What metric will you choose for new graphics cards...

What metric matter the most to you in a new graphics card?

  • Total voters
    172
Factum

Factum

2[H]4U
Joined
Dec 24, 2014
Messages
2,455
...as the "argument" for chosing GPU A over GPU B?

A lot of times it seems that the metric people use to declare a "winner" of graphics cards changes more than (I hope) people change underwear.

So here is the chance.
Pick your metric(s) from BEFORE launch reviews.
Then no one can claim that you are chaning stances etc.

But I guess some people will not dare picking in advance...even if they are very vocal in the forums.

Besides, would be fun to see what people think BEFORE the laucnh...and then compare to AFTER launch.
 
Last edited:
4K performance since I plan on picking up a new monitor soon. Since I'm already under water I don't care about heat, loudness or power consumption at all.
 
Whichever offers the best performance in the price bracket I'm looking at. I don't care if it's AMD or NVIDIA. However, I'm skipping this generation and waiting on Pascal or the AMD equivalent. For the games I play, the GTX680 is still working fine at 1080p.
 
I want something better than my r9 290 for 1440p gaming. Highly considering the 980ti depending on what AMD can bring to the table. Would be my first Nvidia card sense 8800gtx.
 
Performance/$$$$ with sound being 2nd to those. Just can't sound annoying or loud.

My last three cards were: 8800GTX when it came out, 5970 on release, GTX580 a fair amount after release for... reasons. Now I have a 980ti ordered. I was going to wait to see the Perofrmance/$$$$ of the Fury X but I keep my cards for a long time, and I imagined the 4gb on the Fury would not be enough 3 years down the road. The main reason i'm upgrading from the GTX 580 at 1080p right now is 1.5gb is not enough for GTA 5, ARMA 3, BF4, etc.
 
for me its performance/price. that usually lands me at a cut down version of the top in die. my last three gpus were r9 290, gtx 670 and hd 6950.
 
I selected pure performance but after thinking about it, the dollar amount will come into play. I dont think Ill ever be able to afford a $700 video card but Ill always try to spend as much as I possibly can on one. So while I wont be going for bang for the buck, Ill will be trying to get the most raw performance I can with the most I can possibly afford to spend on one.
 
Well my thought process is very much more complicated than a simple metric, but a central metric is performance per price. I tend to want to get the most out of the money spent, which was why I decided to go with 970 SLI instead of single 980 or even 980 SLI or 290x, all of which only had incremental increase in performance at a higher cost.

However, if the increment in performance is the same as the increase in price (EG 20% more performance for 20% more cost, such as 980 vs 980ti), then I most likely will buy the more powerful version as it will probably last longer.

This decision runs parallel to my decision as to what Monitor resolution to go for, though with the existence of DSR, I prefer quality lower resolution monitor than a higher resolution monitor due to a much higher QoL with a lower resolution monitor.

Power consumption is of a concern only to determine the PSU I am going to, however I do prefer to not want a hot card as it would mean it would cost me more to keep the room cool.

Oh, and after what I have gone through with my current build, card aesthetics is quite important. Contrary to rest of the forum, I sometimes would much prefer cards without backplates, since those backplates hinder installing other cards right behind them.
 
Last edited:
Pure performance. Price only matters to me if the top end card is way overpriced versus the additional performance it offers.
 
Why is this a single poll selection?

All those reasons are important depending on what you want to build. PEOPLE *WEIGH* the importance of each differently, but I guarantee they care about them.

The reason Performance/$$$ wins over the others is because that's the most important. But it's certainly not the ONLY reason for a purchase.

If you want a more useful answer, try a check-box list where people can choose ALL the things they care about, not just one. Otherwise, this is just another loaded poll question with just one obvious answer :rolleyes:

Or did you really think people like paying $1000 for a video card?
 
Last edited:
defaultluser said:
Why is this a single poll selection?

All those reasons are important depending on what you want to build.

