Been wanting to get a new video card for a while now but stuck on what I really should do...

>1060 on the same level as 980

Why would they do that
What's the difference

>950
If you cannot afford a GTX 1080 or 1070 or 1060 6Gb go for a RX 480 8Gb or a Sapphire RX 470 Nitro + 8 Gb
The 950 is a low end card from last generation.

What makes a low end and what makes a high end?

I haven't looked too deep into any amd cards. I've always used nvidia and just stuck with it. Always heard AMD cards are 2nd fiddle to nvidia.

Please go to Cred Forums i'll bet they'll have fun laughing at you.

Just get a GTX 960. No reason to get an older one. Before getting my 1070 i had a 960 and it ran DOOM qute well on medium/high settings.

Cost to Nvidia is lower

>Just get an outdated card with not enough VRAM for modern games/high resolutions
You consolefags really know nothing about hardware, do you?

Save your money and wait for Vega or buy an r9 480

Get Nvidia for superior tesselation, lighting effects etc, AMD for great colors. Have had both.

OBJECTIVELY CORRECT ADVICE:

>Save for a 6GB 1060 or 8GB 480
>Buy a used 290/390/970
>Get a 4GB 470 if you're cheap
>Find a super cheap 960 4GB or 380X 4GB, either used or on sale

Thank you

If you read what I put you would see that my intentions are not playing the latest and greatest on the highest settings. You PCfags really know nothing about reading and comprehension, do you?

1060 is about 100000 times better than a 950. why don't you compare the specs and realize this instead of asking fucking Cred Forums of all places?

950 is like 1/3 of a 970, 1060 is faste rthan a 970..are you retarded son?

>my intentions are not playing the latest and greatest on the highest settings
That's what consoles are for. On PC you either go big or go home. Even some older pc games demand strong hardware (especially with mods etc.) You really don't know what PC gaming is about, do you?

patrician here
will wait 2 years for the next series then build a brand new gay man pc

rn i have
4670k
780
16 nigs

>AMD for great colors

uh there is nothing different about colors between the video cards except postprocessing faggot shit available in drivers that nobody should use.

this is why you look at fucking numbers, op, instead of coming and asking Cred Forums of all places.

Just bought a 290x here. Pretty happy plays most things maxed maybe have to turn down shadows 1 notch but I'm also just upgrading from a 6950.

No OP, but kill yourself.

Damn you retarded piece of shit lol.

I'm not OP, you kill yourself first please.
>lol
Back to tumblr

you're a huge faggot lol

Please tell me where I specifically said "I am going to start heavily getting into PC gaming". I play PC for the games that I cannot get on console IE: Dead by Daylight, Pillars of Eternity, Besiege, and plenty others. I am wanting to upgrade so in case something does come up a little more demanding in a steam sale, I can be sure I can play it well enough to enjoy it.

...

Hey man, Just grab a 290x or something like that, I got mine for ~150usd with 2 years warranty off some guy on kijiji you just need to becareful some ppl try to scam just check the SU on the bottom though

Just got a msi 1060, upgraded form gtx 760.

Pretty fucking happy with it.

OP here, I'm just one.

My 960 i bought year ago run ANY game on very high, suck dick plebs

is that cwc?

...

disregard what everyone else in the thread is telling you and listen to me. I have been buying graphics cards since rendition verite, the first consumer 3d accelerator, in 1995.

Buy the 1060 3gb and you will be happy. Every game you care about running will run flawlessly and you will be able to run very demanding games on maxed out settings. Some of the newer, most demanding games like Deus Ex you might not be able to max out on "Ultra", but you will still get like 60 fps on very high. The difference in visual quality is usually very, very little between those settings. 3gb is not ideal, but the 1060 is an extremely, extremely fast card for the price. IMO one of the fastest of all time for its price point.

Do not consider AMD. They are a lower tier company who makes shit for poor people.

Do not consider buying a 950. It is literally about 1/4 as powerful as a 1060.

You will be happy. Trust me.

It looks like I can get a decent 4gb 960 for sub $200. I will probably go that route. Thanks for those who had an actual opinion and fuck you to those who sucked dicks.

> build new pc instead of buying just new video card
What shithole are you from, doggy?

i dont know what cwc is? canadian wood council?

Also thank you for having a well thought out and informative opinion. May go 1060 again.

summer is over, champ. shouldn't you be in school? :)

No, no, no, no, no, no, no. NO. here

You ALWAYS buy a card of a higher generation, not one with more memory. ALWAYS higher generation. Generational leaps are HUGE in graphics cards.

960 is NOWHERE NEAR as fast as a 1060.

oh, PS, the 4gb 960 is basically a lie/a consumer trap the card is not fast enough to saturate 4gb of memory. it performs the same as the 2gb 960.

Just litsen to me. I am 35 and work on computers for a living. I have bought generations of graphics cards for fucking 20 years. Just listen to me. You will be happy. I have been buying video cards longer than most people in this thread have been alive.

BUY THE 3GB 1060. 960 IS NOT A COMPARABLE PRODUCT PERIOD.

I'll go 1060. Thanks again! Cheers.

1 year out of university :(

Thank you. You will be happy.

Another faggot who can't read.
30-kun

950 is trash

1060 3gb is okay, personally I would go 480 4gb over it anyday

PPS in the future just google shit like "960 vs 1060 3gb" instead of asking people here who have NO clue what they're talking about. I will not be around to save you most times. You are on the internet, use it.

yes there is, nvidia via hdmi has shit colors unless you go fiddle with the control panel

most plebs wont even notice they have shit colors via hdmi

was an issue with a single driver that was fixed

>recommending 1060 3gb

its not even a proper 1060, its a 1050 really

Investment is supposed to return money you spent on it.

and based on the games he said he likes to play he will max everything he wants to play for years. it is the best choice.

you idiots always say "just spend a little more" well not everybody has mommy's money. He can't make a better choice. 1060 3gb is probably the best $200 graphics card I have ever seen

Nope, its been around for years. Nvidia doesnt show full RGB color by default on HDMI, quick google you can see this was an issue for 5+ years.

Nvidia is meant to "just werk", I bet tons of people are running with limited colors

>1060 3gb is probably the best $200 graphics card I have ever seen
>I am 35 and work on computers for a living. I have bought generations of graphics cards for fucking 20 years.

lol ok

Didnt even say to spend more, I would just go with a non gimped card like the 470/480. 1060 3gb is gonna be trash in a year, just like the 960 2gb.

if you are on PC you are expected to be able to google issues and change a setting in the control panel.

