GTX 1070

>>58189261
What? You can find 1070s for less than $400. There's nothing from AMD that competes with it atm, and NVIDIA basically competes against itself for higher end cards like the 1070 and 1080.

>>58189261
RX 490

>>58189261
But it beats a Titan x, while the rx 480 struggles to beat a 970 in half the current titles out now.

Plus it's got CUDA which is much easier to work with.

>>58189261
OK, I'm an AMD fanboy, but there really isn't anything that competes with the 1070 ATM. Fury/X is perpetually on sale at this point for ~$300, but is generally regarded as a weaker card and consumes more power. If you can wait, AMD Vega is coming out is H1 2017 but the details are still under wraps.

>>58189345
>AMD fanboi
Ok, leftover GPU architecture buyers

>>58189261
>Is there a bigger meme than this?
The RX line of Sapphire cards.

>>58189309
>fury
hell even the nano is comparable

>>58189261
R9 FuryX is about = in performance and is $300 on newegg right now. Fury is 90% of the performance and is $260. Only issue is low vram.

>>58189333
>while the rx 480 struggles to beat a 970 in half the current titles out now.
2016 is almost over, shill.

>>58189816
>>58189876
If by "comparable" you mean
>"As you can see in these comparisons, the GTX 1070 is clearly the stronger card, even while drawing far less power"

>>58189261
The only meme is using AMD cards.

Seriously, who the hell buys that shit? My first "gaming" computer had an AMD card since I didn't know better.

>Installing drivers was a total nightmare.
>Card quickly became obsolete and couldn't run latest games.
>One day card just goes apeshit and crashes. Now screen has weird lines everywhere when you turn it on.

Fuck AMD. NVIDIA cards are incredible. Way more powerful, much better software, and don't have to worry that they'll explode at any given moment.

>>58190478
>AMD Cards
>Explode at any given moment

I think you meant to say EVGA Nvidia cards.

I just bought msi 1060 3gb for $200 on amazon like some retard before considering VRAM. now kind of regretting.

>>58190253
The Fury is actually not too far off 1070 performance, it can even equal it at higher resolutions it's just not cheap enough and it's cooling/power requirements are quite off putting

>>58190592
I played with a 1060 3 GB on 4K until some days ago, it was hell. Also serious microshuttering because of VRAM.

I would get a 1070 over a 1060 6Gb, the cheapest 1070 start at 400 € here, 1060s are 280-320 € depending on the model.

>>58190478
>Getting cucked by NoVidya GoyForce drivers after their latest release

>>58191069
plus the 4gb vram is not enough for higher resolutions, there's a reason why dooms highest setting is hidden with that card.

I find it baffling amd shills are actually advocating the fury x over the 1070.

>>58190592
>>58191681
autism. if you fall for the 4k meme AND try to play it with the gtx1060 you deserve to get a horrible experience. theres no way atm to play 4k60fps with anything below a gtx1080.

the 1060 is the best 1080p card on the market, cheaper and 15% more powerful than it's amd shit counterpart

File: 1480449591332.gif (446KB, 180x135px) Image search: [Google]

446KB, 180x135px

>>58189261
>calls it a huge meme
>ask if anything is as powerful for less money

you are a special kind of retard

It's called the 980t-
Oh wait I forgot they've already started the gimping process to make the 1070 seem more appealing.
Sorry 980ti owners, though I'm sure you'll have already upgraded to the 1080ti by the time the fury cards have surpassed its performance in every game.

>>58193087
benchmarks before the 1070 was released shows that the 1070 does perform better than the 980ti

>>58193122

by 2%

Not much incentive from nvidia to roll out full chips when they're a monopoly.

>>58193166
when a midrange card performs better than a top tier card a year ago, you can't tell me thats not impressive

though this generation of cards aren't the regular 10% performance increase refreshes that we usually get

>>58191069
>yeah man the card's just as good! Just ignore the terrible downsides who cares if your PC is a power sucking furnace? AMD always wins baby

>>58191708
what lol

>>58193262
I assume you're referring to the 480/1060 vs 970/290/390. The 290x was a top tier card for AMD like 3-4 years ago, yeah, but the 970 was like an upper midrange/lower high end part when it came out. And the ~$350 price it debuted at was nuts. I believe the 290x was still selling for ~$500 at that time and the 970 was as fast as or faster, ran cooler, and drew a lot less power.
If memeory serves AMD cut the 290x price within a few weeks after the 970 launch and it still took a while longer yet before It was actually in the same price range.
We may look back at the 3.5 meme card and chuckle now, but when it came out it sent shockwaves through the entire marketplace. There's a reason so many people bought it.
480 and 1060 are still nothing to bat an eye at, but it's more of a natural progression when you compare it against nvidia's offerings instead of AMD's sadly sparse high end range.