The reason Performance/$$$ wins over the others is because that's the most important. But it's certainly not the ONLY reason for a purchase.

If you want a more useful answer, try a check-box list where people can choose ALL the things they care about, not just one.
Click to expand...

Nope, you pick one or pick none.
I am interested in peoples PRIME metric...you are free to make your own poll :)
 
And I am free to add your ass to my ignore list.

Have fun proving the obvious: that when you limit people's choices, you can slant a poll's results toward your preselected preference.
 
For me it is drivers and stability. Am ok to sacrifice performance for stable and timely drivers something AMD has not delivered for past 2-3 years. Also dual card stability is important to me.
 
defaultluser said:
And I am free to add your ass to my ignore list.

Have fun proving the obvious: that when you limit people's choices, you can slant a poll's results toward your preselected preference.
Click to expand...

So done, since you cannot see the "other" option...bye :)
 
It's always going to be other, because all the above matter along with the driver support and the ability to actually play the games I buy at launch with everything turned on without a long wait for drivers to get it to work right.
 
LurkerLito said:
It's always going to be other, because all the above matter along with the driver support and the ability to actually play the games I buy at launch with everything turned on without a long wait for drivers to get it to work right.
Click to expand...

The poll and posts below the poll disagrees with your stance
Stop deying facts..that is just stupid.
I eg. have only one metric that really matters: Performance.

I don't care for:

- How the card looks (locked inside a case anyways)
- Perf/watt (I have a job and spare income to use)
- Noise (+ 700 Watt of 7.1 sound makes that irrelvant)
- Perf/$$$ (Any GPU is a BAD investment...so don't care)

If the poll isn't to your liking...then leave? :)
 
I'm pretty much exclusively Ubuntu now, so... since there's only one dGPU company that takes Linux support seriously.................. I guess I'll stick with them for my next round.
 
Perf/Watt is a major factor for me. I game for a few hours at a time. I Fold For Life the rest of the 24 left in the day.
 
Factum said:
The poll and posts below the poll disagrees with your stance
Stop deying facts..that is just stupid.
I eg. have only one metric that really matters: Performance.

I don't care for:

- How the card looks (locked inside a case anyways)
- Perf/watt (I have a job and spare income to use)
- Noise (+ 700 Watt of 7.1 sound makes that irrelvant)
- Perf/$$$ (Any GPU is a BAD investment...so don't care)

If the poll isn't to your liking...then leave? :)
Click to expand...

LOL, so you didn't like my reply, then maybe you shouldn't have put (please specify) with the "other" option. :)
 
Chose other. I'm not going to buy from nVidia no matter what. Not until they change their lying scumbag ways. So, not likely ever.
 
Multi-Monitor support is the most important metric, then amount of Display Ports that I can use at once, and then performance.
 
5150Joker said:
Performance + software ecosystem to back it up.
Click to expand...

The standard apple fanboy argument.

apple fanboy :

the iphone is the best phone because of x/y/x

macs are better because of x/y/z


Non fanboy : OK

Supposed we create an android phone/notebook that has a BETTER design than the mac variant, more stylish, more durable, better battery life, more powerful, better in every conceivable way. Would you switch at THAT point?

apple fanboy: No, the "ecosystem" is superior.

To this mythical computer with better design and lighter weight and better batter life and a better display, yeah so what, the final question, does it run os x? No?

disqualified.


This is the point of no return and you realize arguments are of no use, there is more than logic and rationality at play here, there is familiarity, loyalty, "other" considerations beyond mere merit.
 
All above

Pure performance - because I need it to reach certain treshold of performance to be worthy upgrade.
Performance per $ - obviously altrough I'm willing to pay more for other aspects
Price - because i don't have unlimited funds so there's upper limit
Performance per Watt - because I'm not putting 300W gpu into my m-atx when there's alternative
Noise - need to be silent in idle, and acceptable under load when gaming in headphones
Performance in CPU demanding situations - because I play mostly crappy MMOs which rarely use more than 2 cores.
 
