>AMD ready to reveal vega at GDC >nVidia finds out and

>>59170987
yeah look at how the 780ti does against hawaii now
nice going nvidia

>>59170987
amd just looks fucking dumb

they don't have anything worth showing, or at least that's the impression people got from the lackluster presentation

>>59170997
>AMD has such shitty drivers that even though they theoretically have better hardware they won't actually be better until maybe several years down the road when their goofball driver devs have started to figure something out

>>59170987
Proud owner of a 290x space heater reporting in : D

File: 6.jpg (66KB, 670x353px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 670x353px

Why is he so likable?
He's just so nice and kind.

>>59170997
>implying enthusiasts care how their card is gonna perform 3 years down the line.
If you don't change your card every year then you're just being retarded for buying that high-end in the first place.

>You will never go the the AMD and get shitfaced with Raj.

Why even live?

>>59171047
He gives off the friendly "best-friends-dad" vibe.
Jhen hsun gives off the "i used to get laid a lot until i got old, now i'm just a douchebag" vibe.

>>59171018

Bending Nvidia over because they wanna play chicken shit games and keep trying to steal AMDs thunder had to bite them in the ass eventually.

How ever you want to spin it, AMD played that fuck Jen Hsen Hwang like a cheap whore.

Where do I watch?

>>59171031
>buy Vega this year.
>In 2021 I can run Doom at 8K 100fps.

It's not like there was no warning that AMD was investing heavily in improving their software and drivers, though.

>>59171072

Because the video evidence is epic enough.

>>59171047
the rumor is that he's not so kind and actively working against AMD to try to sell off the graphics division to intel

http://www.hardocp.com/article/2016/05/27/from_ati_to_amd_back_journey_in_futility

>>59171057
>sucking that jew dick this hard

>>59170997
It's largely irrelevant, no enthusiast is going to be happy with a 290X or a 780Ti nowadays anyway, they're way too slow.

>>59171087
AMD has disappointed their fans with this "stunt", 1080 ti will be in the spotlight now regardless, so unless AMD has something REALLY good it's just a double whammy of disappointment with ryzen (not that great in games and general computing compared to an overclocked 7700k) and vega

>>59171157

Who gives a shit?

Nvidia no longer has leverage to steal Vegas thunder when they announce Vega pricing and performance at the event with spicy food and ice cream.

>>59171228
>spicy food and ice cream
so much cringe

>>59171111

Bennett is subhuman.

>>59171146
>buy card for $600 when new
>use it for a year
>sell for $400 and invest another $200 to upgrade
>repeat
in three years you spend $600 and consistently have the fastest card on the market
alternatively:
>buy card for $600 when new
>use it for a year
>new card comes out
>keep using it even though it performs like mid-tier trash
>use it for another year
>now it's being outperformed by mid-tier trash
>use it for a third year
>it can't even maintain 60fps on medium
>sell it for peanuts (sub $100)
in three years you still spend at least $500 but have a constantly deteriorating experience.

Hmm, I wonder what the better option is.

>>59171236

So much...

AMD, Radeon in particular are hillariously bad at presentations.

>Meanwhile, the company has also announced that they have inked a major technology and marketing partnership deal with publisher Bethesda. Publisher deals in one form or another are rather common in this industry – with both good and bad outcomes for all involved – however what makes the AMD deal notable is the scale. In what AMD is calling a “first of its kind” deal, the companies aren’t inking a partnership over just one or two games, but rather they have formed what AMD is presenting as a long term, deep technology partnership, making this partnership much larger than the usual deals.

Please tell me this means AMD is going to fix bethesda's shitty engine for them.

>>59170987
>Wait (tm)

AMDfags are so funny

>>59171283

Not just fix it, optimize it and make it actually function like something not from 2009.

>>59171305
>2009
try 2006

>>59171111
>rumor

Idiots just don't get that he's playing 4D chess with them.

>>59171249
>forgets the initial cost of the upgrade cycle

upgrading every year would cost you $1200 you double nigger

why should anyone trust a fucking thing you say when you can't even do basic math? how do you survive on a day to day basis?

