motherboard, and youll be golden. youll be able to reuse the ram as well (if its DDR3)

Is a 970 really that much better than a 7950? If I'm gonna spend $350, I want it to be worthwhile.

[LukaP]

Is a 970 really that much better than a 7950? If I'm gonna spend $350, I want it to be worthwhile.

 

According to this bench i found on google, its around 33% better

 

[Clarkey]

That graph is running at a weird res

 

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/1033?vs=1355

 

The 970 is almost twice as fast as the 7950 at 1080p and 1440p.

[Untitled]

GTX970 is far faster than HD7950, consumes less power and run cooler.

[SteveGrabowski]

Is a 970 really that much better than a 7950? If I'm gonna spend $350, I want it to be worthwhile.

 

I wouldn't buy a 970 right now if I was you. Graphics cards depreciate way faster than CPUs in value, so I'd upgrade the core of your system first and then grab whatever GPU on the market is the best buy in that $350 range then. It surely won't be the 970 if you're waiting until summer. It's an amazing card but not a buy worth the money if you don't have the CPU to drive it. Especially since the 7950 is still a really nice GPU.

[BustinJustin]

I wouldn't buy a 970 right now if I was you. Graphics cards depreciate way faster than CPUs in value, so I'd upgrade the core of your system first and then grab whatever GPU on the market is the best buy in that $350 range then. It surely won't be the 970 if you're waiting until summer. It's an amazing card but not a buy worth the money if you don't have the CPU to drive it. Especially since the 7950 is still a really nice GPU.

 

The problem there is that I'd have to upgrade my motherboard also. I will probably go Intel on my next CPU upgrade but, for gaming, I don't see much benefit in upgrading my current CPU.

[SteveGrabowski]

The problem there is that I'd have to upgrade my motherboard also. I will probably go Intel on my next CPU upgrade but, for gaming, I don't see much benefit in upgrading my current CPU.

 

I thought you said your CPU was already holding your 7950 back though.

[Glenwing]

The problem there is that I'd have to upgrade my motherboard also. I will probably go Intel on my next CPU upgrade but, for gaming, I don't see much benefit in upgrading my current CPU.

 

The Phenom II X6 1100T is still a pretty decent CPU if you've overclocked it to 4.0GHz or so. GTX 970 might be a little strong for it but it depends on the game.

[Humbug]

You could buy an R9 290, or a 970 or 780. Something in that range if you need it now.

But if you are only concerned about Witcher 3 then it is still 5 months away from release and you will get a better deal by then.

 

 

I know, I know.  I could go Nvidia but I'm still left with a single gpu at the cost of a new one with little performance gain.

Nvidia has nothing faster than the 280 for the same price. Hopefully they will rectify that with the 960.

 

Also it's normally not worth upgrading every GPU generation. Games tend to work smoothly as long as you drop a couple of settings rather than keep everything on ultra. Most of the time you can't even tell the graphical difference anyway...

[Zweihander]

Nvidia has nothing faster than the 280 for the same price. Hopefully they will rectify that with the 960.

 

The 960 Ti looks very promising... (errr, speculation)

[Humbug]

The 960 Ti looks very promising... (errr, speculation)

hope so,

if it's good AMD may use the 280x to fight it.

 

Until the new AMD parts come.