[Meta] Can we stop the GTX 960 circlejerk?

[AlexWJD]

"stupidest"

 

my grammer is good

[AlexWJD]

XFX is a reputable company with a decent cooler design

can you not

 

A lot of people will strongly disagree with you. Why do you think they have a lifetime warranty on their cards? 

[miagisan]

i have 3 computers, all a mix of Intel/and/nvidia. But at that performance level, the 280x is a much better deal and better performance than the 960. Only reason it sells better is because of nvidia branding imho.

[Octavialicious]

A lot of people will strongly disagree with you. Why do you think they have a lifetime warranty on their cards?

I'd have to say more would strongly disagree with you.

[christianled59]

my grammer is good

In that case, the word "stupid" would suffice.

[AlexWJD]

i have 3 computers, all a mix of Intel/and/nvidia. But at that performance level, the 280x is a much better deal and better performance than the 960. Only reason it sells better is because of nvidia branding imho.

 

Of course. It all comes down to budget. Like I said before, in a budget build $20 can go either way. The problem I have though is why do people still then recommend the 280/285 if they can get a 280X for $20 more? It's very bias. 

[kuzimins]

VRAM = 280 > 960

 

For now the vram is fine but for how long?

 

I reckon in half a year or a year Triple A games which are big to play will require more vram

 

P.S You have a 960 of course you would say all this

Think of some more arguments m8, it looks like vram is the only thing you can argue on, and in some cases you can't even do it right anyway. 

[AlexWJD]

I'd have to say more would strongly disagree with you.

 

Virtus.Pro is my favourite team so I'm going to stop this argument, I don't want to get into a war with another TeamBiceps member 

[Majestic]

i have 3 computers, all a mix of Intel/and/nvidia. But at that performance level, the 280x is a much better deal and better performance than the 960. Only reason it sells better is because of nvidia branding imho.

 

Or people don't like buying rebrands (7970), value the noiselevel at load and 0dB fantech, enjoy the better day-one drivers better (many new games are a mess with AMD drivers at launch), use shadowplay or value power consumption, enjoy overclocking. There are more reasons than just "bang for buck". Don't generalise, project your own bias or maginalise someones choices.

[AlexWJD]

Think of some more arguments m8, it looks like vram is the only thing you can argue on, and in some cases you can't even do it right anyway. 

 

The VRAM is there, but everything else lacks. The 280 just doesn't have the same GPU power as the 960. The 285, on the other hand, is way better than the 280 IMO and is even with the 960 

[AFlyingBuffalo]

The 960 is actually a pretty good card, but if you want good price to performance get a 285 or 290. Personally I'm going with a 960 4GB for my next build because power supply limits, noise, heat, ShadowPlay, and AMD drivers are pretty bad.

[AlexWJD]

The 960 is actually a pretty good card, but if you want good price to performance get a 280x or 290. Personally I'm going with a 960 4GB for my next build because power supply limits, and AMD drivers are pretty bad.

 

I was hesitant to include the AMD driver argument, but GTA:V is a perfect example.

[christianled59]

The VRAM is there, but everything else lacks. The 280 just doesn't have the same GPU power as the 960. The 285, on the other hand, is way better than the 280 IMO and is even with the 960

Your bias is undeniable. You're trying to say that the 960 is worth it's price. It's not. 280 and 285 win because of vram. It's a fact not an opinion.

[UnofficialPotato]

Id vouch for Nvidia's 960 depending on what you're using it for. Despite everyone telling me to get a 280X I feel the 960 would be far more suited for what I actually want to do, which in my case is play Dota 2 and Skyrim at a comfortable fps. Nvidia is far better as far as software goes and much easier to use for a new PC builder ( such as myself). I don't know if this is relevant or not but if anyone saw the recent WAN show they talked about AMD's 180 million dollar loss in the last year. If you want to look out for the little guy then go AMD which is a great company but if you want to be a consumer then go Nvidia as of now because I think AMD might have to raise some prices to bring them back to where they once were.

[Majestic]

The 960 is actually a pretty good card, but if you want good price to performance get a 280x or 290. Personally I'm going with a 960 4GB for my next build because power supply limits, and AMD drivers are pretty bad.

 

960 4GB is arguably very bad value. That makes little sense and you should just go with a 2GB version. I also think the value for money thing is overrated, especially when you start overclocking the cards. Maxwell is a beast with overclocking and usually closes any pricegap.

 

 

Your bias is undeniable. You're trying to say that the 960 is worth it's price. It's not. 280 and 285 win because of vram. It's a fact not an opinion.

 

Neither card can "win", because it depends on the demands of the user. Stop trying for force a public opinion about what is "best" because there is no "best". Especially not on one single aspect of the card, like VRAM.

[kuzimins]

Your bias is undeniable. You're trying to say that the 960 is worth it's price. It's not. 280 and 285 win because of vram. It's a fact not an opinion.

the 285 has the same amount of vram as the 960

[AlexWJD]

Your bias is undeniable. You're trying to say that the 960 is worth it's price. It's not. 280 and 285 win because of vram. It's a fact not an opinion.

 

The 285 has 2GB of VRAM, same as the 960. The 960 and 285 both beat the 280, while being at the same price. It's fact, not an opinion. I praise the 285, its a very solid card. Is that bias? The 280 is even a damn rebrand!

