|
Prescription Combs posted:RX480's are now listed as coming soon on Newegg. They've been listed for a bit, been eyeing the XFX listing and seeing if it had a VRAM amount listed.
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2016 21:12
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 05:12 |
|
|
I myself might just get an RX480 instead of a 1070 since I'm going to stick with 1080p gaming anyway. My question is would I see any performance benefit getting the 8GB model over the 4GB model?
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2016 21:14
|
|
|
spasticColon posted:I myself might just get an RX480 instead of a 1070 since I'm going to stick with 1080p gaming anyway. My question is would I see any performance benefit getting the 8GB model over the 4GB model? I believe some games like Rise of the Tomb Raider are indeed pushing past 4GB at 1080p. For the minor price difference, I'd get the 8GB, it'll be a powerful enough card to justify it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2016 21:22
|
|
|
Gonkish posted:The amount of "OMG GUYS I SOLD MY 390X/FURY X/980Ti FOR A 480 WHY ISN'T IT LITERALLY THE JESUS OF PERFORMANCE" posts in the last few days is amazing. It's insane the furor that people will whip themselves into with little to no information to go on. God drat. I can't wait to see all the angry posts about how AMD screwed up yet again by not delivering 1080Ti performance for 200 dollars like they (obviously had not) promised! pretty much everything is pointing to "dieshrunk hawaii" with actual data i'm not sure why people expected anything more
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2016 21:25
|
|
|
Beautiful Ninja posted:Been reading r/amd the last few days. Middle of last week people really had bought into the wccftech bullshit and thought they were about to get 200 dollar GTX 1070's with cards that were gonna do 1.6ghz on air. Now it seems like sanity is starting to reign again, with people expecting R9 390-390X performance instead. But the calls to ban wccftech are hilarious because people wanted to believe so hard. AMD is actively encouraging this by embargoing reviews until after the card is in stores.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2016 21:25
|
|
|
Or wait even more for non-reference designs to come out with better cooling and extra power connectors for overclocking. Unless you absolutely need the blower of course.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2016 21:32
|
|
|
spasticColon posted:I myself might just get an RX480 instead of a 1070 since I'm going to stick with 1080p gaming anyway. My question is would I see any performance benefit getting the 8GB model over the 4GB model? I'm gonna play devils advocate and say that you'll probably not notice the 8GB over 4 on settings it will be happy running anyway, and suggest saving the $30. Whenever the RX 470 trickles out, $150 for 970 performance should be sweet.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2016 21:36
|
|
|
Paul MaudDib posted:I'd also recommend a 980 Ti if you can get one for under $400. They outperform the 1070 at those kind of resolutions, and you can actually get them. You keep saying this, but I've only seen the 980ti beat the 1070 ref in doom and metro at 1440/4k & ultrawide benchmarks. Can you cite some more benchmarks? Nearly everything else the 1070 outperforms at ultrawide and 4k resolutions, and I have a hard time imagining that this won't be the case moving forward. edit: ultrawide benchmarks are sparse, but they're starting to trickle out and should be more common in the future http://techgage.com/article/nvidia-geforce-gtx-1070-review-a-look-at-1440p-4k-ultra-wide-gaming/2/ thats not candy fucked around with this message at 21:44 on Jun 27, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2016 21:38
|
|
|
Mikojan posted:Bought a 1070GTX gaming G1 for too much money but it is being delivered tomorrow and I'm hyped as gently caress (coming from a 660GTX) As someone who also went from a GTX 660 to a G1 1070 welcome to the club. The performance difference is night and day. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2016 21:39
|
|
|
thats not candy posted:You keep saying this, but I've only seen the 980ti beat the 1070 ref in doom and metro at 1440/4k & ultrawide benchmarks. Can you cite some more benchmarks? Nearly everything else the 1070 outperforms at ultrawide and 4k resolutions, and I have a hard time imagining that this won't be the case moving forward. Stock v stock isn't the same as aftermarket oc cards, which is what the 980 Tis that are worth a drat are. Twerk from Home posted:I'm gonna play devils advocate and say that you'll probably not notice the 8GB over 4 on settings it will be happy running anyway, and suggest saving the $30. Whenever the RX 470 trickles out, $150 for 970 performance should be sweet. You may see an advantage from high textures medium everything else, but that's less likely on 1080. I'd agree with the 470 possibly being amazing price/perf. Anime Schoolgirl posted:there is no functional difference between r/amd and r/ayymd at this point It doesnt look quite like that as much as they basically started with roughly Hawaii and whenever they increased performance on part of the chip they cashed it in by pulling bits off till it matched Hawaii, especially the memory bus.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2016 21:46
