Please don't buy a 960

[I/O]

970 is faster than the 290X, it is the same price if not a little cheaper and uses much less power.

Still @ 4K the 290X is as good or better. I would just wait for the new Radeon boards to come out and then we will see whom the price performance champ is.

[I/O]

Let's talk about TDP. Let's talk about overclocking headroom. Let's talk about how the R9 290X only won several of the dozens of benchmarks. 

Most of us that would be considering a high performance GPU have a nice high wattage PSU and dont care about power consumption. Let's talk about the staying power of how an old GPU like the 290X is still a power house.

[79wjd]

Most of us that would be considering a high performance GPU have a nice high wattage PSU and dont care about power consumption. Let's talk about the staying power of how an old GPU like the 290X is still a power house.

An overclocked 970 performs very similarly to a 290x except runs a lot cooler and consumes a lot less power, which is awesome for those of us who actually pay for electricity -- which most people do. 

[TheProfosist]

And your just wrong as it out preforms a 760 and a lower price. Why would you think that is bad?

[I/O]

An overclocked 970 performs very similarly to a 290x except runs a lot cooler and consumes a lot less power, which is awesome for those of us who actually pay for electricity -- which most people do. 

Electricity is included in my rent and is dirt Cheap here in Canada even if I was paying for it. I don't hold the GPU in my lap so heat output is a redundant issue for me.

[I/O]

And your just wrong as it out preforms a 760 and a lower price. Why would you think that is bad?

It performs very similar to a 760 and the R9 280 costs less and performs better.

[79wjd]

And your just wrong as it out preforms a 760 and a lower price. Why would you think that is bad?

The issue is that all of the 900 series has performed close to or above the performance of the 700 series a model above, so the 960 was expected to replace the 770+.

 

Electricity is included in my rent and is dirt Cheap here in Canada even if I was paying for it. I don't hold the GPU in my lap so heat output is a redundant issue for me.

Congratulations on not being for electricity, most people however still do. And when I'm gaming for a few hours I need to lower the AC in order to keep my room cool and thats even with a 780, which produces less heat than a 290. So factor in higher AC costs and higher costs to run the card and you find out very quickly that that "cheaper" AMD card isn't even close to being cheaper in the long run.

[TheProfosist]

It performs very similar to a 760 and the R9 280 costs less and performs better.

From the benches ive seen its beats it in most every bench. Im mostly interested in comparisons to a 670 actually.

And eats the power and has a lower feature set (at least for my usage)...

[I/O]

Congratulations on not being for electricity, most people however still do. And when I'm gaming for a few hours I need to lower the AC in order to keep my room cool and thats even with a 780, which produces less heat than a 290. So factor in higher AC costs and higher costs to run the card and you find out very quickly that that "cheaper" AMD card isn't even close to being cheaper in the long run.

Sigh once again you are banking on asinine metrics to try and pump up a over hyped brand. Move you computer case away from yo face LOL and feel the cool air upon yo face LOL. Even running old cards like the GTX 280 and CFX HD 7850s I have never felt the heat LOL. I guess nvidia fan boys must be made of wax.

[I/O]

From the benches ive seen its beats it in most every bench. Im mostly interested in comparisons to a 670 actually.

And eats the power and has a lower feature set (at least for my usage)...

Featuers are the same. AMD had better muti monitor support ... nvidia has better 3D support etc etc etc.

[TheProfosist]

The issue is that all of the 900 series has performed close to or above the performance of the 700 series a model above, so the 960 was expected to replace the 770+.

 

-snip-

That is not what I expected personally. Usually the X60 series has the highest lowest end chip. I think the 960 Ti might do what your looking for as it will be the lowest higher end chip. Remember the 770 is just a OC'd 680.

[TheProfosist]

Sigh once again you are banking on asinine metrics to try and pump up a over hyped brand. Move you computer case away from yo face LOL and feel the cool air upon yo face LOL. Even running old cards like the GTX 280 and CFX HD 7850s I have never felt the heat LOL. I guess nvidia fan boys must be made of wax.

Yep we are made of wax.

Featuers are the same. AMD had better muti monitor support ... nvidia has better 3D support etc etc etc.

Im not going to get into all of this right now in this troll thread. Its a good new product for that price point AMD fanboys just cant seem to admit it.

[I/O]

Yep we are made of wax.

Im not going to get into all of this right now in this troll thread. Its a good new product for that price point AMD fanboys just cant seem to admit it.

$250 for this abomination is not value LOL. It's a GT class card for the price of a GTX.

[Suika]

From the benches ive seen its beats it in most every bench. Im mostly interested in comparisons to a 670 actually.

And eats the power and has a lower feature set (at least for my usage)...

I wouldn't be shocked if the two were on par or very well within each other's range. The GTX 760 was slightly below a 670, and the 960 is slightly above the 760... I can only assume, though, and within a margin of error.