File: how not to fall for a meme at 1080p.jpg (42KB, 462x412px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 462x412px

>>58189261

1070 is more expensive and shit and runs much faster and shit so it must be gud for right?

>>58193813

Uh, if you need the speed, then yes. What are you trying to say?

>>58193496
Fury doesn't even take that much power, it's not a 290x

what's wrong with you niggers?

>>58194198
It's just another /g/ poorfag playing at 1080p

>>58193813
>3GB
>for 1080p
You dun goof'd.
A lot of recent titles already pull much more than 3GB@1080p

t. 1070 owner

>>58193813
>buy r9 290 for 300$ at 2013
>it has 4gb and still runs every game at 60fps @ 1080p
>brand new 1060 is 3gb
>780ti that was 500$ back in 2013 is an irrelevant JOKE right now

Honestly, is nvidia even trying? Is this a joke of some kind?

File: TeamGreen.png (569KB, 1278x770px) Image search: [Google]

569KB, 1278x770px

/g/

>>58194478

show me one

>>58194828
Viral marketing and AMD's lack of high-end releases has done it's toll.

>>58195365
More than a handful, that's for sure.

Forza Horizon 3 sucks up more than 5GB of VRAM at 1080p.
Witcher 3 goes above 3GB as well.

>>58195402

>"who" the game and bitcher 3 which runs on ultra perfectly fine with1060 already

are you trying to justify your 1070 fuck up?

>>58195365
gta v if you want to play on more than high

>>58195433
Sure seems it's you trying to justify the fact you that you didn't have the money to buy a 1070.

File: GTA5 2016-12-25 13-59-15-13.jpg (141KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

141KB, 1920x1080px

>>58195492

>if you want to play on more than high

What a shame

>>58195535

>Why won't you spend money on shit that you don't need?
>WHY?
>I did it so must YOU!

You can calm down now it's not my fault you waste your money like that. I rather spend that money on my 2k mountain bike and get me a nice dropper post instead. Paying twice the price for negligible graphical difference is autism 101.

File: memory.png (12KB, 500x250px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 500x250px

>>58195614
Go justify your poor decisions somewhere else.

File: f3_vram.png (59KB, 629x284px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 629x284px

>>58195631

File: ShadowOfMordor_vram.jpg (56KB, 630x235px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 630x235px

>>58195649

File: download.png (73KB, 629x284px) Image search: [Google]

73KB, 629x284px

>>58195663

File: 500x1000px-LL-b95611af_t2_vram.png (101KB, 500x226px) Image search: [Google]

101KB, 500x226px

>>58195684
>3GB is totally fine for 1080p xDDDD
Fucking luddite perpetuating retarded memes.

File: 1482479342772.jpg (134KB, 500x880px) Image search: [Google]

134KB, 500x880px

>>58195631

>paying close to 1k
>so you can max out a shitty game with "hair" physics
>falling for the "if you can't max it out it's not good enough" philosophy
>having nvidias dick THAT deep up your ass

The autism is off the charts my dude, what's next? They release a game that eats up 20GB of VRAM and you going to sell your organs to play it?

And then you call console "gamers" the retarded ones

>>58195704

You are clearly upset that some people are not retarded like you and spent 60% less for the same result. But it's OK the 970 buyers got over it almost and so will you.

>>58195713
>i'm fine playing my games on pajeet settings
Whatever suits you.

>>58195746
>1070 is the same as 1060
I'm sorry anon, didn't know you were legitimately retarded.

>>58195767

>Whatever suits you

It suits me not being a retaded and paying for shit that will be obsolete very soon. I come from 560 Ti and the upgrade is 200% improvement already.

>I'm sorry anon, didn't know you were legitimately retarded.

at 1080p 60 it is at 1440p meme is a different story.

>>58195846
A 1060 isn't enough to max out every game at 60fps even at 1080p. And I'm talking about the 6GB version which is literally the only version worth the money.

Let that sink in.

I'm sure you're fine playing at 30fps. I'm not.
Dealing with that is up to you, but trying to justify your poor decisions based on poor people memes is just sad.

File: 1482379692630.jpg (32KB, 500x667px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 500x667px

>>58195902

>I'm sure you're fine playing at 30fps. I'm not.