|
|
|
I'm going to guess there will be no difference between 4gb and 8gb at any settings that produce more than 20 fps
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2016 21:59
|
|
|
My only concern is yet again Nvidia leading strongly in overall design. I mean it kind of looks like there has been very little gain in overall chop capability TBH, despite all the hyped µarch improvements (command, geometry processor; primitive discard; ""new" shader engines). I know you have to put it under water for it to happen, but someone on OCUK was posting 290X vs RX480 benches and showing that a 1.23Ghz 290X was beating the supposedly 1.38Ghz RX480, I mean wtf. That and it looks like a 980 will scale higher max OC for Max OC, and it kind of looks like AMDs 14nm is competing more with Nvidias 28nm, rather than 16nm.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2016 21:59
|
|
|
Paul MaudDib posted:So overall you think 30% for both on simpler stuff and 40% for more complex stuff? Cool, I was right in the ballpark I think the 1070 is just fine for VR as it exists today. You're not going to see beautiful AAA content like you're expecting from modern games for quite some time, because no company is going to make big budget game that uses VR more than just a view option until there are more people with headsets out there. By the time that content is available we'll probably be another generation down the road with GPUs. The same goes for RX 480, which I am excited to see where it places in the overall lineup. I am relatively certain it is going to have plenty of horsepower to push Gen 1 VR content through most of the cycle, possibly even on par with 1070 (except the 1070 without the VR optimizations). I'm also curious to see if AMD can do these same sort of optimizations purely in software and get a boost that way. In any case, to me this is one of the most exciting releases in a while for both AMD and NVIDIA bringing a new type of content to gamers and with AMD's affordability maybe even more into the mainstream.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2016 22:05
|
|
|
FaustianQ posted:showing that a 1.23Ghz 290X was beating the supposedly 1.38Ghz RX480 Shouldn't it? A 290X is a good bit larger, with more stream processors, ROPs, memory bandwidth. 1.23GHz is also a great overclock for a 290X and most of them will start artifacting well before that, even under water. Hell my MSI Twin Frozr 290 can't even make 1100 MHz without artifacting no matter where I put the fan and power limit. Twerk from Home fucked around with this message at 22:14 on Jun 27, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2016 22:06
|
|
|
xthetenth posted:Stock v stock isn't the same as aftermarket oc cards, which is what the 980 Tis that are worth a drat are. Certainly, but nearly every aftermarket 1070 is cranking out 2000mhz overclocked, and the FE oc's well too, so  I just want to see some benchmarks, but everyone seems to use stock 980ti's or a titan x.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2016 22:08
|
|
|
mcbexx posted:Is there a formula that approximates the expected fps on 3440x1440 by interpolating the benchmarks for 2560x1440 and 4k? Paul MaudDib posted:Maybe halfway between I guess? If you Google the keywords you'll find them easily enough. A 1070 is about 20fps slower than a 1080 in Witcher 3 IIRC. I'm in a difficult position of having a 100Hz 3440x1440 and wanting to hit as close as possible to that, and having a good price on an OC Strix 1080, but now that the UK is hosed not sure if I should save the £200 and get a 1070.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2016 22:11
|
|
|
has this been posted yet? https://www.techpowerup.com/forums/threads/rumor-rx480-aib-card-leaked-and-tested.223351/page-22#post-3479050 dude on techpowerup claims to have a 480 with out-of-the-box drivers, looks right at 980/390x performance based on arkham knight
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2016 22:13
|
|
|
thats not candy posted:Certainly, but nearly every aftermarket 1070 is cranking out 2000mhz overclocked, and the FE oc's well too, so Yeah unfortunately this is the way its been, although Pascal might produce more realistic benchmarks with the new boost logic. At least with Maxwell the OC was so relatively extreme that OC values were included much more than they were in gens previous to that, but as time goes on we'll just see more and more reference values in benchmarks and nothing more. I mean, really its Nvidia's fault for those numbers I never really understood why they were quite that conservative with reference clocks
