![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
Fury won't beat 980Ti, much less Titan
- Thread starter Stoly
- Start date
- Status
Dayaks
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Feb 22, 2012
- Messages
- 9,773
Well... You'd be paying $200 more for worse driver support and the anxiety of gameworks features tanking performance. Sounds like a bargain.
I'd love to wait a few months for Xfire support on AAA games. Sign me the f' up.
Dirty Butler
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Sep 3, 2011
- Messages
- 293
If you're just linking stuff off rumor sites, here's a reply to that from other rumor sites
We have it on good authority and from multiple sources that :
1) Is a totally made up load of "tosh".
2) is categorically and absolutely false.
Who said its going to be $850? People were glad to pay $1000 for the Titan/X and now all of the sudden the 980 Ti is the same thing but much cheaper? What kind of fan boy do you have to be to put up with that crap?
SweClockers said it was going to be $849. Then again they also said the 980 Ti would launch after summer, so...
EDIT: This is new, WCCF is now calling TT a liar LOL
http://wccftech.com/amd-fury-30k-units-2015-air-liquid-cooling/
EDIT: This is new, WCCF is now calling TT a liar LOL
http://wccftech.com/amd-fury-30k-units-2015-air-liquid-cooling/
Last edited:
Too bad Freesync is such garbage. I might actually want to go back to AMD for cheap performance but G-sync and timely driver releases have me spoiled.
What is wrong with freesync? seems like people who have it like it
Still no CF drivers, manufacturers producing substandard implementations, etc.
Within VERY close distance of the $1000 Titan X and above the 980 Ti according to the leaked 3Dmark. Probably driver tweaks before launch should easily push it above the Titan X, especially the more demanding we go, which is what these cards are meant for anyway. At 4k should wreck the $1k Titan due to it's massive HBM bandwidth advantage...
Looks VERY good for AMD. Card is blazing fast. And this time Nvidia has no "Titan XXX edition" to pull out of it's hat as Titan is the full chip.
AMD has been gaining on Nvidia top performance every generation with much smaller dies, it had to happen that Nvidia ran out of room on 28nm where AMD has plenty to spare, hence AMD's single GPU flagship has finally caught or surpassed Nvidia's top single GPU card for the first time in ages.
I like how the thread title says "much less Titan" LOL. Considering Titan is a whopping 5% faster than 980Ti. Sigh...
I imagine the pricing is fluid (assuming that rumor is even true). When that $849 price was leaked Nvidia only had the Titan X so it made perfect sense (just as fast for less money, more bandwidth but less VRAM). Now if we believe the leak the 980 Ti is almost as fast for $650, they may need to adjust.
Looks VERY good for AMD. Card is blazing fast. And this time Nvidia has no "Titan XXX edition" to pull out of it's hat as Titan is the full chip.
AMD has been gaining on Nvidia top performance every generation with much smaller dies, it had to happen that Nvidia ran out of room on 28nm where AMD has plenty to spare, hence AMD's single GPU flagship has finally caught or surpassed Nvidia's top single GPU card for the first time in ages.
I like how the thread title says "much less Titan" LOL. Considering Titan is a whopping 5% faster than 980Ti. Sigh...
I imagine the pricing is fluid (assuming that rumor is even true). When that $849 price was leaked Nvidia only had the Titan X so it made perfect sense (just as fast for less money, more bandwidth but less VRAM). Now if we believe the leak the 980 Ti is almost as fast for $650, they may need to adjust.
Last edited:
No offense I think you're getting a little ahead of yourself basing all those assumptions and extrapolations on an unverifiable 3DMark score.
No doubt a good AMD showing will benefit everyone, but in the words of Winston Wolf, "Let's not start sucking each other's d**** quite yet ..."
Ehh, it seems very real and in line with past numbers/rumors and what you'd expect out of the 4096 SP count and everything else.
There's hardly any doubt it'll be close to the 980Ti (and thus close to the Titan). Where EXACTLY it falls is the only question imo.
There's hardly any doubt it'll be close to the 980Ti (and thus close to the Titan). Where EXACTLY it falls is the only question imo.
