Who is the fanatic, really? Yes, it's one of those threads again

[don_svetlio]

Technically I own 4... Getting punished for being an early adopter sucks.

 

Coming from my last set of 970's with all their stupid driver crashes is so refreshing. I'm glad to be back on the AMD side. Now I just need a Freesync monitor.

2 DOA or?

[Masada02]

2 DOA or?

2 have the pump whine. One was an early production with the sticker on the pump and was loud as hell. The second was the newer pump but still had a faint high pitched whine. The first one is getting returned, I still haven't decided where the second is going.

[don_svetlio]

2 have the pump whine. One was an early production with the sticker on the pump and was loud as hell. The second was the newer pump but still had a faint high pitched whine. The first one is getting returned, I still haven't decided where the second is going.

Giff me mana

I would do ANYTHING for it

[Masada02]

Giff me mana

I would do ANYTHING for it

Lol, an exchange of currency would cover it. 

 

I will say though, having not been on the bleeding edge of graphics since I owned 2 4870x2's back in '08, being able to play literally anything I want fully maxed out is unbelievably nice. I thought about buying a couple 980ti's, but the better scaling and benefits of Crossfire over SLI just couldn't be beat. Also, having Nvidia drivers crashing my computer every 30 minutes while the Fury X was being released kind of sealed the deal.

[don_svetlio]

Lol, an exchange of currency would cover it. 

 

I will say though, having not been on the bleeding edge of graphics since I owned 2 4870x2's back in '08, being able to play literally anything I want fully maxed out is unbelievably nice. I thought about buying a couple 980ti's, but the better scaling and benefits of Crossfire over SLI just couldn't be beat. Also, having Nvidia drivers crashing my computer every 30 minutes while the Fury X was being released kind of sealed the deal.

Honestly, I would prefer to buy a Fury X imported if I were buying since over here they cost 750-800 euros or about 950$-ish. Titan X is 1200 euros or about 1400$

Inflation ftw.

[Masada02]

Honestly, I would prefer to buy a Fury X imported if I were buying since over here they cost 750-800 euros or about 950$-ish. Titan X is 1200 euros or about 1400$

Inflation ftw.

That's ridiculous. Those import taxes must be killer.

[don_svetlio]

That's ridiculous. Those import taxes must be killer.

980 is the same price as Fury X

[byalexandr]

The main reason I would stick with the 980 Ti is (shallow of me, but true) is that the reference cooler still appeals to me more than the watercooled Fury X, especially in a case like mine where I only have one 120mm slot and it's already going to be taken up by the CPU liquid cooler. That and aftermarket card manufacturers like EVGA have totally stolen my attention because of the stellar power savings and temperature drops. I don't see the value in spending less just to have a hotter card that barely delivers the same performance. That coupled with the over-dramatic marketing that AMD spits out is just not enough to make me want to purchase anything from AMD anymore. I had an FX 6300 (and I know the same doesn't apply with the cards) but AMD hyped it so much and it didn't deliver. If AMD was more calm about the marketing, and actually focused on making a great product that would ACTUALLY compete with Nvidia's offerings I would totally consider them. But as of now, Nvidia is the leader for a good reason. Call me a fanboy but it's just true.

[don_svetlio]

The main reason I would stick with the 980 Ti is (shallow of me, but true) is that the reference cooler still appeals to me more than the watercooled Fury X, especially in a case like mine where I only have one 120mm slot and it's already going to be taken up by the CPU liquid cooler. That and aftermarket card manufacturers like EVGA have totally stolen my attention because of the stellar power savings and temperature drops. I don't see the value in spending less just to have a hotter card that barely delivers the same performance. That coupled with the over-dramatic marketing that AMD spits out is just not enough to make me want to purchase anything from AMD anymore. I had an FX 6300 (and I know the same doesn't apply with the cards) but AMD hyped it so much and it didn't deliver. If AMD was more calm about the marketing, and actually focused on making a great product that would ACTUALLY compete with Nvidia's offerings I would totally consider them. But as of now, Nvidia is the leader for a good reason. Call me a fanboy but it's just true.

Fury X runs 20*C cooler than the 980 Ti

Also, read the long post a guy made in the previous page. He put it better than I could.

Also, 980 Ti is double the Fury X's price here so fuck that.

