Search results

Fully agree. After the first results, it would have been more useful to switch to 1080p for further testing.

+1 I would no longer have a desktop, but instead a decent laptop + docking station. And instead of sinking money in an Nvidia card every two-three years, I'll just pay the money for the service.

AMD already needs an explanation to potential buyers why their top-model has less RAM than the mid-tier models. So they need to tell people HBM blabla.

EDIT: ...and they already need an explanation why the Hawaii-models offer more RAM.

What about a GTX990 AND a refresh of the current Maxwell line-up? Stock +150-200Mhz GPU clocks and 2x the RAM. For only $20 more than the current price of the current model. Can easily be done given the yields and quality of the GPU's after a year in production. Would give AMD a serious...

Kyle, to be honest, I am quite puzzled by the power draw difference. Most reviews report let's say a 100 Watt difference between a single GTX 980 and a R9 290X at full load. To have a 300 Watt difference when using 2 cards seems therefore very odd. How can this be explained? BTW, as a GTX 970...

Basically they now make a lot of worried 'enthousiasts' pay for assurance. Which has multiple advantages. If Intel cannot prove that a CPU died because of overclocking, or testing it costs too much money, they need to give a replacement anyway. Now, those CPU's are paid for by all people buying...