Are you buying a GTX 1070/1080?

[selni]

So is it safe to assume -based on this thread- nvidia launching earlier than AMD in the enthusiast sphere was a null move?

It's safe to assume there's still not a lot of information - particularly around performance, and thus making decisions is hard at this point.

 

[imaheadcase]

Sure why not. Its faster than my 780TI. The whole idea of "waiting to see what so in so product" is past me. Something will always be faster, no point in waiting if you need the upgrade.

Does anyone else find it odd they had no mention of WHY they had custom vapor coolers coming out? To me in indicates these cards will be overclocked a lot, which be a lot more than the %20-25 they are not over 980Ti.

 

[selni]

I'll buy one 1080, not a reference version (founders). I still want to check launch day reviews and see how it performs in the DX12 games that Maxwell is getting crushed in right now. Anything that uses async compute; Ashes, Hitman etc.

I'd like to make sure nvidia has fixed whatever makes a 980ti so bad at running that feature that it performs like a 390X. I know async doesn't even work on Maxwell and it was supposed to be enabled, I guess that never happened. Pascal should have it working day one. I want good performance in Battlefield 1 and I'm guessing it will use async with its DX12 implementation.

Isn't the primary reason there's a performance difference with async compute on AMD cards that there's dedicated hardware that would otherwise be idle? I never got why there's an expectation that async compute should give a performance increase without that - aren't GPUs already able to split tasks well over pretty much all their cores anyway?

Ashes differences being async compute only has been debunked a few times - whatever is going on there is more than just that.

 

[railven]

So is it safe to assume -based on this thread- nvidia launching earlier than AMD in the enthusiast sphere was a null move?

EDIT: Reworded
I'm sure the amount of buyers would be greater in a forum that has either a more balanced user base or a heavier NV user base.

EDIT:
A refresher:
http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2466186&highlight=

24% said they prefer Nvidia. The votes here are roughly 27% will be upgrading.

EDIT Addition: The percentage of preferred NV users seems to reflect the number of people who are willing to buy before all info is revealed.

Note: This does not mean all users identifying as bias one way or another are automatically voting in this poll in the same manner, ie myself.

 

[caswow]

buying amd next time. 660 was the worst card ive ever had since 1997:thumbsdown:

 

[MrTeal]

Ask me votes here reflect the other poll, this place is heavily AMD bias. SO these results are as expected.

EDIT:
A refresher:
http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2466186&highlight=

24% said they prefer Nvidia. The votes here are roughly 27% will be upgrading.

27% here said they planned to upgrade to $350+ nVidia video cards, for which there's no benchmarks yet or word on availability of the non-FE models. A third said that they don't plan a GPU upgrade anytime soon, and 40% said they plan to buy something else, which could be AMD buyers but could also be the majority of people who buy cards under the $350 mark.

Really you could ask this question on the nVidia forums and I wouldn't be surprised to see a similar split.

 

[Keysplayr]

buying amd next time. 660 was the worst card ive ever had since 1997:thumbsdown:

Funny. The 660 is one of the best and most impressive cards I've ever owned for its resources and price point. It was a great mainstream level card to be sure.
Eh, to each his own.

 

[SimianR]

I'll have to wait for reviews to see, but this R9 290 I got at the end of 2013 is still doing quite well. From the looks of it, since so many new games are console ports anyway (and don't seem overly demanding), I'll probably be able to keep this thing for a couple more years if I really wanted. I'm only playing at 1080P so I'd probably go with a monitor upgrade (maybe to 4k) before I consider buying a new GPU.

 

[Grooveriding]

Isn't the primary reason there's a performance difference with async compute on AMD cards that there's dedicated hardware that would otherwise be idle? I never got why there's an expectation that async compute should give a performance increase without that - aren't GPUs already able to split tasks well over pretty much all their cores anyway?

Ashes differences being async compute only has been debunked a few times - whatever is going on there is more than just that.