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2016 22:17
|
|
|
Twerk from Home posted:Shouldn't it? A 290X is a good bit larger, with more stream processors, ROPs, memory bandwidth. 1.23GHz is also a great overclock for a 290X and most of them will start artifacting well before that, even under water. Yet if there were architectural improvements than clock for clock you should see Polaris beat Hawaii, it doesn't and it looks like the performance difference in clocks is why Polaris is equal, reduce clock to something similar and it'd perform somewhere between a 380X and 290. It is literally die shrunk Hawaii updated to GCN3 :\ wicka posted:has this been posted yet? https://www.techpowerup.com/forums/threads/rumor-rx480-aib-card-leaked-and-tested.223351/page-22#post-3479050 Based on this it seems SteamVR weighs a bit heavily on ROPs? I don't quite get the discrepancy between game performance and VR performance.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2016 22:36
|
|
|
Somehow I lucked into snagging a EVGA 1080 SC off newegg just now. Upgrading from a 660ti lol
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2016 22:47
|
|
|
Basically I want a 1070 without paying $100 premium for early adopter. Stupid first world problems. Looks like RX480 will be around 980/390x level performance in games based on the leaks. I think that's a really solid 1080p performance card. Probably makes 1080p freesync worth it. Don't think 1440p freesync is worth it. tijag fucked around with this message at 22:53 on Jun 27, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2016 22:49
|
|
|
FaustianQ posted:Yet if there were architectural improvements than clock for clock you should see Polaris beat Hawaii, it doesn't and it looks like the performance difference in clocks is why Polaris is equal, reduce clock to something similar and it'd perform somewhere between a 380X and 290. It is literally die shrunk Hawaii updated to GCN3 :\ No it really isn't. If it had the same number of functional units, then it would be die shrunk Hawaii updated to GCN4, and then it would be disappointing if it lost clock to clock. In comparison there's new tech in both process and design, and it looks like they cashed most of that into letting a card with less stuff on it perform even with Hawaii. thats not candy posted:Certainly, but nearly every aftermarket 1070 is cranking out 2000mhz overclocked, and the FE oc's well too, so Guru3d got roughly 20% more performance out of their 980 Ti Strix at ~1440, TPU got about 29%. http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/asus_geforce_gtx_980_ti_strix_review,35.html https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/ASUS/GTX_980_Ti_STRIX_Gaming/33.html
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2016 22:52
|
|
|
tijag posted:Basically I want a 1070 without paying $100 premium for early adopter. there's a gigabyte card on newegg that keeps popping up occasionally for $399, pretty close the $379 MSRP. i also wouldn't be surprised to see more stock and lower prices start trickling out after wednesday. 1070s have been very hard to find for the last week so i almost think nvidia and their OEMs are holding back stock to better compete with AMD.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2016 22:53
|
|
|
wicka posted:there's a gigabyte card on newegg that keeps popping up occasionally for $399, pretty close the $379 MSRP. i also wouldn't be surprised to see more stock and lower prices start trickling out after wednesday. 1070s have been very hard to find for the last week so i almost think nvidia and their OEMs are holding back stock to better compete with AMD. I definitely will laugh if there is suddenly plenty of stock of 1070's on Wednesday. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2016 23:18
|
|
|
xthetenth posted:No it really isn't. If it had the same number of functional units, then it would be die shrunk Hawaii updated to GCN4, and then it would be disappointing if it lost clock to clock. In comparison there's new tech in both process and design, and it looks like they cashed most of that into letting a card with less stuff on it perform even with Hawaii. Well considering my 980Ti STRIX still pushed higher than the fastest single 1070 with the same CPU (and overclock on it by chance) it shows how the 980Ti can still hold it's own against a 1070 for a little while longer.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2016 23:20
|
|
|
