the gimping begins... what now Nvidians?

>>56838188
it's not fair
DELET

I haven't used Nvidia since the capacitors literally exploded on my 9600GT

>comparing an 8GB card to 4GB cards on a game that loves VRAM
>claiming things are being intentionally gimped
ok then

I'm no nvidia fan and don't trust them worth a damn, but your pic proves nothing

>>56838188
where did you get this?

What are you trying to say, seems like my 1070 is trashing everything AMD currently has

>>56838188
>a list of cuck cards

Who gives a shit??

>>56838246
>1080p using more than 4GB

I don't get it, what is this supposed to show? I only see how it compares performance to the 1060, which doesn't clarify any sort of "gimping".

>>56838305
>every single 8GB card, regardless of age, performs better than the 4GB cards
seems like a pretty likely explanation

>>56838188
The 1060 was more power than the 970 right out the door. What the fuck is this thread for?

>>>/v/ please.

>>56838311
1060 was faster than 480 on release. Now it's slightly slower than 470

File: untitled-1.png (16KB, 645x328px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 645x328px

>>56838246
>a game that loves VRAM
>The Witcher 3

Come on Pajeet, that's not even passable shilling. The Witcher 3 uses less than 2GB VRAM at fucking 4K.

https://www.guru3d.com/articles-pages/the-witcher-3-graphics-performance-review,9.html

>>56838393
So, you need the prior knowledge of how well the 1060 performed in this same test earlier. Can you at least post that one as well then? Because right now you can't compare them.

>>56838393
Proof that the 1060 now has a lower framerate than at release or consider killing yourself

>>56838265
Not the Fury X :^)
Currently wrecks even the 1080 in games with DX12

File: 405aa433_GAMEGPU_DE_MD_D12.png (130KB, 548x629px) Image search: [Google]

130KB, 548x629px

>tfw your shiny new $800 Founders Edition gpu is equaled by a $400 one

Its just not fair bros
nvidias the best...

File: Witcher_02.png (72KB, 1304x1616px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 1304x1616px

>>56838188
?

>>56838246
>game even supports Nvidia's Gameworks
Shifting those goalposts, I see. 970 always beat the 390 in every early benchmark, and it's already behind by 10% like a year later, even with Gameworks shit enabled. Truly disgusting.

>>56839077
Dubs of truth

>>56838916
Not Ashes of the singularity
Or hitman
Or deus ex
or forza

>>56838188
OP even I cannot find that graph on computerbase.de I think it's shooped. I have an RX 480 OC'd to 1400/2200 and I know for a fact it won't beat the 1060 other than a few select titles.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xuuNiBbYCbk

>>56839077
Oh look a normal benchmark that shows FPS instead of fucking %, and everything is as it should be.
Nvidia providing better performance at the same price, with no fire hazard and no power overdraw

File: 1474876172001.jpg (1MB, 4030x4096px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 4030x4096px

>tfw too smart for a graphics card

>>56838188
Not a Nvidia shill but that looks sketchy.

The 970 always had a lead on the 390 in Witcher 3 unless you reduce tessellation in AMD's drivers.

>>56839353
>better performance at the same price
390 was cheaper than 980 at launch
480 is cheaper than 1060, even with the 480 shortage everywhere
Everything else there is not really comparable. AMD has objectively better price/performance.

>with no fire hazard and no power overdraw
Nice memes

File: dont follow me, im lost too.png (148KB, 831x826px) Image search: [Google]

148KB, 831x826px

Alright guys what the hell do i do
I currently have an r9 390 and can sell it for 215€
meanwhile i can get a new gtx 1060 6Gb for 240

now do i sell the r9 and get the gtx or not ?

>>56839488
>sidegrade
Why bother with all the hassle? Unless you're going 1070 or better, don't bother.

>>56839488
>going through all that trouble for a sidegrade

Either upgrade properly or kill yourself, you dumb frogposter.

>>56838318
Except the 980 beats the 480x...
Are you evn trying here Jensen?

>>56838357
Gpus are more technology related than 99% of threads here.
Unfortunately they are full of fanboy retards

>>56839042
>gpu
>Graphical processing Unit
>singular
Fuck off /v/
Also founders edition was a reference card. Made for people who want to use custom cooling solutions. Still Jewish to charge us more but come on now...

>>56838305
>he's never played gtav

okay

>>56839559
nah it was made for idiots who couldn't wait a week to save $100 on Nvidia tax

>>56839077

>fury X not on list

I wonder why?

