If it was between the 960 4gb and 380 4gb, which one is better? I saw game benchmarks and the 380 got slightly more fps on most games. The 380 was getting higher temps and using more power though.
R9 380 1100mhz vs. GTX960 1500mhz
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XLeLgDpdigo
0:15 Rise of the Tomb Raider
2:56 Tom Clancy's The Division
4:12 HITMAN
5:56 Need for Speed
6:56 Quantum Break
8:28 Far Cry Primal
9:19 Grand Theft Auto V
11:40 The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt
13:36 Assassin's Creed Syndicate
14:28 Fallout 4
15:28 Star Wars: Battlefront
16:23 Battlefield 4
17:08 Crysis 3
18:00 Batman: Arkham Knight
19:30 Total War: Rome II
20:12 Arma 3
20:24 World of Tanks
21:45 Dota 2
22:12 Counter-Strike: Global Offensive
That's a bit harsh. We know first hand from retailers that they were stocked to the rafters with 480s but sales have been incredibly good.
GTX1080 is nearly 2 months out of stock since
announcement date. That's the very definition of a paper launch. The GPU market is also a small fraction of what it used to be 6-7 years during HD5850/5870 days. Even back then, it was far easier to find HD5850/5870 than today it is to find a GTX1070/1080. The interesting part is back then the HD5850/5870 cards smashing GTX285 was akin to GTX1070/1080 today. I'll give RX 480 a small benefit since it's not been that long since it launched but by the looks of it, it's fairing no better than GTX1070/1080.
We are easily in an era of the lowest
unit volume for dGPU graphics cards. The major reason NV has record profits is they increased prices 50-100% for each tier. As far as actual volume sales go, AMD/NV were able to supply the market in the old days without these issues despite selling multiples of times the amount of GPUs.
We are not talking about iPhone 7 sales here. In
1 weekend, a modern iPhone sells close to as much as all mobile+dGPUs in the entire quarter.
Can you imagine if MS/Sony/Nintendo launched 1000-5000 PS4/XB1/NX consoles on launch weekend at one of the major stores in the UK for example? The world would laugh at them. In some MicroCenter stores, NV had no more than 100 GTX1080 cards during launch week.
I don't believe the 960 was ever really a good choice for a card.
And high temperatures are almost never a problem for a card. It's more psychological for owners.
I remember there was some nVidia card that had temperatures of 95c or so and that was perfectly normal operating temperature.
Almost all NV cards are rated to operate at 92-98C.
GTX580 =
97C
GTX680 =
98C
GTX780Ti =
95C
GTX980Ti =
92C
GTX285 could even handle
105C.
This is yet another myth left by the old timers and PC enthusiasts before us that higher GPU temps pre-maturity killed PC hardware. THere are legitimate downsides such as increased noise levels, lower Boost clocks/overclocking frequency, worse power usage as temps rise but there is no real world difference in longevity of a GPU over its
useful life between running it under water at 40C vs. at 90C. As long as you aren't exceeding the maximum spec, you aren't damaging the GPU.
The temperature myth was also proven wrong for CPUs.
For overclockers, lower temps are a nice benefit though since it allows headroom for overvolting and/or increasing frequency before running into thermal throttling. As far safe operating temps go, it's not really an issue (*assuming the VRM/power circuitry of the GPU is also held under spec).
Facebook
Twitter