Are you THAT fucking dense? All games I throw at it play at perfect 1080p 60 with higest settings

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hzR5U0MsqEk

>>58195942
>all muh games play fine
>i'm sure everybody plays the same games as me xDDD
You're the one who's dense, friendo.

>>58195964

>Shows all the popular and recent games out there
>More videos all over YT
>"all muh games play fine" "i'm sure everybody plays the same games as me xDDD"

you have a severe case of "nvidias cock deep up your ass"

>>58196035
>all the games play perfect, I swear!!!
>except some features are turned off on some games
>except some parameters are not maxed out on some games
>except the card on the video is a 6GB and not a gimped 3GB
>except if it was a 3GB card it would get even more gimped settings

You sure made your point.
Are you sure you weren't better off buying ayymd? You already have the damage control mindset spot on. lmao

File: 343455.jpg (145KB, 1520x400px) Image search: [Google]

145KB, 1520x400px

>>58196091

Again read this >>58195713

You are clearly determined to suck up anything nvidia throws at you even if the price difference is solid 60% just so you can play with "hair physics" on.

This is even more retarded than upgrading from PS4 to PS4 Pro.

File: 545612239.jpg (27KB, 750x499px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 750x499px

>>58196173
>you're retarded because you bought a better card than me

>>58195541
Do you like 30fps? That's what you're getting with a 1060 on those settings.

>>58196091
>>58196173

And all that so you can "convince" me that I should spend THAT much money for a 1080p setup.

You should take your medicine now the damage is already done and with the next nvidia's line-up it will be even more painful.

>>58195942
I've played Witcher 3 on a 1060, it does not maintain 60fps on the max. I've also played GTA V on the 1060, it also does not maintain 60fps on max.

>>58196230

I'm getting avg of 56 fps with MSAA x4 on research first dumbshit.

>>58196260
>I'm getting avg of 56 fps with MSAA x4 on research first dumbshit.
You're definitely not, go drive near Devin Weston's house.

>>58196195

You are the retarded that tries to convince me that 1070 is a 1080p card when 1060 is MORE than enough for full HD.

>>58196297
you also will need to lower settings in Dying Light, Deus Ex: Mankind Divided, and Dishonored 2 even at 1080p

I'd still recommend a 1060 over a 1070 at 1080p but the 1060 can't truly max every game at 1080p.

>>58196231
It seems you're the only one worried about money, here.

>>58196246
Of course it doesn't.
You need a 1070 to get more than 60fps with everything turned on/maxed at 1080p.
At least that's my experience, with an overclocked 4690k.

>>58196297
Let's just take this out of the way.

A 1060 with 6GB of VRAM is adequate for 1080p.
A 1060 with 3GB of VRAM is shit, and should not even be taken into consideration.
A 1070 is the best thing to max out every 1080p game at (at least) 60FPS. It is also a great 1440p card.

In no shape or form I said the 1060 6GB wasn't a good card for 1080p, it's just what >>58196333 said.

I wanted a card that could max out every fucking game on the market and still play them at more than 60fps. That's why many people like me bought one, even though they only play at 1080p.

>>58196279

Oh yes I do the built in benchmark clearly shows it and I do play a lot aswell with the minimum FPS I ever reach is about 45 when everything explodes in chains. So your "go X and do Y" bullshit you can stick up yours. I will check it out anyway however.

>>58196364

Then so fucking be it. You spend money on shit that will be obsolete soon. I can save those extra 250€ I saved for the next model if i wish. The next xx60 will wipe the floor with 1070 anyway and the next line up even more. So what's the fucking rush to teach others on how to spend their money?

>you are poor bla bla

Being poor and knowing how to spend your money are two different things. I rather spend that money on something more productive than "maxing out 1440p games"

>1060 with 3GB of VRAM is shit, and should not even be taken into consideration.

CLEARLY does max out everything I throw at it for 100€ less than 6GB version. So your opinion is shit.

>>58196493
lol
If you think like that why would you even buy a 1060? Wouldn't a 1050 be okay?
I mean, it's not like pushing down some graphical parameters bothers you, and you wouldn't spend so much money to have a 1150 blow the shit out of your 1060 in the next generation, isn't it?

>>58196568

Because the price difference is only 50€ and NOT fucking 250€

That's why.

>>58196606
Maybe in the next year you'll be forced to spend another 200 or 250€ to actually play a game at decent settings, while I won't need to upgrade until the next year, depending on the ark jump.

>>58196633

I upgraded from 560 Ti so here is an idea how often it happens. BTW 560 Ti was still capable to play Resident Evil 7 Demo at 1080p 60 with stuff turned to medium with minimal visual change. Now playing it maxed out with 1060 it's only a little cleaner looking and that's it.

