working mans guide "how to finance a high end gaming habit." :)

[GaiaHunter]

I was hoping for something exciting like bounty hunting on the occasional weekend, hack into criminal accounts to steal money or marry old rich ladies...
but pennies, sniff sniff, save pennies.

I guess one could hold their hats while walking tow work, might get more than $.75 a day.

 

[Headfoot]

The GTX 970 isn't that much below the 980. It may be considered mid range now, but it was high end during it's release back in 2014.

No. It was always on the x04 chip which has always been midrange. There has always been a die above it and a die below it. That is "Mid." The Maxwell family is the range. Therefore midrange. This isn't debatable.

If you disagree, answer me these two questions:
1) Were there cards and die sizes both above and below the 970? Yes or no.
2) What are the definitions of "Middle" and "Range?"

 

[crisium]

Don't get lost in the greater field of GPU discussion. Stick to the context: In a scenario where 980 is considered high end (OP's story, GTX 980 launch), then the nearly 90% as fast at equal clocks 970 is also.

Obviously in the greater Maxwell hierarchy the 970 is not high end.

_Context_

 

[tential]

Don't get lost in the greater field of GPU discussion. Stick to the context: In a scenario where 980 is considered high end (OP's story, GTX 980 launch), then the nearly 90% as fast at equal clocks 970 is also.

Obviously in the greater Maxwell hierarchy the 970 is not high end.

_Context_

A midrange card can be close in performance to a high end card. It's still midrange....

 

[Piroko]

No. It was always on the x04 chip which has always been midrange. There has always been a die above it and a die below it. That is "Mid." The Maxwell family is the range. Therefore midrange. This isn't debatable.

If you disagree, answer me these two questions:
1) Were there cards and die sizes both above and below the 970? Yes or no.
2) What are the definitions of "Middle" and "Range?"

There was one die above GM204 in the Maxwell family and three below it. Joke's on you.

 

[Headfoot]

There was one die above GM204 in the Maxwell family and three below it. Joke's on you.

Yeah so it's in between other dies. That's the definition of middle. Not top. Not bottom. It was upper mid range, if you want to categorize mid range out further. You literally prove my point for me.

The second from the top SKU of the second from the top die is about as textbook "midrange" as you can get

 

[daxzy]

The second from the top SKU of the second from the top die is about as textbook "midrange" as you can get

Except the Quadro P6000 is the highest end Nvidia SKU for a GPU. So I guess by your definition, the Titan XP is also mid-range.

 

[whm1974]

Don't get lost in the greater field of GPU discussion. Stick to the context: In a scenario where 980 is considered high end (OP's story, GTX 980 launch), then the nearly 90% as fast at equal clocks 970 is also.

Obviously in the greater Maxwell hierarchy the 970 is not high end.

_Context_

This is why I consider the 970 to be high end for it's time. Well that and it's pricing when it come out as well.

 

[OILFIELDTRASH]

Once high end cards cost 7 to 8 hundred each I quit pc gaming. I am in the minority as profits for nvidia are better than ever. I could buy one pretty easily I just don't see the value in it anymore.

 

[happy medium]

Once high end cards cost 7 to 8 hundred each I quit pc gaming. I am in the minority as profits for nvidia are better than ever. I could buy one pretty easily I just don't see the value in it anymore.

Well if you listen to these guys high end is ONLY gtx580, 680, 780ti, 980ti and Titan XP, so I guess you better just quit now.

If you buy AMD cards, well they haven't released a high end card in years.
The mid range gtx670 = 7970 at release, mid range gtx780=290x at release, mid range gtx970 = the 390 at release, and now the mid range gtx1070 = the fury X.

Is that what I'm hearing?

 

[whm1974]

Once high end cards cost 7 to 8 hundred each I quit pc gaming. I am in the minority as profits for nvidia are better than ever. I could buy one pretty easily I just don't see the value in it anymore.

You don't need to quit PC gaming since you don't need $700 to $800 GPUs for it anyway. A 1070 will play any game you want at high settings, just not at 4K. And most people will make do just fine with lesser cards then that.

 

[SolMiester]

It has nothing to do with it. It's a matter of principle and financial circumstance of the firm selling the said goods. Do you see the prices of automobiles or houses increase in value at the same pace as the pricing of GPUs from 2010->2016?

snip wall of text

Are we talking the US exclusively?
I have never seen the price of automobiles go up unless they are classic cars. As for houses?, in NZ, houses have jump >30% from 2010-2016 and more. the US is the only place I know where people can mine at a profit....
Just in case you thought the only audience was America..

 

[linkgoron]

Well if you listen to these guys high end is ONLY gtx580, 680, 780ti, 980ti and Titan XP, so I guess you better just quit now.

If you buy AMD cards, well they haven't released a high end card in years.
The mid range gtx670 = 7970 at release, mid range gtx780=290x at release, mid range gtx970 = the 390 at release, and now the mid range gtx1070 = the fury X.

Is that what I'm hearing?

Why are you comparing the Fury X to the 1070? The Fury X was released a year before the 1070. Fury x was obviously high end, even if it was a bit slower than reference 980tis at launch (and is still slower than AIB 980tis) - it wasn't far. 1070 was released almost a year after the Fury X.

