I need an upgrade from my shitty GTX 960 4GB. Should I get a

that's not a bad deal for the fury.

>>58394486
Only problem is that I only have a 500W PSU, and I don't know if I'd have enough to go out and order a 650+ one

>>58394509
As long as you don't have an AMD cpu, 500w is pretty god damn fucking fine.

>>58394599
I have a 4790K O'Ced up to 1.28v and it's a CX500M

>>58394509

yeah well maybe you should hold off on the power hungry card then. for the price of the card and psu you can just get a 1070, or just get the 1060 6gb.

then again i have a 1300 watt psu because i got tired of worrying about that shit years ago and could run 3 fury's if i wanted to. psu's are buy once cry once, but the 10x0 nvidia cards sip power so even lower watt psu's are fine.

>>58394599

not really, and he's already sending 100 watts to his cpu.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/9421/the-amd-radeon-r9-fury-review-feat-sapphire-asus/17

the fury will pull ~400 watts at max load. that's 75 from the pcie bus and 325 from the 12v rail. the 500 watt psu will be pushed to it's limit even if it does 'work', it'll be highly inefficient and overloaded.

what are you cooling your 4790k with? just got one a couple days ago.

>>58394648
Yeah, I think I'll wait for Vega and if there's nothing of interest then I'll go Team Green again.

I'm cooling it with a 212 Evo at 4.5GHz, temps are around 80C with Aida64 on the hottest core.

>>58394648

my bad, that's ~400 watts total system draw so that puts the card closer to 300 watts, i knew something didn't quite sound right about that.

>>58394680
I just remembered I have an OG TX950W PSU in my closet that I ran for about 5 years with dual 5870's. Do you think it'll be alright

>>58394716

this?

http://www.corsair.com/en-us/enthusiast-series-tx950-80-plus-bronze-certified-power-supply

if so absolutely, 78 amps on the 12 rail, you can run two fury's for that matter.

the fury requires two 8 pin connectors, make sure the psu has a way to do that, usually 6+2 pins at the end.

I bought that card on cyber Monday for that price and I'm happy with it.
Played witcher 2 4k ultra 60fps. Have been playing witcher 3 4k ultra 30fps with hairworks ON but tessellation limited to 6x in the driver.
It can do >70+ fps in 1080p but I feel like witcher 3 really needs those pixels more than the fps.
Being CGN 3 it should get driver updates for a good long time.

It's super quiet but it's massive. >12in long, wider than a normal card, and just a bit taller than 2 pcie slots.

I've read a lot of complaints about coil whine, but mine doesn't seem to have much of any. I could hear a buzz the first time i powerd on my system with the side panel off but can't hear it otherwise. I know coil whine can be luck of the draw though.
Also the hdmi port is NOT 2.0 so you need to use display port for 4k60, but it can only do that in older, less demanding gsmes anyway.

>>58395257
I run the fury nitro with a 4690, TW3 is only like 45-50 fps at 1080 with full ultra and hairworks on but set to its lowest, how are you doing 4k60?

Also wil adapters work for 4k60hz? I have a 4k tv in the same room so if i could get it conected for some casual SP gaming or viewing youtube can i do it? the 30hz lock is just too fucking slow.

>>58395257
nvm i tohuht iread 4k60, i was gonna say that looked wrong as fuck for the card

>>58395299
I said 4k 30 in w3 friend. You should be able to get well over 60 in 1080p though, I did with my shitty 8320 @ 4ghz. Maybe you have something set weird in the drivers? Also turn off blurring and DOF shit. They suck down more performance than they should. Also consider forcing a weaker aa. I think w3 uses ssaa by default. Don't use HBAO+ either it doesn't work well at all on AMD cards.
Maybe also monitor your clockspeed and cpu temp.
Oh I did also have population density one step below ultra. Even without a lot of npc's on screen it hurts frames a bit for some reason.

But yeah there are active converters available. Club3d claimed to have one for dp->hdmi 2.0 good for 4k60 without needing an external power source. I haven't looked into it since I saw them announce it though.

>>58395299

why are you guys running hairworks? turn that shit off!!!

>>58395452

hbao+ works fine idk what you're talking about.

>>58394456
thought about getting this too. don't think it will fit in my 250d though

>>58395804
If you limit tessellation to 4x it has no impact on performance and looks pretty much the same as having no limit. 8x looks a little better but that's when it starts affecting performance more noticeably. It runs at something retarded like 64x natively.

Cant quote the other post cause I'm mobile posting but HBAO+ is another nvidia gameworks setting. It caused more dips for me with it on than the lesser setting. Avg framerate is probably more or less the same but overall it's less smooth.

>1060 And 480
>Both suck compared to the 970 - 980

>>58394456
I'm still using a 470 GTX and I don't even want to upgrade.

>>58397665
You can't. That's what happens when you're poor.

>>58397704
I sure can. I just don't find myself playing videogames as much. Also when I do they're either older games (sometimes emulated) or I just put settings on medium. I hate things like motion blur anyways.
My laptop on the other hand has a Quadro K2100M for doing 3D rendering stuff. I hate doing graphic design as I mostly do C# but I had to acquire the skill to get some work done.

>>58397552
No the 1060 and 480 are equal performance to a 980 if not better because of the extra vram.