>>58196364

If only 1060 had SLI I mean 1070 would be so fucking finished. Nvidia knows how to jew that's for sure.

>>58196716
And the 970 is still capable of playing anything at good settings. Your point being?

>>58196834
You mean how the 1080 is finished since the price difference between a 1070 and a 1080 is the same as between the 1060 6GB and 1070? lol

>>58196901

>And the 970 is still capable of playing anything at good settings. Your point being?

That I don't spend 60% more for shit I don't need. I always aim for the mid range and get exactly what I pay for, no more and no less.

>the price difference between a 1070 and a 1080 is the same

whoever buys xx80 is a whole another level of retardation. Besides 2x 1060 in SLI would be already reaching 1080 levels for 380€ less. There is a very very good reason they left it out.

>>58197094
Even if you had the option to SLI 1060s, you wouldn't SLI a 3GB version. That's stupid, to say the least.

>>58195541
Strange. My settings are lower but I use about 4GB on my card. I guess playing on 800x600 is smooth eh? :^)

File: GTA5 2016-12-25 13-58-48-55.jpg (135KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

135KB, 1920x1080px

>>58197130

no doubt

>>58197125

For video editing with GPU render it is a killer deal. with 2k+ cuda cores.

>>58195402
ive never seen the witcher use more than 2.2gb of vram, and forza is just a piece of shit but i dont have meme settings turned on so it only uses about 3.8 gb

1070 is good price/performance which will last a few more generations at 1080p (console ports are all we're getting).

1060 is already maxed out and rx 480 was the better buy.

>>58197368
This, 1060 already struggles to maintain constant 60fps on ultra in 1080p with new games. 1070 will last you through next series at least.

Xx70 is best range to buy

>>58189261
There's nothing better, AMD literally can't even beat Nvidia's mid-tier card from a generation ago

>>58190478
I literally never had any problems with AMD (or ATi at the time) drivers.

>Card quickly became obsolete
Are you sure you're not talking about nvidia and crippling the performance of Kepler GPUs with drivers?

File: output.webm (3MB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1280x720px

>>58197130
>>58197551

>1060 already struggles

>>58195704
just a random person passing through....

i dont know what kind of person would have those graphs downloaded and ready to go.... but it seems like they really care about something

>>58197684
That's not ultra

File: GTA5 2016-12-27 21-56-28-42.jpg (155KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

155KB, 1920x1080px

>>58197820

heh wasn't even aware that some setting had it. Well there ya go only about 70mb VRAM difference and no change to FPS

> i5 2500
> 8GB RAM
> GTX 970

> Upgraded to 16GB RAM and a GTX 1070
> No noticeable performance improvements at all

>>58198047
>no performance improvements

>8GB to 16GB
no wonder, 8GB is enough unless you're doing pro image/video editing or use Chrome

>970 to 1070
this on the other hand should make a noticeable difference. My guess is your i5-2500 is struggling.

File: gpu wars conclusion.png (27KB, 412x443px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 412x443px

>>58189261
get a job

>>58198047

Is your 2500 a K model? is it OC'd? Do you play 1440p?

>>58198111

2500K at 4.5 ghz won't struggle anytime soon. Only very recently multi-core optimization became a "thing"

>>58196568
Price difference is lower.
Also 1050 Ti > 960 > 1050 for example.
So it takes 2 new series for 60s to be beat by 50s.
Also the 1060 is better relatively speaking than 60s usually are because Nvidia had to reply to AMDs affordable RX 470 and 480 (why we need competition).
Otherwise 60 Tis are pretty nice when Nvidia decides to Ti them up.

>>58198137
Regular i5 2500 (Got it for $99 due to a pricing error, back when it first launched).

I play at 1080p.

>>58198223

Well at 1080p there will be very little difference unless you have 144hz monitor. With that card it's time to go 1440p

>>58192989
>the 1060 is the best 1080p card on the market, cheaper and 15% more powerful than it's amd shit counterpart

did the RX480 not catch up to it by now?

>>58197801
>what is searching [insert name here] vram usage on google

>>58189333

wow. is your nose always this brown/green?

the RX480 competes with the 390x. the 390x demolishes the 970.

970 competes with a 470 at best

File: 15775056_1639284209707933_7949279208106071491_o.jpg (72KB, 1024x576px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 1024x576px

>>58192989
the 980ti and old titan x can handle 4k well also.