[miagisan]

Or people don't like buying rebrands (7970), value the noiselevel at load and 0dB fantech, enjoy the better day-one drivers better (many new games are a mess with AMD drivers at launch), use shadowplay or value power consumption, like overclocking. There are more reasons than just "bang for buck". Don't generalise, project your own bias or maginalise someones choices.

Sorry but most 280/285 are no louder than the CPU at idle or low usage. You would never be able to tell. And you don't think nvidia rebrands? Lol. Amd also has a shadow play equivalent. So most of your points are moot. Again, that price point, amd is the better choice.

[Majestic]

Sorry but most 280/285 are no louder than the CPU at idle or low usage. You would never be able to tell. And you don't think nvidia rebrands? Lol. Amd also has a shadow play equivalent. So most of your points are moot. Again, that price point, amd is the better choice.

 

The difference is, i'm not saying any of them are "best" because I think that is utterly stupid. And I don't know what CPU you have, but mine makes no sound. It's the cooler that is audible, but it depends on the quality to which extent. So you can't make a generalistic remark on that subject because it depends on which CPU cooler you have. 

 

And my Noctua NH-U9S is quiet enough in Idle for me to notice my A5+ speakers hissing (i have fox ears) so i'd notice an idle GPU fan spinning, so again...context matters and no card is "best".

[ForsakenLive]

We all know today there is a lot of compression going on the video buffers, which means they can use a small memory bus and still manage to effectively use over 2 GB.

 

However, even 2 years ago, we thought 1GB would be ok for 1080p, with 2GB being the recommended amount for high settings. We also saw there was a big relationship between memory bus, speed, and memory speed.

Today a 1080p game will use over 3GB, and it's a common thing for it to happen. These 2GB cards manage to stay on par with the rest, as their technology and drivers allows for a smart handling of data. But, can we say that's going to be the case in 2 years? We are scared that these specs won't be able to keep up, specially for a GPU that is mostly power-efficient oriented. It doesn't look like a balls to the wall card, like the HD 7870 looked.

 

When the GTX 960 was launched, I was kinda mad, as I though the GPU didn't have a reason to exist, it was priced higher than the competition and performed less. But today, with the fixed pricing, and the increased performance thanks to software updates, I find myself adding it to part lists that I recommend.

 

Personally, I think the GTX 960 will stay relevant, and that  it will allow medium settings gaming on 1080p for quite some time. But even for this resolution I'd advice people to save their pennies, hold on with the purchase, and aim higher.

[AFlyingBuffalo]

 Lol. Amd also has a shadow play equivalent.

I've been using it since I got my card and I cannot stand it, the PlaysTV thing is a joke and the game optimization thing is bad. The Raptr app is just bad. That's the one you're talking about right?

[AFlyingBuffalo]

I'm going with the 4GB version because I'd like to have higher texture resolutions in games and ALL THE VISUAL MODS FOR SKYRIM!

 

960 4GB is arguably very bad value. That makes little sense and you should just go with a 2GB version.

[Majestic]

 

Today a 1080p game will use over 3GB, and it's a common thing for it to happen. These 2GB cards manage to stay on par with the rest, as their technology and drivers allows for a smart handling of data. But, can we say that's going to be the case in 2 years?

 

No, but you can't argue the other way around either. 

 

I've been using it since I got my card and I cannot stand it, the PlaysTV thing is a joke and the game optimization thing is bad. The Raptr app is just bad.

 

Indeed, AMD is aping all of Nvidia's stuff but never puts in any effort. It's always half-baked and barely functional. That is not biased, just look at PCPer's discection of Freesync.

 

 

I'm going with the 4GB version because I'd like to have higher texture resolutions in games and ALL THE VISUAL MODS FOR SKYRIM!

 

I don't really think you will gain much from that investment. You might aswell invest that money towards a faster card which will have more memory by default. ENB hammers GPU's just as much as it does VRAM.

[kuzimins]

We all know today there is a lot of compression going on the video buffers, which means they can use a small memory bus and still manage to effectively use over 2 GB.

 

However, even 2 years ago, we thought 1GB would be ok for 1080p, with 2GB being the recommended amount for high settings. We also saw there was a big relationship between memory bus, speed, and memory speed.

Today a 1080p game will use over 3GB, and it's a common thing for it to happen. These 2GB cards manage to stay on par with the rest, as their technology and drivers allows for a smart handling of data. But, can we say that's going to be the case in 2 years? We are scared that these specs won't be able to keep up, specially for a GPU that is mostly power-efficient oriented. It doesn't look like a balls to the wall card, like the HD 7870 looked.

 

When the GTX 960 was launched, I was kinda mad, as I though the GPU didn't have a reason to exist, it was priced higher than the competition and performed less. But today, with the fixed pricing, and the increased performance thanks to software updates, I find myself adding it to part lists that I recommend.

 

Personally, I think the GTX 960 will stay relevant, and that  it will allow medium settings gaming on 1080p for quite some time. But even for this resolution I'd advice people to save their pennies, hold on with the purchase, and aim higher.

Games can use 3gb, but that is not the same as "needs" 3gb. Damn, I play GTA 5 with textures and shit maxed out and it runs just fine

[LarsReviews]

Night Theme, OP I can't read your Post.