Bleh Maestro posted:I definitely will laugh if there is suddenly plenty of stock of 1070's on Wednesday. i don't think there will be plenty but nvidia will want to have at least SOME available to tempt those of us who are in between the 480 and the 1070 and might not be swayed by the official reviews
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2016 23:26
|
|
|
Isn't a lot of this old cards keeping pace with the newest ones just a driver maturity thing? I thought it took a few driver revisions to get a card to its potential. Heck, if your drivers are older than the card, doesn't that also cause terrible benchmarks on new cards, like those leaks that supposedly show the RX480 being worse than the last generation?
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2016 23:27
|
|
|
thats not candy posted:You keep saying this, but I've only seen the 980ti beat the 1070 ref in doom and metro at 1440/4k & ultrawide benchmarks. Can you cite some more benchmarks? Nearly everything else the 1070 outperforms at ultrawide and 4k resolutions, and I have a hard time imagining that this won't be the case moving forward. I'm thinking these results - unfortunately it's hard to find results that compare both cards overclocked. Most places will only overclock a single card and compare them to everything else at stock. It's tough to compare apples to apples because despite the 50% headroom above the reference base clock (1506 base to 2050 MHz at peak OC), GPU Boost 3.0 will happily clock to within 5-10% of that limit (~1900) all by itself, without any manual intervention. However, it won't sustain that performance for more than the 10 minutes it takes to run a benchmark unless you punch up the power target and fan. Meanwhile the 980 Ti frequently has 30-40% headroom above reference base clock (1000 MHz base to 1400-1450 peak OC), but you need to manually tweak settings to get more than about 1/3 of that headroom, maybe 2/3 on nice aftermarket cards (1070 to 1290 boost depending on card). Paul MaudDib fucked around with this message at 23:54 on Jun 27, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2016 23:47
|
|
|
xthetenth posted:Guru3d got roughly 20% more performance out of their 980 Ti Strix at ~1440, TPU got about 29%. Yes, and that bf3 2560x1440p benchmark underperforms compared to their own 1070 FE OC https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/NVIDIA/GeForce_GTX_1070/27.html If you could prove to me that an overclocked 980ti will outperform an overclocked 1070 at 3440x1440@70 now and over the next few months, then I would scalp my g1 and get a firesaled 980ti strix or similar. I have yet to see an apples to apples comparison, however, and it's really hard to gauge performance mixing and matching reviews/benchmarks using different drivers and test setups.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2016 23:47
|
|
|
Well even in Firestrike Ultra my Stock Strix clocked (auto turbo to 1418mhz+-) it isn't far behind a 1070 OC'ed to 2100mhz=- on a Skylake CPU. So if you can get a 980Ti for $100 less than a 1070, even with the VR goodies that won't be around for a good while, it's not a bad card to tide you over until the 1080Ti at least. True other games may show different scores but sites just don't seem to show good Overclock comparisons to save their life. No idea why.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2016 23:54
|
|
|
EdEddnEddy posted:True other games may show different scores but sites just don't seem to show good Overclock comparisons to save their life. No idea why. Make no mistake, review sites are proxies for AMD and NVIDIA. They are in the business of selling cards. If you dump on one of their cards too hard, then you won't get a free 1080 Ti at NVIDIA's next launch party, and Raja won't do his sexy dance for you at the next Capsaicin (or even worse, you piss off Roy and then you aren't even getting a loaner sample next time around). And you won't get nerds clicking through your affiliate links to buy the card. Simply put, neither the hardware companies nor the review sites benefit from hammering overmuch on the fact that the 1070 is not an upgrade for anyone with a 980 Ti, and the RX 480 is not an upgrade for anyone who owns a Hawaii. They are there to focus mostly on the bright-side. So you will get comparisons against old reference cards, comparisons at clockrates nobody really uses, comparisons reusing ancient benchmarks on ancient drivers, etc. You really have to take them with a massive grain of salt and realize exactly what you're looking at. I like TechPowerUp the most but even still you should take them with a grain of salt. Paul MaudDib fucked around with this message at 00:03 on Jun 28, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2016 23:56
|
|
|
