AMD R9 390X, Nvidia GTX 980 Ti and Titan X Benchmarks Leaked

naticus said:
I mean just look at the last 6 months of big game releases, they have all played like ass on AMD. I really wish Samsung would just buy them out and give them the capital to really compete with NV & Intel.
Click to expand...
You're making up FUD. I have a 290 and haven't had an issue playing any games since the day I got it. TWIMTBP games probably work a bit better on nV hardware but they still work well enough for me not to care. CF is a different story but that is true of SLi too.

Samsung will never buy AMD. They're not interested in that market. No one is interested in buying AMD or giving them money to invest with.
 
WorldExclusive said:
For the six years I've been in PC gaming, I haven't seen an ATI/AMD MSRP for a single GPU above $550 at launch.
If they are releasing 8GB at launch, I expect $550-650 pricing.
Click to expand...
They won't be. You'll be waiting 6 months for them to launch the 8 GB cards.
 
TaintedSquirrel said:
They won't be. You'll be waiting 6 months for them to launch the 8 GB cards.
Click to expand...

Ahhh I see. Well then.
I don't have a reason to buy any high-end card with less than 6GB because I'm going 4K soon.

The wait continues until AMD releases an 8GB card and when Nvidia releases the 980Ti 6GB.
 
Last edited:
8GB AMD cards are already out there if you don't mind the 290/X.

If you want a 8GB 390/X it could easily be a 6 month wait.
 
mesyn191 said:
8GB AMD cards are already out there if you don't mind the 290/X.

If you want a 8GB 390/X it could easily be a 6 month wait.
Click to expand...

I'm not buying the 4K monitor until Summer, so I can wait for the 390X 8GB.
I rather have more GPU speed to take advantage of the extra VRAM.
 
Flopper said:
you work at amd?
Click to expand...

He doesnt have to.

The redesign and manufacture of an interposer to handle 8GB will take that long to reach market assuming they made that choice at GDC after the titanX announcement.

and it wont be any faster anyway.

adding layers to the cube adds bandwidth, not adding cubes to the interposer.
 
mesyn191 said:
You're making up FUD. I have a 290 and haven't had an issue playing any games since the day I got it. TWIMTBP games probably work a bit better on nV hardware but they still work well enough for me not to care. CF is a different story but that is true of SLi too.

Samsung will never buy AMD. They're not interested in that market. No one is interested in buying AMD or giving them money to invest with.
Click to expand...

AMD drivers beg to differ. I had nothing but issues with them. Friends that own AMD cards currently have nothing but issues with newly released AAA games that I have to try to help them with -- but we know it's the drivers and the games not the HW.

Like I said it doesn't matter how good the performance in benchmarks is for the AMD cards. As soon as new games come out the AMD cards have issues, especially with AAA games and TWIIMTBP NV games. It is the reason family members have made the switch to NV from AMD.

When was the last AMD driver release again? I have nothin against anything AMD except their shitty drivers and their actual performance in recently released games.
 
Launching in June will give the 390x a very short life span. Considering 16nm will be out soon after.

As for the benchmarks, well there's just not enough salt in the ocean.
 
PRIME1 said:
Launching in June will give the 390x a very short life span. Considering 16nm will be out soon after.

As for the benchmarks, well there's just not enough salt in the ocean.
Click to expand...
And what about the Titan X / 980 Ti lifespan? The 980 Ti could presumably come even later than June. According to this leak, both being slower than the 390X... How about those life spans...

AMD just skipped a series of GTX 970/980 competitors and is instead releasing Fiji to compete with whatever GM200 cards Nvidia is putting out. It's misleading to imply they're late to anything when you consider Fiji is AMD's equivalent of GM200. They just passed over GM204 and depending on the color of your glasses, red or green, you can spin this either way.

For AMD's sake, and our sake, it would have been nice to have a series of cards that launched in Q3/Q4 of last year but it doesn't look like AMD was sitting on their asses the last 6 months.
Maybe not enough R&D to release two separate series. They're extending the release timeframe as long as possible to clear old R9 200 stock, so I don't think AMD is worried about 16nm.