[incarnate]

This thread is amazing. 5 pages in.... civil discussion..... The whole way through, except the inflammatory first post.

Did I make a wrong turn on my way to the internet?

[don_svetlio]

This thread is amazing. 5 pages in.... civil discussion..... The whole way through, except the inflammatory first post.

Did I make a wrong turn on my way to the internet?

Yup, you took a wrong turn. Instead of a going right past the OP's post you should have headed left. There you would have ended up in 4chan

[Bensemus]

Throw it in their what?

The anecdotal evidence of me having driver crashes. Statistically my crashes mean nothing but they are happening to me and affect my perspective of said products. Also I used the wrong "there"

[ybriK]

Can someone actually explain to me why it's always like this:

 

>Nvidia

>Better Drivers

>AMD

>Shit Drivers

 

When I have a 6000 and R9 200 Series card and never experienced any driver related issues? I also have a GTX 780 and never experienced any driver issues, are people just making up these "driver issues" stories to make green or red (majority people tend to go with red) team look "bad"? Or is it one of those ATI issues that carried over to AMD?

[don_svetlio]

Can someone actually explain to me why it's always like this:

 

>Nvidia

>Better Drivers

>AMD

>Shit Drivers

 

When I have a 6000 and R9 200 Series card and never experienced any driver related issues? I also have a GTX 780 and never experienced any driver issues, are people just making up these "driver issues" stories to make green or red (majority people tend to go with red) team look "bad"? Or is it one of those ATI issues that carried over to AMD?

I've been using AMD cards since the ATI 3000 (used Radeon HD 3000 integrated, 5670, 6850 and my current R9 280) series and a friend has also used the ATI X550 and I have not heard of or seen driver issues myself. My friend's 860m had some issues with flickering and stuttering in Witcher 3 but we resolved those in about 15 minutes simply by updating everything. That's about it.

I guess these issues come from 2 types of people

A - those who use the boxed CD and then complain about it on forums since they didn't bother to watch/read/ask anything.

B - Those who update their drivers once in a blue moon and then complain why stuff is "broken"

Now, these are, to my knowledge, only the more common cases. Some people genuinely have driver issues and some drivers are simply bad *cough* doomsday driver for Kepler *cough*.

[Hieb]

Thing is though, they aint wrong. Well, im sort of in the AMD camp unless there is justification to go Nvidia, which there rarely is atm (unless we are talking 980Ti level cards).

 

Right now there's tons of reason to go Nvidia.

GTX 980 Ti > Fury X

GTX 980 = Fury

GTX 960 is a good buy compared to the 380

GTX 750 Ti outperforms the 260X/360

 

AMD's good options right now are the R9 390 and R7 370. And the R9 380 is a decent buy too. Their other current-gen cards are overpriced relative to their performance.

 

They made Gsync a long while back, had years of real world customer experience... it took AMD 1 year with freesync to catch up and match them in performance and quality, always beating them in raw price for the monitors....

 

Yeah GSync is a joke.

 

Nvidia made SLI, technically they may have invented multi GPU configs (i say maybe, was prolly some bloke in a shed that came up with the idea, but we never hear of those guys). Which they are doing worse at then AMD, and has been for a while.

 

Honestly I've heard it both ways. I've recently had someone with crossfire tell me just the opposite and that CFX scaling isn't as good. I don't know since I don't use multiGPU setups and have no intentions of doing so, but I'd be comfortable wagering a guess that they're around the same.

 

Every card Nvidia makes, short of the 980Ti, there is serious grounds for concers... 960 underperforming compared to competition. 970 with its Vram thing, 980 being made obsolete by their own pricing scheme....

 

The GTX 960 performs only slightly behind the R9 380 while usually costing slightly less as well. How on earth is that grounds for concern? It performs as you'd expect for the price...

 

Nvidia also started messing with the games themselves through gameworks. I am not sure what is truth, and what is fiction in terms of them "rigging" performance dumps for AMD. Truthfully, i think they just use a lot of tesselation and geometry heavy stuff in there, which screws over AMD purely due to how GCN works.... but they also screw over their own cards. Which sort of baffles me.

You make a product, that seemingly intentionally performs atrociously on your previous generation cards, for no reason at all... What gives?

 

Yeah I'm not sure what's going on with all that.

