Support NeoGAF

[copelandmaster]

Ya'll know that AMD is not the way to go if you do anything other than game on your card, right?

For instance, Blender Cycles and Octane Render (and the Octane for Blender plugin) don't support AMD officially. That super sucks and puts people like me out of camp red entirely, value be damned.

12GB gpus are what the VFX industry has been waiting for. The X is like a M6000 except way cheaper. That's a pretty good value if you're a vfx hobbyist.

 

[MR ARCADE FOREVER]

Can this do The Order at 900p at 30fps tho?

|o|

 

[viveks86]

A new challenger appears? Man this is exciting!

http://wccftech.com/amd-r9-390x-nvidia-gtx-980ti-titanx-benchmarks/

 

[Souldestroyer Reborn]

Can this do The Order at 900p at 30fps tho?

Lol. No, no it can't. Even if you quad them it can't.

Yes I'm being completely serious.

Spoiler

And joking around at the same time

 

[GHG]

A new challenger appears? Man this is exciting!

http://wccftech.com/amd-r9-390x-nvidia-gtx-980ti-titanx-benchmarks/

So I'm assuming the 200gm cut is a 980ti and the 9** is a 960ti?

Will be interesting to see how they price these.

 

[riflen]

It would be hilarious if this cards hits the streets at $800. Online Tech stores would slow to a crawl on release date for this.

I very much doubt Titan X will list for less than 999. A retailer in the UK let slip that they have 1000 units to sell. That number will sell out in a blink of an eye at that price. There's no reason for Nvidia to price lower.

 

[Prophet Steve]

So with the Titan announcement, how far away are we from a 1080 or 1080ti announcement?

Not any closer, I wouldn't expect it for a few months. Although I have kind of forgotten the rumored timeline.

 

[ZOONAMI]

I could really care less who likes what. It's the fact that you don't know how to group quotes and edit your posts accordingly to make yourself not look so rabid while also turning this into some kind of versus thread when all I'm trying to come here for is updates on benchmarks and specs.

Anyway.

If this Chiphell chart for BF4 is real.. then I'm actually pretty impressed with the performance gain from the 980. This is going to be great for those looking for a devastating small form factor setup. I'm excited. It's going to look good in a Lian-Li PC-O6 or RVZ02.

It would be hilarious if this cards hits the streets at $800. Online Tech stores would slow to a crawl on release date for this.

I pretty much only post with my phone, so sorry? And my edits are pretty much only for spelling/grammar.

And as far as sff, my rig is a hadron air with a 4690k and 290x, running a Samsung 28" 4k monitor, so I am interested in only a single GPU. If nvidia would be honest enough to admit they lied and apologize, and change the damn specs on their website for the 970, I would probably buy a titan x.

 

[ZOONAMI]

Just like many of us are ok with MS after the initial xbox one plans or Sony after their killzone 2 debacle. Companies do shitty things all the time out of short sightedness, overambition and greed. It is in their very nature and what makes them competitive. As consumers, we raise issues and put them in place when they fuck up. The 970 issue will be pressed by those affected and Nvidia will be put in their place. Doesn't mean the whole world needs to hold a grudge. We move on.

A lot more time has passed in your examples than the 970 situation. Microsoft has actually changed their behavior and Xbox strategy because of public feedback. Nvidia has done literally nothing other than say, "our marketing people and and engineers weren't communiticating." So we're supposed to believe the engineers were not aware of the published specs, and didn't read any press about the card they just released?

 

[ZOONAMI]

290x and 980 are absolutely not comparable. one is priced significantly cheaper because its significantly worse

https://youtu.be/6y_GEvObFRQ

Seems pretty comparable to me. Usually within 5 frames and in some games outperforms the 980 at 4k. With the newest omega drivers they are pretty much on par for the newsest games at 4k (video is from last sept).