If you cannot it is not the company's problem it is yours. Do not be on PC if you are not a PC user.

It has been fixed in drivers anyway. Also I never had this issue to begin with.

Trying to crucify nvidia for a single "driver issue" which is actually an end user issue is really funny. Go AMD, have driver issues every single driver that don't get fixed. Have fun with that.

I categorically do not recommend AMD products because of multiple games not working on launch day every single year

It's an inferior company that makes inferior products. Go argue with someone else about it. "more bang for the buck" ALWAYS backfires on consumers in this case.

If a single driver issue isn't enough for you shill how about the shitty practice of crippling their older cards with updates? How about the fact that Nvidia lowers quality on launch day in order to squeeze 3 more frames out because autists like you care about that.

I've got a 960, how long you think it'll last me?

>what is color compression
>what is texture compression

3gb is perfectly fine if it's on an nvidia card. Nvidia cards have actual good compression techniques unlike amd who only implemented any form of compression in fucking fiji. Every amd card before the 3xx series had no form of compression whatsoever hence why cards like the 780 ti 3gb were just as good or if not better than 4gb 290x's in games which were maxing out that 4gb vram in the 290x. Same goes with the 970 and 390 where even some weird ass partition in the 970's vram still didn't affect it when it was btfoing the 390 in 9/10 games.

I just bought a new GPU and I had a dream that it finally came in and it was one of these stubby little shits and I was super pissed

Tip kok

You'll regret 3GB

As some of who just recently switched to AMD from Nvidia.

They ain't that bad, at least now they seem to be cleaning up their act.

Got a Sapphire rx480 around two weeks ago.

Monitor flickered at 144hz. Driver day after I got it fixed that issue.

Today they just released a driver that fixes the cursor corruption thats apparently been an AMD meme for a while.

Gives me 90-120 fps in Doom maxed out and the latest drivers have pretty much brought it in line with the 1060 in dx11 games, since AMD seem to finally have a decent driver team that's reducing their dx11 overhead.

I mean, there are little things, crimson occasionally crashes when I'm fucking around undervolting the card, but it's otherwise just fine.

Nigga you go big on the processor and PSu quality(not wattage necessarily)

Ive got an i7 920 from 2008 that's still kicking ass to this day thanks to over clocking.

The GPU can be something you swap out every couple of years. Definitely not worth getting a big name Nvidia card right now when they're gonna be changing architectures to compete in dx12/vulkan games.

...

Get the EVGA super clocked 1060 6GB version. The super clocked model has ACX 2.0 which is a far better cooler than the non SC model. Plus, for like 150 bucks more you get a far faster card than the 950 and an additional 2gb of vram

I bought 950 a couple of months before 1000 series were released. Fuck me up senpai

>Nigga you go big on the processor
A Core i5 2400 is still enough for modern games to be played at high/ultra in 1920x1080 with 60+ fps because in modern games your GPU matters much much more than your CPU. A powerful Quad Core is still literally enough for gayming.
>and PSu quality
I have a cheap coolermaster 620W PSU that is over 5 years old and still works like on the first i bought it.
Today the only thing that really matters is the graphics card, because that is the component of your PC that games will stress out the most.

Wait for an RX 490 and save up $300-$400

agreed

i have an i7 2700 and its fine with everything. GPU is king in gaming today. then SSD if you really wanna see faster load times. pretty much anything will do for processor with the way modern gaming has gone

r8 this

i can't read german

There's a 4GB 960 you dofus.

You've already done exactly what I said. Though more cores are become better used with dx12 and vulkan.

I'm warning him to stay away from the i3s and bulldozer shit.

Though Zen is looking tight and I'll probably get one of those if Intel locks out IOMMU from over lockable chips.

I'm planning to switch to Linux entirely and play games in a VM with pass through

Get the 1060 man.

More bang for your buck.

It's a no brainer, why did you even made this thread?

>1060
>480 gig ssd
>seagate HDD
>single stick of ram
don't do that.

1060 for $200 is a fucking steal

and I'm an AMD fag

If you want to cheap out but still get something that won't be total shit in three years get a RX480. If the Doom Vulkan numbers are any indication the card should hold up damn well.

my god that looks exactly like my pc.

1080 TI

Do we know when that is coming out, because will it be better than the Titan X, because what's the point of picking up the 1080ti if even the Titan X can't do 1440p/144hz consistently?

It's the 3GB version, which has fewer core and too little VRAM.

lurk more dumbass

>>Buy a used 290/390/970
this is HORRIBLE advice

the best advice is to get a used 980/ti or Fury/Nano for as close to $300 as possible

>which has fewer core
holy shit really? Jesus Christ

Yep. It has 1152 vs 1280. I would say only 3GB really hurts it more though. It's going to absolutely kill the card at high settings in like a year.

no. 3gb is still enough to play 9/10 games at high/ultra settings. even 2gb is enough. as anyone who is educated about this would know, vram is almost never the limiting factor of a gpu. you'll run out of gpu horsepower before you hit a vram bottleneck (ie you'll have to turn the settings so high to max out the vram that you'll be playing at like 20 fps) unless the game is unoptimized garbage like ARK which even a gtx 1080 struggles with. the lower core count goes hand in hand with the halving of the vram.

fun fact: over 50% of all steam gamers have between 1gb and 2gb of vram. devs won't suddenly make games with can't run properly for the majority of people.

tldr; the 3b 1060 is a great buy and many, many gpu upgrade guides recommend it for it's price.

>devs won't suddenly make games with can't run properly for the majority of people
yes they will, because console can use 4-6 very easily

Investment is not purely a financial term

Getting a 1080 is consumerism, not an investment.

you do know that consoles use APUs and their RAM is shared between regular duties and VRAM duties, right? the console version of a game may use 6GB of RAM, but only a third of that is being used as VRAM.

More games starting to require 4 Gb of VRAM or even more. Why do you think the GTX 1060 has a 6Gb version and the RX 480/470 have 8Gb versions? Because having over 4 Gb VRAM will the norm soon. Why waste money on a 950 or 960 when you can get a 6GbGTX 1060 or a 8Gb RX 480/470? Even if you don't play the newest games that demand strong hardware, a 6Gb 1060 or 8 Gb RX 480/470 is still a better investment.