>Hmm, I wonder what the better option is.
you certainly fucking do, you mongoloid

>>59171111
I read that as hardcp.com

>decide to showcase some generic software tech and give the name of vega
With all the "going to buy vega" threads, we played ourselves just as much.

>>59171249
What exactly high end GPU you have that after a year was on par with a mid-range one?

>>59171333
This is only true during the brief period when you've bought a new card but haven't sold the old card yet. Essentially at this time (which is rarely more than a month) you're floating $400. but:

assuming you always sell the card 1 year after buying it the equation is this:
(initial money spent * number of cards) - (money recouped after selling * number of cards)
So bascially equation after sale is:
600*3 - 400*3 = 600

the equation before the final third sale does equal $1200 but nobody doesn't sell their old card unless they're an autistic hardware collector.

link to 1080ti stream?

>>59171249
lmfao whats ur bank account look like?
I bet you have negative money if you think 600-400+200+200+200 = 600.

>>59171454
>980 is amazing when it released
>same as 1060 now

>780 was amazing when it released
>same as 960 now

>680
>680 < 770

etc
it's a common pattern

>>59171491
it's 600-400 + 200 + 200 = 600
in three years you upgrade twice, not 3 times.

>>59171316
Try 2001.

>>59171503
I might be out of the loop when it comes to GPUs but GTX 780 is about the same as a GTX 970.
Also the just from GTX 9XX to GTX10XX is not something you see every generation.

>>59171484
https://videocardz.com/66515/watch-nvidia-geforce-gtx-gaming-event-here

>>59171520
600-400+600-400+600=1000

you're buying a $600 card each time and getting $400 for the old one

>>59171111
>Hey guys, Remember that thing that we got that almost put our company out of business?
>Let's sell it for the lols

>>59170997
Isn't the 7970 leagues above the GTX 680 too?

>>59171018
GDC is for the industry, not clueless consumer garbage like you. They highlighted technologies and showcased demos to get developers interested in their hardware. They showed off things that make development of bleeding edge games easier, and run better.

>>59171111
This is pretty bullshit. The GPU division of AMD was restructured into RTG for financial reasons, and it was put into motion years ago with Su's plan as CFO.
AMD cannot exist as a company without their GPU IP. It is integral to everything they do. Now more so than ever with large scale enterprise APUs being their next big bread winner.

>>59171354
The forum is a bunch of fucking kids, but in an entirely different context.

>>59171555
>Also the just from GTX 9XX to GTX10XX is not something you see every generation.
it's how it's supposed to be, the stagnation between 680-980 was a fluke

>>59171503
>980 is amazing when it released
>same as 1060 now
Mate what?

File: 666.jpg (160KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

160KB, 1280x720px

>>59170987
>AYYYMDPOOJEETS LITERALLY BTFO

>>59171593
But it was the same thing between the 5XX and 6XX series.
The 580 was about on par with 670, the 670 pulling ahead as of later because nVidia droped support for the older one.
How can all the others generations be a fluke and the one that stands apart the standard?

File: 83283.png (31KB, 650x450px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 650x450px

>>59171555
> GTX 780 is about the same as a GTX 970.
nah, the 970 beats it easily while costing $280 less

>>59171600
its true.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/10540/the-geforce-gtx-1060-founders-edition-asus-strix-review

>>59171333
As people tend to own a fair amount of graphics cards in their lifetime it's fair to assess their cost on a per-year basis as you will not just make a single graphics card purchase and never buy one again. so consider the following:

>buy card for $600
>sell card for $400 after a year
you have now spent $200 to use the card for a year
this means the cost of the card is $200 per year

Alternatively:
>buy card for $600
>sell card for $100 after 3 years
you have now spent $500 to use the card for 3 years
this means the cos of the card is $167 per year

Choosing the first option is a little more expensive in the long run but you always have the best card so it's worth it.

