So 480 or 970?

[Kinda Bottlenecked]

11 minutes ago, App4that said:

Again, and I say this as someone who has spent a lot of time in Firestrike. One test say absolutely NOTHING. It takes playing games for hours to see if a overclock is stable, and even then you can have issues. lowering the voltage will not add stability. That is counter intuitive.

 

I've only seen that in OC scenarios. Like my 280x for example. At 1210Mhz at +50Mv stayed solid as compared to +70mv or higher. Did quite a few tests and it always crashes if I added more voltage. 

 

Will have to wait for in depth testing to pass a judgement on this. Since I have experienced a similar scenario, can't really say much. 

[Starelementpoke]

45 minutes ago, App4that said:

Playing what game? And are we trusting anecdotal evidence? If AMD have given us a graphics card that performs better the less voltage you give it, I'll buy one.

And I should rephrase that statement a little. The voltage of the card being too high for some reason out of the box, undervolting it a bit let people get and maintain OCs, causing in better scores. Not necessarily doing better the more you undervolt it.

[Carclis]

1 hour ago, App4that said:

You get a 970 that performs the same or better.

Quite a bold claim to make basing judgement off day one driver don't you think? Especially considering the main focus of Nvidia drivers is now Pascal instead of Maxwell.

[App4that]

1 hour ago, Starelementpoke said:

Would it's stress test count for something?

No, it helps but the only real way to test an overclock is gaming. Even then games change radically between themselves. I have overclocks that work great in everything and cause a crash within minutes playing ROTTR or Mech Warrior Online. Pain in the ass.

 

But that's besides the point. Lowering the voltage lowers the overclocking headroom. That is LITTERALLY why AIB cards have the increased power connections and phases. This is just damage control by AMD and it's fans. Not you, the attempt to pass lowering the voltage as a good thing.

[App4that]

1 hour ago, Carclis said:

Quite a bold claim to make basing judgement off day one driver don't you think? Especially considering the main focus of Nvidia drivers is now Pascal instead of Maxwell.

And AMD now has Polaris as it's main focus verses the architecture it has passed as new cards for how long now? You haven't wondered why AMD only released the 480 and lower? And are we in a "gamer in waiting" situation with AMD again?

[Starelementpoke]

6 hours ago, App4that said:

No, it helps but the only real way to test an overclock is gaming. Even then games change radically between themselves. I have overclocks that work great in everything and cause a crash within minutes playing ROTTR or Mech Warrior Online. Pain in the ass.

 

But that's besides the point. Lowering the voltage lowers the overclocking headroom. That is LITTERALLY why AIB cards have the increased power connections and phases. This is just damage control by AMD and it's fans. Not you, the attempt to pass lowering the voltage as a good thing.

Eh, at least It wasn't me.

[YongKang]

10 hours ago, App4that said:

Ah, so Nvidia pulls the 3,5g deal and the internet freaks. AMD ships a card that pulls over 90w from the PCI-E and everyone's calm. But there isn't a bias...

We haven't had any mobo blow up. So, everyone is calm. BUT, the 3,5gb deal is an issue because it didn't meet what it was advertised. It's fraud.

[Carclis]

10 hours ago, App4that said:

And AMD now has Polaris as it's main focus verses the architecture it has passed as new cards for how long now? You haven't wondered why AMD only released the 480 and lower? And are we in a "gamer in waiting" situation with AMD again?

I'm just alluding to what has happened in the past with the 7970 vs 680 and 290x v 780 which is quite important for a budget oriented gamer who would be considering the 480/970. Calling a race won after the first lap is strange to say the least, especially if you're basing it off reference cards which are almost never worth purchasing.

[App4that]

23 minutes ago, Carclis said:

I'm just alluding to what has happened in the past with the 7970 vs 680 and 290x v 780 which is quite important for a budget oriented gamer who would be considering the 480/970. Calling a race won after the first lap is strange to say the least, especially if you're basing it off reference cards which are almost never worth purchasing.

A budget oriented gamer won't want to have 95w pulled through their PCI-E slot. But AMD warned them? right?