 

[icecold1983]

https://youtu.be/6y_GEvObFRQ

Seems pretty comparable to me. Usually within 5 frames and in some games outperforms the 980 at 4k. With the newest omega drivers they are pretty much on par for the newsest games at 4k (video is from last sept).

the video you just linked shows a near constant 20% to 25% perf advantage for the 980 in everything except C3 and TR. that advantage only grows as you oc both chips. perf has also improved on 980 since those were launch drivers.

http://www.hardocp.com/article/2015..._980_platinum_video_card_review/#.VQQs6uFfB8E

its really not even close. the water cooling only afford them 80 extra mhz over what most cards do on air so just subtract 5% from each overclocked 980 result.

http://www.hardocp.com/article/2015/02/17/gigabyte_gtx_980_g1_gaming_video_card_review/#.VQQti-FfB8E

this one has comparisons between factory oc versions so perf can be compared at sub max oc levels

 

[Respawn]

Hopefully we can use all the ram .
Finally after all these years a card that will last a generation.

 

[Dictator93]

Hopefully we can use all the ram .
Finally after all these years a card that will last a generation.

The original Titan will last the generation out QUITE well. And that thing came out ... in 2013.

 

[ZOONAMI]

the video you just linked shows a near constant 20% to 25% perf advantage for the 980 in everything except C3. that advantage only grows as you oc both chips.

If it was a constant ~10 frames your 20%-25% would actually make sense. But it isn't, so no. 10-15%, yes. Given that a 980 is 2x as expensive as a 290x, and a year newer, not worth it to me. And as stated, the newest omega drivers close the gap. There is also an 8gb 290x for $100-$200 less than a 980 that does even better at 4k. But sure, just make up percentages. All I'm saying is that they are fairly close in performance, outside of heat and wattage.

Edit: The benchmarks you added aren't 4k, where the 512 bit bus of the 290x really starts to become valuable. Also, that Poseidon gtx 980 is like a $700 card. For that much you could buy a 295x2.

 

[icecold1983]

If it was a constant ~10 frames your 20%-25% would actually make sense. But it isn't, so no. 10-15%, yes. Given that a 980 is 2x as expensive as a 290x, and a year newer, not worth it to me. And as stated, the newest omega drivers close the gap. There is also an 8gb 290x for $100-$200 less than a 980 that does even better at 4k. But sure, just make up percentages. All I'm saying is that they are fairly close in performance, outside of heat and wattage.

Edit: The benchmarks you added aren't 4k, where the 512 bit bus of the 290x really starts to become valuable. Also, that Poseidon gtx 980 is like a $700 card. For that much you could buy a 295x2.

please learn math and then check the 2 links i supplied. who cares about 4k all gpus are shit and unplayable at 4k in anything halfway decent graphically.

 

[Diablos]

But on a serious note, it's about time they released a GPU that can compete with PS4's 8GB GDDR5.

 

[ZOONAMI]

please learn math and then check the 2 links i supplied. who cares about 4k all gpus are shit and unplayable at 4k in anything halfway decent graphically.

I care about 4k because I have a 4k monitor. And if 30-50 fps is unplayable, I guess I should stop playing games.

I alreadly looked at your 2 links and addressed them. Seems to me you have the math problem. Still not seeing more than a ten frame advantage, with higher averages because this is at 1440p. Most of these averages are beyond 60 frames for both nvidia, so you're just helping to prove the 290x is a very good card. Last time I checked, 10/80 is not 20-25%, but 12.5%. I said 10-15% in my previous post for the 980 in some games. In some games the 290x actually does better. Again, the only thing I'm saying is that they are fairly comparable in performance, outside of heat and wattage. I don't see why you have a problem with that.

 

[michaelius]

If it was a constant ~10 frames your 20%-25% would actually make sense. But it isn't, so no. 10-15%, yes. Given that a 980 is 2x as expensive as a 290x, and a year newer, not worth it to me. And as stated, the newest omega drivers close the gap. There is also an 8gb 290x for $100-$200 less than a 980 that does even better at 4k. But sure, just make up percentages. All I'm saying is that they are fairly close in performance, outside of heat and wattage.