If the 390X is within +/- 5% of the Titan X (That being 30+% over the 980) @ $500-$600 then I imagine most people will shut their traps.
 
Last edited:
If AMD can match Titan X performance then I really have to question why they would market it at $600? If NVIDIA is charging $1000 then why not sell it at $800 for higher margins? AMD must feel they are missing a competitive edge if they're matching NVIDIA performance but still having to sell at much lower margins.
 
DASHlT said:
http://wccftech.com/amd-r9-390x-8-gb-hbm/

Something to think about. If AMD really does release a 8gb 390x (which I highly doubt) that will basically double the amount of Memory Bandwidth, which would make these benchmarks obsolete since that is the 390x with 4gb of memory.

So it is possible AMD will gain even more performance?....Is that the right way of thinking on the memory bandwidth with HBM?
Click to expand...

I don't understand this -- the GPU only has so many incoming lanes from the vram. If doubling the ram doubles the bandwidth, then the bandwidth was at 50% utilization before, which I find very, very hard to believe.
 
DASHlT said:
Wow that new 960 looks interesting. But I am sure it will have the same memory bullshit issue the 970 has since it will be a cut down 980 GTX.

You know damn well people will test it if it says it comes with 4gb of memory lol.

But yea chiphell...Fudzilla....Man I cannot wait to see real benchmarks and reviews.
Click to expand...

But they've got it listed with 3GB, not 4GB, in these graphs.

Maybe they'll do a straight 25% cut of all resources from the 980, and instead of trying to whip up some weird solution to use extra memory, just make it a 3GB/192-bit interface card.

Depending on the price it might be a nice solution in between the 960 and 970, but it's also going to depend on what AMD has to compete with it.
 
5150Joker said:
If AMD can match Titan X performance then I really have to question why they would market it at $600? If NVIDIA is charging $1000 then why not sell it at $800 for higher margins? AMD must feel they are missing a competitive edge if they're matching NVIDIA performance but still having to sell at much lower margins.
Click to expand...

The 290X was faster than the original Titan $1000 and traded blows with the 780Ti $649 in some games.
At the whopping MSRP of $550. Undercutting Nvidia is the only way for them to make money.

Try to match them in price and AMD will fail.
AMD will have to crush Nvidia two series in a row to start charging a premium for their cards.
I remember when the 7970 was priced a bit above where it should have been. That price drop came pretty quick.
 
WorldExclusive said:
The 290X was faster than the original Titan $1000 and traded blows with the 780Ti $649 in some games.
At the whopping MSRP of $550. Undercutting Nvidia is the only way for them to make money.

Try to match them in price and AMD will fail.
AMD will have to crush Nvidia two series in a row to start charging a premium for their cards.
I remember when the 7970 was priced a bit above where it should have been. That price drop came pretty quick.
Click to expand...

The 290X was only marginally faster than Titan and was 6 months late to the party so I'd hardly consider that undercutting NVIDIA, especially when NVIDIA responded with 780 Ti. The problem is timing and in this case, with only 2 months (rather than 6) separating Titan X and 390X, there's no reason why AMD shouldn't charge $800+, especially if they have to spend extra money on bundling an AIO with it.

NVIDIA will of course release a cut down GM200 to take on 390X but if it's slower, then AMD doesn't have to drop their price much because their target is the Titan X, not a cut down GM200 that isn't as fast. Instead, they can just use the 380X for that purpose. If they keep selling these GPUs at break even prices, they're gonna keep bleeding what little money they have left. So the question again is why does AMD need to price their hardware so cheap? Is it a perception problem or do they really offer an overall weaker ecosystem than NVIDIA and price accordingly?
 
Last edited:
I'm not sure how Titan is there target. Titan is not a number series. Is a Halo product which AMD doesn't make.
AMD doesn't have the following to release $1000 single GPUs. Nvidia is selling "experience and status" a la Apple.

The 980Ti is the card the 390X will compete with, and that will be a $650-699 card from Nvidia.
So stating that AMD pricing of $550-650 is cheap compared to the 980Ti shouldn't raise a question.
 
The Mac said:
He doesnt have to.

