Which do you prefer? 1080? 480?

[cabzkingtech]

Guy's This is very confusing, I'm shown these two products that are very very best quality in terms of VR.

So for you guys? which do you prefer? from the budget? or the quality?

1080? or 480?

And also the leaked the 480x which has the VRAM is 4GB into 8GB????

[smittywits]

It depends entirely on your intended workload. Assuming I wanted VR, and if I was going for a budget PC, the 480 would be my choice. If the budget didn't matter, I'd grab a 1080. Nvidia's cards have some technologies that will improve more than VR though, one example being multiple monitor gaming. In VR, the 1080 also has some optimizations that the 480 doesn't.

 

 

[QFA350]

1080. I used to like AMD but I gave up on theme when problems started to occur on multiple cards. I don't intend to start a war but I personally only choose Nvidia even if it costs more.

Also note that I do think what AMD is doing GPU wise is very cool and I do look forward to seeing benchmarks.

[GlassBomb]

You really can't compare the two (at least in my opinion). Top-tier card will always have worse price to performance ratios.

 

One is a mid-tier card, with a base MSRP of $200.

Where as the other is a top-tier card with a base MSRP of $600.

 

And they only really compared it with the 1080 because that is the newest Nvidia card that they have to compare it against. Would much rather see it compared to GTX 1070, since pricing will be much more similar.

 

But even then, you'd have a multi-GPU setup compared to a single-GPU setup. And the single GPU will be an overall better experience.

 

But that's not to say that the RX 480 can't be a good card, I'm sure that it will. It just can't be a top-tier card.

[astrosheen]

7 minutes ago, cabzkingtech said:

Guy's This is very confusing, I'm shown these two products that are very very best quality in terms of VR.

So for you guys? which do you prefer? from the budget? or the quality?

1080? or 480?

I'd like to point out that we havent seen any non bias performance numbers from the 480. Before this question can be answered we need performance numbers from people other than AMD

[Energycore]

I prefer 3lb. Bags of Haribos. Best price / performance out there.

 

http://pcpartpicker.com/product/kCjG3C/haribo-food-gummibears3lbbag4pack

[LeapFrogMasterRace]

480 certainly has the better chip in terms of price/performance and performance/watt but is fairly weak in comparison. 

[awesomeness10120]

Whichever one has the best bang for buck ratio. There aren't many enthusiasts out there that are smart with their money.

[Enderman]

well i would prefer to have 100fps rather than 50fps, so I would buy a 1080

 

the 480 is half as powerful in the AMD-biased benchmark of AOTS, so in regular games it will be even worse

 

of course you cant expect anything realistic from AMD benchmarks, you have to wait for real reviews before you know how bad the 480 really is

[BrightCandle]

The companies aren't competing with each other at this point. The 480 is a mainstream card and the 1070/1080 are Nvidia's upper mainstream cards. The 480 is coming in performance wise somewhere in current cards, presumably 390-390X levels based on its specs whereas the 1070 is around the 980 ti and the 1080 is 30% faster than anything else.

 

At some point Nvidia will release a 1060 and AMD will release a 490 and maybe then we will see a bit of competition kick in at the higher end and in the mainstream cards but for now at least it entire depends on what you are looking for.

[PlayStation 2]

5 minutes ago, Enderman said:

well i would prefer to have 100fps rather than 50fps, so I would buy a 1080

 

the 480 is half as powerful in the AMD-biased benchmark of AOTS, so in regular games it will be even worse

 

of course you cant expect anything realistic from AMD benchmarks, you have to wait for real reviews before you know how bad the 480 really is

As much as I've been shitting on AMD for using AotS to show off the 480, that's a bit of a pessimistic way to look at the card.

[Delicieuxz]

20 minutes ago, Enderman said:

the 480 is half as powerful in the AMD-biased benchmark of AOTS, so in regular games it will be even worse

The AMD presentation made a point that the 2x480 setup running AOTS at higher FPS than a 1080 was only running at 51% utilization.