 

Sigh once again you are banking on asinine metrics to try and pump up a over hyped brand. Move you computer case away from yo face LOL and feel the cool air upon yo face LOL. Even running old cards like the GTX 280 and CFX HD 7850s I have never felt the heat LOL. I guess nvidia fan boys must be made of wax.

>die hard AMD fanboy

>calling out a fanboy

 

lol

 

Yes, your precious high TDP, lower return GPUs are still within justification considering how cheap they've gotten, but NVIDIA kind of owns the enthusiast market right now, especially if the owners overclock. That I've seen, high overclocks on the R9 290X yield rather low results, especially in comparison to a GTX 980.

$250 for this abomination is not value LOL. It's a GT class card for the price of a GTX.

It's $200, not $250. It's also more powerful than a GTX 760, which makes it a GTX card. The GTX 750 wasn't more powerful than a GTX 660, and I didn't see long threads about how it's bs that it's a GTX card.

[TheProfosist]

$250 for this abomination is not value LOL. It's a GT class card for the price of a GTX.

Its $199 for reference and $209 for most after market ones.

[I/O]

Its $199 for reference and $209 for most after market ones.

http://www.newegg.ca/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&N=100007708%20600537575&IsNodeId=1&bop=And&Order=PRICE&PageSize=30

[TheProfosist]

http://www.newegg.ca/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&N=100007708%20600537575&IsNodeId=1&bop=And&Order=PRICE&PageSize=30

http://goo.gl/8TTGWK

I guess stop being from Canada?

[I/O]

http://goo.gl/8TTGWK

I guess stop being from Canada?

Its way overpriced in every Country other than the US and no I will never move to the US in a million years LOL.

[Suika]

http://www.newegg.ca/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&N=100007708%20600537575&IsNodeId=1&bop=And&Order=PRICE&PageSize=30

Yo, so I looked for you, my blind little friend, and the only card that's cheaper than the "$250 monstrosity" and is worth considering is the R9 280, which is slightly slower than the GTX 960. The 280 also has a higher TDP, and while I haven't seen any word on the 960's overclocking capabilities, probably doesn't do as well in overclocking.

[I/O]

Yo, so I looked for you, my blind little friend, and the only card that's cheaper than the "$250 monstrosity" and is worth considering is the R9 280, which is slightly slower than the GTX 960. The 280 also has a higher TDP, and while I haven't seen any word on the 960's overclocking capabilities, probably doesn't do as well in overclocking.

Stop being a troll.

[79wjd]

Sigh once again you are banking on asinine metrics to try and pump up a over hyped brand. Move you computer case away from yo face LOL and feel the cool air upon yo face LOL. Even running old cards like the GTX 280 and CFX HD 7850s I have never felt the heat LOL. I guess nvidia fan boys must be made of wax.

Yeah, how dare I want to keep my room at the temperature I have the AC set to. God forbid. Also, it's not near my face, but a computer at full load for hours pumps out enough heat to easily heat up a room. 

 

And how is it an asinine metric? The amount of money i spend running the card is just as important as the amount of money i pay for the card. 

[Suika]

Stop being a troll.

Double checked for you, the R9 280 peaks at around 300W. The GTX 960 got 119W (both torture tests by Tom's Hardware). You're paying more than twice in electricity for lower performance with a 280. Honestly the GTX 280 versus the 960, the comparison is laughable.

 

Unless you find the R9 280 for $65 less than the 960, I wouldn't consider it. The 280X is still more expensive than the 960, also has extremely high power usage, and isn't that much more powerful.

[I/O]

Double checked for you, the R9 280 peaks at around 300W. The GTX 960 got 119W (both torture tests by Tom's Hardware). You're paying more than twice in electricity for lower performance with a 280. Honestly the GTX 280 versus the 960, the comparison is laughable.

 

Unless you find the R9 280 for $65 less than the 960, I wouldn't consider it. The 280X is still more expensive than the 960, also has extremely high power usage, and isn't that much more powerful.

Some of us care about performance for money. In the end I would still go for the R9 280 cause of more Vram and better performance for today and in the future.

[Suika]

Some of us care about performance for money. In the end I would still go for the R9 280 cause of more Vram and better performance for today and in the future.

The R9 280 consumes twice the electricity, and would end up costing more, what are you talking about with performance per dollar (protip: not everybody has the same rent plan as you)?

 

The R9 280 has inferior performance and probably less headroom for overclocking, what are you talking about with better performance?

 

The R9 280 isn't even strong enough to support as much VRAM as it actually has, a GTX 760 4GB couldn't even use more than 2GB, what are you talking about?

[I/O]

The R9 280 consumes twice the electricity, and would end up costing more

I don't give a shit ! If you so worried about power consumption cost that turn off your dam PC and stop gaming ... problem solved and then you will have to best more efficient power consumption.