>More games starting to require 4 Gb of VRAM or even more.
None. There are literally zero games that require this

Only DOOM and Gears of War Ultimate even have settings limited to more than 4gb of Vram

cumon guys I need the support

>t.retard who has no idea of what he's talking about

even the 3gb gtx 1060 doesn't have problems at higher resolutions like 1440p. the only games it had problems with (at 1440p) were the unbelievably shitty port that is batman arkham knight and mirrors edge catalyst running at hyper settings which specifically requires 4gb or more to run but has absolutely no visual difference compared to ultra.

at 1080p there were no issues with vram at all even on those games i mentioned.

youtube.com/watch?v=fYNigmB6sWY

youtube.com/watch?v=2R76wLCxRXY

With the 1070 you can play witcher 3 at max settigs

Why do Nvidia buyers always fall for the "you don't need more VRAM" meme.

They were spouting the same shit about 2GB cards and now you can't even use those. 3GB is so bare minimum that it's a bad choice. 4GB is the real minimum.

Get a 1070 instead. A 1060 3GB isn't worth shit.

lol @ everyone in this thread saying it isn't enough for high

I bought a 3gb 1060 and an i5 6500 and I can play (on max settings 60fps)
>fallout 4
>nms
>battlefield 1
>the newest tomb raider

gta v I do have to turn off a few advanced settings though to get a solid 60

so shut your mouth, it's perfectly adequate for 1080p gaming and nobody should have to spend $400 on a graphics card in this day and age anyways

My comp's specs:

Intel i5 4690K CPU 3.5Ghz

Nvidia GeForce GT 610 1.0Gb video memory

8Gb RAM

What would be the best graphics card upgrade that my comp could handle?

so's my r9 290

>vulkan

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_games_with_Vulkan_support

It will probably be better than the old Titan X but not the new Titan X

Literally anything would be better, as long as the second digit is about a 5.

Titan X Pascal

>1060 3gb
Don't. It's pretty much a 1050 in every way but name. It's not even the same as the 1060 6GB.

Get a regular 1060 or a regular 480 if you're looking at a decent 1080p card. Go 1070 or up if you want more and/or aren't planning on upgrading in 2-3 years.

*above

i'm pretty sure you can get a 960 for 160$, but i'd suggest to go for a new card. Rx 470 4gb maybe? It should be cheaper than a 1060 but still very good

Because they use different technology to make newer cards and newer cards almost always make previous cards obselete in terms of performance vs cost.

If you care that little about the nuances of pc gaming then just fucking buy whatever is in your price range. You clearly dont care about details and dont understand anything regarding this so just buy whatever you can afford and i guarantee it will run your game at above 40 frames on medium or higher

Definitely get the 1060 3GB or 470 4GB for 1080p 60Hz. The 1060 is about 3x the power of the 950 for only a few dollars more. Also 2GB cards (like 950) are on their way out. Absolute minimum for new games is 2GB.

It's enough for High. Not Ultra, but High.

New process node. Also in general tech gets more powerful. Shocker, right?

Not worth it on a price/performance basis unless you're guying used, and even then you'd have to think twice.

Housefire m8 - could have gotten a 470 or 480 for the same price

>4gb 960 for sub $200
Shit purchase senpai

>its a 1050 really
It's more like a 1050Ti. The real 1050 will be PCIe powered only.

Meh/10, expensive case, expensive cooler, unlocked i5

And? The 4GB 960 was a good buy a year ago, not now

Retard detected

>games starting to require 4 Gb of VRAM or even more
No games require 4GB except B:AK, and that is only an unofficial requirement. Other games it's optional

Change to i5 6500 and get at least a 120GB SSD for OS (if not 250)

If prebuilt you should wait for the GTX1050 because you'll avoid problems like space and power management. If you have space in your case and an 8pin connector from your PSU you can use any graphics card

Looking it up, I think I'll wait for the 1050, not in any dire need to replace the one my comp came with (pre-built- yeah), though Subnautica runs a bit choppy and I can't play Overwatch on it because of the graphics card.

The one you want will be without a 6-pin power connection. It's powered by PCIe slot only.

Some variants will undoubtedly have a 6-pin, so make sure you get the right one.

K, thanks for the heads-up.

Its not, you are getting rused by the thick planks that post here

the 980ti is vastly better than a 1060

980 =/= 980ti you fucking inbred trash fuck

So, does nvidia actually downgrade your GPU through drivers? Should I stop updating drivers for my 770?

No, new games just require more powerful hardware to run well, shocker right?

There was one that did, but it was a bug and they fixed it with a subsequent driver update.

However everyone ignores the second half of that sentence so now it's immutable fact that nvidia is deliberately hindering the performance of older GPUs.

Not OP, but r8 me pls

I would say no since my gtx 660 is working just fine

>get at least a 120GB SSD for OS (if not 250)
Not him, but is it really worth it to get an ssd just for the OS? I'm personally okay with HDD load times

Nvidia didn't gimp old gpu, they just didn't bother to optimize it for newer title.
Which is why it fell off in the benchmark of newer title compared to its rival competitor.

1060 = 980
1070 = 980Ti
Fucktard

Stupid CPU/mobo for gaming

Hell yes, but seriously put your games on it too.

Isn't the 1070 on the level of the Titan X? (without the VRAM)

Titan X isn't for gaming, but the 1070 is more like a 980Ti. If both cards are heavily OC'd the 980Ti wins

I think your CPU integra is better than this graphic card

I think you might need a better psu one of at least 750w

He doesn't, the i5 is 65W and the 1060 is 120W.

Fyi, R9 Fury is

Integrated graphics is better than the 610.

That's a decent enough cpu that it could handle basically any graphics card.

>x99
you missed when it was cheaper than z170
you fucked up, get z170

get 480 with 8 gigs and be set for years.

Upgrade big or go home, homie.

>mfw I bought prebuilt and I want to upgrade my video card but have no idea how to or what one I need to get

I just want to play games that don't drop to 30 frames.

you'll probably need a new PSU at the bare minimum

Nah man, he needs at least 1000W. This is le gaben way

How many months will I have to wait until the 480 is actually 200 bucks and not the almost 300 it is now?

have to get the 4gig version for $230 usually will be oced and have aftermarket cooling.

>put your games on it too.
I was thinking of getting a really small cheap ssd for just the OS. How much benefit do games get if they're on an SSD? Are there any performance increases or is it just 'it boots up quicker'?

So never then?

Get a 6500 instead. Very small price increase for a big clock speed difference.