 

Without knowing exactly what that 2x480 setup can do, there seems to have been the intention from AMD to express that those cards can actually achieve greater performance than they were during that particular demo. Why they wouldn't have been running at full utilization, I don't know... maybe the drivers weren't ready, or maybe AMD only wanted to match (or slightly exceed) the 1080's FPS while making a point of how much more headroom the 2x480 setup still had left over.

[Enderman]

39 minutes ago, Dan Castellaneta said:

As much as I've been shitting on AMD for using AotS to show off the 480, that's a bit of a pessimistic way to look at the card.

 

25 minutes ago, Delicieuxz said:

The AMD presentation made a point that the 2x480 setup running AOTS at higher FPS than a 1080 was only running at 51% utilization.

 

Without knowing exactly what that 2x480 setup can do, there seems to have been the intention from AMD to express that those cards can actually achieve greater performance than they were during that particular demo. Why they wouldn't have been running at full utilization, I don't know... maybe the drivers weren't ready, or maybe AMD only wanted to match (or slightly exceed) the 1080's FPS while making a point of how much more headroom the 2x480 setup still had left over.

 

Everyone knows AOTS performs like crap on nvidia

literally every other DX12 game that exists performs well on both AMD and nvidia

Using AOTS to compare nvidia and AMD is like using unigine heaven to show how much better nvidia is than AMD

AOTS is a AMD biased benchmark, and just like Heaven, should not be used to compare the two

 

games are made to perform well no matter what brand of GPU you use

obviously AOTS is an exception because they dont know how to code a game properly so it can also perform great too on an nvidia card

 

Let's wait for real benchmarks on realistic games to come out before thinking that the 480 is so great

and by "realistic" i mean a game that is well coded and runs fine no matter what GPU you have (because yes, there are MANY DX12 games that perform well on both)

[Simon771]

2 hours ago, Enderman said:

 

 

Everyone knows AOTS performs like crap on nvidia

literally every other DX12 game that exists performs well on both AMD and nvidia

Using AOTS to compare nvidia and AMD is like using unigine heaven to show how much better nvidia is than AMD

AOTS is a AMD biased benchmark, and just like Heaven, should not be used to compare the two

 

games are made to perform well no matter what brand of GPU you use

obviously AOTS is an exception because they dont know how to code a game properly so it can also perform great too on an nvidia card

 

Let's wait for real benchmarks on realistic games to come out before thinking that the 480 is so great

and by "realistic" i mean a game that is well coded and runs fine no matter what GPU you have (because yes, there are MANY DX12 games that perform well on both)

Well there aren't so many DX12 games acctually.

So I prefer DX11 benchmarks, since most games are still using that

[ivan134]

4 hours ago, Enderman said:

 

 

Everyone knows AOTS performs like crap on nvidia

literally every other DX12 game that exists performs well on both AMD and nvidia

Using AOTS to compare nvidia and AMD is like using unigine heaven to show how much better nvidia is than AMD

AOTS is a AMD biased benchmark, and just like Heaven, should not be used to compare the two

 

games are made to perform well no matter what brand of GPU you use

obviously AOTS is an exception because they dont know how to code a game properly so it can also perform great too on an nvidia card

 

Let's wait for real benchmarks on realistic games to come out before thinking that the 480 is so great

and by "realistic" i mean a game that is well coded and runs fine no matter what GPU you have (because yes, there are MANY DX12 games that perform well on both)

No, Nvidia performs poorly in any dx 12 game that users async compute, including hitman, quantum break and total war : warhammer.

 

Quantum break might be broken, but the fact that most people test that game with only Nvidia cards makes it look more broken than it actually is. The 980 ti is slower than a 390 in that game. 

 

Nvidia cards not having async shaders =/= oxide is bad at coding. You're blaming the wrong people. Nvidia already tried what you are doing by blaming oxide, and oxide ripped them a new one. You keep saying this game is AMD biased, but oxide had spent more time working with Nvidia on this game than AMD, just so their performance doesn't stuck even worse than it does now. 

[cabzkingtech]

Up this topics...