>>59171555
nah 970 was more like a 780Ti

>>59171639
gpus are easy as shit to scale in performance because of their inherent parallelism. in a healthy market they should improve at a decent pace

>>59171086
>>59171047
Holy shit do you guys actually believe this?

He gives off a creepy manic manipulative control freak vibe.

>>59171283
>AMD and Bethesda want to get Vulkan in all of Bethesda’s games in order to leverage the many benefits of low-level graphics APIs

In other words
>the people who basically created the underlying framework for Vulkan will be helping them directly to create Vulkan optimized engines

Which sounds pretty awesome. I'm a bit worried attempting to optimize Gambyro might literally kill AMD's software department though.

>>59171581
you missed the sale of the third card though. It's inevitable that you will sell that card, even if you don't bother to upgrade again because you give up gaming. You will always end up selling that card as long as you don't destroy it or get it stolen so you might as well consider it floatable income and factor it into the calculation.

>>59171698
nvm I'm a dumbass there is no way that wasn't sarcasm lol.

File: ffas.png (22KB, 972x386px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 972x386px

>>59171644
>970 beats 780
>posts benchmark that somehow includes none of the GPUs

>>59171644
Damn, old benchmarks of the 480 really didn't look good. Glad it dramatically improvedd.

File: homelessman.jpg (214KB, 675x900px) Image search: [Google]

214KB, 675x900px

>>59171152
>tfw using 290

i thought it was still fast

at least its fast enough for me then

>>59171711
Even if I give up on gaming why would I sell the card?
What good will be a desktop that uses some shit APU or some integrated POS?

>>59171712
bruh it wasn't, he genuinely reminds me of my best friend's dad.

>>59171588
Yes a good 7970 is pretty much 90-110% as good as a 970 depending on the game.

I got a non-reference one that was particularly good. The MSI TwinFrozr. It's able to overclock a lot better (925mhz was the stock 7970 speed. MSI TF was 1000 with 1025 boost. I can OC stable to 1325mhz which is +40% over stock)
At stock speeds, I can still run almost every new game maxed at 60fps 1920x1200, not just 1080p.

The 7970 looks worse in benchmarks because the reference cards were way too conservative, and because they were benchmarks on old drivers. It'd be nice to see someone go back with some top SKUs of old cards and do a new roundup on new drivers, but no one will because either they're lazy or OEMs will stop sending them new cards when people just buy old ones instead.

So in other words it's still over twice as powerful as the PS4. Any game that gets 30FPS 1080p on the PS4, I can run 60fps at 1920x1200. But there are some shitty optimized games.

This is a lot of why I'm waiting for Vega. It looks like it'll last a long time just the same.

>>59171593
Uhh Nvidia sucked dick from the 200 series all the way up to the 1000 series.
Sure the 200-600 worked, but they were heavily gimped in compute in order to not cannabalize their workstation card sales, which made them age terribly as games started using compute.
And the 900 series was alright, as good as Maxwell got and they reversed the compute gimping, but still nothing compared to the 1000 series and you still might as well had bought a deeply price-cut Fury X unless you really needed 3 titans for 3x 4K.

>>59171751
Don't listen to his memes. It performs closely to the GTX 1060 today. The RX 480 is also essentially a slightly better R9 290x with major power consumption improvements.

>>59171757
i meant if you decided to never buy a gpu again - for whatever reason - you would still sell it. unless you like just leaving free money lying around in a box. When i said quit gaming i was just looking for a quick example of why you would not need the gpu anymore.

>>59171757
not him but to be fair igpus are actually quite decent for non-gaming and other non-gpu intensive applications. plus your computer will run quieter without a discrete graphics card.

>>59171751
it's usable but enthusiasts want the latest and greatest

>>59171832
Have you ever tried to watch a 4k movie on an igpu?
Let alone stream one to your desktop.

File: bf4.png (32KB, 650x400px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 650x400px

>>59171719
> I need to be spoon fed all information
http://www.anandtech.com/show/8568/the-geforce-gtx-970-review-feat-evga

i thought vega was going to be good.

what happened amd shills?

