Wow, a 390 beating a 980 at 1080p! That would be crazy if in say 2017 the 390 is solidly a better card than the GTX 980.
But "Most gamers upgrade their GPU after 1-2 years," it's perfectly normal for a $549 980 to start losing to a $329 R9 390 and for a 2013 $699 780Ti to not be supported in DX12 games. /s "Once we cross-check that with the info listed below, you'll notice that AMD GCN 1.0 and Kepler GPUs only have support for DX feature level 11_1 where we need feature level 12_0 supported as minimum. It's a bit tricky, but the tables below show it precisely. Hence such cards do not work with this test."
What's there to worry about? The 780Ti/980 owner just sells those gets a 1070/1080. :thumbsup:
BTW, did you see R9 380/380X beating GTX960 2GB by 2.08/2.28X?
At 1440p, the 970 is only 16% faster than the 380X.
The 960 shows in this game how underpowered it is, it's not even funny.
I know right. 1.5 years later and it's toast, esp. the 2GB version. If more and more games start using DX12, RX 480 could be a solid mainstream card as the foundation for DX12 is already there in its architecture for budget/mainstream gamers ready to dump their 750/750Ti/950/960 2GB.
maybe i should pick up another 290 now that people seem to be dumping them :hmm:
CF work in this?
I would hold off until some reviews shows CF working properly under DX12.
"In the end, we still have to remember that the drivers have not been finalized for the DX12 version of this game so we can use this to see how everything is performing comparatively at the current time. Something of note is that multi-GPU does not appear to be functioning at the moment, at least on AMD side since neither the R9 295×2 or Fury X + Nano configurations would crash as soon as the game loaded."
Not for this game, but I think overall for many other games, I'd rather pick $400 AIB 1070 OC over 2x R9 290 OC.