390 faster than 980

>390 faster than 980
>Fury X faster than Titan X
>people unironically bought Nvidia in 2015

Other urls found in this thread:

phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=dota2-vulkan-redux&num=3
pcgamer.com/total-war-warhammer-benchmarks-strike-fear-into-cpus/
hardocp.com/article/2016/05/27/from_ati_to_amd_back_journey_in_futility#.V0hNFb4f30Q
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

...

>you need a fury x to maintain greater than 60 fps
Why are games such unoptimised pieces of shit these days?

LE NEW KING XD

>AMD sponsored game

What a surprise

fuck off lincuck

TOPPEST LELKEK

NVIDIOTS BTFO

Fuck off

>800€ GPU needed to maintain 60fps

This shit does not benefit any side, it is just another unoptimised console port

AMD sponsor games are games that arent gimped by goyworks. So AMD performs as it normally should.

>my shitty high TDP circa 2013 video card outperforming Nvidia's 2015 flagship


the 290x was mean to compete against the 780, but now it's stomping the fuck out of the 980

Where did it go wrong, Nvidibros?

>R9 Nano CF worse than single R9 Nano
>GTX 970 SLI worse than single GTX 970

Probably best to ignore benchmarks for this game.

crossfire/sli is shit if the engine has interframe dependencies.

>console port
>only released on PC

he reminds me of this guy

It doesn't even have to beat it lol

The fact that amd is competing now has caused great distress in the Nvidia owner's life.

>Total War
>representative of anything other than shitty optimization

My last GPU was 280x, a beast of a GPU with high performance/dollar, but I really don't know why you'd use a Total War game as an example. Shadow of Mordor get 121FPS at 4K with 1080s in crossfire

Yeah this game and Hitman are the only ones that seem to use DX12 somewhat correctly so far.

>those Nano CF scores
Other than that, breddy gud for AMD.

lol port

Cherrypicked benchmarks dont mean jack shit you fucking shill

oh yeah pcgamer is famous for being big AMD shills

It's DX12, there is no real CF/SLI, the engine needs to support that shit and we don't know if it does or not.

I like how the tolerances are hehe

It means the SLI and CF are not working.

>cherry picking this hard
AMDrones becoming desperate.

the total war games have always been notoriously CPU bound. says a lot about AMD's H1B'd shill staff when they're that desperate to smear NVIDIA for putting out better products.

and drops to 42fps at minimum. Nearly the same as a single 1080 at minimum.

Lmao, that graph. 10/10.

>BTFO

looks like AMD is revving up the fake hype machine in preparation for another disappointing product launch. we saw the same fake bullshit right before we got bulldozer and the 390/x rebrands and the 'overclocker's dream' fury x as well.

looks like you're a fat cuck

indian detected

AMD btfo

By building your games to only run properly with 1500$ machines, you effectively silence any justified criticism about lack of optimization, because "IT'S YOUR PATATO PC NOT THE GAME XDDDD".

Total war, especially Attila is the most demanding benchmark you can get. Call it unoptimised but it isn't your average strategy game for that matter. Warhammer is well optimised on direct launch.

I have a devils canyon gm200 build ok and you got give it to amd, alot is on the line on their zen platform, then vega tbr next year. You can't possibly stay blue pilled your whole life drinking fluoride and gobbling up marketing and ignore that competition is healthy. If you had cash and traveled the world you would consider an amd build just for the lulz

Amds current progress is historical and constant, unless some jack rabbit is pulled out of the hat, theyre going to slowly but surely consume the market because its not like they have much to lose anyway. Besides their capitalisation is stronger than nvidia which is much more volatile, its just tech and not reactions and marketing bs

>That graph scaling
AYYYYYYYYYY

>AMD (a silicon company) helped CA (a game company) on how to use DX12 (a proprietary API by Microsoft) properly

wat? amd isn't making any progress at all. that's why they're floundering and hemorrhaging money and market share. if anything AMD should just sell RTG already so that they become managed by someone who isn't a retarded indian.

More like
>AMD (a silicon company) helped CA (a game company) gimp the shit out of nvidia cards to make their cards look good

You're gonna need to show some proof for that.

They made a long term investment in developing good GPGPU architectures which has not paid off in the short term, but GCN is definitely the way forward as opposed to nVidia's current half-assed solution which doesn't even have fully asynchronous compute.

Nvidia isn't winning, ergo AMD must be gimping them because Sup Forums genuinely believes Nvidia will outperform AMD no matter the scenario.

Why do you think there has been so much damage control over DX12? Its fundamentally shaking things up and team green fanboys don't like what they see.

>960 2GB getting more frames than the 4GB

I beg your pardon

Depends on the model, they surely ain't reference cards. 2G might have higher OC than 4GB.