The redesign and manufacture of an interposer to handle 8GB will take that long to reach market assuming they made that choice at GDC after the titanX announcement.

and it wont be any faster anyway.

adding layers to the cube adds bandwidth, not adding cubes to the interposer.
Click to expand...

Honestly I don't see them making that decision at GDC. The original Titan was 6Gb so it would only be reasonable for it to have a minimum of 6Gb again. Either AMD is not concerned with the Titan as a direct competitor (highly likely= although I am sure they are fine with out performing it) and is gonna use 4Gb regardless or Already have been working on an 8Gb variant. I just don't see AMD being surprised by 12Gb and feeling the need to go 8Gb all of a sudden.
 
WorldExclusive said:
I'm not sure how Titan is there target. Titan is not a number series. Is a Halo product which AMD doesn't make.
AMD doesn't have the following to release $1000 single GPUs. Nvidia is selling "experience and status" a la Apple.

The 980Ti is the card the 390X will compete with, and that will be a $650-699 card from Nvidia.
So stating that AMD pricing of $550-650 is cheap compared to the 980Ti shouldn't raise a question.
Click to expand...

I agree as AMD does not have a product designed to compete with the Titan X. Their concern is only the 980ti and lower cards.
 
5150Joker said:
The 290X was only marginally faster than Titan and was 6 months late to the party so I'd hardly consider that undercutting NVIDIA, especially when NVIDIA responded with 780 Ti. The problem is timing and in this case, with only 2 months (rather than 6) separating Titan X and 390X, there's no reason why AMD shouldn't charge $800+, especially if they have to spend extra money on bundling an AIO with it.
Click to expand...
AMD has surpassed Nvidia quite a few times over the last many years and they've never once exceeded $550 MSRP for a single GPU card.
Nvidia can sell their over-priced crap for $800+ because they know people will buy it. "The more expensive it is, the better it is". AMD doesn't have that luxury.

If you're going to blow $800 on a 390X, you might as well pay the extra $200-$400 for a Titan X.
 
TaintedSquirrel said:
And what about the Titan X / 980 Ti lifespan?
Click to expand...

Titan X will probably have a 3 month lead on the 390x. The 980ti will probably come out after the 390x as NVIDIA will just pull the same trick they did last time. Maxwell has been out over a year and with most of the marketshare I'm sure NVIDIA has made plenty on it.

Pascal will be here soon and even after Pascal launches the Titan X and the GM200 will live on doing HPC/CUDA/Professional work until the new versions of those cards launch.

For most people there best bet is to buy a 980/970 now or wait until 16nm. I mean unless you have the kind of cash to throw at a Titan X. Witcher 3 and GTAV will motivate a lot of people to upgrade. After that we have our usual summer dead zone and then the fall spending season hits.
 
PRIME1 said:
Titan X will probably have a 3 month lead on the 390x. The 980ti will probably come out after the 390x as NVIDIA will just pull the same trick they did last time. Maxwell has been out over a year and with most of the marketshare I'm sure NVIDIA has made plenty on it.

Pascal will be here soon and even after Pascal launches the Titan X and the GM200 will live on doing HPC/CUDA/Professional work until the new versions of those cards launch.

For most people there best bet is to buy a 980/970 now or wait until 16nm. I mean unless you have the kind of cash to throw at a Titan X. Witcher 3 and GTAV will motivate a lot of people to upgrade. After that we have our usual summer dead zone and then the fall spending season hits.
Click to expand...

*cough* 1 month *cough*

Yeah, GM107 has been out for over a year... isn't exactly what people who buy AAA games at release would be using...

Pascal is more than a year away, 2H '16.

"Best bet is to buy a 980/970" without having a clue at what is coming... Yeah not everyone wears the same green glasses as you.
 
PRIME1 said:
Titan X will probably have a 3 month lead on the 390x. The 980ti will probably come out after the 390x as NVIDIA will just pull the same trick they did last time. Maxwell has been out over a year and with most of the marketshare I'm sure NVIDIA has made plenty on it.

Pascal will be here soon and even after Pascal launches the Titan X and the GM200 will live on doing HPC/CUDA/Professional work until the new versions of those cards launch.