Considering games have to load shit all the time, substantial benefits.

get a normal sized SSD like 500gb or 480gb and you can install plenty of games on it.

loading times are much faster in some games when installed on SSD

why are amd buyers so deluded that they think everything amd throws at them should be the standard?

they were spouting the same shit about 8gb being the standard with the 390/x, yet they release a 4gb 470 and 480. nice way to officially contradict yourself amd.

FUCK
I was hoping I could just work my way around getting more than just a video card. Maybe some day.

Just faster load times, but you'd be surprised what a difference that makes. Games with lots of transitions like dark souls 3, fallout 4, mankind divided etc are a lot more tolerable.

couple months. you can buy visiontech I think its 200.

theres a reason to why most old as fuck amd cards are beating the shit of brand new nvidia cards on Vulkan and (well developed)DX12 games.

nvidia doesn't build cards thinking of the present anymore, much less the future.

you have to find out what pci if any you computer came with. then find out the wattage on your psu and if it has 8 pin pci-e connectors.

If $200 is your hard limit, get an aftermarket 4GB 470. When OC'd it'll be the same as a 480 reference model at stock clockspeed.

It's a huge difference anytime anything that requires loading happens in game. It's extremely slick. I'll never go back to a HDD except for storage

Post your speccy (google it)

Excellent purchase

bad idea you can get a 200 dollar 480

>nvidia doesn't build cards thinking of the present anymore

i have never seen a more retarded comment in my life. neck yourself.

>post your speccy
I'm day to day normal fag and I share my computer occasionally so excuse the shit OS and terrible parts

>literally 2x performance for 1.3x price
>more vram to be futureproof
>newer tech so nvidia won't drop support as soon (they'll still drop it soon but not AS soon)
>all new software tech that comes with 10 series

Don't be a jew, for $50 extra you'd be an idiot to get a 950 over the 1060

what is the point of creating the 1070 when the 980ti is better?

Like what's the fucking point if you already have a 980ti card? Why they name it with a bigger number if its not really better at all, jewish naming scheme?

do you know what power supply its using? do you have a link to the prebuild you bought

480 is 50% faster in doom with vulkan enabled. dont buy nvidia this year. they are btfo.

thanks for proving my point.

amd cards are so good that they can even release the same cards again and they are still good for the future.

Man, I wish I lived in the US. Hardware is so fucking cheap there.

ment to reply to

Depends on the game, some games instead of loading up data in bulk at the start of a level, constantly load data as and when it's needed, sometimes this can be a bottleneck.

Other games can benefit if they load their data in bulk but you have to constantly switch between areas that take a long time to load, like in the new deus ex.

Otherwise there isn't that much benefit to it, you will notice lower loading times but not so much lower that it'll feel worth it for most things.

Get a big enough SSD that you can stick your OS and a few big games on there, 250GB-ish, any more is probably a waste at the moment.

I have a 950 and I love it, but I mostly do game dev and play older/weeb games. Wouldn't recommend if you want to play new stuff.

unfortunately no. I'm planning to have a look at it in my spare time, is what I posted anything to get a grasp of what card i'd need or could use or does it all depend on my psu wattage?

It's cheaper. That's also not how the naming scheme works. First number is the series, second number is the tier.

what's the point of having cheap hardware if you take 20 years to download a game to use it, spend your internet cap (yes they still have those there) on that game, and if the game is pirated you even get shot.

is it worth it?

Hows this look?

damn you got some shit tier internet provider.

>he unironically is defending being sold the same product for $130 more with 0 performance improvement that gets blown the fuck out by cheaper nvidia products

The 8GB VRAM showed up because the PS4/Pro both have 8GB shared GDDR5. Personally I don't think my 470 can handle 8GB, and neither can the 390.

We don't know anything til you post your specs. What's your PC's make/model?

No you can't, stupid. nowinstock.net/computers/videocards/amd/rx480/
Anyway no one smart buys reference, and aftermarket will be +$30 for the cooler and a good chip.

The 470 is actually selling for near its MSRP and really it's only 12% different by specs if you get an aftermarket card.

Could be pretty good, look up your graphics card and find out what kind of power connectors it uses. If 6-pin, you're golden.

Surprise, tech gets better with each successive generation. First number is the gen, so Nvidia went 700s 900s 1000s. Second number is the relative placing in that gen (usually, they fucked it up with two variants of the 1060). Generally speaking cards are in tiers, and the tier numbers drop by one, i.e., 980Ti = 1070, 980/970 = 1060 now. This gen is a little better than normal because of the process shrink to 14/16nm. Nvidia and its partners basically don't make any new 900 series cards at this point.

not really, i would if i was afatmerican tho

Bad, come back with a Skylake build. (i5-6500 is what you're looking for.)

>4590
why

ignore you need at least 1 TB if you wanna store all your 200GB Skyrim games and mods

Alright, so looking at SSDs, I've heard the SSD controller is important, but how do I know which ones are better or worse? Some SSDs of the same capacity are $50, and others are $100+.
I realize this is more of a Cred Forums question, but I'm already here.

and you're defending nvidia who can't beat the 290 two times in a row.

the 390 and 390x can't even utilize the 8gb vram. amd slapped on an extra 4gb of vram as a reason to resell the same shitty housefire product to their fans.

>the 390 and 390x can't even utilize the 8gb vram

>maybe if i say amd is doing the same shit as nvidia someone will believe me

kek

>vulkan
is only revolutionary for smart phones
it will have no impact on pc

>970
>blows the fuck out of the 290 and 290x whilst being half the price
>blows the fuck out of the 390 and beats the 390x when overclocked for much cheaper

ok

resorting to false flagging to insult a country. nigger what shit hole are you really from?

Anything Intel/Samsung is usually top tier with Kingston's hyper X series and Crucial not far behind.

One exception to mentioning samsung above however, don't get anything from the 840 series, there was a bug that caused performance to degrade and they never really fixed it.

techspot.com/review/1114-vram-comparison-test/page5.html

>As for the 4GB R9 290 vs. 8GB R9 390 comparison, there was nothing to see here. Most games didn’t consume more than 4GBs of VRAM, but there were cases such as in Assassin's Creed Syndicate where with almost 5GBs of memory usage, there was still not a single frame difference. Moreover, in this Assassin's Creed Syndicate example the 290 and 390 were good for just 26fps on average, so clearly the quality settings will need to be reduced for achieving playable performance and consequently memory use will drop.

