Ok so heres the deal.
I've got a Radeon 6950 right now. Been getting real sick of AMD and their drivers. I've got an ideal budget of 350 CAD (250 USD), but can go up to 400.
I can order on Amazon.ca/com. I have the potential opportunity to pick up a GTX 970 for 350. Should I wait for the R9 390 to go on sale, or jump on the 970?
Also, anyone with experience with either of these cards? I've heard of the 970 memory issues, but don't see it being a problem since I only have 2gbs right now.
You may want to wait till the next line up of cards comes out this hear for either better performance or a price drop on the current generation. Should be about 6 months if you can hold out. That being said, I haven't run into any memory issues with my 970
> buying a 28nm card when 2x faster/more efficient 14nm/16nm cards are 6 month out
at the very least, consider waiting till this summer, when last gen GPU get massively price cut to dump inventory.
Polaris/Pascal will be the biggest single generation jump since the Radeon 9700 Pro in 2002.
I'm actually an AMD fan but honestly there is nothing wrong with nvidea whatsoever. I can't think of anything either company has done to make me not want to support them.
So if it fits your budget and performance needs then I say go for it. Most anything in the 300+ range is going to perform adequately for most people's needs.
i believe jet.com works in canada. I just got an msi 390 for 275 usd total. If you're interested try it out
use debit card -1.5%
SCARYMOMMY15 at checkout -49.23usd
waive free return -7.83usd
idk about canadian taxes but its worth a shot
Wtf is all this fanboy shit about? I'm really starting to lose hope for humanity.
People are so desperate for acceptance they force their communist teir opinion about whatever shit product they bought so they can feel better about it.
If the card you have works now, wait..... either choice will get cheaper.
Choose the one that looks better and make you feel funny inside.
Unless you buy both and benchmark them you will personally never know the difference on your rig.
More than double.
>Been getting real sick of AMD and their drivers
Every time somebody says that, I feel bad for the chronic autism they must have.
And my trusty copypasta inbound.
On the topic of the 970;
3.5 does exist. It is there. We can measure it, the impact it has on performance, and when it triggers.
That being said. It IS still a fantastic GPU for gaming at 1080p, performance is solid so long as you don't go silly with mods or higher resolutions, something that will push vRAM usage higher, and ultimately end up with stuttering.
How long the 970 will be good for 1080p gaming is the main question. As of these next few months we will have new generations of GPUs equipped with HBM2, meaning higher amounts of vRAM. That vRAM being there is just shouting to Game Developers "Hey, look at me!, you don't need to optimise anymore!" and very quickly we could see the 970 become a very poor GPU.
That is one scenario. Should developers continue with this pattern of "Ok, I'll do SOME optimisations here", then the 970 will hold up to the test of time a little better.
All that being how it is, or how it may turn it. The 970 WILL age poorly. Even compared to past nVidia GPUs. The vRAM and general on-going optimisations we see for AMD GPUs, the 290/290x/390/390x especially will age well.
Hell, look at the 7970, that thing is beating out 780ti's at this point thanks to driver optimisations made possible by it being GCN, which means that AMD's driver team can easily alter drivers and send them back.
nVidia's drivers as a whole are solid. Just avoid GameReady drivers, they always cause more issues than they fix. nVidia will churn out a really solid driver once every 3 months or so. But never be the first to install a driver, wait and see how the forums react for a week after the release of a driver.
Neither is better than the other when it comes to drivers. If you were to compare each release and the problems both bring to the table or resolve. Then you would soon realise this.
>ATI gets a reputation for having bad drivers around 2003 while it was transitioning from AGP to PCIe and that caused serious driver issues
>It's been 13 years, ATI doesn't even exist anymore, and idiots are still repeating that old nonsense without even having a clue where it came from
Kill yourself, newfag.
You mean the ones that perform worse than on Windows, do not get the same performance improvements the Windows ones do, and are missing features compared to the Windows one? You can argue that they suck less, but they definitely still suck.
