[Meta] Can we stop the GTX 960 circlejerk?

[Majestic]

The 960 isn't inherently a bad card, it's just priced wrongly considering the 280X is the same price here in the UK and the 280 is £20 less. The overclocking potential of the 960 is outstanding, as is the efficiency, enough so that I'm tempted to get one and later on down the road go SLI, as my PSU will be able to support it and an overclock. The memory is a bit of a bugger, it's more likely that the 960 will run into issues with textures etc. earlier on than the 280X, but for now it's good enough, although for how long, taking into account games like GTA V, we've yet to see.

 

No not really. Maxwell doesn't scale at all with memory overclocks, meaning the bandwidth is sufficient. I did a test with my 970 when I still had it.

 

Tomb Raider 2013, 4K DSR with 4xMSAA (i think). Tested with 7ghz memory and 8ghz memory. This is the result;

 

7ghz; http://i.imgur.com/fETPHKt.jpg

8ghz; http://i.imgur.com/y3zBr4i.jpg

 

Less than 4% better on a 14% overclock. Really poor scaling, making it rather a moot point to worry about. I did the same test with my 670 back in the days and the scaling with memory was equal to the overclock. For Kepler the bandwidth limitation was real, maxwell not so much. The efficiency of maxwell is mostly because of the compression, and it doesn't suffer for it.

[AlexWJD]

The cheapest is $190, unless you want a crappy PNY XLR8. $20 more is a pretty damn good price for the performance increase.

 

You were just telling me about the $210 XFX 280X, which is a shitty cooler. Don't talk about the PNY cooler when you just said the XFX was good. 

 

 

snip

 

 

Again, one benchmark with nothing other than the resolution. Try again. 

 

 

snip

 

The 960 is not an upgrade for 670 and 770 users. It is for the 660 and 760 users. Think of it like this: if you sell your current GPU (660's for $100 and 760's for $130) then you use it plus some more to upgrade to a 960, its not a bad deal. I do agree the performance gap between the 760 and 960 isn't huge, but look at the 780 and 970. Not that big difference. I can tell you for a fact, from personal experience, I got a 60%+ increase in performance from my 660 to 960. Thats worth it to me. 

 

snip

 

 

Unfortunately thats just how your country is  But please don't act like its like that for everywhere, because its not

 

 

The 960 a good value?

 

Why? My main point: everyone says the 960 is bad and all, but evidence to support such claim is never included. 

 

 

I disagree slightly. Personal preference might play some part in peoples choices, but the most logical choice at all time should be price:performance. It should come before anything for consumers on a budget, and these two choices are aimed towards people on a budget anyways. That being said, time plays a very important factor in these choices. What is a cheaper option today, could cost more tomorrow. The more expensive card could go on sale tomorrow, making it the better choice at the time. I know some people have other means for buying things, such as aesthetics and performance per watt, etc, but i still advise people to get the best for their dollar. 

 

I personally don't believe in the futureproofing and stick with the "futureproofing is a sham" ideal. Because it is. We don't know what Just Cause 3 or Battlefront 3 will need to run. We can only play for today. I left the futureproof remark in my post because people will always live by it no matter what. 

[MageTank]

Price/performance or price/value? I'd say the latter is the most interesting. Raw performance can come at a cost and can blind you to other benefits. Nvidia's day-one drivers are generally better, the 10-15% performance gap the 280(X) has is mostly elievated by overclocking (which is piss easy on the 960). The memorybus isn't a bottleneck for the 970, so it's not a bottleneck for the 960 either. 

 

So it boils down to preference. You can either choose for;

 

960;

-High Overclocking (1.5+ ghz pretty much guaranteed)

-Shadowplay

-Gsync

-2GB memory

-fanless idle

-low heat output (so less airflow req.)

-lower power supply required

 

280

-Freesync

-3GB memory

-Mantle (though in most mantle titles nvidia's DX11 driver is just as good).

-.... i got nothing.

 

That is not meant as a stab, I just don't really know what else AMD has going for it. So help me fill in.

 

I understand the pro's and cons of each card, i am just saying that when it comes to computer hardware in general, that one should strive to get the most out of their dollar, regardless of the brand name. I do have a slight preference for Nvidia cards at the moment, but only because Nvidia cards offer the lowest TDP options (I run mini ITX in tight small form factor cases) and they offer enough performance for my needs. However, if AMD had a card of similar specs and was priced lower, i would not hesitate to buy it if it too performed as i needed it to. 