I can't answer the question as it is currently defined as I prefer to give individual weight to each parameter:
1) Performance (including OC potential): 65%
2) Noise: 20%
3) Power: 1%
4) Aesthetic: 4%
5) Customer service/Warranty: 10%
 
Features is the one and only thing to care about. You can get all the FPS in the world by just running a game at 640x480. The real reason we buy high end cards is to get features like AA/AF/Physics/High Resolutions/etc.
 
Price/Performance + Features

I was quick to jump on Eyefinity and am interested in seeing where things progress with G-sync/Freesync long-term, but right now, want a single-card that can drive 3440x1440 for me.
 
Just saving this for post-launch ;)
5b8mx5.png


Votes cast after launch are not interesting too me.
 
The reason it changes all the time is because the playing field changes all the time and because its never that simple its called total value. Lets say we look at performance / $. At some point it might makes sense but then theoretically most people would never buy high end GPUs as they rarely offer good value in those terms. Performance / watt is another one, its not black and white, if A beats N on performance / watt I might not care, but if it forces me to upgrade a PSU suddenly I start caring. Also it may depend on how much it wins by, back when GPUs started first jumping into 250 watt territory it bothered me , now I have been sitting on more PSUs that can handle it and care less. The most prominent driving force for me is performance / $$ but I am not going to sacrifice 50 watts just because someone undercut someone else with a GPU that is pushed too hard.

Think of it like you are buying a car or a home there is no freaking way you can boil it down to simply what the MPG rating is. Sometimes a car with slightly worse MPG is going to win because its on sale, or it looks better or its a combination of 4 things that pushes you over the edge.
 
Was gonna pick performance/$$$, but picked other instead because perf/price doesn't exist in a vacuum and needs proper context. 270X is the current perf/price champ at 1080p, but does that mean I'm interested in it? Hell no because it still lacks the absolute performance needed to play modern games smoothly.

So the full answer is perf/price as long as the baseline performance is there.
 
Performance/$$$ of coarse. Anyways aim for sweetspot pricing between performance and price.
 
rudy said:
The reason it changes all the time is because the playing field changes all the time and because its never that simple its called total value. Lets say we look at performance / $. At some point it might makes sense but then theoretically most people would never buy high end GPUs as they rarely offer good value in those terms. Performance / watt is another one, its not black and white, if A beats N on performance / watt I might not care, but if it forces me to upgrade a PSU suddenly I start caring. Also it may depend on how much it wins by, back when GPUs started first jumping into 250 watt territory it bothered me , now I have been sitting on more PSUs that can handle it and care less. The most prominent driving force for me is performance / $$ but I am not going to sacrifice 50 watts just because someone undercut someone else with a GPU that is pushed too hard.

Think of it like you are buying a car or a home there is no freaking way you can boil it down to simply what the MPG rating is. Sometimes a car with slightly worse MPG is going to win because its on sale, or it looks better or its a combination of 4 things that pushes you over the edge.
Click to expand...

Comparing cars to GPU is not optimal..banans have nothing to do with motorbikes either..diffrent applications....different uses....diffrent classes.

I would be willing to SAVE money on a GPU buy the GPU maker making the following:
-Stop with the stupid LED's on cards. (Save the money, make the card cheaper, it locked incase anyways)
-Stop with the overdone packinging. (A brown box will do the same job just fine, make the card cheaper)
-Stop with the game bundles (I will pick my own games, make the card cheaper).

Today I am paying for more than my GPU..a lof of fluff I don't necessarily want/have any use for/need.


-Stop with gamebundles
 
Fastest card for the $$. To boot my last two cards have been purchased second hand off hard forum. ATI 4890 and ATI 7950. Buying second hand makes the performance/$$$ go up a lot! When I bought my 7950 they only had the 7970 out as their flagship card so I wasn't far down on the totem pole.

Last card I bought brand new was an ATI 1800XT 512mb to go with my socket 939 rig.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top