[stconquest]

14 hours ago, App4that said:

https://www.pcper.com/reviews/Graphics-Cards/Power-Consumption-Concerns-Radeon-RX-480/Overclocking-Current-Testing

 

 

970

I love you and all, but this is insane.  How can you even think about recommending the GTX 970 over the RX 480 even at the same price?

 

Worst case scenario:

 

 

...and a window to the future:

 

So the reference card has "issues" to say the least.  Don't buy it, but don't go around telling people to waste their cash on a GTX 970, that is a bad card to buy now... only because you can get better for the same price.

 

Anyways, @ItsDanish  Don't buy a RX 480 or a GTX 970 right now.  Let AMD sort out their reference 480 mess and see what your options are with better versions of the 480 and maybe even the 1060.  You might get some extra cash and find yourself in GTX 1070 territory.

 

Look at this shit:

 

[App4that]

5 minutes ago, stconquest said:

I love you and all, but this is insane.  How can you even think about recommending the GTX 970 over the RX 480 even at the same price?

 

Worst case scenario:

 

 

...and a window to the future:

 

So the reference card has "issues" to say the least.  Don't buy it, but don't go around telling people to waste their cash on a GTX 970, that is a bad card to buy now... only because you can get better for the same price.

 

Anyways, @ItsDanish  Don't buy a RX 480 or a GTX 970 right now.  Let AMD sort out their reference 480 mess and see what your options are with better versions of the 480 and maybe even the 1060.  You might get some extra cash and find yourself in GTX 1070 territory.

 

Look at this shit:

 

Sorry, on my phone and it won't delete stuff...

 

Anywho, your figures seem off when a 980 beats a Fury X. Unless the Fury X for neutered when I wasn't looking. 

 

To get the 8g model you're at the 240us price point, Sapphire has said they will keep to that but who knows. And that's the root of the issue. Who knows what else is wrong with the 480. Gamer Nexus couldn't get a 480 past 1350MHz even liquid cooled and giving it extra voltage. And at when compared to a 970 at the same clock speed they were equal. And you know a 979 will get in the 1400s easy. Most my friends are in the high 1500s. 

 

Personal I'd wait for the 1060, but a 970 fills the gap nicely still. 

[stconquest]

21 minutes ago, App4that said:

Sorry, on my phone and it won't delete stuff...

 

Anywho, your figures seem off when a 980 beats a Fury X. Unless the Fury X for neutered when I wasn't looking. 

 

To get the 8g model you're at the 240us price point, Sapphire has said they will keep to that but who knows. And that's the root of the issue. Who knows what else is wrong with the 480. Gamer Nexus couldn't get a 480 past 1350MHz even liquid cooled and giving it extra voltage. And at when compared to a 970 at the same clock speed they were equal. And you know a 979 will get in the 1400s easy. Most my friends are in the high 1500s. 

 

Personal I'd wait for the 1060, but a 970 fills the gap nicely still. 

You might be right about those benches.  I was trying to verify, but testing on FO4 has so many different settings at different outlets. 

 

My point was that just because the RX 480 launch was messy, pointing to a card like the GTX 970 and saying it is better is not very pragmatic.  AMD is always competitive and on many occasions, their cards age better than Nvidia's.  It's only day two coming to an end.  I am sure board partners are busy getting their versions of the RX 480 out there.  GTX 1060 is being announced on the 7th.  

 

Buying a GTX 970 right now is a bad move all around.  Maybe if it like $150-$175.  I would still wait though.  It is not like the GTX 970 will go up in price 

[App4that]

1 minute ago, stconquest said:

You might be right about those benches.  I was trying to verify, but testing on FO4 has so many different settings at different outlets. 

 

My point was that just because the RX 480 launch was messy, pointing to a card like the GTX 970 and saying it is better is not very pragmatic.  AMD is always competitive and on many occasions, their cards age better than Nvidia's.  It's only day two coming to an end.  I am sure board partners are busy getting their versions of the RX 480 out there.  GTZ 1060 is being announced on the 7th.  

 

Buying a GTX 970 right now is a bad move all around.  Maybe if it like $150-$175.  I would still wait though.