For most people there best bet is to buy a 980/970 now or wait until 16nm. I mean unless you have the kind of cash to throw at a Titan X. Witcher 3 and GTAV will motivate a lot of people to upgrade. After that we have our usual summer dead zone and then the fall spending season hits.
Click to expand...
I've had rough times with AMD over the last ~year, leaning more and more towards Nvidia (something beyond the 970/980 though).

... But the more you post, the more I just want to buy a 390X to spite you. Sometimes less is more, if you catch my drift. Right now your dial is at 11, and you need to be closer to 6 or 7 for people to take you seriously. The more reasonable you sound, the more likely reasonable people will listen to you. There's a few people on these forums who've mastered the art of persuasion and they get their opinions across much more smoothly.
 
I have to imagine it'll be a long time for a high end 16nm card. nVidia seems to have good practices... I would think they'll release a low end, like they did with the 750ti, work out any bugs and then move up the ladder again.
 
16nm not until mid-2016 at the earliest.
A year is a long time to hold out. If people weren't willing to pass up the 980/970 to wait for Fiji, don't expect them to pass up Fiji and wait for Pascal.
 
5150Joker said:
The 290X was only marginally faster than Titan and was 6 months late to the party so I'd hardly consider that undercutting NVIDIA, especially when NVIDIA responded with 780 Ti. The problem is timing and in this case, with only 2 months (rather than 6) separating Titan X and 390X, there's no reason why AMD shouldn't charge $800+, especially if they have to spend extra money on bundling an AIO with it.

NVIDIA will of course release a cut down GM200 to take on 390X but if it's slower, then AMD doesn't have to drop their price much because their target is the Titan X, not a cut down GM200 that isn't as fast. Instead, they can just use the 380X for that purpose. If they keep selling these GPUs at break even prices, they're gonna keep bleeding what little money they have left. So the question again is why does AMD need to price their hardware so cheap? Is it a perception problem or do they really offer an overall weaker ecosystem than NVIDIA and price accordingly?
Click to expand...

I was going to post something but TaintedSquirrel beat me to it. It basically boils down to this:

TaintedSquirrel said:
Nvidia can sell their over-priced crap for $800+ because they know people will buy it. "The more expensive it is, the better it is". AMD doesn't have that luxury.
Click to expand...
 
TaintedSquirrel said:
AMD has surpassed Nvidia quite a few times over the last many years and they've never once exceeded $550 MSRP for a single GPU card.
Nvidia can sell their over-priced crap for $800+ because they know people will buy it. "The more expensive it is, the better it is". AMD doesn't have that luxury.

If you're going to blow $800 on a 390X, you might as well pay the extra $200-$400 for a Titan X.
Click to expand...

Why doesn't AMD have the luxury of charging $800+? The 390X is entering uncharted territory with a costly AIO included with it and if it matches Titan X in performance, why can't it cost a premium? If what you say is true and AMD has surpassed NVIDIA quite a few times, then that means it's an equal competitor. Or is there something missing besides raw performance? Maybe overall ecosystem (TWIMTBP, GameWorks, PhysX, G-Sync), better drivers (with regular release cadence) is a factor that drives the perception of NVIDIA being a more premium brand? That could theoretically justify a price premium.

If the latter is true, then AMD is just fighting an uphill battle and would be better suited improving perception via viral marketing and driver quality rather than raw performance to bring parity with NVIDIA. Then maybe they could create their own Titan. I'm truly curious where this sense of "NVIDIA is premium like Apple" notion is coming from because I see this uttered yet at the same time contradictory statements about AMD being on par with NVIDIA are also made. So if it's on par with NVIDIA, then it should have no problem commanding a premium from the same customers. Why would you choose to pay $200+ for the Titan X over a 390X that has a superior cooler and equivalent drivers + ecosystem? Unless of course that isn't the case and AMD is deficient.
 
Last edited:
5150Joker said:
Why doesn't AMD have the luxury of charging $800+? The 390X is entering uncharted territory with a costly AIO included with it and if it matches Titan X in performance, why can't it cost a premium? If what you say is true and AMD has surpassed NVIDIA quite a few times, then that means it's an equal competitor. Or is there something missing besides raw performance? Maybe overall ecosystem (TWIMTBP, GameWorks, PhysX, G-Sync), better drivers (with regular release cadence) is a factor that drives the perception of NVIDIA being a more premium brand? That could theoretically justify a price premium.
Click to expand...
The geniuses in AMD's marketing/accounting departments have concluded they will make more profits selling their flagship at $550 rather than $800 since, despite making less money per GPU sold, they will sell more overall which will off-set the price difference.