>>59171859
How many people do you think are upgrading from a 290 to 980 or 970 to 1080 to go from 60fps to 100fps when they only have a 60hz monitor?

>>59171928
>enthusiasts
kys

>>59171923
What they showed is good. They just didn't "launch" it like Ryzen.

They still showed a lot of new technology coming in Vega and driver updates to double performance in many scenarios.

Previous demos they showed with Vega couldn't use the new NCU architecture as drivers weren't there. They're getting them there bit by bit and showing how much more performance per CU/Mhz/FLOP and such that you'll get.

>>59171751
It's a fine card, hell even a 7970 is usable, but a 290 is far, far away from providing enthusiast performance.

>>59171923
it's hardly a surprise that AMD is far behind. the 1080 ti announcement is in just a few hours.

>>59171503
But Titans were better tho

>>59171249
this wouldn't happen if you bought amd, because they are all the same card.

>>59172017
kek

>>59171928
just upgraded from a 270
to a 1070
why didnt anyone say anything

>>59172033
the 1070 is a fine card, a big upgrade over 270. even if you're only playing at 1080p 60 Hz you'll be able to play on max settings with a solid frame rate which you can't do with a 270

>>59171928
im upgrading from a 970 to a 1080 so I can play at 4K with decent fps

>>59172033
270x or gtx 270?

>>59172077
270s could hit good frames at high, now im saying high not "make no difference but tank fps by 20 so i can say i run it at full ultra".

t. ex user of 270X Vapor X

>>59171978
Uhh the 290 is just a rebadged 7970.

And a 290X is a rebadged 7970 Ghz edition.

>>59172033
The 1070 isn't bad, just a little overpriced. The Pascals are the first time NVidia has made cards really worth buying since the 8800.

And you had a 270. I didn't have 270 on that list. A 270 isn't the same as a 290X. A 270 is much worse than a good 7970, too.

>>59171928
To clarify, I was talking about the RX290.
Did Nvidia even make a dual gpu GTX 290?

>>59172265
>Uhh the 290 is just a rebadged 7970.
>
>And a 290X is a rebadged 7970 Ghz edition.
This is completely wrong. 280/280X are 7950/7970, 290/290X were new at that time.

>>59171474
>the equation before the final third sale does equal $1200
So the equation only works if you assume you'll always sell the card for $400. The card never breaks, you never stop buying cards, the card never loses value to a competitor, you never die, etc.

No, that's spending $1200.

>>59171647
I was never arguing against buying a new graphics card every year, if that's what you want to do. I was pointing out that you fucking butchered the math on that.

>>59171726
lol it's still only about 70-80fps in bf4 1080p ultra.

>>59172410
Yes but the initial $600 means less and less as the years go on
Also who cares about $400 after you die?
And you don't need to keep buying cards you just need to keep selling them which you always will because what dickhead is gonna keep a care that they no longer use?

>>59171647
>get robbed while trying to re sell
you now have no gaymen machine and it cost you $300
(what kind of tremendous faggot spends $600 on a fucking gpu? even $300 is stupidly expensive.)

>>59172302
but the r9 390 and the rx 480 are just a rebranded 290x.

>>59172606
Not the 480

>>59171111
Oh, I remember this article. They got called out as nvidia shills by AMD and told to buy their own hardware instead of expecting a freebie from AMD. Then they threw their toys out of the pram with that article. Shit was hilarious.

>>59171588
>Isn't the 7970 leagues above the GTX 680 too?

I wouldn't say "leagues"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BfSi-Z8r12M


If you bought a 680 you can still get good performance, too bad the 2GB VRAM limits it otherwise it would hold up much better.

Also the 7970 overclocks really good with later models going over 1300mhz easily, I had a reference 7970 (day 1 before Ghz edition) OC to 1270.

One day two years ago it started showing artifacts and weird behavior as in sometimes textures won't display and I could see the vertex on the 3D models and I had to replace it with a GTX970.

>>59172939

Except the only reason he started attacking AMD with bullshit like that article is because they didn't send him a nano.