>The 390 and 390X are really graphics cards we never wanted. At the time of their release the Radeon R9 290 and 290X were exceptional buys. The 290X cost just $330, while today the 390X costs around $100 more for no additional performance and it is no different with the 290 and 390.

>We see plenty of gamers claiming that the 390 and 390X are excellent buys due to their 8GB frame buffer ensuring that they are "future proofed," and well, that simply isn’t the case, as neither GPU has the horsepower to efficiently crunch that much data. Perhaps the only valid argument here is that the larger frame buffer could support Crossfire better, but we haven’t seen any concrete evidence of this yet.

>it will have no impact on pc

except 3 year old amd cards are beating the shit of brand new nvidia cards, but that's probably why you called it irrelevant.

and since DX12 is basically the same and they are all based on AMD's Mantle, nvidia cards are pretty fucking fucked.

dumbest post I have seen all week. you should be proud.

>Could be pretty good, look up your graphics card and find out what kind of power connectors it uses. If 6-pin, you're golden.

So 6 pin or 8 pin would be all I'd really need to look out for then? Can you recommend any 6 pin graphic cards in that case assuming it is 6 pin?

i want to ask where you get this information
have you owned a recent AMD card? or do you just post false information based on things you read somewhere on Cred Forums
please share your experiences with past AMD cards
ive used both pascal and polaris cards in previous builds and the only one that gave me problems was pascal because nvidia drivers for windows 10 are fucking stupid and you needed the anniversary edition update in order to even get the drivers to install while amd just worked
what are the games you claim that "dont work on AMD at launch"? ive seen this claim being made multiple times but they leave it at that but ive yet to experience that as an r9 390 user. they might have minor issues on launch but this happens to both vendors and the issues are usually resolved quickly. if you read other posts around and even bother to look at current information youll also know that the "amd drivers are shit" meme is also no longer valid and hasnt been for a long time now. they often push out drivers for new AAA titles a few days before or after the launch.
if youre complaining about amd not releasing "WHQL" drivers then you should know that paying the fee to get the WHQL stamp doesnt guarantee the driver is safe. nvidia has had past WHQL drivers they had to remove because they were fucking peoples systems.
be real with your suggestions. 1060 3gb isnt a worthwhile product for someone who has the option to get more ram and is on a tight budget. whats the first thing that will hold your card back in 4-5 years? ram
right now the 1060 and 470/480 can run modern titles at max or near max 1080p settings and get 60fps. in the coming years they might need to reduce the settings but they will still be able to get acceptable fps until they start being held back by the amount of ram their system has
i used a 4gb ram/hd 5770 1gb system for about 5-6 years and the biggest issue i had was ram.
for 200 dollars rx 470 4gb. if he must have nvidia then gtx 1060 6gb or go amd

nvme is the top tier but mostly for video editing
any cheap ssd will do to load games/boot off. even the slowest ssds will out preform a HDD

1060 is the best bang for your buck card.
1070 is a completely pointless card, don't buy it.
1080 is the best if you're willing to spend a lot.

More like the 480 is 50% less of a piece of shit than it is with OpenGL, because AMD has never in the entirety of their existence bothered with fixing their trash-tier drivers.

ok kiddo. its 50% faster than a 1060.

>whats the first thing that will hold your card back in 4-5 years? ram

Well no, pretty sure having the performance of a 5 year old card will hit you first.

See the 560ti struggling on games that aren't even that vram intensive.

tfw 4 year old computer with legacy video card
HELP ME
I have an AMD hd radeon 6450

there was a good discussion on Cred Forums about this. it's basically a repeat of the whole dx9/dx11 situation where amd had the advantage at the beginning with good dx11 support but then nvidia used their dominance to win over devs and we all know how the dx11 era turned out. this will end up even worse for amd because the way dx12 works is very different to dx11. devs so far are managing big gains on amd hardware based on amd's gpuopen deferred shader assets. nvidia cards are currently not utilizing dx12 fully hence why there aren't really any gains. once nvidia fully embrace the dx12 era and once again win over the devs, games will end up being unoptimized for amd hardware as nvidia will tell the devs to not optimize for it as much as their nvidia hardware just like nvidia told the devs to implement gameworks and they actually went and did it.

tldr; it's not going to end well for amd. they don't have enough devs in their pocket.

because nvidia. meanwhile amd cards all the way back to the 7800 series are seeing signifigant performance boosts in dx12 and Vulcan.

upgrade to gtx 1060

Wow, what a surprise, AMD cards are faster on an API built upon components AMD specifically developed for AMD cards!

i have friends with gtx 980ti and he had to lower his settings on call of duty black ops 3 because that game uses about 7GB vram and the 980ti only has 6gb so he would get stutters while i was able to maintain a silky smooth 100-120fps in game because r9 390 has 8gb vram
this case is pretty rare though and its true that modern games dont go past that 3-4gb ram but i dont think being at the bare minimum is a comfortable spot to be at
as for assassins creed syndicate and unity since theyre both the same engine the performance is greatly reduced if youre running all the gameworks bullshit
if you disable nvidia soft shadows, HBAO+ and some other bullshit i mightve forgotten you can easily get 60-70fps depending on where youre looking with minor detail loss.
i personally prefered not using nvidia's soft shadows because they were slightly blurry
the max graphics for ACS include tons of MSAA on top of nvidias soft shadows which easily puts hawaii cards down to the 30s on absolute max graphics
this is similar with far cry 4 and basicly any title that has gameworks and their soft shadows but the performance penalty varies per title

I think i won't be able to just upgrade my GPU. Whole computer is outdated, im probably better off building one from scratch instead of replacing everything in this shitty dell.

i7 6700 or i7 4790?
What is the best for gaming?

Just get any cheap SSD with a good warranty. Personally I'd buy a 250GB because I'm a budget builder

Probably 3GB 1060 with that CPU, but you could get a 470 or a 6GB 1060 with a 6-pin

>1070 is a completely pointless card, don't buy it.
Fuck no, the 1070 has a price/performance ratio that's nearly as good as the 1060. But you need a 144Hz or 1440p monitor for it to be worth it.

You're literally a marketeer recommending the 1080 aren't you? Especially since the 1080Ti is coming out soon which will be INCREDIBLY more powerful that the 1080.

It's a balance. A 2GB 770/960 is VRAM gimped. An 8GB 470 is horsepower/bus width gimped.

Controllers are important, but the stuff to pay attention to with regards to controllers is mostly just avoiding notoriously bad controllers. There were some SandForce controllers that were problematic because they achieved their touted speeds by compressing stuff on the fly, meaning speeds were inconsistent because how well data can be compressed is variable. I don't remember if they had other problems.