>>56839500
>>56839503
>all that hassle
its literally 10 mins work

>>56839612
Becuase it's garbage

>>56839598
I mean that's a consumer base sure.
But you must understand people who Watercool pretty much need reference cards. I wouldn't mind the premium if it had souped up power delivery etc, and maybe even an onboard voltage dipswitch. But not doing anything special and making me pay more is bullshit. Why I'm waiting for Vega.

>>56838246
>>56838399
>>56838305
>GeForce GTX 1060 3 GB
>NVIDIA CUDA® Cores 1152

>GeForce GTX 1060 6 GB
>NVIDIA CUDA® Cores 1280
Fucking dumbs.

>>56838208
I still use my 9600GT it's nine years old, have been using it every day, the capacitors are good as new, not even showing any signs of age. Pushing highest quality pixels using the best quality electricity.

Anyone have actual empirical evidence of them doing this though? Not a fanboy just curious. Like before and after benchmarks, etc.

>>56839630
Do it then, you stupid fuck. Literally nobody but you cares.

>>56839488
>meanwhile i can get a new gtx 1060 6Gb for 240

reference? the only 6gb 1060s I can find are at least €260-270

>>56839630
>its literally 10 mins work

so is applying the bare minimum overclock to the 390 to get 390x performance levels which is well within 2-5% performance of the 1060 6gb even on nvidia games

if you want to pay nvidia €240 with €25 out of your own pocket for +/- 2-5% performance go for it buddy, nobody gives a fuck

>>56839630
>10min work
>plus having to actually sell the GPU to someone and everything involved
>plus having to actually wait for the new one to arrive/pick it up from the store
>plus pay even more money than what you got from the GPU for 2 FPS increment that will likely dwindle over time, just like the 970 is doing right now
Ye, you clearly thought it all through. Go ahead and do it

>>56838280
>he is emotionally attached to graphics cards

>>56839488
>falling this hard for fanboy memes.
Graphics cards perform at about their price in most cases, exceptioms being shit like the titan, or super low end shit.
Amd equivalents of nvidea are exactly that, equivalents.
If you had a case of coke in youe fridge would you sell it on CL to buy pepsi?

>>56839897
no
fuck pepsi

>>56839788

i got it yesterday since everything was 15% off on ebay

>>56838428

Other way around.

480 has gotten faster

Is the 1060 6GB a better overclocker than the RX 480?

>>56840122
yes

>>56840315
No. They both are shitty overclockers. It's just that the 1060 has the advantage on DX11/OGL games and better power/heat. But the 480 drivers are improving slowly and catching up.

>>56839393
except the gtx 1060 is cheaper than the rx 480 in most places outside the US

File: perfdollar_2560_1440.png (30KB, 500x810px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 500x810px

>>56839393
>Everything else there is not really comparable. AMD has objectively better price/performance.

what? no. AMD has worse price/performance this generation. Pretty much every non-FE 1060 is better value than both the 480 and 470.

File: perfdollar_1920_1080[1].png (36KB, 500x810px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 500x810px

>>56841885
Nice cherry picking

File: perfdollar_2560_1440[1].png (32KB, 500x810px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 500x810px

>>56841988

>>56842004
>>56841988

are you retarded? reference 1060 in those lists are using FE pricing.

>>56842033
The non-FE list completely skips non reference RX cards

File: untitled-53(2).png (63KB, 682x982px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 682x982px

The difference between a 1060 and 480 is marginal. Buy whichever is cheapest.

>>56842056

so what? the non-reference RX480 and RX470 cards are pretty much across the board worse perf/$ than the reference variants. the non-reference 1060s being better perf/$ than them just shows that AMD doesn't have a competitive product.

>>56842148
I got my MSI 480 Gaming X $50 cheaper than the MSI 1060 Gaming X. So what you speak is bullshit.

>>56842236

>anecdotal evidence

lul nice try pajeet

>>56838399
>The Witcher 3 uses less than 2GB VRAM at fucking 4K.

you forgot: at low settings.

>>56842310
Prices vary according to region asshole. Just because America is fucking you over does not mean the rest of the world is.

>>56841494
>They both are shitty overclockers.
wtf i thought the 1060 was known to be a good OCer

File: image_0.png (415KB, 655x653px) Image search: [Google]

415KB, 655x653px

>>56839077
>that 970 performance

File: f3_1920_h.png (183KB, 548x629px) Image search: [Google]

183KB, 548x629px

>>56842148
Aftermarket 470: $200
Aftermarket 1060: $250

>>56842004
>>56841988
Im assuming those charts are using the value of the cards when they came out? Because right now you can buy a fury for $275-$300 new which should put it way higher(lower i guess) in the chart.

I sure am glad I have a 1080 and don't need to worry about any of this shit until Volta hits mass production