 

This thread is pretty much doing exactly what OP wants it to do. It is fighting a pointless brand war to justify his purchase of a GPU. The fact that we all fell for it is kind of disappointing, but expected. We all are capable of agreeing that the 960 is not a bad idea to purchase when in dire need of a budget 1080p gaming card, and i am also certain we are all capable of agreeing that the 960 is exactly that, a 1080p budget card. Anyone trying to say it is anything more, or less, is misinformed. It is not a magical GPU that runs on unicorn dust enchanted by the most powerful wizard on top of a volcano, it is just your average run of the mill budget GPU that we've been seeing for every iteration of Geforce GPU's. 

 

Again, my complaints for this GPU does not stem from anything it resembles now, it comes from my feelings towards what this GPU should have, and could have been.

[zappian]

You were just telling me about the $210 XFX 280X, which is a shitty cooler.

 

The XFX cooler is decent on the 280x , it had vrm cooling issues on the 290.

The denial is so strong lol , every argument thats made OP just makes up a totally irrational and senseless comeback.

[Majestic]

I understand the pro's and cons of each card, i am just saying that when it comes to computer hardware in general, that one should strive to get the most out of their dollar, regardless of the brand name. I do have a slight preference for Nvidia cards at the moment, but only because Nvidia cards offer the lowest TDP options (I run mini ITX in tight small form factor cases) and they offer enough performance for my needs. However, if AMD had a card of similar specs and was priced lower, i would not hesitate to buy it if it too performed as i needed it to. 

 

This thread is pretty much doing exactly what OP wants it to do. It is fighting a pointless brand war to justify his purchase of a GPU. The fact that we all fell for it is kind of disappointing, but expected. We all are capable of agreeing that the 960 is not a bad idea to purchase when in dire need of a budget 1080p gaming card, and i am also certain we are all capable of agreeing that the 960 is exactly that, a 1080p budget card. Anyone trying to say it is anything more, or less, is misinformed. It is not a magical GPU that runs on unicorn dust enchanted by the most powerful wizard on top of a volcano, it is just your average run of the mill budget GPU that we've been seeing for every iteration of Geforce GPU's. 

 

Again, my complaints for this GPU does not stem from anything it resembles now, it comes from my feelings towards what this GPU should have, and could have been.

 

All i have done is argue between two products, not brands. And I never said any of them was better in general. I also have pref. towards the 960 since I own one, but I can understand someone buying the 280. I don't think the OP wanted infighting, the discussions in this pricemargin are just incredibly dense and one-sided. Everyone just basically argues "3GB, so 280 is better" and disregards everything I've listed in the pro's and cons. That is the issue, noone lists the pro's and cons and lets the buyer decide for themselves. They're forcing people to either side, which is annoying and not helping anyone.

 

We're basically arguing the same, but that's usually not the case, which is the point (i believe) the OP was trying to get across.

[AlexWJD]

I understand the pro's and cons of each card, i am just saying that when it comes to computer hardware in general, that one should strive to get the most out of their dollar, regardless of the brand name. I do have a slight preference for Nvidia cards at the moment, but only because Nvidia cards offer the lowest TDP options (I run mini ITX in tight small form factor cases) and they offer enough performance for my needs. However, if AMD had a card of similar specs and was priced lower, i would not hesitate to buy it if it too performed as i needed it to. 

 

This thread is pretty much doing exactly what OP wants it to do. It is fighting a pointless brand war to justify his purchase of a GPU. The fact that we all fell for it is kind of disappointing, but expected. We all are capable of agreeing that the 960 is not a bad idea to purchase when in dire need of a budget 1080p gaming card, and i am also certain we are all capable of agreeing that the 960 is exactly that, a 1080p budget card. Anyone trying to say it is anything more, or less, is misinformed. It is not a magical GPU that runs on unicorn dust enchanted by the most powerful wizard on top of a volcano, it is just your average run of the mill budget GPU that we've been seeing for every iteration of Geforce GPU's. 

 

Again, my complaints for this GPU does not stem from anything it resembles now, it comes from my feelings towards what this GPU should have, and could have been.

 

I'm not justifying my purchase. That would be recommending it as the only option and saying that it is the best. I made that post a while back, hoping people would stop with dumb arguments, but it didn't help. Hopefully people will start understanding now. All three cards have a place, but everyone simply dismisses the 960, even though it outperforms some and costs the same. I want to clarify here, I'm not bias. If I was, this thread would be very different. I understand the gr8 b8 m8 I created here, but I feel the need to get this point across, and I know some people agree. 

