1 D A Y L E F T
D
A
Y
L
E
F
T
1 D A Y L E F T
Other urls found in this thread:
cool, I dont give a fuck
The most technologically demanding game I have left to play in by back-log is The Witcher 3...
'''''''''''''''''''''founders edition'''''''''''''''''''
>tfw ready to pounce on cheap used 980ti's
>graph starts at 0.5
Hadn't even noticed it
I can't even remember the last time I saw an nVidia graph that has a y-axis starting at zero.
>no units
Here's one, but here they start the x axis at 1300, top kek
Performance is unitless
FPS/FPS
reminds me of this
that's cool but the consoles our games are being made for still only run at 720p with 30fps on an APU
which is why my 3 year old r9 290 still runs everything I play at like 100fps
>which is why my 3 year old r9 290 still runs everything I play at like 100fps
Then you only play old shit or at low settings
then fuck off, what are you even here for?
holy fuck, how is this even legal. I havent noticed it either, and looking at the bars it looks like 200%+ improvement.
>r9 290 still runs everything I play at like 100fps
>everything I play at like 100fps
>everything
kill yourself
shitposting in a shill thread?
I generally keep everything maxed except depth of field and tessellation, and use 2x or 4x MSAA/FXAA/whatever.
Drop those first 2 things and suddenly games don't really have heavy requirements for an overclocked r9 290.
I fixed your slide for you.
still 60% over 980 ofcourse both at stock speed
pretty much what is expected
people who can't read graphs deserve to choke on shit
It's actually more like 25% in most cases for general gaming.
nVidia cherry picked the benchmarks, but their VR stuff is interesting.
There's a reason this image exists.
wow I was thinking of buying used 290x, but even though I hate nvidia, I think I'll have to go with them
Making that graph start at 0 would be absolutely retarded. How stupid are you?
Here's what it would look like.
haha oh wow
What benchmarking site is this so I can avoid it in the future?
The 84-85 graph is satire, but nVidia is pulling this shit all the time with their performance graphs.
PCGamesHardware
It's from Sup Forums.
Not from an actual review.
>1080/1070 benchmark and price
>titanx, 980ti, 980 users are shooting at each other because their cards seems to lost its value
man, this is fun
Are you implying AMD doesn't do it?
>relative performance
try again idiot
What are you even trying to say?
>it okay when AMD does it
0.1 relative performance can means anything from 10 fps to 100 fps.
>0.8
TOPPEST LELKEK, AMDPOORFAGS
Ok? How is that relevant?
The problem with the graph is that it starts at 0.8. If you're okay with that one, it must mean you're okay with the one in the OP as well.
Both companies are full of jews who want your money. Don't try to pretend otherwise.
I'm waiting for AMD announcement
Dawn of the final day for AMD
GTX 1080 is too pricey for me.
AMD Polaris is too weak.
There is only GTX 1070 as a real option.
Isn't 1070 going to be $400+?
Polaris 10 will probably match 1070 closely in performance while being
You're full of shit, no fucking way are you getting 100 fps at those settings with an r9 290 in lets say witcher 3
as far as leaks rumors etc go it will barely have fury x performance, polaris 10 seems to be this years HD68** series
>It's actually more like 25% in most cases for general gaming.
It's interesting that you say this while there aren't even benchmarks out
fuck off with this stupid bullshit
Wtf is on the Y axis, violating paths?
>for sure
Yeah, surely AMD has so much money that they will sell their products underpriced....NOT
>Polaris 10 will probably match 1070 closely in performance while being
Are you pretending to be retarded again?
You are a fucking retard, what makes you think polaris 10 will match the 1070 at 150 bucks less?
It's literally based on nothing but wishful thinking
>probably
>for sure
Tuck those nuts in your ass and say it man.
>It's literally based on nothing but wishful thinking
It's an AMD product alright
Most of AMD's slide still start at 0.
Wtf are "violating paths"?!!?!?!?
>inb4 I'll violate your path
>AMD fans need a chart to get that 256 is 128 doubled
lmao
>needing a graph to know 256 bit is twice as much as 128 bit
Uh oh.
390 matches 980ti in DX12 games and beats them in some. At $350-$400 less.
390 matches and beats 980 in some DX11 games and beats them easily in DX12 games at $150-$200 cheaper.
There's already a precedence. Are you a retarded nvidiot who's completely ignorant of competitor card performance?
Everything looks better with a graph.
>in DX12 games
You mean all three of them?
Goal shifting much?
they got the 970 graph wrong
more like 0 released
I have a two or three year old GeForce 760, is it worth it to upgrade to 1070?
Since you don't have the balls I'll say it for you.
Polaris 10 will be getting sold for $2-300 dollarydoos with the R9 490X going for $450.
The R9 490X will keep up with the 1070, and land somewhere between the 1070 and 1080 for an awkward price.
The R9 480 will be slightly slower than the 1070, but it will be easily $100-150 cheaper.
AMD will continue the trend of having horrendous driver issues and performance failures due to drivers that need unfucked, which will take 6-9 months to correct.
