Why people are so cuck...
Damn, I was enjoying watching fags fall for the AMD meme
Because people can't see past marketing.
For the technological retarded consumer, the 970 is more than they'll need, and Nvidia knows this. The card can be as gimped as they want, it will still do just barely well enough in the current games. When it starts shitting itself, the retarded consumer will just buy another one.
Rinse and repeat. The non-gimped 970 would be too good. It wouldn't be good for selling cards at the end of this year. It would be too good at performance per dollar, and the 980 and 980ti wouldn't be as interesting for those who want a bit more, since the 970 was such a great pick at that price point.
I can't blame the people that bought a 970 at launch. For the specs and price, it was amazing. Then the 390 launched for the same price and with better specs, and it came down to brand preference. Then the whole fiasco happened, and there was just no reason to buy a 970 anymore. But once again, marketing is all the majority ever listens to. By the time this broke out, it was already too late, all the benchmarks and hands on reviews were already out, the amazing marketing for the 970 was already done. It's easy to find content in review websites praising the 970 as the new world wonder, which it seemed to be at launch, but obviously isn't now.
Nvidia played their cards well, and they will surely continue to play them like this for as long as they dominate the market. Don't get me wrong, AMD is also shit in many situations, I'm not shilling for anyone. But one thing is being incompetent in some areas (AMD), the other thing is just intentionally fucking over the consumer like Nvidia does.
>inb4 nvidia fanggots
Come at me, you know this to be true.
I got my timelines wrong. The fiasco happened before the 390 launched.
Still doesn't invalidate my point though, after the whole fiasco came public, there was already a new AMD series ready to launch and everyone knew about it.
It wasn't just memory. It also had less ROPs and less L2 cache, which effectively affects the performance.
The memory doesn't affect it immediately, only after the 0.5 starts being used. They can patch around that, but one has to wonder how long they will keep patching newly released games when the 970 isn't part of their flagships anymore. It will most likely take a lot longer to patch these games. Besides, we all know that while 3.5GB is enough for 1080p now, in the future it will likely be much easier to hit that threshold, so it will effectively affect performance.
This "it doesn't affect performance" is disinfo, always has been.
well like you said, it would be a more expensive part if now for those flaws. hotter and more power hungry too. instead of obsessing over the hypothetical just see if the 970 as it is warrants the price tag. it seems to fall in line with everything else so i don't think there's a problem.
The alternatives are generally cheaper and have better performance.
At this point, the 970 is getting closer and closer to the 380x than the 390. It's no longer direct competition to the 390, hasn't been for a while now. And they cost roughly the same, in some cases the 390 is even cheaper.
The 970 is a gimped card and always will be. No amounts of backpedaling and conforming are enough to justify getting one.
Nvidia owners don't care though. They'll just buy the next Nvidia card when it comes around to get an upgrade. Nvidia have successfully created the same sort of customer base as Apple have, who'd never consider a competitor and are happy to take it in the ass to own the brand.
Thanks for your story, Anon. I actually never knew what the 970 fiasco was, but after reading your two posts and confirming it with le Wikipedia, I have a clearer understanding.
.....be my boyfriend?
I bought a 970 because I got it for like $240 and I've yet to hit 3.5 at 1080p and 900p windowed.
In fact the only game that I wish I had a better card for is The Witcher 3 so I could use hairworks, but apparently you need a Titan-X for 60fps with Hairworks.
Also AMD has shit drivers.
I use a GTX 950
Although I believe it would be really stupid to buy one now unless you got the same kinda deal I did. $120, then $135 after tax and shipping. They're all $160 now.
>does it even matter if it doesn't affect performance?
Holy shit, do you cucks listen to yourselves? Don't you care at all about the fact that Nvidia consciously cheated their customers? That they sold a gimped product claiming higher specs to squeeze every tiny bit of money out of their customers, already knowing that they would not give a fuck anyway?
When we allow hardware manufacturers to get away with this, we set precedents for more and more cuckery. What do you think, when will the new Intel 4GHz (but it's actually 3) CPU be released? What about your new 16GB RAM stick (but 4GB of it are flash memory, who needs 16GB of memory anyway, right)? These companies need to be shown that you get punished if you fuck up. That if your product does not have the specs you promised because of a conscious engineering decision, nobody will ever buy your shit ever again, you lying fuck.