I doubt seriously you will see asynch compute in nvidia for at least 2 generations. also Cred Forums vidya card threads are full of people that just parrot what they heard from the board and have no idea what they are talking about.

why are you lying out of your ass? even a gtx 970 with it's vram partition can max this game out fully at over 100+ fps.

youtube.com/watch?v=qJV1WAChDxQ

you can continue lowering the resolution and video settings but when the new generation of consoles came along games had a huge spike in video ram usage and i simply wasnt able to keep playing new games even if i was able to run them 25-30fps on lowest settings 720p
bf3 ran fine because it had older consoles in mind but then bf4 started using so much vram i couldnt move without stuttering and having freezes
fallout 4 and thi4f also had this problem.

they have also boosted Intel and their own cpu's performance with these open source products. Improving computer performance across the board. This is what a good company looks like. Nvidia on the other hand does everything it can to stifle performance where they can. See gimpworks.

>950
>smoothly at least on high
Good joke nigga

>1070 has a price/performance ratio that's nearly as good as the 1060
You have no idea what you're talking about. The 1070 is far too expensive to justify the measly extra performance compared to the 1060.

Neither, get an i3. If you really want performance get an unlocked i5 and OC. Also there's no reason to get a depreciated platform.

AMD cards age better because they have more VRAM. People who buy AMD are generally fine turning down some settings to get 60fps, and that's where the extra VRAM comes in handy. They can turn textures up with no hitching.

Nvidia buyers just buy a new GPU when they can;t set everything to Ultra. The sad thing is that High and Very High often look the same with better performance. So Nvidia buyers never get VRAM-limited because they just keep giving Nvidia money.

So why does the GTX 970 slow down in more and more games if 3GB are enough?
pcgamer.com/why-nvidias-gtx-970-slows-down-using-more-than-35gb-vram/

Literally kill yourself
>posting like a know it all
>Doesn't know the difference between 980ti and 980

>want to be pcmasterrace
>still sitting here with my 560

dx12 was actually in development before oglnext (ie vulkan) was in development. guess who was working with ms right from the beginning of dx12 development? yes nvidia.

oh yeah, guess who the ceo of the khronos group is (the people that develop vulkan).. one of the main men at nvidia!

don't listen to these deluded ayymdrone conspiracy theorists.

No, YOU have no idea what you're talking about.

You already see it in Pascal, dummy. Barely any games have used it and most of them (Hitman, Ashes of the Singularity, Total War: Warhammer, etc) are co-developed with AMD, though even with that they struggle to maintain a 3-5 fps advantage over the equivalent Nvidia hardware (480 vs 1060).

youtube.com/watch?v=CnQW-60ZaA4
youtube.com/watch?v=p6MDUjFiUR4
youtube.com/watch?v=COEwgUI6D3w
youtube.com/watch?v=ljHgKO1E3s4
youtube.com/watch?v=IW-H0qNw38M
youtube.com/watch?v=Gx9YVklTYTk

hm? got any video proof of this being the exact issue of slowdown? or any other proof for that matter?

why do nvidiots straight up make shit up all day like middleschooled children.

>one of the main men
>vice president of mobile ecosystem
>one of the main men
l m a o

So how am I doing so far? Not trying to make a monster here, I'm on budget.

Don't know anything about motherboards or cases though, I just threw them in. Advice would be appreciated. And I still gotta buy fucking Windows.

Look at that 1070. Pathetic. But go ahead, waste your money, be my guest. Just don't complain when you realize what a huge mistake you just made.

swap the 1060 3gb for rx 470 4gb

>Shitty jewtube videos
>Buy and old outdated card for the price of a new generation card
Nice shilling, shlomo!

is 500w PSU alright for 1060 6GB and an i5

prove me wrong then faggot.

oh wait, you can't!

L M A O
M
A
O

he's the vice president of content development you retard
bloomberg.com/research/stocks/people/person.asp?personId=216703&privcapId=32307

bullshit, doom runs at 50% better performance in doom over a 1060. Also better get used to seeing it more often. only incompetent reject developers wont use the new api's.

>using perfdollar charts

It's fine

use this anyway though

images10.newegg.com/BizIntell/tool/psucalc/index.html?name=Power-Supply-Wattage-Calculator

I have one of these OP, it runs pretty great. But really, just spend the extra 10-15 bucks for the superclocked version. It has better cooling and won't go up to the mid-80's when under load.

Just looked up that card, no 6-pin. Your best bet is to wait on the GTX 1050, which will come with a variant that requires no extra power connections. It'll give you a HUGE boost. You just have to make sure you get one that is PCIe powered only.

Actually that's outdated, use this

coolermaster.com/power-supply-calculator/

lets say your right. nvidia developed dx12. for what purpose? they dont see any performance improvements.

the difference between a donkey and a pegasus with a unicorn horn

the difference between your toaster and the liquid metal terminator

the difference between a virus you get from shady porn ads and the virus they used in independance day to hack into and destroy an alien mothership

the difference between chewing ice and eating cookies and cream ice cream

You're fucking retarded. There's an 8% perf/$ difference between the FE 1060 and the FE 1070.

Also I bought the 470, dumbass. Shows how much you think you know but you really don't.

blogs.nvidia.com/blog/2015/02/24/gtx-970/

save money on the processor, depending on the games you're playing, the cheaper i3 will cover most games and only bottleneck a 1070 or higher on more demanding games like the witcher and such, esp at higher resolutions. since you're only doing 1080p at 60hz, a faster clocked i3 dual core could outperform a slower clocked 4 core i5 in smaller games, and save you money. also, try to find cheaper ram, 16 gigs is good, but you definitely could go down to 8 gigs and save the money and not really take a huge performance hit. i would also get a cheaper wifi card if possible, 20 bucks is more the right price there, unless you can't find any dual band (5ghz) cards under 30 bucks.

also make sure your monitor has the ports your video card has, usually DVI, HDMI, or Displayport, atleast one of those.

Fuck off you fucking dumbass.

>nvidia developed dx12
>sharing resources and contributing to help development = making the fucking thing

oh yeah sorry i forgot nvidia are actually microsoft.

>they dont see any performance improvements

that's down to their own business plan. when they think dx11 is fully dead is their own opinion. there's no use in them skimping on dx11 performance when it's still the industry standard. they did the same with dx11.

