Can't decide on gpu for 1440p upgrades

[Morgan MLGman]

1 minute ago, i_build_nanosuits said:

probably because my experience with nvidia for the past 4 years or so has been flawless..we've discussed this already and you've shown your control panel crashing and stuff...i think you just need to format your machine and re-install some shit cause it ain't happeing on mine...never has. I do get a flawless stutterfree and crashfree experience on my machines since using nvidia hardware...and i do get driver updates with each and every new games that launch and they do perfom admirably on day 1 at 100%...so what else could i say? and i'm not the only one.

Though I've heard bad things about AMD drivers from so many people, and starting from September when I first got my R9 290X (my first AMD GPU ever), there was LITERALLY not a single issue those drivers gave me. First the old Catalyst for a short time, then Crimson update.

[i_build_nanosuits]

1 minute ago, ivan134 said:

480 is faster than a 1060 in Forza Apex and fighting games are all locked to 60 fps.

forza is beautiful and the level of optimisation this game received is unmatched IMHO...i get 125FPS average with all maximum settings and 8xMSAA...yes 8 fucking X MSAA lol

 

 

[i_build_nanosuits]

2 minutes ago, Morgan MLGman said:

Though I've heard bad things about AMD drivers from so many people, and starting from September when I first got my R9 290X (my first AMD GPU ever), there was LITERALLY not a single issue those drivers gave me. First the old Catalyst for a short time, then Crimson update.

how about doom that ran like poop for months?!

or the witcher 3 that ran like poop for over a FUCKING YEAR?!

or fallout4?! ask @App4that

 

you do realize that by the time the vulcan patch for doom came out if was long done playing through the entire thing right? and i got 100FPS+ averages on MAX settings...day 1...yup!

[Morgan MLGman]

1 minute ago, i_build_nanosuits said:

how about doom that ran like poop for months?!

or the witcher 3 that ran like poop for over a FUCKING YEAR?!

Oh believe me that Witcher 3 ran like poop on Kepler as well, until Nvidia got so much flame from 780Ti users that they had worse performance than GTX 960s that they updated drivers.

 

I had a GTX 660 (which indeed is Kepler) at the W3 release time and I had the game day-one. After two months it worked much better, but I also had to wait for drivers and it was no different from AMD. Though my 290X is so fast at 1200p anyway that even without specific drivers games perform great on it.

[ivan134]

1 minute ago, i_build_nanosuits said:

how about doom that ran like poop for months?!

or the witcher 3 that ran like poop for over a FUCKING YEAR?!

or fallout4?! ask @App4that

2 GameWorks games and Doom came out May 13. It's only been out for 2.5 months so I don't know what you mean by "ran like poop for months."

[i_build_nanosuits]

Just now, Morgan MLGman said:

Oh believe me that Witcher 3 ran like poop on Kepler as well, until Nvidia got so much flame from 780Ti users that they had worse performance than GTX 960s that they updated drivers.

 

I had a GTX 660 (which indeed is Kepler) at the W3 release time and I had the game day-one. After two months it worked much better, but I also had to wait for drivers and it was no different from AMD. Though my 290X is so fast at 1200p anyway that even without specific drivers games perform great on it.

fun fact: i was a GTX 780 user when the gameready driver for witcher 3 came out and it was the first and only bad nvidia driver i received...then the next week a driver was ready to be pulled and the performance was back where it should have been and then some...i experienced this first hand...and then people started saying nvidia is gimping keppler etc.

We've seen now that it wasn't true at all many reviewers re-visited this myth not long ago and they proved it was complete bullshit...you even sent me one of these links through PM yourself.

[Kinda Bottlenecked]

1 minute ago, i_build_nanosuits said:

probably because my experience with nvidia for the past 4 years or so has been flawless..we've discussed this already and you've shown your control panel crashing and stuff...i think you just need to format your machine and re-install some shit cause it ain't happeing on mine...never has. I do get a flawless stutterfree and crashfree experience on my machines since using nvidia hardware...and i do get driver updates with each and every new games that launch and they do perfom admirably on day 1 at 100%...so what else could i say? and i'm not the only one.