Edit: The benchmarks you added aren't 4k, where the 512 bit bus of the 290x really starts to become valuable. Also, that Poseidon gtx 980 is like a $700 card. For that much you could buy a 295x2.

I really hope that everyone who says that really buys 295x2 so he can enjoy all that dual gpu magic on his own

 

[PdotMichael]

Can this do The Order at 900p at 30fps tho?

Put the The Order BD into your BD drive and try it.

 

[ZOONAMI]

I really hope that everyone who says that really buys 295x2 so he can enjoy all that dual gpu magic on his own

Well, it's a good thing for AMD that he's bringing up a ~$700 water cooled 980 that isn't even in stock anywhere to prove a 980 can outperform a 290x by 10-15%.

 

[icecold1983]

I care about 4k because I have a 4k monitor. And if 30-50 fps is unplayable, I guess I should stop playing games.

I alreadly looked at your 2 links and addressed them. Seems to me you have the math problem. Still not seeing more than a ten frame advantage, with higher averages because this is at 1440p. Most of these averages are beyond 60 frames for both nvidia, so you're just helping to prove the 290x is a very good card. Last time I checked, 10/80 is not 20-25%, but 12.5%. I said 10-15% in my previous post for the 980 in some games. In some games the 290x actually does better. Again, the only thing I'm saying is that they are fairly comparable in performance, outside of heat and wattage. I don't see why you have a problem with that.

30 to 50 fps in most games does suck. just a constant juddery mess. very few games feel smooth at a variable fps jumping around between 30 and 50. you also are relegated to medium settings to even attain that.

as for your video:
-bf4 : typically 8 fps lead where the 290x is constantly jumping all around between 30 and 44 fps.
-metro : typically 8 to 10 fps lead where the 290x is mostly between 20 and 30 fps
-bioshock : typically 10 to 20 fps lead where the 290x is mostly between 40 and 50 fps

do you even math?

 

[strugler]

Put the The Order BD into your BD drive and try it.

LOL

 

[ZOONAMI]

30 to 50 fps in most games does suck. just a constant juddery mess. very few games feel smooth at a variable fps jumping around between 30 and 50. you also are relegated to medium settings to even attain that.

as for your video:
-bf4 : typically 8 fps lead where the 290x is constantly jumping all around between 30 and 44 fps.
-metro : typically 8 to 10 fps lead where the 290x is mostly between 20 and 30 fps
-bioshock : typically 10 to 20 fps lead where the 290x is mostly between 40 and 50 fps

do you even math?

You're ignoring 2/5 of the games in the video, and you're inflating the fps advantage of the 980 in the other games. The 980 also has a variable frame rate that's jumping all around. And again, AMD drivers have improved performance more for the 290x since September than nvidia drivers have for the 980.

I enjoy playing my games at 4k, even though they aren't a locked 60fps. I imagine there are other people out there with 4k monitors who feel the same.

I'm done talking about the 290x versus 980 - it should be clear to most folks that a 290x offers comparable performance, for half the cost. If you aren't concerned about 50 more watts and a bit higher temps, it's a good way to go.

 

[icecold1983]

You're ignoring 2/5 of the games in the video, and you're inflating the fps advantage of the 980 in the other games. The 980 also has a variable frame rate that's jumping all around.

I enjoy playing my games at 4k, even though they aren't a locked 60fps. I imagine there are other people out there with 4k monitors who feel the same.

I'm done talking about the 290x versus 980 - it should be clear to most folks that a 290x offers comparable performance, for half the cost. If you aren't concerned about 50 more watts and a bit higher temps, it's a good way to go.

just went to the DF page that video is from

bf4 - 19%
metro - 20%
bioshock - 31%.

yep my numbers are clearly inflated. math is fun. these are also at 4k, where that 512 bit bus is suppose to be laying the smack down

 

[dr_rus]

You're ignoring 2/5 of the games in the video, and you're inflating the fps advantage of the 980 in the other games. The 980 also has a variable frame rate that's jumping all around. And again, AMD drivers have improved performance more for the 290x since September than nvidia drivers have for the 980.