 

While AMD fans may be loyal to a fault. Nvidia fans are simply blinded by their own fanatiscism. They refuse to achnowledge that they are being shafted time and time again, for no logical reason. If AMD did this, and they have, even AMD fans rise up against them to make sure the issue is corrected. Yet Nvvidia fans seem to just brush it off and pretend it never happened....

 

Lol. "Our fanboys are better than Nvidia's fanboys". Literally one of the stupidest things I've ever heard. There are morons on both "teams" who blindly follow their preferred brand.

 

Your post was basically just a really long rant about Nvidia that started off saying AMD fanboys are right. Can you see how it's hard to take you seriously now?

[don_svetlio]

Right now there's tons of reason to go Nvidia.

GTX 980 Ti > Fury X

GTX 980 = Fury

GTX 960 is a good buy compared to the 380

GTX 750 Ti outperforms the 260X/360

 

AMD's good options right now are the R9 390 and R7 370. And the R9 380 is a decent buy too. Their other current-gen cards are overpriced relative to their performance.

 

 

Yeah GSync is a joke.

 

 

Honestly I've heard it both ways. I've recently had someone with crossfire tell me just the opposite and that CFX scaling isn't as good. I don't know since I don't use multiGPU setups and have no intentions of doing so, but I'd be comfortable wagering a guess that they're around the same.

 

 

The GTX 960 performs only slightly behind the R9 380 while usually costing slightly less as well. How on earth is that grounds for concern? It performs as you'd expect for the price...

 

 

Yeah I'm not sure what's going on with all that.

 

 

Lol. "Our fanboys are better than Nvidia's fanboys". Literally one of the stupidest things I've ever heard. There are morons on both "teams" who blindly follow their preferred brand.

 

Your post was basically just a really long rant about Nvidia that started off saying AMD fanboys are right. Can you see how it's hard to take you seriously now?

Actually, the 390X is on the same level as the 980 and the Fury has more horses than the 980, not by little.

Also, the 750 Ti compares to the 370, not the 360 and that is a much closer match with them being basically even.

The 960 is just a joke. It's underwhelming compared to previous X60 cards and the 380 really is a better option offering double the VRAM and more horses to drive that VRAM.

The only Nvidia cards that are better are the 980 Ti and Titan X. They simply perform better than the Fury X but those are for a select few. Most people buy 960/970/380/390s

and at that price point AMD simply has a better offer at the moment.

Recently, however, gameworks has been alarmingly bad with Witcher 3's performance still being arguably weird and Batman being flat out broken. I honestly don't like how Nvidia went out of their way to screw over GCN-based cards, be it tessalation or via via code itself. When Tress FX was better on AMD, Nvidia at least got the chance to make it run well on their cards. I am not entirely confident enough to call it foul play but it's getting there.

[Hieb]

Actually, the 390X is on the same level as the 980 and the Fury has more horses than the 980, not by little.

Also, the 750 Ti compares to the 370, not the 360 and that is a much closer match with them being basically even.

 

The 390X compares to the GTX 980 at 4K but most people are playing at 1080P and some at 1440P, and in these resolutions the GTX 980 is better than the 390X and about equal with the Fury. And the 750 Ti I usually see between the price of the 360 and 370. The 370 is definitely a better card though, no question.

 

 

The 960 is just a joke. It's underwhelming compared to previous X60 cards and the 380 really is a better option offering double the VRAM and more horses to drive that VRAM.

The only Nvidia cards that are better are the 980 Ti and Titan X. They simply perform better than the Fury X but those are for a select few. Most people buy 960/970/380/390s

and at that price point AMD simply has a better offer at the moment.

 

The GTX 960 and R9 380 both come in 2GB and 4GB configurations, and the R9 380 is only slightly more powerful than the GTX 960 out of the box. From what I've seen it also seems that you can get a better OC out of the GTX 960. If they're the same price then yeah I'd go for the R9 380. But the GTX 960 usually costs ~$20-30 less, so they have similar value.

 

The 370 and 390 are both excellent values and the 380 is a pretty good value. The 390X, Fury and Fury X are overpriced.

 

Recently, however, gameworks has been alarmingly bad with Witcher 3's performance still being arguably weird and Batman being flat out broken. I honestly don't like how Nvidia went out of their way to screw over GCN-based cards, be it tessalation or via via code itself. When Tress FX was better on AMD, Nvidia at least got the chance to make it run well on their cards. I am not entirely confident enough to call it foul play but it's getting there.