Do you want a simple answer to a complex problem? Go to your grocery store and examine the cereal aisle. Notice there are "Cheerios" and directly next to them, a box of "Toasted Oats" that cost about half the price. There isn't much of a difference between the two brands... Both boxes have the same amount of cereal and the same ingredients... But for some reason the one with the big General Mill's logo costs much more.

The Nvidia logo itself carries worth. If you don't understand why that's the case, you haven't been paying attention for many years. People will pay extra for a product they believe is better, whether it's true or not (and in many cases between Nvidia/AMD, it is true).

Beyond that... I'm not an economist. I don't think anyone here is an economist. So you won't get a more precise answer.
 
TaintedSquirrel said:
The geniuses in AMD's marketing/accounting departments have concluded they will make more profits selling their flagship at $550 rather than $800 since, despite making less money per GPU sold, they will sell more overall which will off-set the price difference.

Do you want a simple answer to a complex problem? Go to your grocery store and examine the cereal aisle. Notice there are "Cheerios" and directly next to them, a box of "Toasted Oats" that cost about half the price. There isn't much of a difference between the two brands... Both boxes have the same amount of cereal and the same ingredients... But for some reason the one with the big General Mill's logo costs much more.

The Nvidia logo itself carries worth. If you don't understand why that's the case, you haven't been paying attention for many years. People will pay extra for a product they believe is better, whether it's true or not (and in many cases between Nvidia/AMD, it is true).
Click to expand...

I've been paying attention before GeForce was ever created. However, as you stated, there's been many times ATi (especially with the Radeon 9800 Pro) demolished NVIDIA but still suffered from the poor driver image. My personal experiences with AMD crossfire (mobile) were pretty poor overall and I think those that say AMD drivers are on par with NVIDIA are just lying to themselves or haven't delved deeply into the issue enough. Perception isn't created simply from marketing, that's my point. At some point the marketing has to be backed up with substance, especially with enthusiast level graphics technology--we aren't buying $4 cereal. Most consumers that are in the Titan X/390X segment have done their homework and concluded that NVIDIA is worth the premium and that isn't out of sheer loyalty or brainwashing like some claim but rather recognizing that NVIDIA does in fact offer a superior experience and are willing to pay for that. People like me that purchase $1000 Titan's aren't stupid, we've been in this game far longer than most and to us NVIDIA is worth a premium and that (justified) perception has obviously been passed on to the market as a whole given NVIDIA's lions share of AIB sales. So you're right, even if AMD bundles a superior AIO with the 390X, they cannot market it at $800+ because their drivers + ecosystem overall are inferior to NVIDIA.
 
Last edited:
I see this playing out different as it's up to AMD now to force Nvidia to name that price on TiTan X after the goof up .. Nvidia will be $1000+ and then AMD will set the 390X much lower..

See ..Nvidia's public image is at stake now with the lawsuit over the 970GTX and selling overpriced products to there fan base.. this is a lot more then Titan x vs 390x
 
fanboy said:
I see this playing out different as it's up to AMD now to force Nvidia to name that price on TiTan X after the goof up .. Nvidia will be $1000+ and then AMD will set the 390X much lower..

See ..Nvidia's public image is at stake now with the lawsuit over the 970GTX and selling overpriced products to there fan base.. this is a lot more then Titan x vs 390x
Click to expand...

I can guarantee you that aside from limited enthusiast circles, very few people are aware of the GTX 970 fiasco and even those that are aware will continue to purchase from NVIDIA. This was evidenced by the fact that a lot of people who got refunds ended up purchasing 980s despite cheaper 290X's being available with AMD pleading with them to go with team red. When the next JPR results come out in a quarter or two, you'll probably see NVIDIA market share grow even larger.
 