[Trik'Stari]

-snip

It's not that its "bad" per say, it's just that there are much better options, for not that much more.

[AlexWJD]

It's not that its "bad" per say, it's just that there are much better options, for not that much more.

 

Alright, I see your point. People say that for $30 or so more you can get a 280X. But think about it like this, why do people still recommend the 280/285 then, which are the same price as the 960, if for $30 more they can also get the 280X aswell?

[Briggsy]

I personally don't believe in the futureproofing and stick with the "futureproofing is a sham" ideal. Because it is. We don't know what Just Cause 3 or Battlefront 3 will need to run. We can only play for today. I left the futureproof remark in my post because people will always live by it no matter what. 

 

The 280x (7970) is over 3 years old now, and is still the best 1080p card you can buy, and would probably outlive the 960 if AMD weren't giving it the ol' "End of Life" stamp. 

 

Future proofing is all about buying more than what you need right now, and it is in Nvidia's best interest to not give you more than what you need right now. If you want something that will last a few years, they will charge you through the nose for it. 

[AlexWJD]

 

 

and it is in Nvidia's best interest to not give you more than what you need right now.

 

Last time I checked, the 970 was pretty damn good at 1080 and 1440. Is that not enough? 

[Trik'Stari]

Alright, I see your point. People say that for $30 or so more you can get a 280X. But think about it like this, why do people still recommend the 280/285 then, which are the same price as the 960, if for $30 more they can also get the 280X aswell?

Not everyone overclocks.

[Briggsy]

Last time I checked, the 970 was pretty damn good at 1080 and 1440. Is that not enough? 

 

its overkill for 1080p, and twice the price of a 960. my point stands on futureproofing, even if you quoted me out of context.

[MageTank]

 

The 960 is not an upgrade for 670 and 770 users. It is for the 660 and 760 users. Think of it like this: if you sell your current GPU (660's for $100 and 760's for $130) then you use it plus some more to upgrade to a 960, its not a bad deal. I do agree the performance gap between the 760 and 960 isn't huge, but look at the 780 and 970. Not that big difference. I can tell you for a fact, from personal experience, I got a 60%+ increase in performance from my 660 to 960. Thats worth it to me. 

 

 

 

 

I personally don't believe in the futureproofing and stick with the "futureproofing is a sham" ideal. Because it is. We don't know what Just Cause 3 or Battlefront 3 will need to run. We can only play for today. I left the futureproof remark in my post because people will always live by it no matter what. 

 

The 960 is not an upgrade to the 660 or 760 either. The 660 is still capable of driving the latest AAA titles at Medium settings. Are you really going to pay another $200 just to go from medium to high settings at the same resolution? Also, it is most certainly not an upgrade to anyone with a 760, do not even try to call that logical. If you are going to sell your old GPU to get the same relative performance, why not wait and buy something that will actually show you a difference in performance? You do not need to remind me that the 780 is almost as fast as a 970, because most of us also know this. I have friends that own 780's that refuse to upgrade to a 970 for the exact reason i mentioned above regarding the 760. It would be pointless to spend $330 for a slight performance boost.

 

You are also an optimist if you think you can get $130 for a 760, as i've seen them sell for as little as $100 flat before (My 770 only got an offer for $160). GPU's depreciate in value heavily when they are used, so selling your current used GPU might not be a viable choice unless you already have something to replace it with. If you can already afford the $200 960, and you have a GPU worth selling to recoup your money, then holding on for another $100 to afford the 970 wont hurt.

 

Also, i never once mentioned future proofing in my posts, because that concept is impossible to achieve. You can delay the future by buying cutting edge hardware, but time always catches up.

 

 

 

I'm not justifying my purchase. That would be recommending it as the only option and saying that it is the best. I made that post a while back, hoping people would stop with dumb arguments, but it didn't help. Hopefully people will start understanding now. All three cards have a place, but everyone simply dismisses the 960, even though it outperforms some and costs the same. I want to clarify here, I'm not bias. If I was, this thread would be very different. I understand the gr8 b8 m8 I created here, but I feel the need to get this point across, and I know some people agree. 

 

You are trying to justify it. That previous thread i linked is 100% proof of that. This is the second time you are trying to sway people's personal opinions over a product you own, simply because you feel its better than they say it is. Had you not owned this card, would you be going through all this effort to make these claims? Here in Ohio, our local Microcenter lets just play on test rigs with these new hardware that comes out, and i actually got to play with the GTX 960 on Far Cry 4. They had it hooked up to a test bench with a 4670k and 16gb of ram (dont ask why) and it ran good, with most settings on high/very high. I then played around with the options (trying out ultra) and the card then met its limitations. I went back to very high, and tried 1440p, where it again fell very short. I had to put the settings all the way down on medium to even play 1440p on the 960, and some would argue that the FPS is still outside of their comfort zone.