Even Nvidiots should be smart enough to understand this. And yet >lmao it doesnt affect me cuz i only play dota. Great for you, faggot, I hope you'll enjoy paying full price for Nvidia's next gimped line-up. I'm sure you can't wait.
This. If you buy it knowing "3.5", and you get it at reduced cost, how the fuck is this an issue? I don't give two shits what other card it was originally held up against performance wise, we all know the truth now and the fact is, the 970 is still a decent card.You can argue the same about every gpu on the market that doesn't out-perform whatever gpu you choose to shill.
>Don't you care at all about the fact that Nvidia consciously cheated their customers?
Those people stupid enough to pay full price because of hype are always going to exist. Apple makes billions off this tactic. It's shitty, I know, but when prices came down, the performance to cost was acceptable.
See anon, that's fine. $240 is a good price for the 970. I don't mind people getting 970s if they get a good deal on them and they're massively cheaper than a 390.
On the other hand, if you bought a 970 at the same pricepoint as a 390, knowing all of the story, I'd consider you clinically retarded.
The "non-existent" competition is the 390, and beats it at pretty much every game. In the most recent Gameworks game, Tom Clancy Ranbow Six Siege, which is supposed to be optimized for Nvidia cards, the 970 loses to the 390 at 1080p. The difference is even bigger at bigger resolutions.
Pretty much every game that isn't Gameworks, the 390 beats the 970. They're both in the same pricepoint, save for some ridiculous rebates or discounts you might occasionally find, that also happen for the 390 every now and then.
How's that for "non-existent competition"?
>Uninformed consumers being dumb
There are people in a tech board that don't actually know what the fuck they're talking about, but still feel like sharing their useless thoughts.
Do your own research faggots, I won't even bother. But for the love of God, stop posting, preferably now.
Except he says it destroys the competition. It really doesn't. It doesn't even win, much less destroy.
That's not being informed, not even close. He might be retarded, he might be baiting, but it's just not true.
but your 390 competition is a old 290 overclocked vs a stock 970...
So you're saying the old 290 overclocked is beating the 970! Hot Diggity Dog!!!
Heres the funny thing, when DX12 games comes out expect to see AMDs old cards at the same frame rates, because they can Async and Nvidia cards cant! el oh fucking el !
I bought a 970 for about $400 (Canadian, feels bad man) because I was in the market right around when the AMD 300-series GPUs came out, so I waited until about 2 weeks after launch when Nvidia prices dropped to compete. At the time (before the dx12 fiasco) the consensus was 970 ~= 390, buy whichever is cheaper, and the 390 was about $60 more. As a bonus I got all the Batman Arkham games with it for free.
It had shitty drivers. It's just a meme at this point.
AMD drivers were pretty hit or miss back then. You would have to shift through drivers when you bought an AMD card to see which one worked best with your card. There was no set driver for each card, it was pretty random.´
That's no longer the case. You might be able to get a couple more FPS on a certain game with a certain driver now, but generally speaking, the latest driver will work best and give you best performance. The most recent driver had a bug when you had MSI Afterburner installed alongside it, where it locked down the fan speed to like 15 or 20%, which caused some cards to bluescreen a PC by reaching the speed cap, thus reviving the old shit drivers meme.
In reality, the worst that happened was a couple bluescreens and cards throttling. There are reports of cards dying because of it, but all of them could be caused by something else besides the driver. The card is supposed to protect itself by throttling or shutting down when it gets to temperatures that high, so it's not like it could kill itself.
That's about it, at least for recent events. On the other hand, Nvidia updates their drivers every week to patch up their gimped cards, and the past couple years, every single Nvidia card owner I know complains about the driver crashing at least once every other day. No one talks about that, though. Go figure.
Different person here. Just different versions of the drivers. They come out pretty often. Whenever a big new game comes out they release new drivers to optimize the card for that game.
>monopolies are a good thing
Surely even Nvidcucks can't be this delusional, right? You understand it's in your best interest that AMD stays competitive, that is to be expected from anyone with a brain.
No one talks about that here. The driver meme for AMD has been going on for years now, while Nvidia drivers are much worse right now.
Every time someone's defending Nvidia while calling AMD drivers being shitty, I chuckle a bit inside.
A driver is just software to support the card. You install it like a normal program. Drivers are supposed to fix problems and help the operative system interface with the card. It enables a range of different settings that cards support, but only when their software is there to tell the operative system how to work it.