>Mr. Trevett’s content development team will focus on platforms including, but not limited to, mobile phones, medical imaging devices, game consoles, and onboard navigation systems.
VICE PRESIDENT OF CONTENT DEVELOPMENT FOR PHONES AND CONSOLES LMAO

50% is a flat out lie. Doom manages to be 10fps higher on a 480 than a 1060 and, again, that's entirely because Vulkan is built on a foundation developed by AMD specifically for AMD.

Looks good, but get 8GB RAM and a bigger SSD. Also a 21" monitor is tiny. Just get a used one off craigslist.

hm? i don't see anything mentioning any slowdown there. you fucked up but i don't hate :^)

Thanks for the advice, usually this is the last place you'd find help.

ya nah you dont have a fucking clue.
Its true but whatever you say. this api is good across the board for pc performance the only company not benefiting from it is nvidia.

so you've gone from him being some mobile dev to a developer of many different types of content spanning all types of devices ie. a content developer like i said. thanks for proving me correct.

>he still can't prove me wrong
>y-you d-don't have a c-clue

KEK, i'm still waiting for this revelation which will prove me wrong.

I accurately described his job and you're still stuck on what his old job title was. Meanwhile, linkedin.com/in/neil-trevett-748791
>Neil Trevett is ***Vice President of Mobile Ecosystems*** at NVIDIA, where he is responsible for enabling and encouraging advanced applications on smartphones and tablets.

what the fuck is there to prove wrong. There was a guy from nvidia that helped work on it? I cant confirm nor deny that but it truly is irrelevant.

Reminder that you need a top of the range Intel i7 to fully take advantage of Vulkan on AMD hardware.

Mr. Console thinks he knows anything about hardware.

>get a 6 month old card right before they announce the 1080ti bro it's an investment
No
Wait for the 1080ti or the 1180 at this point

thanks, dropping from 16gb to 8gb seems like a good idea. pcpartpicker even found a newegg deal that saves me 10 bucks so that's cool.

>what the fuck is there to prove wrong.
to prove retards like this wrong .

i think we can safely agree he's mentally challenged though. no one can be this stupid and uneducated.

he's right you know. nvidia is a shit tier anti-consumerist company.

please, tell me when a vice president of a division at a company is not one of the important people within said company.

>amd is a shit tier anti-consumerist company.

FTFY

That test is bugged. Literally no other Vulkan/Doom test shows that.

heres a list i put together for you

pcpartpicker.com/list/B8LJnn

>is the major player to implement an api that in no small way improves performance for all pc's,
>it's open source.
ya nah.

>It's all a lie

Sure it is buddy.

are you for real lmao amd played no part in vulkan, it was happening regardless. they saw opengl turning into vulkan, started foaming at the mouth and involuntarily convulsing when they realized their shit driver implementation would continue for another hundred years and instantly volunteered to hand over mantle and the khronos group were dumb enough to take the bait, which is why nobody uses vulkan unless they're paid to by amd.

hahaha wtf, nice head cannon.

Looks good. Only thing I'd change is swap out the HDD for an HGST.

You're a cool guy user. Thanks again.

you do realize OGL Next was in development well before Vulkan right? and so was dx12. OGL Next was working towards the same thing as Mantle and AMD donated a few lines of code which helped speed up the process. you're making out like amd are the sole creators of Vulkan and dx12 when

1. OGL Next would have been the exact same as Vulkan whether AMD contributed or not
2. DX12 isn't based on any Mantle code whatsoever

AMD are attempting to claw back some market share by giving Mantle away for free because they know it's the best thing for their hardware and also because they're too lazy to have a proper driver support team. No devs will use Vulkan unless they're asked by AMD and the same goes with DX12 optimization. All dx12 games so far have been by request of AMD to use their GPU Open intrinsic shader assets. Once dx12 fully takes off, devs will be lazy to do the level of optimization AMD are currently asking them to and Nvidia will re-take the lead as nvidia have all the devs in their pocket.

gpuopen.com/gcn-shader-extensions-for-direct3d-and-vulkan/

again see >i think we can safely agree he's mentally challenged though. no one can be this stupid and uneducated.

now fuck off with your retarded posts

Oh great a cancer fag.

You assume way too much in every one of your posts. you act like you know anything at all other than some dates and names. and some arbitrary bullshit you made up to fill in the blanks.

you seem butthurt because you finally know the real truth about amd not being the holy grail of a company you want them to be and also because you can't disprove anything i've said as it can all be verified by a simple google search. hell, even the biggest amd shill AdoredTV can confirm everything i've just said in his videos.

stay mad son, stay mad.

>2. DX12 isn't based on any Mantle code whatsoever
you wut?

except for the fact you are full of shit.

please, show me this incriminating proof that microsoft took mantle and rebranded it as their own api, just like khronos group did. i'll be waiting.

hint: you can't because it was in development even before mantle and has many differences albiet working the same way.

still waiting for you to disprove me.

underrated post

dsogaming.com/news/amd-on-mantle-dx12-both-apis-can-co-exist-mantle-benefits-both-developers-gamers/
>But what about DX12? Nalasco believes that both APIs can co-exist and is really excited about this new API from Microsoft as it borrows a lot of features from Mantle.

5 seconds in google. its literally all over the internet you would have to be trying not to see that dx12 uses mantles features.

>Have 8 year old i7 920 OC'd to 3.6ghz
>At best it's on par with Sandy bridge
>At worst it's on par with your average amd processor
>It's basically equivalent to the i5 750 in that test with hyperthreading that I turn off to save power.

Nigga I get 90-120 fps fully maxed out on my rx480.
I've only been on amd for three weeks, they've already fixed two of the major driver bugs. Only issue now is that wattman occasionally crashes. That's it.