5150Joker said:
I've been paying attention before GeForce was ever created. However, as you stated, there's been many times ATi (especially with the Radeon 9800 Pro) demolished NVIDIA but still suffered from the poor driver image. My personal experiences with AMD crossfire (mobile) were pretty poor overalland I think those that say AMD drivers are on par with NVIDIA are just lying to themselves or haven't delved deeply into the issue enough. Perception isn't created simply from marketing, that's my point. At some point the marketing has to be backed up with substance, especially with enthusiast level graphics technology--we aren't buying $4 cereal. Most consumers that are in the Titan X/390X segment have done their homework and concluded that NVIDIA is worth the premium and that isn't out of sheer loyalty or brainwashing like some claim but rather recognizing that NVIDIA does in fact offer a superior experience and are willing to pay for that. People like me that purchase $1000 Titan's aren't stupid, we've been in this game far longer than most and to us NVIDIA is worth a premium and that (justified) perception has obviously been passed on to the market as a whole given NVIDIA's lion's share of AIB sales. So you're right, even if AMD bundles a superior AIO with the 390X, they cannot market it at $800+ because their drivers + ecosystem overall are inferior to NVIDIA.
Click to expand...

Actually, back when I designed and sold enthusiast gaming PCs: I experienced the exact opposite. When people have the money to spend, they think LESS about the purchase. I had a customer who would whip out his credit card as soon as I told him we had a product that was more expensive than what he owned: he just wanted to say he had the best. People at that level of disposable income are VERY susceptible to brand loyalty, marketing and price gouging: they RARELY do their research. I had 13 year old kids dragging their wealthy parents through the store with credit cards out, ready to buy, demanding Titan Black cards for their new gaming system. When I state that the 780 Ti could do the same damn thing for damn near half the price, they didn't beleive me and threatened to go elsewhere.

People with the money to spend do less research: trust me.
 
KazeoHin said:
Actually, back when I designed and sold enthusiast gaming PCs: I experienced the exact opposite. When people have the money to spend, they think LESS about the purchase. I had a customer who would whip out his credit card as soon as I told him we had a product that was more expensive than what he owned: he just wanted to say he had the best. People at that level of disposable income are VERY susceptible to brand loyalty, marketing and price gouging: they RARELY do their research. I had 13 year old kids dragging their wealthy parents through the store with credit cards out, ready to buy, demanding Titan Black cards for their new gaming system. When I state that the 780 Ti could do the same damn thing for damn near half the price, they didn't beleive me and threatened to go elsewhere.

People with the money to spend do less research: trust me.
Click to expand...

You're right, marketing is obviously a factor and it's not like AMD didn't try with their own marketing campaigns (e.g. their game bundles which were fantastic). However, despite all that, they still kept bleeding market share so brand loyalty cannot explain that alone. Chalking it up to ignorance + brand loyalty I think does a disservice to the quality NVIDIA puts out.
 
TroyX said:
its not a joke when you get 12gb of Vram and SLI profiles before new games get released, etc.

390x has only 4gb Vram, do you know that? did you know that AMD never releases crossfire support until months later for most games?

its not fun waiting for new AMD drivers, like I did with the R200 series before I took them out and threw them out of my 4th floor apartment.

AMD hasn't released a new driver for like? 3-4 months now? people still waiting for crossfire support for many new games like FC4, etc...

if you are only looking at the prices for your next purchase I must say you are stupid, don't take it personal.

I rather pay more money by going with NVidia for a better game support than waiting months and years for AMD drivers.

right now I have two 980's in SLI and everything runs perfect without a single issue, getting new drivers days before new games come out is a big deal to me.

for those who are looking to save some money by going with AMD, all I want to say is, GOOD LUCK!
Click to expand...

EXACTLY BROTHA. Team Green for the win. Don't care if 390x is a rat hair faster on a benchmark. AMD drivers are crap, Crossfire profiles are crap, their cards use too much power and run hot. Despite what some people believe and have read, I -SAW- with my own eyes that 290x crossfire was not as smooth as old 580 sli's. So don't care what reviews say about crossfire smoothness.

Just like he said, have to wait forever to get crossfire profiles in games. Nvidia's drivers are much better. I have a 3440x1440, so I need two cards to max all settings. I'm not putting two huge 390'x with bulking water coolers and fan/reservoirs in the machine.

