[WccfTech]Nvidia to discontinue 2 GB GTX 960 versions

[thesmokingman]

You posted this after seeing the graphs that demonstrate that a 4GB comparable card gets much more playable frames than a 2GB?

That may be so but it's still a losing proposition.

 

[xorbe]

This kinda shuts the door on a 960TI or further cut down 970 with 192 bit because it will be a tough sell with 3GB to the average consumer.

Nah, typical of lower cards to get more vram sometimes. It's cheap and helps support inflated prices. There was a GT710 or 720 with 8GB ddr3, lol.

So are they going to still see the 4gb version. It doesn't really have the horsepower to make use of that does it?

Well, it might not be able to effectively use all 4GB of textures, but it should at least ward off the problem with games peaking over 2GB usage.

Really? This is the chart we're using to bash the 960 only getting 40 fps ... at Very High Quality 2560x1600. Who has a 2560x1600 screen and buys a 960 to use like that. A 960 user at 1920x1080 at med-high is going to work perfectly fine. Yeah it's a crummy deal, but this is a try-hard data point, haha. That's 2/3 the Titan X perf for 1/5 the price, just sayin' (as owner of both cards, and many more ...)

 

[Techhog]

Really? This is the chart we're using to bash the 960 only getting 40 fps ... at Very High Quality 2560x1600. Who has a 2560x1600 screen and buys a 960 to use like that. A 960 user at 1920x1080 at med-high is going to work perfectly fine. Yeah it's a crummy deal, but this is a try-hard data point, haha. That's 2/3 the Titan X perf for 1/5 the price, just sayin' (as owner of both cards, and many more ...)

And the award for the most misleading statement in the history of the forum goes to...

 

[xorbe]

And the award for the most misleading statement in the history of the forum goes to...

What??? For that chart it's 60 vs 40 fps, and $1000 vs $200. Those are the numbers! That's why that chart wasn't a great one. It's more like 1/3 the hardware and perf. That was my point. In no way am I claiming a 960 is 2/3 of a Titan X on average. I have both, that's not happening, haha.

 

[crisium]

What??? For that chart it's 60 vs 40 fps, and $1000 vs $200. Those are the numbers!

... it's a frame rate locked game. 970 gets 100% of the Titan X performance for 1/3 of the price!

Take another look at the chart. A 280X 3GB almost gets a smooth 60fps - surely just lower a setting or two and you are there. The once comparable 770 2GB gets around 40fps. The chart is almost sorted by memory size. All 2GB cards are stuck at 40fps - even a 690 which should otherwise be far faster than single 7950 but gets creamed by it instead.

 

[Techhog]

What??? For that chart it's 60 vs 40 fps, and $1000 vs $200. Those are the numbers! That's why that chart wasn't a great one. It's more like 1/3 the hardware and perf. That was my point. In no way am I claiming a 960 is 2/3 of a Titan X on average. I have both, that's not happening, haha.

Do you want a list of the things wrong with your post, or are you going to stop playing dumb on your own?

 

[Keysplayr]

Do you want a list of the things wrong with your post, or are you going to stop playing dumb on your own?

List them.