 

The point is, i am not talking out of my head when i speak about the 960, i did actually get to play around with one for a good 20 minutes before moving on, and i was capable of seeing what it could do. To be fair, my 770 cannot perform well at 1440p either, but i am perfectly fine with calling my 770 a 1080p card. We were just hoping the 960 would match the performance of a 770, while offering a better experience at 1440p with a better memory bus, and slightly more vram to go with DCC and the other Maxwell features.

 

Since you, and everyone else here agree's that the card is not a "bad" card, i guess we can finally end the point of this thread. Let's hope we don't see another "Come on guys, the 960 is a graphics card too!" thread, because that would drive me to the brink of insanity.

[AlexWJD]

The 960 is not an upgrade to the 660 or 760 either. The 660 is still capable of driving the latest AAA titles at Medium settings. Are you really going to pay another $200 just to go from medium to high settings at the same resolution? Also, it is most certainly not an upgrade to anyone with a 760, do not even try to call that logical. If you are going to sell your old GPU to get the same relative performance, why not wait and buy something that will actually show you a difference in performance? You do not need to remind me that the 780 is almost as fast as a 970, because most of us also know this. I have friends that own 780's that refuse to upgrade to a 970 for the exact reason i mentioned above regarding the 760. It would be pointless to spend $330 for a slight performance boost.

 

You are also an optimist if you think you can get $130 for a 760, as i've seen them sell for as little as $100 flat before (My 770 only got an offer for $160). GPU's depreciate in value heavily when they are used, so selling your current used GPU might not be a viable choice unless you already have something to replace it with. If you can already afford the $200 960, and you have a GPU worth selling to recoup your money, then holding on for another $100 to afford the 970 wont hurt.

 

Also, i never once mentioned future proofing in my posts, because that concept is impossible to achieve. You can delay the future by buying cutting edge hardware, but time always catches up.

 

 

 

 

You are trying to justify it. That previous thread i linked is 100% proof of that. This is the second time you are trying to sway people's personal opinions over a product you own, simply because you feel its better than they say it is. Had you not owned this card, would you be going through all this effort to make these claims? Here in Ohio, our local Microcenter lets just play on test rigs with these new hardware that comes out, and i actually got to play with the GTX 960 on Far Cry 4. They had it hooked up to a test bench with a 4670k and 16gb of ram (dont ask why) and it ran good, with most settings on high/very high. I then played around with the options (trying out ultra) and the card then met its limitations. I went back to very high, and tried 1440p, where it again fell very short. I had to put the settings all the way down on medium to even play 1440p on the 960, and some would argue that the FPS is still outside of their comfort zone.

 

The point is, i am not talking out of my head when i speak about the 960, i did actually get to play around with one for a good 20 minutes before moving on, and i was capable of seeing what it could do. To be fair, my 770 cannot perform well at 1440p either, but i am perfectly fine with calling my 770 a 1080p card. We were just hoping the 960 would match the performance of a 770, while offering a better experience at 1440p with a better memory bus, and slightly more vram to go with DCC and the other Maxwell features.

 

Since you, and everyone else here agree's that the card is not a "bad" card, i guess we can finally end the point of this thread. Let's hope we don't see another "Come on guys, the 960 is a graphics card too!" thread, because that would drive me to the brink of insanity.

 

I disagree with the price part. I sold my GTX 660 for $100 on ebay and my dad sold his GTX 760 for around $150 or so, both cards being relatively old. You don't pay the full 200 dollars, you sell your old card and pay the difference making it way more viable. Anyone with a 660 and below will notice a substantial upgrade. 

[MageTank]

I disagree with the price part. I sold my GTX 660 for $110 on ebay and my dad sold his GTX 760 for $150, both cards being repetitively old. You don't pay the full 200 dollars, you sell your old card and pay the difference making it way more viable. Anyone with a 660 and below will notice a substantial upgrade. 

 

You sell your GPU before you have one to replace it with? What do you do when waiting for your new card to arrive? Sounds counter productive. Also, i don't know if you have craigslist in your area, but you can find cheap cards all the time on craigslist. 

 

Note: This is not an advertised selling, just using this to prove a point:  https://columbus.craigslist.org/sop/4971279345.html

 

That is a GTX 760 very close to my home for sale, took me 5 minutes to google it. Before you say "you might get scammed, or murdered for using craigslist", always test the hardware before making a purchase, and always meet your seller in a public location. 

