gtx 980 or fury for 1440p ?

[Azix]

The bottom line is that the 290/290x/390/970 and 980 ti make anything between them irrelevant because the performance difference is small compared to how much more it costs you to get it.

If you would choose a cheaper card over the Fury for performance/$ reasons, why not choose the fury over the 980ti/Fury X for similar reasons?

 

[tential]

I thought we decided the 390 was a better buy than the gtx 980 or fury and is fast enough for 1440p. I will wait until the nano release since it is suppose to be this week or next to see where it fits in the picture.

We did.... You think on anandtech your thread is about you? Oh poor friend, it's going to go far off topic. Youre waiting for nano to release, doesn't mean this discussion will end lol.

 

[Headfoot]

If you would choose a cheaper card over the Fury for performance/$ reasons, why not choose the fury over the 980ti/Fury X for similar reasons?

Because the $100 going from Fury to 980 Ti gets you a substantial amount more performance and perf/$, where increasing your budget from $330 to $550 (390 to Fury) gets you substantially less perf/$ for the performance

In other words, the 980 Ti has good perf/$ for the top end card with a substantially higher top end performance ceiling and the r9 390/290x/970 have much higher perf/$ for mid-high end cards without losing much performance from Fury/980. 980 and Fury both have pretty poor perf/$ in light of better options both above and below.

 

[Azix]

Thought I saw a 390x in that list. very well.

 

[Fallen Kell]

You're safer with a fury if you look at the history of nvidias *80 cards. If you can't get the Ti, don't get the 980. it's already degrading compared to 290x/390x (coulda sworn these cards never looked like they were in the same category a year ago).

I think what you are really seeing in the AMD cards getting better over time compared to the Nvidia cards really is more about the day 1 driver performance more so than anything else. AMD simply takes 6-12 months to get drivers that actually use the card properly and typically will see a performance boost over that time frame as they finally get drivers out. Nvidia tends to have drivers that will already give you the performance of the card on/near release day, and thus there are very little gains that occur later on since it already was giving you the card's performance.

 

[tential]

I think what you are really seeing in the AMD cards getting better over time compared to the Nvidia cards really is more about the day 1 driver performance more so than anything else. AMD simply takes 6-12 months to get drivers that actually use the card properly and typically will see a performance boost over that time frame as they finally get drivers out. Nvidia tends to have drivers that will already give you the performance of the card on/near release day, and thus there are very little gains that occur later on since it already was giving you the card's performance.

This is another take on it.

I decide to look at it like this.

Buy and hold? Amd
Higher turnover rate(sell products, buy new ones, whatever the reason is you get new cards more often than averaged)? Nvidia

So rather than worry why it happening I just look at how to use it.

 

[cmdrdredd]

Consider this. A new DX12 benchmark shows the 390x getting a big boost over a 980.
http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Graphi...ted-Ashes-Singularity-Benchmark/Results-Heavy

 

[Silverforce11]

Consider this. A new DX12 benchmark shows the 390x getting a big boost over a 980.
http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Graphi...ted-Ashes-Singularity-Benchmark/Results-Heavy

I expected GCN to shine with DX12, given how close it is to Mantle.

But I did not expect no gains or even slower for NV on DX12. Very strange indeed.

 

[bystander36]

I expected GCN to shine with DX12, given how close it is to Mantle.

But I did not expect no gains or even slower for NV on DX12. Very strange indeed.

We'll have to wait and see if this is a trend or not. This is a single game that is in alpha. It's a nice teaser, but we don't really know how it will all turn out.

 

[cmdrdredd]

I expected GCN to shine with DX12, given how close it is to Mantle.

But I did not expect no gains or even slower for NV on DX12. Very strange indeed.

It is unusual but I think right now we are seeing raw GPU performance with little to no optimizations in the driver or maybe AMD has the optimizations and Nvidia doesn't. Nvidia is clearly behind in at this point when it comes to this particular game.

 

[Silverforce11]

It is unusual but I think right now we are seeing raw GPU performance with little to no optimizations in the driver or maybe AMD has the optimizations and Nvidia doesn't. Nvidia is clearly behind in at this point when it comes to this particular game.

Oxide clearly said NV did optimized the game. They even listed an example.

For example, when Nvidia noticed that a specific shader was taking a particularly long time on their hardware, they offered an optimized shader that made things faster which we integrated into our code.

When they had source code for over a year, lack of optimization is no excuse.