is there any reason to ever use FPS/dollar as a performance metric?

>>59796827
Perhaps if you have some sort of a budget.

>>59796827
With any piece of hardware there bang per buck can come into question
Personally last time I shopped GPU I looked at which GPUs reached the performance I require. Then I sorted that list after bang/buck and made a decision.
But since the top scorers on a list like this will usually be lower specced cards, you may want to shave off the top.

After 1060/480 gtx 1080 is most fps/dollar card

with a gpu yes, once you find your minimum performance a performance per dollar metric comes into play.

lets say the 470 and 4gb was you minimum,

the 1060 3gb was now never an option

finding a good deal on 480 may put it at a better buy then the 470, or also the 6gb 1060

we all do this math roughly in our head each time we buy a gpu unless we blindly just by the most expensive one.

>>59796827

looks like the RX 480 is the best bang for the buck, best fps/dollar gpu

>>59799156

same guy here, just going to say that vega 10 is going to replace fury x on that chart once it releases

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

>>59796827
I used to when I was poor and in college. It's all pocket change to me now.