When it is corrected the R9 490X will then be able to slightly beat the 1080, but not by a significant margin, and not in nVidia optimized games that use the proprietary nVidia graphics sit and neglect the AMD shit.
Bottom line, this is going to be more of the same that will in the end come down to how much you're willing to spend and how long you're willing to wait for drivers to work
This is pathetic. Why would a budget card even need 8GB of VRAM anyways?
He's not goalshifting he's right.
DX12 is a huge stinking pile of shit anyway, Vulkan is where its at
Here have a game developed with the Vulkan Api
See how shit the 390 performes?
I'd rather have a card that performs much better in 99% of the games than one that matches it only in a few cherrypicked games
new techfag here.
This looks like an educated assumption based on historical data.
Based on your best guess, what do you think the best new "bang-for-buck" GPU will be?
>AMD will continue the trend of having horrendous driver issues and performance failures due to drivers that need unfucked, which will take 6-9 months to correct.
This guy knows whats up, I'd rather pay a little extra and not have to deal with driver bullshit.
Well games will either end up being DX 12, or OpenGL.
Preferably they'll go OpenGL and stay open source so that there's no hardware fuckery.
>This is what people who never owned an AMD card actually believe
You see it after a lot of major game releases in the last couple of years, there's always going to be news reports of "AMD users reporting problems". Literally happening right now again with Doom. When I wanted to buy an adaptive sync monitor I bought into nvidia instead of AMD and I don't regret it one bit.
>r9 390 will match 980ti performance in the future
>amdrones actualy believe this
>b-but muh DX12 that will be relevant in 2020
Not him, but I had a 4970 back in the day and there were a fuckton of driver issues.
I heard they sorted them out in the last couple of years, but I don't think I'll be going back.
>Doom
>running opengl 4.3 on AMD cards
>running opengl 4.5 for nvidia cards
>vulkan/dx12 version not even released yet
>Doom
>Vulkan
Doom currently only supports OpenGL. Vulkan patch will come later.
Go spread your misinformation somewhere lese
Which is where you are wrong.
Let me describe my experience with the r9 390
>stick in my motherboard, boot up
>artifacts on screen before motherboard bootscreen
>okay.jpg
>boot up witcher 3
>it runs smooth but every few minutes theres a huge lag spike, have to look up shit on the internet, find out I have to force certain settings off for it to properly run the game
>okay.jpg
>boot up arkham city
>it literally runs worse than it did on my old gtx 670
>fuck this shit, kick that motherfucker out of the door and got a 780ti instead , everything smooth as fuck, no problems whatsoever.
AMD's DX11 drivers fucking suck, anyone denying that is delusional, why do you think Nvidia can beat AMD with on paper weaker cards? Because they optimized the shit out of DX11.
Sup Forums can eat shit with their memes I'm never listning to their bullshit again, AMD cards are cheaper and for a good reason
Gamerware isn't technology
>380x faster than 290/390
i think i need new GCN card.
Oh really?
You two faggots don't realize drivers are sqaurely at the feet of game developers when it comes to dx12.
And you realize that dx12 adoption is extremely slow, games that have it almost always have a DX11 function too and that Vulkan will probably be the dominant choice over DX12 because its much easier to use cross platform?
>have 290
>run any games just fine
hmm
>60 degrees idle
>it works for me so nobody can have problems with it
So I guess nVidia never fucked up their drivers too since I never had problems with my meme card?
i was playing game
The video proves you wrong. 30 seconds in.
Fucking idiot.
>not released
Thats the point. Vulkan is still work in progress.
The point is, pascal cards apparently run games on vulkan extremely well, so dx12 doesn't matter
Not like it's difficult to find nvidia slides that start at 0.
If you want to make a claim that most of AMD's slides start at 0, while nvidia's do not, I hope you have more than a few slides to prove that. A claim like that is actually fairly difficult to back up, as you'd need to provide several non-cherrypicked examples.
Same thing with vulkan with drivers. Whatever portion of dx11 they'd use would be just fine consider how much faster async compute is (esp compared to nvidias software-based preemptive compute). Regardless, if you want to play AAA titles (why else would you get a 1070/1080/polaris) you're going to mostly use dx12 code. Adoption isn't slow it's just that dx12 coding requires a good deal of expertise given how everything must be optimized from the developers' end not the manufacturer.
Fact of the matter remains polaris won't have "driver issues" for games that matter to the consumer specifically buying these cards for AAA games. Besides, the latest round of driver releases had nvidia fucking up twice not amd.
>DX12 doesn't matter because the only OpenGL engine on the market uses Vulkan
>Meanwhile everything other game is DirectX
>Fact of the matter remains polaris won't have "driver issues" for games that matter to the consumer specifically buying these cards for AAA games.
That's not fact thats baseless conjecture
This just shows how inconsistent the 900 series is with regards to power draw. The power spikes are insane.
>dx12 doesn't matter
No it's not.
Yeah at least with AMD cards from the 300~ series you know they will consistently use a shitload of power
We will see in the benchmarks
That's not what this chart says, at all. You'd seriously have to misinterpret like three things on this chart to come to that conclusion.