 

Yeah this topic is really iffy. Whatever the truth is (be it foul play or not) there's definitely a lot of deception going on. Like back in Project Cars the devs debunked the PhysX myth explaining that it makes up less than 10% of the physics processing on the CPU... and they also said Nvidia didn't pay them a dime... but then there are Nvidia banners everywhere in the game even on the console versions where there is no Nvidia hardware. You don't advertise a company in your game for free....

 

Little ranty there but yeah. Some really sketchy stuff going on with Witcher, Batman and PCARS.

[don_svetlio]

The 390X compares to the GTX 980 at 4K but most people are playing at 1080P and some at 1440P, and in these resolutions the GTX 980 is better than the 390X and about equal with the Fury. And the 750 Ti I usually see between the price of the 360 and 370. The 370 is definitely a better card though, no question.

 

 

 

The GTX 960 and R9 380 both come in 2GB and 4GB configurations, and the R9 380 is only slightly more powerful than the GTX 960 out of the box. From what I've seen it also seems that you can get a better OC out of the GTX 960. If they're the same price then yeah I'd go for the R9 380. But the GTX 960 usually costs ~$20-30 less, so they have similar value.

 

The 370 and 390 are both excellent values and the 380 is a pretty good value. The 390X, Fury and Fury X are overpriced.

 

 

Yeah this topic is really iffy. Whatever the truth is (be it foul play or not) there's definitely a lot of deception going on. Like back in Project Cars the devs debunked the PhysX myth explaining that it makes up less than 10% of the physics processing on the CPU... and they also said Nvidia didn't pay them a dime... but then there are Nvidia banners everywhere in the game even on the console versions where there is no Nvidia hardware. You don't advertise a company in your game for free....

 

Little ranty there but yeah. Some really sketchy stuff going on with Witcher, Batman and PCARS.

Yeah, I agree the 390X is overpriced. Haven't heard enough about Fury (almost nothing really) to say and Fury X is a good alternative to the 980 Ti/Titan X for people who want the bleeding edge of new tech (HBM) and AMD. I've also seen talk that HBM and with it the Fury cards are a lot better when it comes to VR because you really need fast memory to be able to accurately do everything associated with it. IIRC, the Oculus demos were running on Fiji cards before the actual release (not 100% sure).

As for the 960, I personally dislike the 128-bit buss the most. It just doesn't sit right with me. I know Maxwell's efficient and all and compression but seriously? 128-bit buss? That's mobile crap. Sorry but I really think they should have made the 960 slightly more powerful and actually able to drive 4 gigs. + It's horribly overpriced where I live so that's some bias. It costs about 50$ more than a 380 or 280 (when I was buying). And considering how overpriced stuff here already is, that just rubs me the wrong way. Also, Fury X is the same price as the 980, go figure

But yeah, gameworks is just very murky territory at the moment. I really wish Nvidia could play nice and release the source code. Look at it this way, if they are right and it's not designed to undercut AMD cards, then why would they hesitate to release the code? It would simply prove their statements and make everyone claiming otherwise into a laughing stock. Alternatively, if it's true, then that would make them look quite bad and that's actual motive for holding the info back. I mean, what, are they scared someone will use their badly optimized hair without their permission? I don't know. I am personally waiting for Tress FX 2.0 as I really like 1.0 and Hairworks actually looks weird to me. Not sure if just me but fur and stuff looks sort of wonky. I wouldn't have it on even if I had a Titan X. Just don't like it.

[D2ultima]

No, the GTX 760 was an underclocked 670, not an improved 660. The 660 wasn't used in the 700 series.

Actually since the 670 was 1344 cores, it wasn't a downclocked 670 either.

No, the 660 was for the most part 960 cores GK106 with a 192-bit memory bus and 2GB or 3GB of vRAM. The 680/770 on the other hand were 1536 cores with a 256-bit memory bus and 2GB or 4GB of vRAM. The 760 also had 1152 cores and a 256-bit mem bus with 2GB or 4GB of vRAM (or 192-bit mem bus with 1.5GB of vRAM for OEMs like Alienware)

[kirBi]

One of the stupidest post I have seen in a while.

[don_svetlio]

One of the stupidest post I have seen in a while.