Lunas
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Jul 22, 2001
- Messages
- 10,048
honestly your in the same boat with team green gameworks funked up nvidia cards too the main difference here is they were able to label that a driver bug and fix it within a week vs amd who had to optimize the drivers to help with an area the cards they make are notoriously weak at...
And sli needs game profiles too so team green is not immune to that either.
And Nvidia has had their share of bad drivers they were the ones more famous for it but they did something about that and now they are generally better than amd...
NVIDIA has always had good drivers. I've used NVIDIA cards dating back to the GeForce 256 days, and they were reliable even then. They've had a few high profile issues over the years, but those have been few and far between. AMD (then ATI) had some pretty rough drivers for a while, but all-in-all I haven't had problems with them in a long time. The only issue I see is that AMD is generally slower with CrossFire profiles.
For single GPU users (most people) it shouldn't be a concern anymore.
For single GPU users (most people) it shouldn't be a concern anymore.
Lunas
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Jul 22, 2001
- Messages
- 10,048
I beg to differ i used to be a hardcore nvidia fan for years I had a host of issues with drivers. And every single time no matter how i installed them they always blue screened pretty regularly.
My first nv card was a geforce gts 256... my last one was a geforce 250 gtx...
I have sitting around still functional a agp 4200 ti and a 6800 xt
If you haven't used NVIDIA drivers in what sounds like 7 years (GTX 200-series time frame) I don't think you can really make a qualitative judgment of how well they work.
While I wholeheartedly agree with this statement, I'd say it equally applies to those on the other side of the fence as well. Too bad reality is often a one way street.
Lunas
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Jul 22, 2001
- Messages
- 10,048
and my current cards are a r7 260x r9 270x and a r9 280x
i am currently looking at a new laptop and im trying to avoid nvidia and intel nvidia due to the shit i have herd about the 560m and the drivers.
and intel just cause i am not impressed with intel's gpu offerings and i want to game on it. i am open to a intel proc tho...
The 960/970/980/980Ti and Titan X all support HDMI 2.0. As far as the Fiji cards go, we'll have to wait and see (it would be stupid if it didn't at this point).
I'm going to definitely have to disagree about who had the worse drivers in the late 90s early 2000s. I built hundreds of systems using all manner of cards, including the good old Voodoo and no drivers ever gave me more troubles than the nVidia drivers. ESPECIALLY on upgrades or uninstalls for trying to install a better card (even moving over to a new nVidia card). ATI certainly had their problems, but the weren't anywhere near as glaring. Of course, every drivers on Windows 9x had problems...
nVidia has come a LONG way, but they are the only ones who intentionally cripple competitor products if they are installed alongside (AMD doesn't prevent you from running nVidia cards along theirs, but nVidia prevents AMD cards from working when an nVidia card is installed).
AMD and nVidia drivers, these days, are about on par. The only thing that nVidia does better is getting updates out faster and more frequently. This is largely because they have a larger budget and they use that budget to buy themselves into game developer's hearts so the game developers will often help them out and completely leave AMD on their own - even though AMD still represents a very large portion of the installed gaming GPU base.
"Only thing Nvidia does better" -- I'd call getting updates out fast a major thing if not the most important thing. Day one drivers and SLI profiles on major AAA releases is paramount and trying to marginalize the importance of it or making excuses for why AMD can't meet that expectation is absurd.
Maybe instead of blowing one big 8 million dollar chunk in a check to EA to crowbar Mantle into a handful of games, AMD should have spread that money around a bit more or maybe not gutted their driver team. No one to blame but themselves.
Dayaks
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Feb 22, 2012
- Messages
- 9,773
They did buy a giant advertisement in Times Square for the 300 series launch. I personally would of preferred they used that $ to hire a few more engineers and get their multi-GPU back up to speed.
It wasn't too long ago [H] was praising them for XDMA and smooth crossfire.My only hope is that they shifted some of their engineers to VR and DX12 so when that launches it'll go smooth.
durquavian
Gawd
- Joined
- Dec 13, 2014
- Messages
- 757
But then you are only catering to the minority. Most here speak of playability day one with single GPUs. Most concede CF needs work, but that is an extremely small market, which doesn't mean they shouldn't but it isn't as paramount as you might wish. Besides right now we are looking at GW titles and it is no secret that AMD will have issues trying to optimize for those titles. It took AMD 2 weeks for CF profiles on Witcher which isn't terrible.