Does this faggot even have a monitor worth using a fury with?

>>58397894
The fury is only a bit better than the 480 8gb oc and 1060 6gb oc. I bought it because I was really tempted to buy a 480 and when the nitro dropped to that price it was within $20 of the best 480 on the market. That and I had a plenty capable psu and full tower with lots of airflow already to make up for the drawbacks.

It's a great card for absolute max settings, even the retarded meme ones, 1080p60. Obviously it's plenty capable of high/ultra settings 1440p60 and 4k30 if you don't mind lower framerates, but I see no issue in buying it for 1080p.

For me it's an excellent stopgap while I await zen and vega for a fresh build, and is a massive upgrade from my 7870.

>>58394456
>upgrade from 960 to 1060
save your money and don't be a fucking retarded bottom feeder
you're throwing your money in the fucking trash

>>58397552
480 blows the 980 out of the water

>>58398859
I have a 1060 6GB. It's a damn fine card for not a lot of money, and it'll work just fine for 1080p gaming.

Obviously if the OP wants to go higher he'll need something with more ass behind it.

>>58398859
960 is starting to show its age. Obviously vega will be a great option, but lets not forget how long it took the 480 non reference cards to become available. And it wasn't until the end of the year, a good 6 months after launch, before they were actually at MSRP. Chances are we'll see a similar situation with vega.

>>58398924
>I have a 1060 6GB. It's a damn fine card for not a lot of money, and it'll work just fine for 1080p gaming.
you never upgrade from one low end card to the next gen low end card. you're getting the worst performance per dollar twice in a row

and you're right, it's perfectly good for 1080p but it's not worth spending money no an upgrade for a GPU anymore just to have high shadows turned on; you should at least be getting a resolution bump, which the Fury or a 980ti/1070 would give him

>>58398952
>960 is starting to show its age
what, like 8 months?

>>58394509
You should be fine as long as it's not a generic chink PSU and you're not overclocking.

>>58398982
960 was a piece of garbage upon release

as far as I know it didn't even fucking outperform the 770, which in turn gets beaten routinely by the 7970 and 7970

5 year old cards

>>58398999
That's my third trips today and I'm not even trying.

Kek has blessed me.

>>58398963
Some of us are on budgets. Performance per dollar takes a backseat to price. And seeing as I was upgrading from a 560, it was a pretty substantial step forward.

Furthermore, not everyone has a 1440 or 4K display. There's no point in buying a 1070 when you're not even going to get the full use out of it, and buying a newer display in order to do just that is heavy on the wallet.

>>58399055
>Some of us are on budgets
>Performance per dollar takes a backseat to price
???
I'm saying I know you're on a budget, so don't waste your money on a poorly valued card TWICE in a row

take what money you have now, double it in 3-5 months and when you have that money buy the best card for the dollar amount. That card will now last you 3-4 years instead of 1, when you'd dump $220 down the drain again and still be behind a $350 card from a year prior

>>58397552
>Gimpwell
Yeah, no

It's an excellent deal mate, plus a Fury can trade blows with a 1070.

>>58394509
It'll be fine but you can just under volt it as well

If you only have a 1080p display you don't need more than a 4GB 480 around $200 there's pretty much no reason to buy a 1060 anymore since AMD caught up in GPU performance

>>58394610
Get a seasonic S12II 620W they're around $60

You weren't supposed to buy a CX PSU anon

>>58394456
i bought the card. shit is dank. make sure you have a PSU that has two 8 pin connectors.

>>58399481
forgot to mention that 8 pins usually means a 6+2 connector

File: WUT..png (253KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

253KB, 1920x1080px

>>58397776
>WHAT
>WHAT
>WHAT
>1060 Equal to the 980
what the fuck. Are you retarded?

>>58394456
Ive been wondering the same. I have a 6850 so anything will be better than this piece of shit. May as well wait for Vega lol kill me

File: WUUUT.png (229KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

229KB, 1920x1080px

>>58397776

>>58394456
Using that same Fury right now on a 650w psu. It undervolts very well. Still getting 110+ fps in Doom 1200p at -20% power.

>>58399378
Please don't spread this BS.

The fury is an excellent deal at the listed price but it falls short of the 1070 all around.

The HBM keeps up great but like the 970 relies on drivers to segregate the slow portion of ram to lesser assets, the fury needs drivers that keep the 4gb from saturating.
So long as it dumps unnecessary assets as quickly as it pulls newer more important ones, it can do some amazing shit, but when >4gb is required to draw a scene it will inevitably reach its limits.

Add to that some painful hardware bugs inherent to the fiji arch and you see less gains in low level api's compared to other GCN cards.

The fury is an excellent performer, but in many ways it's a very flawed card. It's a shame we never got a hardware revision to sort out some of the issues, but I assume AMD ultimately decided it wasn't worth it for a card with underwhelming reception, low yields and low margins, that would still suffer the drawbacks of the ancient 28nm process.

I love mine and I'm happy I bought it, but I can't deny the 1070 is simply a superior performer.

>>58401227
t. nvidia shill

You aren't even good at hiding it

File: IMG_0198.jpg (1MB, 3264x2448px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3264x2448px

>>58401254
Here's your (you)

Like I said I'm happy with it, but I'm not blind enough to believe it "trades blows" with the 1070.