>I've got a Radeon 6950 right now
You got fucked RAW by amd and you still want to go back? Are you a cuck?
The GTX 480 released a year before your 6950 is still getting full support and DX12. Your card got its support officially dropped by AMD several months ago.
You should know more than anyone how capable your card is. The 6950 is still on par with a 7870/R9 370 but amd just tossed it aside.
970 if you want to play older games and use windows 7 only.
390 if you plan on playing any game and use any windows os including windows 10.
Nvidia has no stable windows 10 drivers. No proper dx12 hardware support. There is some coil whine issues too. Might be certain models.
AMD draws about 70w more than nvidia cards. And generally cheaper. 390 on DX11 and older beats or trades blows with 970. On DX12, it trades blows with 980.
It's a shame, I'd really rather support AMD as a company, but I'd totally be shooting myself in the foot. Hopefully GPUOpen changes things but I'm not getting my hopes up just yet. Maybe in a few years.
Anyone bringing up power consumption should really look at the big picture alot more.
>>amd has bad drivers
>When will this awful meme end?
Not a meme... Every third release or so I had to run driver sweeper and clean install because of otherwise shit performance and random crashes. Even after new OS! Switching to Nvidia made it all go away. Fuck AMD garbage...
Your point? The 39** arn't a house fire?
Only the reference 970 runs at the 145w power target - all of the aftermarket versions (as technically the reference 970 was only for reviews) use a higher power target and thus draw more electricity.
>The 39** arn't a house fire?
The 390 and 390x only such around 40w more than a similarly clocked 290/x.
The main point is the idea that maxwell is super effecient is misunderstood by /g/ as it only looks at charts made by retards because accurate power measurement is hard.
Pic semi-related, its why Tom's is one of the few sites with the gear to pick up on shit like this.
>The 390 and 390x only such around 40w more than a similarly clocked 290/x
>implying the 29** wasn't also housefires
Can I have the power consumption of the 390 vs 970 please?
Stop your damage control, The AMD GCN have a higher power draw that maxwell, it's why AMD can't release good gpu for laptops and need a big AIO for Fury X. Meanwhile, a full desktop 980 can go in a gayming laptop.
> The AMD GCN have a higher power draw that maxwell
That was never in question, what was in question is how big of a delta there is.
Hey ho though lets not actually understand why so many sites report inaccurate numbers and just pick any old shit. Pic related - somehow this 290x is drawing more juice than a 295x2.
295x2 accurately measured, for comparison.
I never said that and you clearly misunderstood the entire post. Its okay, I understand reading is hard.
>typical AMDfaggot delusion
> reference hawaii within TDP
>reference 970 running beyond TDP
Its almost as if Nvidia lied!
>970 fans are on at low temps, 980 is be default off until 64c
>980 is more efficient at "Average" tasks
>implying it's average power usage rather than "average user tasks"
>implying my resource is credible
>implying it's impossible
fans are on at low temps, 980 is be default off until 64c
Not on reference models, which is what that chart is as it does not indicate otherwise.
>980 is more efficient at "Average" tasks
You wot m8? Unless the 970 is boosting significantly higher the higher core count of the 980 alone should drag power consumption above the 970.
>implying it's impossible
This is the only sensible thing you typed. No it isn't impossible but extremely improbable.
When it is no longer true.
I sell this shit part time while going to university and the shop I am part timing in does also do repairs.
Often it is just minor shit, but shit remains shit regardless at which size.
Sure beats your drives flatout imploding an OS or your screen eh?
Wait about 4 months. New generations of cards will come out.
Old cards (970, 390x, etc) will be a lot cheaper.
New cards (polaris, whatever nvidia has) will be a lot more powerful.
that looks about right. almost the same results i got the last time i tried running a real stress test on my 290x. it consumed 600~700w total system draw.
hawaii is real fuckin hungry piece of turd.
You know that if you google shit like that you will always come up with stuff like that.