At least get your facts straight you piece of shit.

>>59171249
um, 290x came out over 3 years ago, still maintains well above 60fps in damn near all games, with some going to 120/144+

Oh what this on a scale of low medium high ultra extreme nightmare ungodly holy-fuck nigga-you-serus?

the difference between the max and high is almost unperceivable, but reduces framerates by at least 50%....

Get the high end gpu, play games and stop pushing the resolution when you know that is the most demanding thing you are doing.

well, unless you are nvidia, and they just stop all support of your gpu, till halo wars 2 beta happened and you saw the 780 performed nearly on part with a 980 when the drivers were no longer in nvidia's hands.

>>59171859
enthusiasts and retards are not the same.

an enthusiast looks at their options, knows the hardware and picks, regardless of price

a retard looks at the brand and the price and goes for the most expensive one, but somehow these people started to be called enthusiast's.

>>59171275
nvidia's going to need some of amd's cream to help their burn.

>>59173629
My 7970 non-reference card still does 60fps+ on 99% of games at 1920x1200 with settings maxed.

Even in >>59173051 sure that does alright, +/- the 1050Ti, but what the youtuber doesn't mention is that's a reference card and reference cards don't perform nearly as well as most of the other OEMs cards, and some OEMs make really crazy special editions that wildly outperform reference.
I get more than 10% higher on all those results in those same games that I've played. Close to 25% in some cases.

That's on a 6 year old card.

>>59173726
I have a 7970 ghz equivalent, however my cpu held it back bad, really want to know how it performs, but may get a newer card back in the warranty repair.

File: bottleneck.jpg (27KB, 482x117px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 482x117px

>>59173747
>I have a 7970 ghz equivalent, however my cpu held it back bad, really want to know how it performs
bottleneck brother!

>>59173747
Well mine was the MSI TF which was the most non-reference design of them all. It was a bit more expensive, too.

I can overclock it to 1325mhz stable, it's that good. But even not overclocked, just on 1000mhz, it runs fantastic (albeit hot). It, like I said, outperforms the 7970 benchmarks in that video by 10-25% on 1000mhz but I could crank it up higher - I just haven't needed to.

I'm using an i5-2500k which does hold it back on some games.

I'm not even going to be upgrading it when I get my Ryzen 5, I don't think. I'll just wait for Vega to launch and drop down in price. Most of all, I want a Nano successor.

>>59173845
phenom 955 with 677 mhz ram, got bottlenecks in the form of ram and old ass cpu single core.

getting ryzen soon though.

>>59173861
probably getting vega because I can get it for effectively half price, unless amd fucks up horribly.

>>59171535
2002 to be exact

>>59171333
I mean, while your principle is right before you accuse someone else of not being able to do simple maths, 3 years would cost $1000, not $1200, you triple nigger.

I'm still pretty happy with my 380X

>>59171283
think they are going to port fallout 4?

>>59174043
Hope not, they should port Morrowind because everything else besides that was junk.

>>59171031
>tfw AMD's driver team has been almost exclusively working on Vega's drivers for the past 8 months

IT'S GOING TO BE BIBLICAL

I'm glad to see AMD finally presenting some actual opposition to both Intel and Nvidia

>>59171031
Although it might be annoying it gives the cards better longevity

File: portrait.png (280KB, 3388x3638px) Image search: [Google]

280KB, 3388x3638px

>tfw still happy with 290x

>>59174317
Artificial happiness, if you got a 1080 you'd be much happier

>>59174357
oy vey

>>59174357
His wallet wouldn't be

>>59174310
As someone who uses 1440p and upgrades gpu every third year, fuck you. I want something that works well now, not when I'm due to upgrade.

File: 1487854679575.gif (2MB, 300x300px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 300x300px

>>59174357

I'm still on a damn 6970. When I bought it, it was just a 6950, so it's cool.

I want a midrange card with HBM, that is affordable and isn't the size of a niggers cock.

>>59175253
Every HBM card is small senpai