It seems async related as the disparity in performance is present in DX12 Hitman as well. We'll find out if its fixed in a couple weeks when the reviews and benchmarks are done on the Pascal cards in those games. I think it will be fixed, it would be a large blunder to botch again like on Maxwell. Big DX12 titles are coming this year and some of them will probably be making use of async.

 

[iiiankiii]

I'll have to wait for reviews to see, but this R9 290 I got at the end of 2013 is still doing quite well. From the looks of it, since so many new games are console ports anyway (and don't seem overly demanding), I'll probably be able to keep this thing for a couple more years if I really wanted. I'm only playing at 1080P so I'd probably go with a monitor upgrade (maybe to 4k) before I consider buying a new GPU.

If 4k is your next logical step, expect to wait until Volta and/or Navi to get 60fps on a single card. At the rate performance is increasing, We're a good 2 years away from that.

 

[Kenmitch]

Ask me votes here reflect the other poll, this place is heavily AMD bias. SO these results are as expected.

EDIT:
A refresher:
http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2466186&highlight=

24% said they prefer Nvidia. The votes here are roughly 27% will be upgrading.

Reading thru this thread it seems many current nvidia users are either already content or are waiting for big Pascal. The logical users are waiting for reviews before deciding one way or another.

Adding a I'm waiting for reviews option most likely would have swayed the poll greatly to undecided at this time.

Why stir the pot?

On another note I voted no as I'm looking to buy a new monitor currently. I'll ride out my 390's fo a while and see how things pan out in the end.

 

[railven]

Reading thru this thread it seems many current nvidia users are either already content or are waiting for big Pascal. The logical users are waiting for reviews before deciding one way or another.

Adding a I'm waiting for reviews option most likely would have swayed the poll greatly to undecided at this time.

Why stir the pot?

I made a comment based on the last poll, I pulled it up so people could see it - and there is a similarity to the results of both polls.

Also, there are over 100 votes and only perhaps 30-40 individual posters.

Whatever pot you think I'm stirring, it is in your head.

EDIT: To your edit, I voted AMD bias in the other thread, I voted buying 1080 here. I didn't say the results were conclusive of how every person who voted in both polls is. I said there was an perceivable AMD bias here and it shows in both polls.

 

[Dribble]

I think for most that bought something like a 970 last gen (which was a lot) there's no need to update. The 970 still works fine (despite the effort of some on this forum to convince us otherwise).

For the ultra high end people with their 980Ti's this isn't a sufficiently big upgrade to make it worth it, and they will wait till the GP102 or whatever it's going to be called.

The only people this is a must have for is VR early adopters, but again despite all the hype on this forum I bet their numbers a tiny.

 

[showb1z]

1 in 4 deciding to buy a card based on some JHH PR speak is pretty damn high.

 

[selni]

It seems async related as the disparity in performance is present in DX12 Hitman as well. We'll find out if its fixed in a couple weeks when the reviews and benchmarks are done on the Pascal cards in those games. I think it will be fixed, it would be a large blunder to botch again like on Maxwell. Big DX12 titles are coming this year and some of them will probably be making use of async.

This is something that's been benchmarked repeatedly as it's a setting you can turn off.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/10067/ashes-of-the-singularity-revisited-beta/6 for the anandtech article, although it's a bit old now. [H] looked at this relatively recently and found smaller numbers again. Taking the larger anandtech number... sure 10% is a lot, but subtract 10% from AMD's AotS numbers and they still look really good in comparison.

So yes it matters in compute heavy titles (which are likely to be very common given the console GPUs), but there's more to the story.

 

[railven]

1 in 4 deciding to buy a card based on some JHH PR speak is pretty damn high.

I've said it a few times, there is a healthy amount of buyers. I never intended for that to imply it means majority, but I'm always shot down with some statistic unrelated to my comment.

These are the whales that any company would love to have.

