How dated is Ivy Bridge

[The Falcon]

4 minutes ago, Morgan MLGman said:

Don't date as fast? GTX 660 is Kepler. Nvidia is known to have abandoned Kepler architecture in favor of Maxwell, they just stopped optimizing games for the older GPUs and therefore AMD is MUCH better in that department.

Look at my R9 290X. At release, a GTX 780Ti was beating the 290X in more games than the 290X was beating the 780Ti, and it was considered to be a faster GPU. Today? The 290X is faster than both a 780Ti and a GTX 970. AMD kept improving drivers and optimizing games, and now older cards perform better than they did earlier. It goes back up to HD 7000 series. Which is pretty damn impressive. Nvidia abandons two-years old cards.

The RED VS GREEN argument just leads to cancer lol

[A/C]

5 minutes ago, Morgan MLGman said:

Don't date as fast? GTX 660 is Kepler. Nvidia is known to have abandoned Kepler architecture in favor of Maxwell, they just stopped optimizing games for the older GPUs and therefore AMD is MUCH better in that department.

Look at my R9 290X. At release, a GTX 780Ti was beating the 290X in more games than the 290X was beating the 780Ti, and it was considered to be a faster GPU. Today? The 290X is faster than both a 780Ti and a GTX 970. AMD kept improving drivers and optimizing games, and now older cards perform better than they did earlier. It goes back up to HD 7000 series. Which is pretty damn impressive. Nvidia abandons two-years old cards.

 

As an owner of a 280X who considered both the GTX 770 and the 780 at the time of purchase I can second this, and I leaned towards nvidia but bought AMD because it was noticably cheaper.

[Morgan MLGman]

4 minutes ago, The Falcon said:

The RED VS GREEN argument just leads to cancer lol

It's not an argument These are facts, I had a GTX 660, I had a GTX 970, and now I've got a 290X. The best card I've ever had.

 

Now on a more serious note, The RX 480 is simply very likely to be the superior card to a GTX 1060 because Polaris seems to be a superior architecture to Pascal. And it should present much better value for money (FPS per $) ratio. But what you choose to buy it's up to you, I personally always look to get the most for my money

[A/C]

1 minute ago, Morgan MLGman said:

It's not an argument These are facts, I had a GTX 660, I had a GTX 970, nad now I've got a 290X. The best card I've ever had.

 

Now on a more serious note, The RX 480 is simply very likely to be the superior card to a GTX 1060 because Polaris seems to be a superior architecture to Pascal. And it should present much better value for money (FPS per $) ratio. But what you choose to buy it's up to you, I personally always look to get the most for my money

 

But I remember the 290X launch being a bad one because of high temps, and all that "uber mode" nonsense. I looked int the 290X back then but didn't get one because of it, so I just went for the much cheaper, albeit older 280X.

 

But I wouldn't be so bold do predict the 480-1060 performance. As you can see a lot can change even after a GPU is released, just imagine how much changes before release then.

[Morgan MLGman]

4 minutes ago, A/C said:

 

But I remember the 290X launch being a bad one because of high temps, and all that "uber mode" nonsense. I looked int the 290X back then but didn't get one because of it, so I just went for the much cheaper, albeit older 280X.

 

But I wouldn't be so bold do predict the 480-1060 performance. As you can see a lot can change even after a GPU is released, just imagine how much changes before release then.

High temps only concerned reference-design cards, if you researched a little bit more, you could see that a Vapor-X 290X from Sapphire went up to 66 degrees MAX under full load

 

As for the 480-1060 performance, it's most likely simply impossible for Nvidia to create a card that's gonna beat a 480 in performance at 199$ price tag. Pascal is just not efficient enough, so they're gonna either release a worse card, or they're gonna lose money with every sale of the 1060, and I don't see that happening

[A/C]

1 minute ago, Morgan MLGman said:

High temps only concerned reference-design cards, if you researched a little bit more, you could see that a Vapor-X 290X from Sapphire went up to 66 degrees MAX under full load

 

As for the 480-1060 performance, it's most likely simply impossible for Nvidia to create a card that's gonna beat a 480 in performance at 199$ price tag. Pascal is just not efficient enough, so they're gonna either release a worse card, or they're gonna lose money with every sale of the 1060, and I don't see that happening

 

nvidia was never cheaper in that segment. Didn't stop them earning money in it. 

[Briggsy]

ivy bridge uses pci 3.0, and is still as fast in gaming as newer intel cpu's, clock for clock. Actually, embarrassingly so.

 

http://ocaholic.ch/modules/smartsection/item.php?itemid=1158&page=13

[The Falcon]

2 minutes ago, Briggsy said:

ivy bridge uses pci 3.0, and is still as fast in gaming as newer intel cpu's, clock for clock. Actually, embarrassingly so.

 

http://ocaholic.ch/modules/smartsection/item.php?itemid=1158&page=13

This is looking good thank you

[Morgan MLGman]

2 minutes ago, A/C said:

 

nvidia was never cheaper in that segment. Didn't stop them earning money in it. 

After the R9 380 released, GTX 960 sales dropped DRAMATICALLY, as it simply was worse than the Radeon counterpart