It's not like you can't show the OC for all the cards you get and comparison to keep them all looking good. Unless you really make a new card that is worse than your last one, you should be able to make all cards look a little better with a little OC magic just for those that need those numbers. Even if a 980Ti is hitting on par with a 1070, thats still talking pretty good of the 1070 that the "MidHighend" card is hitting where the last '2nd from highest end" card was last generation. Right now it's a great buy to get what was a $650 card for $300+ vs a card that (should) be $400ish new. The 1070 will continue to be available while the 980Ti' will dry up, eventually. And won't gain any new features either when VR eventually hopefully starts to use the new tech. ^^ and this is all true. As long as Stock vs Stock comparisons are true, at least then it will allow the average non goon to go pick up whatever card they want and it will fit in the segment it was priced for as it should. All OC's are still up to some chance and while they help, aren't the end all to upgrade to the next card for free like CPU clocks can sort of be. *I also am taking some happiness seeing that my stupid purchase in May before all the new cards arrived wasn't 100% retarded and I can comfortably wait for the 1080Ti or so without struggling to run anything in VR that I got the thing for in the first place. My 780's sure as hell weren't going to be able to as VR SLI has yet to be a thing, and that was the only VR feature they might have been able to do to still only = ~ my 980Ti. EdEddnEddy fucked around with this message at 00:07 on Jun 28, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2016 00:03
|
|
|
EdEddnEddy posted:It's not like you can't show the OC for all the cards you get and comparison to keep them all looking good. Unless you really make a new card that is worse than your last one, you should be able to make all cards look a little better with a little OC magic just for those that need those numbers. So you get one benchmark redone using a stock card at stock clocks, if you're lucky. They'll probably keep using that single datapoint until the card dies, never updating graphics drivers or anything else. quote:Even if a 980Ti is hitting on par with a 1070, thats still talking pretty good of the 1070 that the "MidHighend" card is hitting where the last '2nd from highest end" card was last generation. Right now it's a great buy to get what was a $650 card for $300+ vs a card that (should) be $400ish new. The 1070 will continue to be available while the 980Ti' will dry up, eventually. And won't gain any new features either when VR eventually hopefully starts to use the new tech. If you buy a 1070 in six months you will probably not be doing it through $REVIEW_SITE's affiliate link. Driving clicks only makes you money if it happens right now. The 980 Ti firesales are too sporadic to make any money driving clicks from - there are quite a few of them, but any individual sale only lasts a couple of days, so it's not like you can toss a link onto the 1070 review and make money from it. edit: EdEddnEddy posted:^^ and this is all true. As long as Stock vs Stock comparisons are true, at least then it will allow the average non goon to go pick up whatever card they want and it will fit in the segment it was priced for as it should. Yeah, definitely, but when you start messing with what a "stock" card does like GPU Boost 3.0 does, then it's no longer Stock vs Stock, it's Stock vs Overclocked To Within 10% of Maximum. Heck, it doesn't take aftermarket cards into account either. I definitely agree that "boost clocks" and OC headroom are a major copout instead of just giving a faster base clock, but it lets them pass chips through QC that would otherwise fail binning, and it makes the TDP numbers look nice and low (until the boost clock kicks in or the user overclocks it). I actually am running a reference 780 Ti in my Vive PC and it's fine (will replace with a 1070 at some point). 780 is pushing it but just give it a try, it might work. A lot of the games will lock framerate to 90 and manage settings to hit that target, so your game will look like crap but you won't vomit from lag. Paul MaudDib fucked around with this message at 00:17 on Jun 28, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2016 00:10
|
|
|
xthetenth posted:No it really isn't. If it had the same number of functional units, then it would be die shrunk Hawaii updated to GCN4, and then it would be disappointing if it lost clock to clock. In comparison there's new tech in both process and design, and it looks like they cashed most of that into letting a card with less stuff on it perform even with Hawaii. Except the difference in SP count is almost exactly the difference in clockspeed (for both Maxwell to Pascal and Pirate Islands to Polaris), same with effective computational capability. I'm okay with being wrong, but can you at least do a tear down the math on how there really is improvement in SP performance?