Of course, as with all software, newer doesn't always mean better, and new drivers can ruin old features or make the experience worse. AMD had beta drivers which usually are more unstable than the stable release, that much is obvious. You can expect things not to be perfect when using these.
Nvidia, on the other hand, has no beta drivers, at least not publicly available. The most recent driver is their beta. That means, if you update on release, you are pretty much testing them. There's been multiple occasions where Nvidia drivers have fried GPUs or even laptop screens. It has happened more than once, and pretty recently too. Those threads are usually populated with a lot of people posting "AMD has shitter drivers lol" with no basis, and end up dying fairly quickly due to all the shitposting. Nvidiafags conveniently quickly forget about that happening.
This happened last year and still you can't get your facts straight. Fuck you redditor, no upvotes today.
3.5 happened long before 390.
390 is a fucking 290 anyway, fucking literally. 290x is a better card anyway and was available for much lower than the 390 during the price cut period.
So what's the point of your post? Third hand information, poor information at that. Why the fuck did you write this when it's clear you have no idea what you're saying?
Purposefully sabotaging a game's performance, because you know that your competitor's framerates will suffer from it even more than you will (also known as 'Goyimworks') hardly qualifies as user experience
Literally 2 minutes later >>52440326
You discredited an entire post because the timeline was wrong, when the guy corrected himself right after.
Even though he was right about everything else.
Fuck outta here.
Funny you should say that because in that very post he says something else which is completely wrong:
>after the whole fiasco came public, there was already a new AMD series ready to launch and everyone knew about it.
AMD had nothing ready for the longest time to the point where it became a meme.
Then when they finally did come out with the 390, it was just a rebrand with a batch of drivers that gave it an artificial advantage over the 290. When they released the improvements made in those drivers for the 290 and 290x, the gap closed, but most drones didn't notice. They kept screaming about 8 gigs as if they matter, kept posting idiotic mainstream benchmarks that don't compare cards at same clocks and kept insisting the 390 has higher overclocking headroom which was just plain not true. Most vendors simply came out with better coolers, which a model like the Tri-X 290 already was, whereas Gigabyte and MSI's (excluding Lightning) solutions were kind of crap.
This guy's posts are almost uncanny valley, like an alien trying to infiltrate /g/ or something. Says shit that sort of sounds true but then misses all the crucial details.
tfw still using a 660
hbm2 cards need to come out sooner ffs
Only if it's a Nano. That's now the best value of all of them after the price cut. Full Fiji, overclocks to Fury X speeds and beyond even on air, consumes less power due to premium low leakage chips.
>he doesn't know about the Zotac 980 ti amp extreme edition
6 years old
update nvidia every week
never once a broken driver.
continue to take throughly optimized and update updates, for ever my old ass cards to this date.
>amd fag mad they dont get 0day support for new games.and suffer with poor performance for a month till amd releases a new driver, which then is old already
I bought my 970 before the 3.5 issue was known and it was the best option at the time.
I don't regret it because nobody knew about it at the time, and everyone was upset over "coil whine" which I never had so whatever.
>he bought the Zotac 980 ti amp extreme edition
>he bought the best graphics card in the world second only to the superclocked titan x
Yeah I did
>amd doesn't even have anything like shadowplay
AMD has a recorder see link. I have been using it. Also seriously? thats your fucking argument shadow play?
>But once again, marketing is all the majority ever listens to.
You must have evidence to support this theory, such as interview and questionnaire before and post 3.5 scandal, asking 970 buyers their motivation of purchase, otherwise you are merely speculating and is not fact at all
never had a problem. currently running 2 7950's with crimsom(beta edition) 0 problems
Just look at this thread. People are claiming they'll buy the 970 in this very thread. When the 390 is a clearly better option. When the 970 is gimped. When a new generation is already on the horizon.
The reason is almost always fanboyism or memes like "drivers" and "power efficiency".
The only valid reason to buy an Nvidia card that is not the 980ti (the only one that's actually better than the AMD counter part) is if you exclusively use Linux. But even then, if you use Linux exclusively, you shouldn't be caring that much for computer games and enthusiastic level GPUs in the first place. It is a valid reason though.
So what except the recording function does geforce experience offer? Its bloatware, just like AMDs raptr. Wait no, you need it for beta driver access now...
Shadowplay and AMDs GameDVR (does the same as shadowplay) also got obsolete once OBS published a branch that includes NVENC and VCE (and quicksync) support...