 

[Kenmitch]

I made a comment based on the last poll, I pulled it up so people could see it - and there is a similarity to the results of both polls.

Also, there are over 100 votes and only perhaps 30-40 individual posters.

Whatever pot you think I'm stirring, it is in your head.

EDIT: To your edit, I voted AMD bias in the other thread, I voted buying 1080 here. I didn't say the results were conclusive of how every person who voted in both polls is. I said there was an perceivable AMD bias here and it shows in both polls.

Not everybody who votes will reply to a thread.

In the interest of forum peace making such statements are counter productive is all I'm saying.

 

[Erenhardt]

Funny. The 660 is one of the best and most impressive cards I've ever owned for its resources and price point. It was a great mainstream level card to be sure.
Eh, to each his own.

Because you didn't have a competing 7870. Which now beats gtx670. The 660 has troubles keeping up with 7850 in recent titles.
Even getting one for free is not that great, since you could crypto-mine a 10 times worth of your HD7000 GPU by now.

 

[railven]

Not everybody who votes will reply to a thread.

Understandable, which is why your comment didn't make sense to me. I was going just with the raw data.

In the interest of forum peace making such statements are counter productive is all I'm saying.

Making a comment about two sets of data is counter productive? Was it the word bias? Because that was the purpose of the first poll, was even in the name of it.

 

[MrTeal]

Understandable, which is why your comment didn't make sense to me. I was going just with the raw data.



Making a comment about two sets of data is counter productive? Was it the word bias? Because that was the purpose of the first poll, was even in the name of it.

I think the implication of your post (at least as I read it) is that the number of people buying 1070/1080s corresponds to the number of people who prefer nVidia, and that the reason only 25% of respondents are buying them is that this place is heavily AMD biased.

 

[railven]

I think the implication of your post (at least as I read it) is that the number of people buying 1070/1080s corresponds to the number of people who prefer nVidia, and that the reason only 25% of respondents are buying them is that this place is heavily AMD biased.

Considering I voted AMD-Bias, but also voted would buy 1080 that makes no sense.

My comment was basically drawing a connection that this forum in particular would show lower votes to buying a new NV product due to it's majority AMD bias user base.

Read the comment I responded to. Make the same poll in a heavily NV-bias forum, you think the comment I responded to would make sense?

 

[caswow]

Funny. The 660 is one of the best and most impressive cards I've ever owned for its resources and price point. It was a great mainstream level card to be sure.
Eh, to each his own.

i had to decide between 660 and 7870. both were almost the same at the time in every metric. now look where the 660 is and the 7870...:thumbsdown:

 

[xthetenth]

If and only if big polaris is enough more impressive than big vega that losing freesync support is worth it, big polaris, in all other cases big vega barring a true successor to the < $250 290s and even then I probably need the raw power. Also I really want the AMD top end CLC so I can go full moonbogg and smell my GPU.

My purchasing decisions were made by a really nice refurb XR341CK I scored for $600. No way I'd go gsync over a comparable monitor and $150 extra for my next two upgrades. I mean sure I'm AMD biased, but I wouldn't have even a soft vendor lock screen if it weren't for that screaming deal. Bias is deciding ties, not outright ignoring the other side.

 

[Subyman]

I'm waiting. I learned my lesson with the 680 launch. I'll wait for big pascal. My 980TI eats up pretty much anything I play anyway.

 

[MrTeal]

Considering I voted AMD-Bias, but also voted would buy 1080 that makes no sense.

My comment was basically drawing a connection that this forum in particular would show lower votes to buying a new NV product due to it's majority AMD bias user base.

Read the comment I responded to. Make the same poll in a heavily NV-bias forum, you think the comment I responded to would make sense?

Yeah, I'm not disagreeing with you. That poster did make a stretch with their claim. I'm just saying the wording of the post itself might not make your point as clearly as you'd like, and it does come across as a little incendiary even if that wasn't your intention.