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2016 00:15
|
|
|
Paul MaudDib posted:Make no mistake, review sites are proxies for AMD and NVIDIA. They are in the business of selling cards. If you dump on one of their cards too hard, then you won't get a free 1080 Ti at NVIDIA's next launch party, and Raja won't do his sexy dance for you at the next Capsaicin (or even worse, you piss off Roy and then you aren't even getting a loaner sample next time around). And you won't get nerds clicking through your affiliate links to buy the card. Why would they? That's a $400 card vs a $650 card, and a $200 card vs a $400 card. That's current mid-range vs last gen's high-end. That's not a relevant comparison. They'll show it in the benchmarking results but I don't see why'd they'd be expected to devote a paragraph to comparing two cards from two different markets in two different generations. Also, isn't there some review site that makes a point of buying most of their samples off-the-shelf instead of relying on freebies?
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2016 00:17
|
|
|
wicka posted:Why would they? That's a $400 card vs a $650 card, and a $200 card vs a $400 card. That's current mid-range vs last gen's high-end. That's not a relevant comparison. They'll show it in the benchmarking results but I don't see why'd they'd be expected to devote a paragraph to comparing two cards from two different markets in two different generations. A year ago you could pick up an aftermarket 290X for $250-260. Nowadays you can pick up an aftermarket 390 for under $250 if you watch around (AMD marked it up to mark it down a year ago). Like it or not they are in the same midrange market segment and have been for quite a while. Anyone who is hoping they could step upwards in performance just by buying a newer card at the same pricepoint is going to be disappointed. That's worked in previous generations but not with the RX480, it runs cooler but it's not a step forward in either price or performance. Conversely the 1070 actually is a price/performance improvement, but firesales on the 980 Ti have kept it competitive for the meantime. Again, the problem there is GPU Boost 3.0 works differently and a "stock" 1070 is actually going to be overclocked quite heavily by the software. If you push the 980 Ti's OC up like the 1070 does automatically (or slow them both down to base clocks), then it's pretty much a wash in terms of performance. The lack of guaranteed OC performance cuts both ways there - maybe your 1070 sucks at overclocking and GPU Boost won't take it past 1600. It's still an OC and NVIDIA won't guarantee OC performance, sucks to be you. (Apologies to overseas goons who don't get good deals on hardware, but you can buy a 390 for GBP 200 right now!) Paul MaudDib fucked around with this message at 00:36 on Jun 28, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2016 00:24
|
|
|
Is there anything resembling an ETA to when this supply shortage will be over?
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2016 00:42
|
|
|
SweetBro posted:Is there anything resembling an ETA to when this supply shortage will be over? My uncle works at the fabs that Nvidia uses and,
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2016 00:45
|
|
|
Haquer posted:My uncle works at the fabs that Nvidia uses and, NVIDIA using the ol' Nintendo fabs, eh?
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2016 00:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 05:12 |
|
|
NX repurposed Nvidia Shield platform confirmed
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2016 01:19
|
|