My 960 has been doing me wonders for what I do. Good price too.
THIS, FUCKING THIS RIGHT HERE!
I would have agreed with you, but Zotac has the best <200mm (small form factor) offerings this generation. Also as far as I'm aware, they don't prebin their GPUs like the "extreme" manufacturers do.
I've been really happy with my zotac 970 so far.
Well, the 960 and especially 950 are really nice for ITX builds, the latter even for a quite competitive price considering its performance. The 980 is also a nice card if you're in that price range... Don't delude yourself, nvidias line up is very competitive to say the least, even from an objective standpoint. So is AMDs, especially with the 380 and 390.
Most people buy brands, and most "gamers" buy pre build shit, that's why the market distribution looks like it currently does. People even reading reviews are a minority.
This. I bought a 970 for my ITX toaster and it's insanely low temp. 35c idle and 55c load. If I had gone with AMD i'd acoustically and thermally have a small jet engine under my desk instead of a computer.
1 year later and no regrats
But ITX builds are pretty much a meme. When you want a good performing card, you generally don't care about size, noise or temps, granted they're within acceptable levels.
Yes, AMD cards are slightly more noisy and hot than Nvidia cards. That difference is minimal if you have good coolers, such as Sapphire, the new MSI on the 300s, and PCS+.
For the average gamer that just wants good performance, none of those are good selling points, or at least shouldn't be.
It does make sense going Nvidia on ITX, don't get me wrong. It's just a gimmick that most people don't care for.
Nah, there are really good Hawaii cards. The HIS IceQ X2 is the most silent one, at the price of a lower power target which will let it throttle a bit in some situations though. So the cooler of the cards isn't the problem, with an ITX build it is moving the heat out of your case.
An other mistake by AMD, using the blower shit for the Hawaii release ruined the chips image...
lmao. AMDs raprt does the same. I used both, and both suck. If you're to retarded to know what the 5 settings in your games do you should go back to your gameboy.
>AMD cards are slightly more noisy and hot than Nvidia cards.
Thats complete bullshit. It doesn't depend on brand (neither Nvidia/AMD nor the board partners), it depends entirely on the used cooler. The Sapphire Fury is the most silent aircooled high end card, despite sucking up more power than most 980Tis. There are enough other examples like this...
I like AMD more than Nvidia, but AMD cards are slightly hotter than Nvidia, there's no going around that. It's not like the difference is significant or impacts anything, it's just fact.
But like I specifically said, it depends on the cooler more than anything. Yes, the Fury's are much cooler than 300 series, but the 300s and 200s are hotter than the Nvidia's 900 or 700's. The difference on average should be around 5-10 ºC, at most, unless you have really shitty coolers like Asus.
Honestly, AMD gets pretty bad rep in terms of temps, but it's just fine. It's not too hot or ridiculously low, it's at a good point, and they get too much flak out of something they're not doing wrong.
>my argument was geforce experience as a whole. "amd has only recently had anything comparable"
And my argument was AMD has it when means your argument is invalid so why both to state some thing thats invalid? ORRRR did you just research the fact that AMD has a recorder...yes yes I think you did cause it seems that you're talking about stuff you dident know existed.
Sure it does, if you have a good case. What doesn't make sense is full sized ATX cases with 20 empty drive bays, taking up half your desk.
Here's my ITX case, with a full size evo cooler and a 970. *Squee* its so cute and functional.
Sure ATX cases have their place, but that's mostly for servers and workstations. ITX is the gaming form factor of the future.
An HIS R9 290 X2 or a sapphire R9 390 Nitro runs cooler than a zotax GTX 780 AMP or a 970 ACX (not the ACX 2 with the fixed cooler). Its retarded to claim that "AMD cards run hotter/louder", simply because this is solely determined by the cooler you use. Chip size and power consumption obviously influence it, but the difference between the used coolers is so enormous that this isn't a significant factor for the last few generations.
Also comparing company's, not products, is just as retarded. AMD and Nvidia offered a shit ton of chips, you can't judge all of them at once. What was more efficient, Fermi or VLIW4/5?
FACT: AMD chips have higher TDP for each performance bracket.
Even if you have a 100% efficient cooler, that heat doesn't just disappear. It increases the room's temperature. If you already have a hot summer, the last thing you want is a space heater graphics card.