They did buy a giant advertisement in Times Square for the 300 series launch. I personally would of preferred they used that $ to hire a few more engineers and get their multi-GPU back up to speed.
My only hope is that they shifted some of their engineers to VR and DX12 so when that launches it'll go smooth.
Did they pay for that or did they get ad space for supplying the hardware and helping with the implementation? Hell, they probably got paid for it.
Dayaks
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Feb 22, 2012
- Messages
- 9,773
That's a good point.
TaintedSquirrel
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Aug 5, 2013
- Messages
- 12,688
Without knowing Mantle's impact on the industry (API's in particular) it's really short-sighted to call it a failure. Calling it a success, in any capacity, is also presumptuous.
Or... you can make yourself sound like a dick by taking sides on the issue.
Or... you can make yourself sound like a dick by taking sides on the issue.
Pieter3dnow
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Jul 29, 2009
- Messages
- 6,784
Bankruptcy clause does not fix anything for AMD, Sony and Microsoft. Console manufacturing relies on a competitive product when previously the situation with both Intel and Nvidia the hardware was so damn expensive they took a good financial hit. Now with competition that part has been solved but in no way are they benefiting from a short term clause. If they wanted to be at the mercy of Intel and Nvidia they never would have gone with AMD.
In the end it might even be cheaper to bail out AMD rather then to "let" them go bankrupt. Your clause with Cry engine really is peanuts compared to the massive amounts of money that is in the console industry.
DejaWiz
Fully [H]
- Joined
- Apr 15, 2005
- Messages
- 21,824
Mantle is a success for the very fact that both Khronos and Microsoft realized the benefits and took the exact same direction for Vulkan and DX12, respectively.
Pieter3dnow
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Jul 29, 2009
- Messages
- 6,784
Then again Prime1 goes of and says anything without any knowledge it has not stopped him before from hitting the reply button (EVER).
Pieter3dnow
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Jul 29, 2009
- Messages
- 6,784
NVIDIA was able to beat Mantle without paying game developers to use a separate API.
http://www.tomshardware.com/news/nvidia-driver-update-direct3d-optimization,26381.html
This is probably why AMD killed it.
http://www.tomshardware.com/news/nvidia-driver-update-direct3d-optimization,26381.html
This is probably why AMD killed it.
TaintedSquirrel
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Aug 5, 2013
- Messages
- 12,688
Three things.
1) Those are Nvidia's graphs.
2)
290X: $550
780 Ti: $699
3)
Also, gotta love the misleading Y-Axis in the Thief chart.
here is the problem with your statements, you don't understand when I 'm giving an example. You are adding more information based on $ amounts where doesn't need to be. Again trying to shift the conversation to a particularly trivial part that doesn't make any sense to the original.
I was giving you an example of bankruptcy clauses, you said they wouldn't have anything like that. If such a small contract (your condescending tone irks a bit, because when you have a small size company spending seven digits and a sizable amount of investment for them, shouldn't be taken lightly) based on your words , why wouldn't a multi hundred million dollar deal have even more extensive legal protection? You think MS and Sony wouldn't protect their interests as much as a small development company that is 1/10000 their size?
You are only thinking of what would be best in AMD's interest, when you have two parties make a contract its what in the best interest of both companies that works, its never one sided. If it was the contract will fail. Remember nV sued MS in the first Xbox? nV was making chips at a loss for them, hence the contract failed.
I can show you many more examples of one sided contracts that failed also.
I never said anything for free, possible payout or they might actually already have the IP rights don't know, or AMD might function the same with a new executor, but there would be provisions in such a contract.
Understand this, you obviously feel like you are backed into a corner and have to defend your position with selectively ignoring parts of what I have stated and things you have stated. Which typically comes from when someone doesn't have the experience or knowledge of what they are talking about and this point even open minded to any type of possibilities other then whats already stuck in your head.
Last edited:
- Status