I enjoy playing my games at 4k, even though they aren't a locked 60fps. I imagine there are other people out there with 4k monitors who feel the same.

I'm done talking about the 290x versus 980 - it should be clear to most folks that a 290x offers comparable performance, for half the cost. If you aren't concerned about 50 more watts and a bit higher temps, it's a good way to go.

What? Really?

If you mean 970 vs 290X then you're right to some extent. But then you'll have to consider that 290X owners will miss out on some tech which is/will be coming to 970. This has always been the case between AMD and NV GPUs.

 

[Backfoggen]

Can this do The Order at 900p at 30fps tho?

Titan X would probably melt trying to do that

 

[……forgetit]

Can this do The Order at 900p at 30fps tho?

I hate argument s like this, it wasn't funny 8 years ago and it's not funny now. Condoles have exclusives, we get it.

 

[CadetMahoney]

Can this do The Order at 900p at 30fps tho?

I loled.

 

[Momentary]

I hate argument s like this, it wasn't funny 8 years ago and it's not funny now. Condoles have exclusives, we get it.

It think it's more of a joke about it being the new benchmark in graphics with it's vaseline resolution, black bars, and closed corridor design.

 

[……forgetit]

It think it's more of a joke about it being the new benchmark in graphics with it's vaseline resolution, black bars, and closed corridor design.

Let's not forget that the game itself isn't very good.

 

[ZOONAMI]

just went to the DF page that video is from

bf4 - 19%
metro - 20%
bioshock - 31%.

yep my numbers are clearly inflated. math is fun. these are also at 4k, where that 512 bit bus is suppose to be laying the smack down

You must be terrible at math http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2014-nvidia-geforce-gtx-970-review

3840x2160 (4K) GTX 970 GTX 970 (OC) GTX 980 GTX 780 Ti R9 290X R9 290GTX780
BioShock Infinite 50.3 58.2 57.4 50.7 43.7 40.6 39.9
Tomb Raider 35.1 40.5 39.5 43.3 40.1 37.1 34.1
Battlefield 4, High 40.9 46.8 46.2 41.9 38.9 36.7 35.8
Metro: Last Light 32.8 37.7 36.4 33.1 30.4 28.6 27.6
Crysis 3, High 32.0 37.2 34.2 33.4 35.2 32.8 28.1


Bioshock - 980 has a 24% advantage
BF4 - 16%
Metro - 17%

Crysis 3 and Tomb Raider 290x beats the 980. (3% and 2% respectively).

If you average all 5 games out you get a 10.4% advantage for the 980. So yes, you are inflating things.

 

[ZOONAMI]

I hate argument s like this, it wasn't funny 8 years ago and it's not funny now. Condoles have exclusives, we get it.

Yeah I laughed.

 

[BeEatNU]

This banter is starting to be abit ridiculous.
Every time this is bumped im getting hyped some legit information about the Titan X is posted. Not its lil bro 980

 

[icecold1983]

You must be terrible at math http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2014-nvidia-geforce-gtx-970-review

3840x2160 (4K) GTX 970 GTX 970 (OC) GTX 980 GTX 780 Ti R9 290X R9 290GTX780
BioShock Infinite 50.3 58.2 57.4 50.7 43.7 40.6 39.9
Tomb Raider 35.1 40.5 39.5 43.3 40.1 37.1 34.1
Battlefield 4, High 40.9 46.8 46.2 41.9 38.9 36.7 35.8
Metro: Last Light 32.8 37.7 36.4 33.1 30.4 28.6 27.6
Crysis 3, High 32.0 37.2 34.2 33.4 35.2 32.8 28.1


Bioshock - 980 has a 24% advantage
BF4 - 16%
Metro - 17%

Crysis 3 and Tomb Raider 290x beats the 980. (3% and 2% respectively).

If you average all 5 games out you get a 10.4% advantage for the 980. So yes, you are inflating things.

is this real life???