Worth nothing. Games of bad developers (like the latest CoD, AC and batman shenanigans) will suck at launch on every card, and games of competent devs have the necessary adjustments in the driver weeks/months before release, examples are the witches 3 and star wars battlefront.
>he thinks TDP is power consumption
I want /v/ to leave.
>AMD chips have higher TDP for each performance bracket.
RV790/GF100. See why it's retarded to compare based on company and not on product?
>Even if you have a 100% efficient cooler
You don't, that's the point. Look at charts of all the different GTX 970/390/980Ti/whatever cards
With minor differences in clock speed and voltage different models have huge differences in noise and/or temperature. The cooler is way more important than die size and/or power consumption.
>It increases the room's temperature. If you already have a hot summer, the last thing you want is a space heater graphics card.
That's ridiculous. Do you life in the small room under the chair like Harry potter or what? Your own body puts out like 200-300W in heat while you're just sitting there. The most shitty space heaters come with like 3kW. And you say that measly 50W more of your GPU are going to make a noticeable difference in room temperature?
Did you read the entire post?
GPUs are made to throttle after a certain temperature to prevent damage. Even if they do for some reason hit a temperature they shouldn't, they'll instantly shut off to prevent damage.
There is no way a card can kill itself because of temperature, unless it was already about to die due to something else.
I bought a 970 because it seemed like a good balance between what I wanted to do using CUDA and could run modern games decently.
Is there a better card out there for both CUDA and shit that a graphics card does?
>You can get AMD but they're very inefficient and hot for the same compute power.
This isn't true at all... Nvidia underrates their cards TDP and AMD overrates theirs. You can find a lot of benchmarks showing less than a 10% difference in power usage.
AMD cards tend to be cheaper unless the Nvidia card is extremely gimped so they always put it on sale (le 970 faec)
Nvidia wins at the 980ti tier. Everything else, AMD beats Nvidia, performance-wise.
Hardly matters when you're paying over 200$ for a card. The power bill difference is less than 5$ a year. This is a meme.
Of what, exactly? The card? If so, that's a bad thing. If Nvidia's card is already as optimized as it can be at launch, it sucks. On the other hand, AMD can get a little extra juice out of their cards even after years of being on the market, and they always surpass their Nvidia counterpart heavily in the long run, while being competitive at launch. How is this good for Nvidia?
Debatable. Nvidia drivers in the past couple years have been really shitty, with BSODs and crashes everywhere, and patches every week to patch up their mess. AMD stable drivers have been good for about 2 or 3 years now, only beta have issues, which is normal.
Like what? Gameworks? Anti-competitive and anti-consumer shit is now features. Okay kid.
>tfw pic related is real
>So many people have been cucked by Nvidia, yet they keep defending that shit
The poster wants a compute card. Depending on their work load they should consider amd. If you really need cuda get nvidia. If you can afford it you would get a Tesla or the amd equivalent. For a relatively inexpensive cards the 390 offers good performance in double precision. If you need CUDA get a 980/ti.
If I was starting a project that could make use of gpu acceleration I would consider cuda alternates like magma or arrayfire. Opencl is more portable and some of the libraries can share with the cpu automatically.
m8 you don't even know what suffering is until you come to Argentina.
950 is about $350.
970 is $680
980ti is $1300
At least we're white
AMD hates freedom
AMD is incompetent (and uncooperative) #amdbastards
AMD seemed like it was on the right track in 2011 when it started cooperating with and releasing source code for several critical components to the coreboot project. It was not to be. For so-called economic reasons, they decided that it was not worth the time to invest in the coreboot project anymore.
For a company to go from being so good, to so bad, in just 3 years, shows that something is seriously wrong with AMD. Like Intel, they do not deserve your money.
Given the current state of Intel hardware with the Management Engine, it is our opinion that all performant x86 hardware newer than the AMD Family 15h CPUs (on AMD's side) or anything post-2009 on Intel's side is defective by design and cannot safely be used to store, transmit, or process sensitive data. Sensitive data is any data in which a data breach would cause significant economic harm to the entity which created or was responsible for storing said data, so this would include banks, credit card companies, or retailers (customer account records), in addition to the "usual" engineering and software development firms. This also affects whistleblowers, or anyone who needs actual privacy and security.
about coreboot, the company amd hired to develop it for their platform was closed and development was slowed down significantly.
Not really, Open CL is in a lot more software and as soon as adobe stops sucking nvidia's dick and adopts it better into premier nvidia is fucked due to the much lower price of firepro cards