AMD had similar issues aswell.
I just want to remind that AMD made microstutter possible on single GPU cards and it took them nearly 3/4 of a year to hand that issue.
No microsruutering... Runs like buttah and driver updates install every single time. Explain how I got "cuked" you fukin shill. Oh yeah and I get vdpau in Linux which totally blows AMD shit away, hands down.
why do people care about power consumption? in the end the difference is only a few dollars. power consumption should only be considered after performance and 390 performance > 970 performance
nvidia and physx
nvidia and gameworks
nvidia and drives making old cards worse (took a solid month to fix that, surprised they even did that)
nvidia and proprietary boner
nvidia and 3.5
nvidia and 960 and 780ti
nvidia and locking code to their cards only (this is older than physx and gameworks) so the work around made everyone else look like shit...
nvidia and 3 gpu killing drivers
nvidia and no windows 10 drivers
list goes on and on and on and on.
nvidia and no tessellation limiter in deriver (think of it, once the next gen comes out they will find a way to push something so the 980ti performs worse than new mid range, and an nvidia user will have no way to cut it off like an amd user does)
nvidia and 3d (granted this is a personal grievance from when vista was new)
yea, i can think of more than enough reasons to hate nvidia to make me go with amd so long as amd is competitive.
i had a 390 crossfire setup.
pic related it was it
i upgraded to a 970 sli (evga ftw+) and much more happier.
MUCH less power draw and day and night experience in heat generation. my room dropped 4c - 5c.
and in the games i play i noticed a slight fps boost.
my 390's ran extremely hot, no overclocking head room, the power draw was unreal. my 390's according to gpu-z would draw about 250 - 320 watts... each. while my 970s according to gpu-z draw about 130 - 190 each.
then ran into amd driver issues. from games crashing after an hour or two, to random display drivers stopped responding. i reformatted and reinstalled windows from scratch 5 times seeing if that would fix it. tried all the beta drivers. after two months, sold my 390s and went nvidia.
i'm happy now.
>The GTX 480 released a year before your 6950 is still getting full support and DX12.
Nigga, not even Maxwell gets proper DX12 support, what makes you think Fermi is gonna get anywhere near that shit?
I like both AMD and Nvidia. Been using Nvidia cards for awhile now, so most likely I'll be looking at AMD when my 970's no longer happily running games maxed on the U2415.
Both have their faults (AMD being incompetent and behind on tech, Nvidia jewing their customers and being assholes) but I've never seen the need for the red v green troll wars.
A cheaper Fury would be THE high-end card to beat if that's true, because you have a pretty good shot at unlocking half of the disabled shaders, or all of them if you hit the jackpot, giving you an air-cooled Fury X or near-X either way
I was only able to unlock 3840 shaders total, but for $480, it was a bretty gud deal for something that matches a 980. It's also probably the coolest/quietest card I've ever used, probably because it's fucking LONG
the next gen gpus won't come out till 3 months, and chances are they'd be out of stock from the beginning and food reciews would take time to come through, so about 6 months of waiting time.
I'd say jump in now but don't spend too much.
Maybe r9 390? Or fury x if it goes on sale
>It's a shame, I'd really rather support AMD as a company
The 390 is far better and gives you potentially better DX12/Vulkan support, as well as saving you money on an adaptive sync display
Apparently there's like a 50 dollar price difference in canada for whatever reason, but you'd still save money if you ended up with a free-sync display
More reasons NOT to use AMD. Even if that's a pretty shitty business practice on behalf of Nvidia, why would I want a card with shittier performance, even if it was forced to do so?
>390 (rebranded 3 year old 290x) already on par with 980 in some recent benchmarks.
>2xx series only sees performance gains
>meanwhile 780 (and older card) users are getting fucked in the ass by nvidia
Oh man I can't wait until NVIDIA releases their new line-up and drops their driver support for the 970/980.
Serves you right for letting yourself get jewed.