Nvidia vs AMD

[WangKe]

Yeah, AMD really stepped their GPU game up, not to mention that there basically are no bad early DX12 benchmarks for AMD GPUs, I wish I could say the same of Nvidia's.

I never really had a bias in terms of favoring AMD or Nvidia over the other. But after what Nvidia did, I'd rather take the "lower performance" of the Fury X as a way of support. You can have the best performance in the world today or tomorrow, but if on the third day... if things turn around quickly... I'd rather have two shit days and a great day afterwards instead.

[App4that]

wait what

i was for crossfire lol

"AMD has significantly better dual GPU"

 

I was responding to that, my experience contradicts that statement :lol:

[Morgan MLGman]

I never really had a bias in terms of favoring AMD or Nvidia over the other. But after what Nvidia did, I'd rather take the "lower performance" of the Fury X as a way of support. You can have the best performance in the world today or tomorrow, but if on the third day... if things turn around quickly... I'd rather have two shit days and a great day afterwards instead.

I mean, I've used Nvidia my entire gaming "career" basically, since 2004 only Nvidia GPUs up until 3 months ago when I switched my GTX 970 to R9 290X.

What I would be afraid of when getting a 980Ti is that the same thing might happen to it as happened to a 780Ti. That an equivalent of a GTX 1070 will beat it for half the price next year. Not to mention shaky DX12 results with async computing not being utilized properly on Maxwell-based GPUs.

[don_svetlio]

"AMD has significantly better dual GPU"

 

I was responding to that, my experience contradicts that statement :lol:

Could be since you have a 390 and 290 rather than 290 and 290 or 390 and 390 - it's a refresh, not a direct rebrand some there ARE some differences

[PlayStation 2]

"AMD has significantly better dual GPU"

 

I was responding to that, my experience contradicts that statement :lol:

oh lol

[App4that]

I mean, I've used Nvidia my entire gaming "career" basically, since 2004 only Nvidia GPUs up until 3 months ago when I switched my GTX 970 to R9 290X.

What I would be afraid of when getting a 980Ti is that the same thing might happen to it as happened to a 780Ti. That an equivalent of a GTX 1070 will beat it for half the price next year. Not to mention shaky DX12 results with async computing not being utilized properly on Maxwell-based GPUs.

You have to admit the values are just reversed. Nvidia users have to worry about a driver limiting their performance, we AMD users have to hope a driver comes along to have our GPUs operating as they should. I'm pretty salty about both actually. No reason for the money we spend more attention shouldn't be given to optimize both.

[App4that]

Could be since you have a 390 and 290 rather than 290 and 290 or 390 and 390 - it's a refresh, not a direct rebrand some there ARE some differences

I've given that considerable thought. But the performance in synthetic benchmarks is flawless. Not saying that couldn't be an explanation though. But if that was the case it would make Nvidia's decision to keep a tight leash on SLI a wise one.

[TheGamingBarrel]

Why not use NVIDIA NVENC In OBS?

[don_svetlio]

I've given that considerable thought. But the performance in synthetic benchmarks is flawless. Not saying that couldn't be an explanation though. But if that was the case it would make Nvidia's decision to keep a tight leash on SLI a wise one.

280X with 7970 worked well - it was since the cards were identical

The VRAM might be part of the issue as well as the reworked power delivery

[Morgan MLGman]

You have to admit the values are just reversed. Nvidia users have to worry about a driver limiting their performance, we AMD users have to hope a driver comes along to have our GPUs operating as they should. I'm pretty salty about both actually. No reason for the money we spend more attention shouldn't be given to optimize both.

Yeah, well, this issue basically doesn't exist for me cause I never buy games day-one, I always wait a month or so until they get cheaper and fixed, a driver should hit by then either way.

You have to admit though that if you bought a 780Ti for 700$ just a year before the 980Ti launch and see it lose to a GTX 970 in games you'd be pretty upset

[don_svetlio]

Yeah, well, this issue basically doesn't exist for me cause I never buy games day-one, I always wait a month or so until they get cheaper and fixed, a driver should hit by then either way.

You have to admit though that if you bought a 780Ti for 700$ just a year before the 980Ti launch and see it lose to a GTX 970 in games you'd be pretty upset

I'd be rage quitting lol

I usually buy with a 6-month delay on steam sales. The ONLY exception was Witcher 3 because Triss <3 and that worked flawlessly day one on my i5 4590 and R9 280 with 50-70fps on low-medium (though after driver update the CPU usage improved dramatically (got lower))

[App4that]

Yeah, well, this issue basically doesn't exist for me cause I never buy games day-one, I always wait a month or so until they get cheaper and fixed, a driver should hit by then either way.

You have to admit though that if you bought a 780Ti for 700$ just a year before the 980Ti launch and see it lose to a GTX 970 in games you'd be pretty upset

Hell yeah, like I said both are utter BS.

[Nena Trinity]

They are the same go for best value card (mostly AMD) but if you want best 980Ti!  (Fury X win often in DX12)

[App4that]

280X with 7970 worked well - it was since the cards were identical

The VRAM might be part of the issue as well as the reworked power delivery

Wish there was a way to test that. I'm driving myself more mad trying to find a setting that allows for them to play nice in ANY game.