Dood this ain't cherrypicking. This is picking all the DX12 benches that come out, showing every time over and over how NVidia is shit in async, making the 1080 a big flop (AAA titles are using DX12, so wow best 2016 card for 2015 or earlier titles! The way it's meant to be played™)

AMD usually sticks their GAMING EVOLVED™ logo on somewhere when they do that, same as Nvidia's THE WAY IT'S MEANT TO BE PLAYED™

It's not gimping. AMD tech is Open Source, so NVidia can cope. Gimpworks is not, and AMD suffers. Look at Tomb Raider, done with AMD, working flawlessly on NVidia. Then look at Witcher's Hairworks on AMD.

>le async maymay

back to india with you. phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=dota2-vulkan-redux&num=3

NVIDIA crushes AMD in dx12 and vulkan games.

I would rather see benchmarks of games like Witcher 3 that have been out for a bit and are patched.

>consoles' hardware are holding gaming back!
>PC exclusive is released, takes a beefy rig to run it
>muh optimization!

On Vulkan in 4K a Fury (not X) performs almost as well as a 980ti and a 290 almost as a 980. Then there are the 285 and 260x which are budget cards of older gen and have no way to compete with a 970.

I think this is proof of what I said earlier, and also proof that you are a bad shill, just like phoronix.

>Total war, especially Attila is the most demanding benchmark you can get
I'm sure there are various Firestrike type benchmarks that are way more demanding.

It's a niche (irrelevant) game, and benchmarks particularly from older Total War games completely defecate on i7s even. Of course most gaming rigs don't need i7s. It's not demanding, just unoptimized.

...

you realize that was a margin of error result right? all the other benchmarks he did showed the AMD cards getting crushed.

keep in mind here that valve are the only ones with a proper vulkan renderer actually available to the public, and worked with AMD and Khronos for literally years to make this happen.

Most benches I've seen comparing 2gb to 4gb cards tend to show the 2gb one as 1-2 fps faster for some reason, in games that use less than 2gb vram at least.

Had the same issue when trying to decide between my 4gb or 2gb gtx 680.

Do you realize that there is no fucking DX12 there just to start? OpenGL render is bad for AMD, Vulkan is not. All Vulkan results show minimal difference from AMD and NVidia cards. Also, having almost the same result on 1280x1024 and 1920x1080 makes me just dump those benchmark and stick with 4k Vulkan, which is the one that actually stresses the GPU instead of being bottlenecked by CPU (goym all cards result equal, did you even check the benchmarks before shilling?)

Bonus note : confronting Maxwell vs 2x series is shilling, like putting polaris vs maxwell and calling the miracle. And putting in the fray low end cards (285 and 260x) vs top tier is plain retarded.

"LOOK GOY MY 390X OUTPERFORMS YOUR 840m, NVIDIA BTFO"

Try harder.

>Do you realize that there is no fucking DX12 there just to start?

indian detected: you're shilling for both currysoft and raja's rebranded GPUs.

>Bonus note : confronting Maxwell vs 2x series is shilling, like putting polaris vs maxwell and calling the miracle.

AMD should release some GPUs that aren't just straight rebrands and rehashes of GCN then.

>AMD should release some GPUs that aren't just straight rebrands and rehashes of GCN then.
What is Pascal

>Game isn't a good looker
>Eats GPUs

I buy power to run good looking games

>promotional slides
The shilling is too obvious

technical debt. no concurrency, parallelism or simd optimizations make code extremely easy to debug but can't easily be engineered in later as easily as they could've been when the game was being built from the ground up.

data oriented/driven design seems to try to alleviate some of that bad technical debt, but most devs aren't catching on and still write terrible object oriented shitcode

>>Fury X faster than Titan X
>in one game
Holy shit I'm convinced brb buying the fury x

In all DX12 games so far. Read : future AAA titles

Oh really?

Is it faster in Tomb Raider?

>inb4 'That benchmark doesn't count'

you mean one AMD sponsored game. all other DX12 and Vulkan titles so far have shown NVIDIA to be crushing AMD.

>future AAA titles

Future AAA titles are far more likely to be build on Vulkan than on DX12.

Example, Doom (patch is coming)

Vulkan is hugely favored by gamedevelopers because it is cross platform, so much easier to port from console to PC and vice versa.

Dx is just a huge pile of shit in that regard

>fury x dx 12
>70fps
>titan x dx 12
>40fps
Can't make this shit up

>muh cherrypicked benchmark
Oh let me guess the 99% other benchmarks in which the 1080 crushes AMD don't count?

