> Stuck with a R9 290X because AMD won't give me a worthy

as someone who is religiously nvidia can we keep the false flagging bullshit to /v/ please?

>>58506725
Look at this you shit stirrer>>58506847
The 290x is not bad
Hell, most cards aren't.

>>58506725
even if you consider nvidia an option, you got dickall reason to upgrade unless you have a 4k monitor and want to play native, but at that point we can all call you a retard and move on with our lives.

>>58507403
I just bought a system with a GTX 1080, 32GB of RAM, and i7-6700k. The only thing I do is play Dota2 at 1080p 144 fps. Does this bother you?

>>58507403
What's wrong with wanting to play 4k? Might be awhile before I upgrade but my friend let me play TW3 on his 4k and it honestly is a different experience.

>>58506725
R9 Fury X

>>58507426
No but it should bother you. You spent far more cash then you needed to accomplish your goals.

>>58507489
Sure but it'll be able to handle games on ultra and 144 fps for 3-5 years and I have room to upgrade to 1440p or 4k if I feel like it.

>>58507451
>costs as much as a 1080
>performs like a 1050

>>58506725
Vega is coming.

>>58507534
>performs like a 1050
wew lad

>>58507507
144... not so much, you won't have much of a gpu bottleneck but you have a cpu one, and hitting a cpu bottleneck makes games feel like absolute shit to play

use virtual super sample thing to scale up to 1440 and try to get your shit gpu bound over cpu bound

>>58507443
because games aren't going to get more efficient, they won't halt progress and wait, they will march on their 'needs to be ultra real or we failed' path and your shit will barely function a few months from now at this rate.

Would be smarter to get a 1440 monitor and take advantage of 120/144hz gameplay over 4k 'i need hardware level antialiasing processing cost be damned'

Personally, Im looking at 4k at 40 inch + because I want screen real estate and not sharper images, with a side benefit of I prefer to play games in windows rather than full screen thanks to old win 98 and xp days where a game crashing would take the entire system if it was fullscreen.

Right now i'm on a 1200p screen, I want a 144 but can't go back to 1080 so i need a 1440, but i don't want to pay money for an expensive ips because realistically contrast is worse on many of them then what I have now and that defines image quality FAR more than accurate colors does.

main point is, passed a 290x you are going into stupid performance levels that bottlenecks the cpu, and when you do that you get stuttering, massive frame drops and other issues that make games feel like fucking hell, but if you are around a 290x performance (as in between 970 and 980 +-5% depending on game), you can get the over 60hz frame rates, and be gpu bound that does not have the same massive impact on gaming. amd offers this performance for around 170-300$ depending on card nvidia offers it for 250-300

>>58507534
heres your reply

>>58506725
hawaii chip is still going pretty strong but you could always get a regular fury from newegg for like 240-250 bucks if you cant wait for vega

File: chrome_2017-01-06_06-58-09.png (10KB, 902x122px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 902x122px

>>58506725
R9 Fury X was 300 dollars two weeks ago.

You're just a dumbass.

>>58507507
>not buying cheaper card to sli later
>144hz not 240hz VA
Yes, it bothers me that you're not thinking of upgrading to quadruple SLI and triple 240 hz monitor in 4 years.

>>58507980
>Personally, Im looking at 4k at 40 inch + because I want screen real estate and not sharper images, with a side benefit of I prefer to play games in windows rather than full screen thanks to old win 98 and xp days where a game crashing would take the entire system if it was fullscreen.
huh interesting. although input lag would suck.

maybe buy that and a 144hz VA panel. Put the 40 inch TV benind your 1080 144hz VA panel. :p


That's a good point, but overclocked CPUs and "need to be ultra real" used to the coolest thing about modding and tweaking game performance graphics.

>>58506725
on the other hand it is amazing how 4 year old card is still competitive

>>58509432
i'd buy one if it didnt have meme cooling

File: ridiculous.jpg (532KB, 1024x563px) Image search: [Google]

532KB, 1024x563px

>>58509734
>cool
>quiet

Are you retarded?

>>58506725
>he's not perfectly happy with an RX 460

>>58509764
>watercooling on a gpu
meme

>>58509659
Input lag... there really isn't any in windowed, It's one of the things I notice fairly easily, so its either so miniscule that its not an issue, or its largely not an issue anymore.

I have considered the tv route, but what keeps me from doing it is 2 of out cheaper tv's we got no matter what you do, the image will never not be processed so text is always fucked and scaling is wrong.

I cant drop a few hundred dollars on that easily, same with a 120/144, it would likely replace my current monitor but if the contrast isn't as good, i just cant deal with it.

File: sapphire r9 fury nitro.jpg (521KB, 3264x2119px) Image search: [Google]

521KB, 3264x2119px

>>58509734
no excuse picrelated has gone as low as $220 on newegg

>>58511146
I would have been all over that if it weren't for its paltry 4GB of VRAM. I'm just gonna have to make due with my 390x in the meantime.

They should really just lower the price of the Pro Duo with Vega coming soon. Great performance, but not at all worth $1300.

File: 574681.png (130KB, 332x339px) Image search: [Google]

130KB, 332x339px

>>58506725
>290
>mfw high settings 1440p 60hz
what are you on about op?

290X is fine for for a little while. Vega is coming this year.

File: 1430516816179.jpg (12KB, 400x400px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 400x400px

>tfw r9 290
>tfw i can play almost everything at 1080p 144hz
>tfw got it for only €145,- new

>>58507354
290 and 290x were awful cards, ex owner of one

anything less than a 980ti is subpar for maxed out settings at 1080p 144hz+

people saying a 980ti for 1080p is overkill dunno what they're talking about

>>58511623
Novidio shill

File: s2lhMaP.png (174KB, 388x320px) Image search: [Google]

174KB, 388x320px

>>58511623
get a load of this chuckle head

>>58511653
nah trust me i love amd and would like to change to vega if it proves to be better than my classified, but goddamn the 290/x aged poorly after passing up the 780/ti

>>58511672
The fuck are you on about? 290 and gtx 770 were around the same price. At first everyone was shouting to get the 770 but nowadays even the 280(x)/7970 fucking destroys the 770.

>>58511758
why are you even talking about the 770

>>58511623
144hz+
dude there are a lot of wankers playing on 144hz and higher monitors but look at the majority of the players still stuck with CRT monitors, me im stuck with a shitty Fujitsu x180f and a old gritty LG tv. if you expect that the majority of people are fortunate to even play games at 1080 with a solid 40-50fps. personally im speaking for my friends and poorfags (im one, suprised to have an octa core and a 960 in my rig). plus the >>58511672
>>58511758
>>58511878
770 and 290x can be compared but the 770 is still more worthwhile if u mangage to get them in sli. can get 2 of them right now for 200€.
still price comparison instead of performance?

>>58511216
You can get a powercolor r9 390 for something like $250

>>58511307
The Pro Duo will go down in price once Vega launches, and just like the 295x you'll be able to find it in some places for as low as 600. Then it'll go back up to obscene levels. And will most likely go on to be the most powerful card for a long time to come just like the 295x did.