 

You and your father got a good amount of money on your cards, but as i stated before, time plays a big factor on things. You might not be able to get that much now.

[AlexWJD]

You sell your GPU before you have one to replace it with? What do you do when waiting for your new card to arrive? Sounds counter productive. Also, i don't know if you have craigslist in your area, but you can find cheap cards all the time on craigslist. 

 

Note: This is not an advertised selling, just using this to prove a point:  https://columbus.craigslist.org/sop/4971279345.html

 

That is a GTX 760 very close to my home for sale, took me 5 minutes to google it. Before you say "you might get scammed, or murdered for using craigslist", always test the hardware before making a purchase, and always meet your seller in a public location. 

 

You and your father got a good amount of money on your cards, but as i stated before, time plays a big factor on things. You might not be able to get that much now.

 

Intel HD graphics. Works for some, was good enough for me. 

[Laputacake]

Also, what does meta mean?

[Octavialicious]

You were just telling me about the $210 XFX 280X, which is a shitty cooler. Don't talk about the PNY cooler when you just said the XFX was good. 

 

 

Again, one benchmark with nothing other than the resolution. Try again. 

 

 

 

The 960 is not an upgrade for 670 and 770 users. It is for the 660 and 760 users. Think of it like this: if you sell your current GPU (660's for $100 and 760's for $130) then you use it plus some more to upgrade to a 960, its not a bad deal. I do agree the performance gap between the 760 and 960 isn't huge, but look at the 780 and 970. Not that big difference. I can tell you for a fact, from personal experience, I got a 60%+ increase in performance from my 660 to 960. Thats worth it to me. 

 

 

Unfortunately thats just how your country is  But please don't act like its like that for everywhere, because its not

 

 

 

Why? My main point: everyone says the 960 is bad and all, but evidence to support such claim is never included. 

 

 

 

I personally don't believe in the futureproofing and stick with the "futureproofing is a sham" ideal. Because it is. We don't know what Just Cause 3 or Battlefront 3 will need to run. We can only play for today. I left the futureproof remark in my post because people will always live by it no matter what.

Hope you realize the XLR8 is a terrible reference cooler, where the XFX is a decent aftermarket design

[AlexWJD]

Hope you realize the XLR8 is a terrible reference cooler, where the XFX is a decent aftermarket design

 

No its quite the opposite. The cooler is quite good. XFX is super loud and poor at cooling. 

[SteveGrabowski]

Conclusion:  960 is a great card, along with the 280 and 285. If you're recommending the latter two, which sometimes fall to the 960 (In GTA:V especially) then isn't it logical to recommend the 960 as well? Don't talk about subjects in which you have no knowledge in. 

 

The 960 is not a great card. It's a nice 1080p card, but calling it great is really overselling it. The only card on the market right now that I'd truly consider great is the GTX 970, because it offered 780 level performance for $330 at launch, as compared to spending $400 for 680 level performance with the GTX 770. It completely shook the GPU market and forced AMD to drop prices on their flagship 290 and 290x cards by $150 almost overnight.

[Elapo]

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

Because they stand behind their product?

 

I mean, Making shitty stuff and then offering lifetime warranty isn't a good business model.

[sgloux3470]

http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/hardware-canucks-reviews/68697-nvidia-gtx-960-reference-review-16.html

 

Read it.

[miagisan]

http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/hardware-canucks-reviews/68697-nvidia-gtx-960-reference-review-16.html

Read it.

Great article. I love hwcanucks. This is exactly what I was trying to point out.

[AlexWJD]

http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/hardware-canucks-reviews/68697-nvidia-gtx-960-reference-review-16.html

 

Read it.

 

Dude, do you bottleneck your 980's with that CPU? I can't imagine... 

 

As for the article, the 960 wasn't meant to bring anything new to the market. Nvidia needed competition against the R9 280/285 and thats what the 960 does. 

[sgloux3470]

Dude, do you bottleneck your 980's with that CPU? I can't imagine... 

 

As for the article, the 960 wasn't meant to bring anything new to the market. Nvidia needed competition against the R9 280/285 and thats what the 960 does. 

 

Not in most games at 4K.

 

The 960 doesn't do anything the 760 didn't already do.  Atleast the 970 and 980 were significantly cheaper than the 780/780Ti despite their similar performance.  

 

It's not a bad card, but it could have been a great card if it was closer to the 970 in performance.