Because 1080 is a new generation retard. It's meant to be compared to next generation amd flagship (vega not polaris)

>you should compare it to cards that aren't out yet

That's a fantastic idea, AMDrones are always so inventive

amazing how some AMD drones are trolling everyone with that benchmark article. AMD supplied a separate version of the game with specially tailored dx12 implementation, thats what those pics show... read the article... pcgamer.com/total-war-warhammer-benchmarks-strike-fear-into-cpus/

Are you insanely delusional or just astonishingly retarded? It's obvious it wins against older gen, and that's my everyone with an ounce of brain is waiting for both competitors' cards to take a stand. If you want a card now go with the 1080. If you want the best card for this gen and get the 1080 now, you're so retarded I have pity for you.

>Game is going to support DX12 and have that performance
>AMDRONES SHILLING OMG LOOK AT HOW THE GAME WILL RUN FOR 1 MONTH OMG NVIDIA IS BEST AMD IS KILL
Hope you're underage, because otherwise you're retarded

not a cherry picked benchmark or AMD sponsored game, its worse.. an AMD tailored version of Total War thats not even playable...

the developer didnt supply that version, AMD bypassed them and built a custom benchmark version of the game.
Yet you are so sure this is what the game will look like that once the dx12 patch is released right? thats what fanatism causes?

Look at Hitman. Look at AOTS. Answer yourself.

>who here with AMD stock
Ayy, I bought 2000€ worth of AMD stock 9 months ago because of the HBM hype it was getting and for being so low in value.

Now the value almost doubled, and if shit keeps going this way, with AMD doing great shit and nvidia fucking up, then it'll increase at least 4x the current value if Polaris, Vega and Zen are also amazing.

My best investment in years, thank you AMD.

what are you talking about, the benchmarks i have seen around with 1080 had it on top, even for Hitman or AOTS (smaller gap but still).
Also see:Btw, check that dx12 TotalWar bench again, it places the 1080 at equal performance of the normal 980. You really believe this tailored amd benchmark is reliable?

>what are you talking about, the benchmarks i have seen around with 1080 had it on top, even for Hitman or AOTS (smaller gap but still).
Just a little ahead of older gen cards is kinda a bad thing for NVidia
>Also see:
Checked. It's a bunch of CPU-bottlenecked benchs on old render engines with top tier maxwell cards against only 2 previous gen AMD good cards (and 2 entry level cards). The only benchmark which matters (because the CPU bottleneck is not yet hit) is the 4k vulkan, and a fury (non x) almost beats a 980ti. Also, in other benches the margin is minimal (heck also a 260x seems comparable to a 980ti, wtf).
Oh and let's not forget the memelord that kept answering in memed instead of argumentating.
>Btw, check that dx12 TotalWar bench again, it places the 1080 at equal performance of the normal 980. You really believe this tailored amd benchmark is reliable?
It may have hit the CPU bottleneck. In that graph, all cards result mostly comparable (5fps difference). That's shit, and nobody can argue : TWW is a CPU bitch. In Ultra we actually hit the GPU limit and it shows the async capabilities

>with AMD doing great shit and nvidia fucking up
Not releasing cards is a great thing?

Releasing a maxwell rebrand is shit tho

How is it shit? Maxwell is still a relatively new architecture, much newer compared to the old GCN shit that AMD is still on.

Why would you expect Nvidia to release a brand new architecture each year but not hold AMD to the same standard?

>tfw didn't pull the trigger on several thousand shares at $1.6
I hate myself, I really do. Such a fucking pussy and I knew it was going to rise too.

how does my r9 290 fare these days

>been waiting all year for Warhammer
>decided to wait on buying a Nano because new meme cards

Why did I listen to you fucks??

The new meme cards are Polaris/Vega, which aren't out yet.
Nobody ever got hyped for the Nano.

CPU limited. Nvidia has worse DX12 support, so it's more limited.

It's a graphically intensive game, it probably wouldn't even run in 30 FPS on the current consoles.

Nobody got hyped for Nano except for people wanting to do very small sized builds.

The hype was on the Fury X, which I bought.

>it's not gimping when AMD does it
top kek

On a more mature note - can we for one get a relatively impartial DX12 game? So far every title was sponsored by one brand or the other with performance miraculously being better on that vendors cards.
AMD is in full shill force with DX12, but I'd like to see some rather more trustworthy info.

>960 2gb >4gb
???

Vulkan says more than dx12. You could benchmark for it in doom.

Man, I am so conflicted between getting a 970 or a r390 4gb

THANK YOU BASED AMD

Get a r9 390 8gb. They are close but i personally would hit the vram limits in modded skyrim and gta5.

AMD's software a shit so I went with nvidia.

nVidia WINS

hardocp.com/article/2016/05/27/from_ati_to_amd_back_journey_in_futility#.V0hNFb4f30Q

>In the simplest terms AMD has created a product that runs hotter and slower than its competition's new architecture by a potentially significant margin.

IT'S OVER, AMD IS FINISHED & BANKRUPT

>AMD in charge of staying solvent and not splitting apart at the seams
kek
They're fucking done
We Civil War now

What kind of software other than a driver does a gpu need according to you?