I've been seeing the 970 cheap as chips around here new. At the same price point of the 480. And most of my friends run them and don't have issues. Problem with the 480 is performance. Gamer Nexus got one of the best overclocks out of a 1080 seen yet using a FE and a hybrid cooler. Yet all they could get out of the 480 was 20MHz for all their hard work. So I just don't see how the 480 is impressive. So it gets 5% in driver support, still 390 level performance and they're down in the 200us range too. A 480 uses as much power as a 1070. The list just keeps going. 

[stconquest]

48 minutes ago, App4that said:

I've been seeing the 970 cheap as chips around here new. At the same price point of the 480. And most of my friends run them and don't have issues. Problem with the 480 is performance. Gamer Nexus got one of the best overclocks out of a 1080 seen yet using a FE and a hybrid cooler. Yet all they could get out of the 480 was 20MHz for all their hard work. So I just don't see how the 480 is impressive. So it gets 5% in driver support, still 390 level performance and they're down in the 200us range too. A 480 uses as much power as a 1070. The list just keeps going. 

We'll see.  ...and soon.

[Carclis]

4 hours ago, App4that said:

A budget oriented gamer won't want to have 95w pulled through their PCI-E slot. But AMD warned them? right?

It has been said by PCPer that on stock settings that power draw is not an issue. Overclocking is what results in the 95W power draw and furthermore, we have seen worse examples of this from both the GTX 960 and 750ti which did not seem to be an issue.

[Starelementpoke]

1 hour ago, Carclis said:

It has been said by PCPer that on stock settings that power draw is not an issue. Overclocking is what results in the 95W power draw and furthermore, we have seen worse examples of this from both the GTX 960 and 750ti which did not seem to be an issue.

The 960 and 750ti have been discussed, and they weren't an issue because it wasn't a continuous draw at that level. They were peaks, while the 480 seems to be suffering continuous draws at that level.

[Starelementpoke]

18 hours ago, App4that said:

No, it helps but the only real way to test an overclock is gaming. Even then games change radically between themselves. I have overclocks that work great in everything and cause a crash within minutes playing ROTTR or Mech Warrior Online. Pain in the ass.

 

But that's besides the point. Lowering the voltage lowers the overclocking headroom. That is LITTERALLY why AIB cards have the increased power connections and phases. This is just damage control by AMD and it's fans. Not you, the attempt to pass lowering the voltage as a good thing.

Also, if your still interested in a link to one of those Firestrike tests, managed to find one:

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/9074879

Screenshot it goes with so you can cross reference the voltages and whatnot.

[Starelementpoke]

5 hours ago, App4that said:

I've been seeing the 970 cheap as chips around here new. At the same price point of the 480. And most of my friends run them and don't have issues. Problem with the 480 is performance. Gamer Nexus got one of the best overclocks out of a 1080 seen yet using a FE and a hybrid cooler. Yet all they could get out of the 480 was 20MHz for all their hard work. So I just don't see how the 480 is impressive. So it gets 5% in driver support, still 390 level performance and they're down in the 200us range too. A 480 uses as much power as a 1070. The list just keeps going. 

I mean, how cheap though? And the fact that a card, regardless of make, can only reach a 20MHz oc, and similarly minor ocs across the board points to a probable issue with the card in someway, no? Wouldn't it be better to see if the issue can be resolved first?

[ItsDanish]

On 7/2/2016 at 7:58 AM, Prömetheus said:

which one is cheaper lol

They're the same price that's the point

[ItsDanish]

On 7/2/2016 at 8:03 AM, BirdyTheMighty said:

970 is the same as teh RX 480 and trhe RX 480 is cheaper so i will pick the RX 480

The link i had provided was a newegg deal that had the 970 for 200$ which was the point of the post since they were the same price

[ItsDanish]

On 7/2/2016 at 8:10 AM, Pohernori said:

Wait for custom 480s to be reviewed. And then decide. 

 

Also, turbo edition? Ew. 

Hey it looked pretty cool, and went well with my red and white theme

Also it was only 200$

[YongKang]

2 hours ago, ItsDanish said:

Hey it looked pretty cool, and went well with my red and white theme

Also it was only 200$

Wait for AIB 480s and the GTX 1060. Then decide. This is the most sensible advice I can give you right now.

I would not recommend you to throw your money at a 970. It's simply a bad buy for what you're getting comapre to todays offering.

[DXMember]

480 but wait for Sapphire Nitro