If the 980ti was high end (per your post) so was the Fury x.

The 290X was also obviously high end, being 0.92% of the 780ti, and beating the Titan.

And yes, the 390/X were always an mid-range/upper mid range cards. However they were never flagships, the Fury X was.

 

[casiofx]

I would think we should look at gpus according to their performance, unless the person has the habit of looking at the gpu dies and not gaming?

High end and midrange performance are better indicators than high end and mid range dies. High end die gtx580 is slower than low end die 1050ti for example

 

[happy medium]

Why are you comparing the Fury X to the 1070?

because in 2016 that is AMD's fastest card vs Nvidia.
What should I say gtx1070 vs AMD's unreleased card in the crystal ball in 2017?

 

[linkgoron]

because in 2016 that is AMD's fastest card vs Nvidia.
What should I say gtx1070 vs AMD's unreleased card in the crystal ball in 2017?

You said "[AMD] haven't released a high end card in years.". They have, and I've shown you proof. The Fury X was high end at release, as was the 290x. You're just thread crapping your own thread now.

They were competitive with Big Kepler and Big Maxwell respectively.

 

[happy medium]

the 390/X were always an mid-range/upper mid range cards

The 290x is the 390x are the same card man, and they were the fastest cards AMD had (like 3 years) until the Fury x was launched. .

 

[happy medium]

You said "[AMD] haven't released a high end card in years.". They have, and I've shown you proof. The Fury X was high end at release, as was the 290x. You're just thread crapping your own thread now.

They were competitive with Big Kepler and Big Maxwell respectively.

How is the Fury high end if the gtx1070 is not? its slower than the gtx1070!

How was the Fury high end if the gtx980ti was not? The Titan x was the high end. The gtx980ti was the second fastest card.

 

[linkgoron]

The 290x is the 390x are the same card man, and they were the fastest cards AMD had (like 3 years) until the Fury x was launched. .

the 390/x were released with the Fury cards.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/9387/amd-radeon-300-series

I don't really see what you're trying to claim. At release, the 390/x were no longer high end cards. The 290/x were high end cards, per your definition.

How is the Fury high end if the gtx1070 is not? its slower than the gtx1070!

The same way an ATi Radeon 9700 was a high end card and is now slower than a RX 460 2GB.

 

[happy medium]

the 390/x were released with the Fury cards.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/9387/amd-radeon-300-series



The same way a ATi Radeon 9700 was a high end card and is now slower than a RX 460.

Oh I see now ,even though the second fastest card in Nvidia's line up the gtx1070 (that you guys call mid range) is faster than AMD's Fury x high end, the gtx1070 is still midrange. Is that what your saying?

So performance means nothing when choosing what is mid range or high end?

 

[linkgoron]

Oh I see now ,even though the second fastest card in Nvidia's line up is faster than AMD's high end, the gtx1070 is still midrange. Is that what your saying?

No. I'm saying that at release the Fury X was high-end, as was the 290x. I'm making no claims about the 1070 at all. They were also, at the time, the best cards AMD could make, and the best their engineering could essentially produce.

A Fury X today is not high-end any more. There are many faster and better cards today.

 

[happy medium]

No. I'm saying that at release the Fury X was high-end, as was the 290x. I'm making no claims about the 1070 at all. They were, at the time, the best cards AMD could make, and the best their engineering could essentially produce.

I know but I am, can you answer my question?

Oh I see now ,even though the second fastest card in Nvidia's line up the gtx1070 (that you guys call mid range) is faster than AMD's Fury x high end, the gtx1070 is still midrange. Is that what your saying?

So performance means nothing when choosing what is mid range or high end?

Or are you saying that AMD and Nvidia cards have different high end standards?
Or is the Fury Air midrange?

 

[linkgoron]

I know but I am, can you answer my question?

Oh I see now ,even though the second fastest card in Nvidia's line up the gtx1070 (that you guys call mid range) is faster than AMD's Fury x high end, the gtx1070 is still midrange. Is that what your saying?

So performance means nothing when choosing what is mid range or high end?

Or are you saying that AMD and Nvidia cards have different high end standards?

We've already had a discussion about this in the Nvidia board. You are welcome to post whatever you want in that thread. I will not derail your thread any further, even though you're trying hard to thread crap. You already know my answer to your question. As already stated by me earlier, I do not consider the Fury X as high-end today.

Seriously, my whole claim is that both the 290X and Fury X were high end cards at release, contrary to your claim that AMD have not released a high end card in years (while listing Nvidia cards to the 580 era). You obviously have not read or understood any of my posts or claims in the other thread, so I will not waste my time on you anymore.

 

[happy medium]

I do not consider the Fury X as high-end today.

I agree. and yes no more off topic, but it seems most of this whole thread is off topic.

 

[whm1974]

I agree. and yes no more off topic, but it seems most of this whole thread is off topic.

Look lets us agree that the GTX 1070 is the GPU to get. Since the 1080 isn't that much more faster and cost much more to boot, it's not even worthy of consideration. The only folks who should be looking at the 1080Ti when it's released are 4K gamers.