If you mean the OP, I agree, no question. Surprisingly, an actual civil conversation and discussion happened.

Props to everyone who took part btw. You guys are awesome and are what make this forum awesome.

Here's to more cool and neat threads like this one.

[Dinkleberg]

Right now there's tons of reason to go Nvidia.

GTX 980 Ti > Fury X

GTX 980 = Fury

GTX 960 is a good buy compared to the 380

GTX 750 Ti outperforms the 260X/360

 

AMD's good options right now are the R9 390 and R7 370. And the R9 380 is a decent buy too. Their other current-gen cards are overpriced relative to their performance.

 

 

Yeah GSync is a joke.

 

 

Honestly I've heard it both ways. I've recently had someone with crossfire tell me just the opposite and that CFX scaling isn't as good. I don't know since I don't use multiGPU setups and have no intentions of doing so, but I'd be comfortable wagering a guess that they're around the same.

It's more like :

Fury X = 980 Ti, nearly equals, with the 980 Ti being a bit better performing, overclocking better and having more VRAM, but the Fury X is expecting unlocked voltage in a short time, some people have figured out how to overclock HBM which gives quite a boost in games and potential, a driver update or two down the line will nearly surely make it the better performing card, if you want the better card NOW then the 980 Ti > Fury X, if you want to take the risk and wait for AMD exploit the potential of the Fury X then Fury X > 980 Ti;

Fury > 980, beats the 980 by quite a margin for 50$ more, quieter, if you get the Tri-X, HBM for those who like being early adopters and potential;

390X = 980, they trade blows in most games, with the 980 getting the upper hand in 60% of the games, but the 70$ difference in price makes the 390X the better buy;

390 > 970, more VRAM and better performance out of the box in favour of the 390, and an OC to 1200 MHz, which is achievable by like 95/100 cards makes it beat a 970 OCed to 1450+ MHz;

380 > 960, better performance out of the box in favour of the 380 and a minor OC makes it beat even the most heavily OCed 960, they're priced the same with the 380 4 gigs version actually being priced lower, at least in Europe, and it can actually use 4 gigs;

370 > 750 Ti, the 370 performs better all around, a better buy unless you're upgrading an OEM PC;

360 = 750, the 360 has more VRAM but that's about it, they're very similarly performing;

I agree, G-Sync is a joke, it's 2 years (?) older costs at least 200$ more and does the same than what AMD figured out to do in a year and for cheaper.

CrossFire pros:

-Gives out more raw FPS;

-Less microstutter;

-Bridgeless;

CrossFire cons:

-Not as much support in games as SLI;

-No sexy LED-illuminated bridges (I like good looks, don't judge me);

[Dinkleberg]

Actually since the 670 was 1344 cores, it wasn't a downclocked 670 either.

A slightly cut-out 670 then ?

[Dinkleberg]

Yeah, I agree the 390X is overpriced. Haven't heard enough about Fury (almost nothing really) to say and Fury X is a good alternative to the 980 Ti/Titan X for people who want the bleeding edge of new tech (HBM) and AMD. I've also seen talk that HBM and with it the Fury cards are a lot better when it comes to VR because you really need fast memory to be able to accurately do everything associated with it. IIRC, the Oculus demos were running on Fiji cards before the actual release (not 100% sure).

The 390X isn't overpriced, it performs roughly the same as the 980 while being cheaper, the 980, for example, is overpriced, the Fury X is a little overpriced, the 960 is overpriced, the Titan X is OVERPRICED. It's a refreshed Hawaii XT, but it isn't overpriced, because AMD made a card that went neck-to-neck with the 970 go head-to-head with the 980, it's overpriced considering what it is, but not considering what it competes with.

[D2ultima]

A slightly cut-out 670 then ?

Yup, it's still GK104, but not as low as the 660 or as high as the 660Ti/670. In fact, in terms of compute power, the 660Ti is better than a 760, but the 192-bit mem bus + vRAM mismatch causing the final 512MB of the 2GB 660Ti meant that slowdowns due to slower vRAM (not as bad as the 970, and it was also created in a time where 1.5GB was still perfectly normal) as well as lower ROPs and TMUs meant that the 660Ti and the 760 traded a lot of blows in a lot of games, resulting in the 760 getting the "win" in many benchmark comparisons, despite the 660Ti being an overally (number-crunching-type) more powerful card.