 

[viveks86]

FFS you guys. Can we stop with the 290 vs 970/980 already? If you want to compare benchmarks, at least compare them to the titan x. If not, please find another thread to derail.

 

[ZOONAMI]

is this real life???

Yes.

 

[ZOONAMI]

FFS you guys. Can we stop with the 290 vs 970/980 already? If you want to compare benchmarks, at least compare them to the titan x. If not, please find another thread to derail.

Yeah I'm done. There is an inherent comparison to the titan x given that it is supposed to offer 36% more performance than a 980 though.

 

[icecold1983]

Yes.

actually its not. math doesnt work in real life how it apparently works in your reality.

 

[ZOONAMI]

actually its not. math doesnt work in real life how it apparently works in your reality.

Oh my bad, it's too early. Sorry. I see what I did there - dividing instead of subtracting and then dividing. The numbers I had would be like the 290x offers 76% of the performance of a 980 in Bioshock Infinite lol. Still though, it does do better than the 980 in some games, and is still pretty close in most games. For the money, it's a great card. Going back to sleep now lol.

 

[Momentary]

Damn this thing looks good internally.

It's just begging to have an EK Waterblock slapped on it.

 

[tuxfool]

Ya'll know that AMD is not the way to go if you do anything other than game on your card, right?

For instance, Blender Cycles and Octane Render (and the Octane for Blender plugin) don't support AMD officially. That super sucks and puts people like me out of camp red entirely, value be damned.

12GB gpus are what the VFX industry has been waiting for. The X is like a M6000 except way cheaper. That's a pretty good value if you're a vfx hobbyist.

The VFX industry is already using those 12GB Quadros. They won't change to the TitanX unless it is certified to work with the programs they use (which check whether you're using a professional card). AFAIK the original titan was in that class, but the rumors that it doesn't support fp64 makes me wonder if they are targeting it as a premium gaming card (then again 12GB for gaming is really overkill).

 

[tuxfool]

Damn this thing looks good internally.

It's just begging to have an EK Waterblock slapped on it.

Looks like any other high end graphics card with the exception of that massive gpu.

Also that VRM only appears to have 6 phases for the GPU, which might not be pretty. It gives credence to the rumors that it is voltage locked.

 

[Momentary]

Looks like any other high end graphics card except for that massive die size.

Also that VRM only appears to have 6 phases for the GPU, which might not be pretty. It gives credence to the rumors that it is voltage locked.

They don't all look the same. Reference PCBs do look similar from the 780 to th 980 to the TITAN X. Just something about it having more symmetry that I like. The 980 Strix looks good to me too.

 

[tuxfool]

They don't all look the same. Reference PCBs do look similar from the 780 to th 980 to the TITAN X. Just something about it having more symmetry that I like. The 980 Strix looks good to me too.

I'd have to ask, what looks bad? They all use a similar layout generally more often than not.

 

[AstroZombie]

AMD fanboys confusing the best performance with price/performance budget. Nvidia cards are typically better and the drivers and software suite are better and more frequently updated.

 

[Momentary]

I'd have to ask, what looks bad? They all use a similar layout generally more often than not.

I'm old man. I just like to point out the fact that PCBs don't look like this anymore

 

[Raticus79]

Star Citizen should be one game that can actually use the 12GB. 8K textures!

I'll be picking up two of these for VR SLI. I needed another displayport port anyway - ROG Swift + BenQ BL3201PH (4k60) and I only had one port on my Titan, so I'm just swapping connections at the moment.

 

[tuxfool]

I'm old man. I just like to point out the fact that PCBs don't look like this anymore

You might as well go even further back. All the way back to when GPUs were still packaged in QFP or PLCC. Now those are some fugly PCBs

 

[Kezen]

12gb of VRAM could be useful when running the latest games at 4K.

 

[Theonik]

12gb of VRAM could be useful when running the latest games at 4K.

You'd probably hit a processing wall before you really hit a VRAM wall there though wouldn't you?