[Prysin]

I run both at 1050 core and 1450 memory, doesn't matter. In a synthetic benchmark they scale beautifully, try playing a game and they trip over each other. I always play on full screen.

Mechwarrior is free, and a shit ton of fun. From what I hear the Crysis 3 profile should work, but I get horrible performance with it.

My patience has a limit, and I'm close to selling both. 100% because of crossfire, not the 390s performance which has been great.

i suspect that your Vapor-X may not play ball here.

do you know any friends that could borrow you a 390 for testing purposes only? So that you could pair 2x 390s and see if that remedied the situation.

[WangKe]

Yeah, well, this issue basically doesn't exist for me cause I never buy games day-one, I always wait a month or so until they get cheaper and fixed, a driver should hit by then either way.

You have to admit though that if you bought a 780Ti for 700$ just a year before the 980Ti launch and see it lose to a GTX 970 in games you'd be pretty upset

I bought my 780Ti at $450 when it was still relatively new and two years later... I see it eaten by a 970... hell, I even saw a benchmark of the 960 (NINE SIXTY) beating it as well.

[don_svetlio]

I bought my 780Ti at $450 when it was still relatively new and two years later... I see it eaten by a 970... hell, I even saw a benchmark of the 960 (NINE SIXTY) beating it as well.

#FeelsBad

 

Wish there was a way to test that. I'm driving myself more mad trying to find a setting that allows for them to play nice in ANY game.

 

i suspect that your Vapor-X may not play ball here.

do you know any friends that could borrow you a 390 for testing purposes only? So that you could pair 2x 390s and see if that remedied the situation.

I'd like to see the results too. Could be interesting

[Quadlazer]

Charts are biased, way too many variables. Do you get the fps you want using the settings you want. That's not biased. But Digital Foundry has really good video's, but 90% of them are outdated because of drivers that changed the results.

True. I just need something to get started. It's been too long since I bought a gpu, so I don't even know which model fits where in the heirarchy. I guess I really just want a FPS per dollar chart that I can quickly glance at.

[App4that]

i suspect that your Vapor-X may not play ball here.

do you know any friends that could borrow you a 390 for testing purposes only? So that you could pair 2x 390s and see if that remedied the situation.

No. I do know that matching memory speeds doesn't help. Ether raising the 290 or limiting the 390. And last night in Fallout I went over the 4g that should be the cap because of the 290. I haven't found anyone else mixing the 200 and 300 series ether. I also have to run the 300 series driver on the 290. Might try running the 200 series driver on the 390 and see if that helps.

[WangKe]

#FeelsBad

Nevermind that I got it from a sale, plus the store owner was my uncle (so, more discount), but it was a then-$700 +/- value card. Seeing it eaten by a 960 at one point had me livid. I didn't mind the 980 winning, but considerably slower than the 970? I was up in fumes for that shit.

[Morgan MLGman]

I'd be rage quitting lol

I usually buy with a 6-month delay on steam sales. The ONLY exception was Witcher 3 because Triss <3 and that worked flawlessly day one on my i5 4590 and R9 280 with 50-70fps on low-medium (though after driver update the CPU usage improved dramatically (got lower))

I have to admit I had The Witcher 3 as soon as it released too, but that's cause I got a key off a friend for free (he bought a GTX 960 and the store accidentally sent him two so he gave one to me ) I was running a GTX 660 back then, so the performance was a little shit cause Kepler GPUs sucked in TW3 in the early stages, a 780Ti was getting beaten by a GTX 960...

 

 

I bought my 780Ti at $450 when it was still relatively new and two years later... I see it eaten by a 970... hell, I even saw a benchmark of the 960 (NINE SIXTY) beating it as well.

A retail price for MSI Gaming 780Ti was 710$ when it came out 780Ti was losing to a GTX 960 in The Witcher 3 when it was released cause Kepler got no driver support for that game when it came out for some reason

[Prysin]

#FeelsBad

 

 

I'd like to see the results too. Could be interesting

i too do, as this shouldnt happen. the GPUs are by all means the same. and CF is known to work, regardless of RAM capacity differences and clock speed differences. As long as the GPUs are the same GCN version, they should CF.

This simply doesnt seem normal.

[don_svetlio]

I have to admit I had The Witcher 3 as soon as it released too, but that's cause I got a key off a friend for free (he bought a GTX 960 and the store accidentally sent him two so he gave one to me ) I was running a GTX 660 back then, so the performance was a little shit cause Kepler GPUs sucked in TW3 in the early stages, a 780Ti was getting beaten by a GTX 960...

 

 

A retail price for MSI Gaming 780Ti was 710$ when it came out 780Ti was losing to a GTX 960 in The Witcher 3 when it was released cause Kepler got no driver support for that game when it came out for some reason

What fps were you getting with a 660?

[Morgan MLGman]

True. I just need something to get started. It's been too long since I bought a gpu, so I don't even know which model fits where in the heirarchy. I guess I really just want a FPS per dollar chart that I can quickly glance at.

FPS per dollar? R9 290 is the king here I believe

[don_svetlio]

i too do, as this shouldnt happen. the GPUs are by all means the same. and CF is known to work, regardless of RAM capacity differences and clock speed differences. As long as the GPUs are the same GCN version, they should CF.

This simply doesnt seem normal.

Vapor-X have entirely Sapphire-designed PCBs while Nitro are reference - can that affect it?