I'll go with double titan x's or double 980ti's

BESIDES........DirectX12 benches show nvidia getting huge boosts in fps's, way more than amd's are getting.

Nvid's are efficient, have adaptive vsync (which gives me no noticable lag), and use way less power. Game over
 
To me, a brand usually gets loyalty because of consistency. Having the top card helps. I thought AMD releasing that crappy cooler on the 290x was a mistake. They should have kept it under 90C as well. Nevermind the thing pegging out at 95C immediately and being loud, from that day forth that's what came to mind. Didn't matter if there were custom coolers that helped... It was a hot loud poorly engineered beast.

Also doesn't matter if they designed it to go to 95C. It's all about perception. That fact it did it out of the box is where they fouled up - should of had it stay around 80C by default and let the customers overclock it up to 95C. Makes is feel like we get a good deal.

If they are going to go with long release cycles maybe they should make the cards seem more "solid". Spend an extra $20 and make it look decent like the nVidia reference cooler and stick aroud decent temps out of the box. Even if it is a cheap piece of plastic from China you don't have to make it look that way for a $500-600 card.

I think some people are right relating nVidia to Apple. nVidia made a sexy product, supported it well, the only difference is nVidia's product actually performs better and Apple's just sucks.
 
Last edited:
Ultranifty said:
EXACTLY BROTHA. Team Green for the win. Don't care if 390x is a rat hair faster on a benchmark. AMD drivers are crap, Crossfire profiles are crap, their cards use too much power and run hot. Despite what some people believe and have read, I -SAW- with my own eyes that 290x crossfire was not as smooth as old 580 sli's. So don't care what reviews say about crossfire smoothness.

Just like he said, have to wait forever to get crossfire profiles in games. Nvidia's drivers are much better. I have a 3440x1440, so I need two cards to max all settings. I'm not putting two huge 390'x with bulking water coolers and fan/reservoirs in the machine.

I'll go with double titan x's or double 980ti's

BESIDES........DirectX12 benches show nvidia getting huge boosts in fps's, way more than amd's are getting.

Nvid's are efficient, have adaptive vsync (which gives me no noticable lag), and use way less power. Game over
Click to expand...
That makes zero sense. Adaptive vsync is nothing more than regular vsync when you hit your refresh rate so it has the exact same lag that regular vsync would have too. If you are below your refresh rate then of course there is no lag as its no different than having vsync disabled.
 
GameWorks sucks and not because of the AMD issues with it. Just completely erase that AMD has issues with it from your minds for a moment. If you'll took the time to actually read and comprehend [H]ardocp reviews of GameWorks games you'll notice that when you enable certain features it makes the top of the line Nvidia cards run like shit. Like pure crap. It makes your PC into a sub 30 fps console.

If 1/2 of you touting how great the GameWorks ecosystem took the time to question Nvidia why does it make their #1 video card, the GTX 980, run like dog shit then you might actually get them to fix their technology. But what you do is fanboy it up. As long as the beloved Nvidia card is 1 fps faster than the AMD card you don't care that it only gets 25 fps when you enable TXAA; a GameWorks exclusive tailored to show the power in the GTX 980.

That's why I don't understand brand loyal consumers. You should remove the shackles from your mind and buy what you can afford with the features that actually work well with your equipment. I don't understand fanboy silliness. I can't wrap my mind around the concept. It's the same with people that buy games from developers like UBISOFT. WTF is wrong with you? You know it's going to be another yearly installment of the same game that you played a decade ago only broken.

I guess Nvidia, GameWorks, and that type of "yearly installment" consumer goes hand in hand. Why not just buy an iMac to go along with it? I can't wait for the Nvidia streaming crap to come out and Nvidiots to come out of the woodwork and try to brainwash us that 150ms is low latency. :)

Dat ecosystem doe. Got to love the fanboys!
 
fanboy said:
Just take it with salt.. but we know the cards exists and AMD confirmed a flagship product was running demo's at the last event.

http://wccftech.com/amd-r9-390x-nvidia-gtx-980ti-titanx-benchmarks/
Click to expand...

iusfv.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top