>>58190478
Yeah, that's totally why the rx 480 beats the 1060 for $55 less.

You bought a pre-built. Of course it's GPU was shit - That's what you get when you're a moron.

>>58192989
The 480 is faster than the 1060.

A M D

F I N E W I N E

>480 is faster than 1060
do people actually believe this?

>>58199475
Go and look at the most recent benchmarks. At launch the 1060 was better than the 480, but at this point the 480 is the better card.

>>58199505
Except most reviewers won't rerun the benchmarks because it takes too much time. Only new games will reveal recent performance.

>>58193122
>1070 cucks actually believe their cards outperform the 980ti
In a handful of games it gets an extra FPS or two and that's literally only because stock 980tis are trash and the 1070 is running at an extra 700MHz

File: Screenshot_8.png (557KB, 1866x649px) Image search: [Google]

557KB, 1866x649px

>>58200399
this
when overclocked the 980ti always performs better than the 1070 overclocked
a card running at 500 less on the core clock performing better is a real kick in the nuts

>>58198545
haha

>>58197684
>no framerate
>visible stutters
>not even driving around or flying which is when the engine gets stressed the most
0/10

>>58197684
>distance scaling and high-res shadows not enabled / maxed
I don't need to do that on my 1070.

>>58200431
>unknown game / benchmark
>unknown overclock
I don't doubt that the 980Ti can beat the 1070 in some games as it has more memory bandwidth and was a higher-end GPU when it launched, but come on with that worthless fucking graph. For all we know that could be temperature in Celsius.

>>58200508
Here is a whole video for you
1070 at 2ghz
980ti at a measly 1.4 compared to the 1.5 you can easily get

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kgfe4QdhBbE

>>58200856
I'm not watching random video with a 1:1 like:dislike ratio

Anyway, as I said I don't doubt that the 980Ti wins in some benchmarks, it's got a wider memory bus hence more memory bandwidth. You can say that "well the 1070 has a huge clock speed advantage!" but it also uses significantly less power, so I don't know why you keep mentioning clock speed like it's relevant. The 1070 can easily break 2GHz.

>>58200994
>Provides proof
>No i not gonna watch it psh in your face
>easily break 2 ghz
yeah ok bud
you're a fucking retard

>>58200994
>1070 fags are in this much denial
Seriously? Grow up anon

>>58200994
Here is another video where neither are "Overclocked"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3-FRuIvGF7U

>>58199505
>d-d-d-d-drivers... the card isn't... it isn't shit guys...

>>58194790
>780ti that was 500$ back in 2013 is an irrelevant JOKE right now
no, the joke right now is that $800 1080 which doesn't even run dx12 @1080p ultra 60fps

>>58195684
>r9 480x
there is so much wrong with this
why would you even shitpost this bullshit?

>>58193087
Bitch I don't care about "performance" beyond "can I crank the settings up to max" and "can I see the frame rate fall". Everything else is just audiophool-tier placebo.

>>58195541
>Shows pic of settings screen
What is this supposed to prove? Also the GTAV VRAM estimate is wildly inaccurate

>>58189316
Not out yet though

>>58189261
the msi "armor" version of those cards

>>58200079
Even then a card that bragged about being 10% better than it's rival losing that lead is a big deal. It even lost it's lead in DX11, which was the main thing keeping it relevant over the 480.

File: 1482762434908.jpg (28KB, 250x235px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 250x235px

>gtx 570 was $350
>gtx 670 was $350
>gtx 970 was $350


>gtx 1070 is $450

fuck off nvidia

>>58195402
I'm playing the Witcher 3 with a 270x toxic 2GB and I go at 60fps at 1080p in ultra... So please don't say weird things

>>58205298
it's $379 now, AMD can't do nothing

http://www.newegg.com/Product/MappingPrice2012.aspx?Item=N82E16814125870

>>58189816

Like saying a pre-war grand prix car is comparable to a new hot hatchback.

>>58194256

You keep stuffing shit in our faces. Fuck off with your retarded autism GPU. Nobody wants a 290x/fury whatever that house fire crap is called.

>>58190174
https://youtu.be/ZyAOtQOu2YM

Watch this kiddie. Pretty much sums up a lot of you scrotoms on here

>>58206106
Yeah 60 fps when you look at the sky, Run through novigrad and watch that potato gpu take a massive shit.
270x running witcher 3 https://youtu.be/qPFKbMtWqO4

He has his set on medium and its fucking 36 fps

>>58198545
Lol no it doesn't :3

Wait for the price cuts

>>58206106
LOL
Sure you do.