 

2 other users popped up on same thread where I mentioned the issue. Not only that, I've found out why the text gets blurry when I boot up my PC sometimes. Because nvidia has been ignoring the damn issue for years. Not only that, the high idle clock speed issue still isn't fixed. Even till today. 

 

Well well well, what do you know? "flawless stutterfree and crashfree experience" basically described my experience on the 390x and 280x. 

 

Again I stress that you should consider your position and not abuse it. 

[Prokart2000]

How do i add a poll? We will do it that way

[ivan134]

1 minute ago, Pohernori said:

 

2 other users popped up on same thread where I mentioned the issue. Not only that, I've found out why the text gets blurry when I boot up my PC sometimes. Because nvidia has been ignoring the damn issue for years. Not only that, the high idle clock speed issue still isn't fixed. Even till today. 

 

Well well well, what do you know? "flawless stutterfree and crashfree experience" basically described my experience on the 390x and 280x. 

 

Again I stress that you should consider your position and not abuse it. 

I see you like talking to walls.

[i_build_nanosuits]

1 minute ago, Prokart2000 said:

How do i add a poll? We will do it that way

i think you can edit your original post for the thread and add a poll from there.

[Prokart2000]

1 minute ago, i_build_nanosuits said:

i think you can edit your original post for the thread and add a poll from there.

Done

[Kinda Bottlenecked]

1 minute ago, ivan134 said:

I see you like talking to walls.

 

Not talking to @i_build_nanosuits is a waste. 

[Morgan MLGman]

Just now, i_build_nanosuits said:

fun fact: i was a GTX 780 user when the gameready driver for witcher 3 came out and it was the first and only bad nvidia driver i received...then the next week a driver was ready to be pulled and the performance was back where it should have been and then some...i experienced this first hand...and then people started saying nvidia is gimping keppler etc.

We've seen now that it wasn't true at all many reviewers re-visited this myth not long ago and they proved it was complete bullshit...you even sent me one of these links through PM yourself.

Regardless of the excuses why it happened, things like this happen, To both Nvidia and AMD. I was a Kepler owner back then, suffered from the issue and upgraded very soon to a GTX 970 to avoid any of those in the future. GTX 660 experience was very, very poor at the release, but after a month or two the game was playable because they fixed the Kepler issues, I upgraded anyway.

 

I didn't say they nerfed Kepler, but we both know they stopped optimizing for it. R9 290 is now very close to the GTX 970 and 780Ti, and the 290X beats those on the other hand, at the moment.

2 minutes ago, Prokart2000 said:

How do i add a poll? We will do it that way

Remember how it is in democracy though, there's more stupid people than the smart ones. It's how it's always been.

[Prokart2000]

1 minute ago, Morgan MLGman said:

Regardless of the excuses why it happened, things like this happen, To both Nvidia and AMD. I was a Kepler owner back then, suffered from the issue and upgraded very soon to a GTX 970 to avoid any of those in the future. GTX 660 experience was very, very poor at the release, but after a month or two the game was playable because they fixed the Kepler issues, I upgraded anyway.

 

I didn't say they nerfed Kepler, but we both know they stopped optimizing for it. R9 290 is now very close to the GTX 970 and 780Ti, and the 290X beats those on the other hand, at the moment.

Remember how it is in democracy though, there's more stupid people than the smart ones. It's how it's always been.

I guess i can see the majority vote though, it wont be my final but will help persuasion

[i_build_nanosuits]

Just now, Morgan MLGman said:

I didn't say they nerfed Kepler, but we both know they stopped optimizing for it.

on that we agree.

 

@Prokart2000 what's the price difference between GTX 1060 and R9 Fury?

[Prokart2000]

Just now, i_build_nanosuits said:

on that we agree.

 

@Prokart2000 what's the price difference between GTX 1060 and R9 Fury?

Which 1060, for the strix oc its £25 more than the fury but the msi gaming is £10-£20 cheaper

[i_build_nanosuits]

Just now, Prokart2000 said:

Which 1060, for the strix oc its £25 more than the fury but the msi gaming is £10-£20 cheaper

Fury Strix ASUS i guess?!

[Prokart2000]

1 minute ago, i_build_nanosuits said:

Fury Strix ASUS i guess?!

i meant the 1060 strix

[Morgan MLGman]

2 minutes ago, Prokart2000 said:

Which 1060, for the strix oc its £25 more than the fury but the msi gaming is £10-£20 cheaper

The cheapest non-reference GTX 1060 and the cheapest R9 Fury. If the 1060 is more expensive than the Fury, it's not worth it cause it's slower.

 

Avoid ASUS and Gigabyte for AMD cards.

[Prokart2000]

1 minute ago, Morgan MLGman said:

The cheapest non-reference GTX 1060 and the cheapest R9 Fury. If the 1060 is more expensive than the Fury, it's not worth it cause it's slower.

 

Avoid ASUS and Gigabyte for AMD cards.

£233 for zotac mini vs £300

[Morgan MLGman]

Just now, Prokart2000 said:

£233 for zotac mini vs £300

1. Not the mini card, they overclock worse and are louder in general, a normal-sized one

 

if the difference is so big that the Fury is almost 70 pounds more expensive, a GTX 1060 is a no-brainer.

 

I'd also check R9 390X prices if I were you, as it performs superb at 1440p at its price.

[Prokart2000]

Just now, Morgan MLGman said:

1. Not the mini card, they overclock worse and are louder in general, a normal-sized one

 

if the difference is so big that the Fury is almost 70 pounds more expensive, a GTX 1060 is a no-brainer.

 

I'd also check R9 390X prices if I were you, as it performs superb at 1440p at its price.

palit £250

[Morgan MLGman]

Just now, Prokart2000 said:

palit £250

I'd also avoid Palit. MSI or EVGA are your best bets to be honest.

 

MSI or Sapphire R9 390X prices?

[Prokart2000]

1 minute ago, Morgan MLGman said:

I'd also avoid Palit. MSI or EVGA are your best bets to be honest.

 

MSI or Sapphire R9 390X prices?

None on overclokcers, scan had xfx ones for £260

[i_build_nanosuits]

ALRIGHT THEN!

here is my ''non-fanboy'' post and FINAL post:

AMD and Nvidia both have pros and cons...nvidia generally have better day 1 driver support for games and they do have a few cool features and softwares (shadowplay for example)
AMD have hardware Async compute which will help them in the future to get on par with nvidia and FINALLY get their hardware to perform LIKE IT SHOULD HAVE from the get go..which is great.

It's true that so far many of the DX12 titles are AMD sponsored, and they do have a few more coming...but it's also true that nvidia will also give a big push in the future for DX12 games and optimisation...that's a given, they have to if they want to keep selling as many cards.

It's also true that AMD require a powerful CPU for cards to perform like you see in reviews...reviewers always use overclocked core i7 to test...it's also true that AMD DX11 drivers are inneficient and require a lot of CPU overhead...which mean you'll get worse minimum FPS at times if you do not have a state of the art CPU to push them.

it's also true that AMD GPU's give you usually more memory for the money...and they do work fine...they run a bit hotter but nothing to worry about.

it's also true that AMD have FREESYNC which is great because while not as versatile as Gsync (gsync has an unlimited range from 1FPS to 250FPS and beyond where as freesync operate in a much tighter window usualy ranging from 40FPS to 70FPS and you have to check reviews for the monitors cause i've seen some with a range as tight as 45FPS to 60FPS) but FREESYNC as the name implies is FREE...where as Gsync come at a HUGE premium of around 150 to 250$ depending on the monitor...

OP, you don't have a 1440p monitor yet...i would greatly suggest you look at those options first...do you want to have variable refresh rate (which is AMAZING btw) in which case getting a freesync 1440p monitor along with an AMD GPU is a very viable solution if you're on a budget cause the Gsync and nvidia option will cost A LOT more...it's better, but it cost a lot more as well.

done!