I HAD a fucking unstable gtx 470 the OG house fire, the rx480 is anything but.

i can't tell if you're legit stupid or just trolling. nowhere does it say that dx12 is based off mantle code. in fact the article you linked implied the opposite, that dx12 was microsofts own api implementation which targeted low level hardware access.

i guess you think apple's Metal api also stole from mantle because it also targets low level access.

anandtech.com/show/9038/next-generation-opengl-becomes-vulkan-additional-details-released

>GTX 1060 3GB for 200$
Where

looks like the internet is all abuzz about it. regardless dx12 and vulkan show increases in performance for amd cards all the way back to the 7800 series. meanwhile new drivers actually hurt performance on older nvidia cards.

forgot link
wccftech.com/microsoft-directx-12-mantle-integrated-performance-boost-xbox-questionable/

what an awkward gif

>posting speculation

the xbox kernel can not utilize mantle or vulkan. that report is beyond stupid.

blogs.windows.com/windows/b/appbuilder/archive/2013/10/14/raising-the-bar-with-direct3d.aspx

>meanwhile new drivers actually hurt performance on older nvidia cards.

i've been waiting 2 years to see proof of this. still nothing. i've actually searched so hard i've found nothing but proof confirmed that drivers don't gimp older cards.

bytemedev.com/the-gtx-780-ti-sli-end-of-life-driver-performance-analysis/

it has to do with ludicrous ammounts of tesselation. and since nvidia drivers wont allow you to turn down the tess older cards eat shit. and there have been some cases where the fps actually dropped from a new driver.

youtube.com/watch?v=O7fA_JC_R5s

again, more unproven speculation with no solid evidence. how did i know you would post that video. every issue that has occurred with older cards have been patched asap just like with the witcher 3, which had a driver bug but got patched within a few days. it's funny that everyone seems to forget those patches though. assblasted haters gonna hate i guess.

eteknix.com/witcher-3-kepler-problems-will-fixed-new-driver-update/

next thing you're going to tell me is that nvidia develops all games when it's actually the devs who are responsible for implementing features such a gameworks. witcher 3 is such a well optimized game now that even the rx480 can get similar performance to a gtx 1060. people will still hate on good implementation though, just because they're mad of nvidia's success. reminder that the gpu all amd fanbois love to hate (gtx 970) is still the most popular and successful gpu in the world.

there is solid evidence. IN THAT VIDEO. and nothing you are going to say will change the fact that nvidia is shit. they have been doing this garbage since physx was still proprietary. I bought into the hype back on the gtx260. the first game to ever implement physx couldnt run on that card only a year after its release and it had to be turned off.

really? i can't see any evidence and neither can anyone else except deluded amd fanboys. all i see is incompetent devs who were too lazy do to proper implementations of some features.

no company is perfect anyway. just like all the times amd have actually banned reviewers from future review samples because they didn't shill for the flops which were the r9 3xx series and the "overclockers dream" fury x.

kitguru.net/site-news/announcements/zardon/amd-withdraw-kitguru-fury-x-sample-over-negative-content/

eteknix.com/things-go-from-bad-to-worse-for-reviews-of-amd-radeon-fury-x/

amd banning reviewers for not calling amd the greatest is much worse than a shody implementation by a lazy dev. if you're going to reply defending amd, don't bother replying at all. i won't reply back.

Are usb Wi-Fi cards any good? Found cheap /ac adapters but they're all USB instead of pci-e

Its in there. you arent watching the video. personally I dont see how you justify paying twice as much to do pretty much the same thing. Different strokes for different folks.

Get a 8gb 470 or at least a 4gb 480.

3gb is absolutely retarded at this time. Even the fictional 1050 has at least 4gb.

the gtx 950 is essentially the same as buying a current gen console, sometimes even better. not too bad for the price, honestly.

youtube.com/watch?v=3L-jVhZg0G8

There is a MASSIVE gap in performance from the 950 to a 1060.

Even the 3gb version of the 1060 is around a GTX 980's level of performance. For $200 that's crazy.

I bought a 970 since I was tired of waiting and figured it was cheaper and good enough.

After playing shit on high at 144 fps, I now constantly wonder what could've been.

Don't knock it, when I upgraded to my current card I stuck my 560ti in my media box so it could also function as a living room steam box and it still runs like a champ. As long as I keep settings medium to high, or don't max out AA, AO, or shadow quality it still runs everything I've thrown at it respectably. The only thing that was unplayable was The Witcher 3, and I'm pretty sure that the CPU was the bottleneck there, since for movie watching purposes I only went with a dual core i3.

an aftermarket gtx 1060 is cheaper than a rx 480 STOCK here. i don't know how you could defend paying more for a worse card when playing games made using the current industry standard api. no one in their right mind would buy a mainstream budget gpu as "futureproofing" because of a new api which has barely 10 AAA titles out utilizing it.

the next gen is always coming out in less than a year for PC tho.

I hope the 4GB 1050 isn't shit.

I'm concerned though, because I thought Pascal performed basically the same per core per GHz as Maxwell. Apparently, the 1050 has the exact same number of cores (768) and only the boost clock is only 200MHz higher.

Dunno, I hope it's near a 970.

i got an RX 470 for $200

runs bf1 beta maxed out 1080p 60-80 fps
runs Doom maxed out 120 fps lol, but thats vulkan.

because I'm not an idiot that thinks no one is going to use the upgraded api. also 3 gigs of vram isnt enough anymore.

nm I see its the 6 gig. statement still stands.

The 1060 is more powerful than the 480 in DX11 though. I think it's fair to get that card, especially with more VRAM, if you plan to upgrade in 2-ish years.

no one said no one will use the new api. it's a question of WHEN. like i said you'd be stupid to buy a card now which has shit dx11 performance for the price and only shows its true potential in 10 pretty shit games, with one of them being a glorified benchmark. if you're buying now you'd be looking to play the current most popular titles which would be gta 5, fallout 4, witcher 3 etc. when dx12 becomes the mainstream standard in ~3 years time that's when you should be looking for a good dx12 card.

I dont like the fact that I cant remove the absurd tesselation from nvidia sponsored games with an nvidia card. I dont like updating for at least 4 years. and would still be using my 7850 if it didnt croak.

except this api has been fast tracked and wont fallow the same pattern(free windows upgrade). like I said I like to buy once every 4+ years and its really not viable on nvidia if the past is any indicator. main reason being cant remove the crazy over tessellation gameworks games use. this alone makes amd cards last longer in the long run.

lets not pretend to be an unbiased consumer here. we all know you wouldn't take anything nvidia related even if it was given to you for free. you claim of absurd nvidia tessellation can't be further from the truth as i (an nvidia user and ex amd user) has never had any "tessellation" issues on any nvidia game. i'm currently playing both fallout 4 and witcher 3 and i'm getting top performance on my nearly 3 year old 980, with no signs of "gimping" as you love to imply. i can max out pretty much any game i throw at even after this length of time which fanboys love to claim will show signs of gimping and crippling.

using one example of a game like crysis as every nvidia game in existance shows how immature you really are. remember, nvidia doesn't develop games.

They're fine, but just go to a used computer shop and pick up a PCI card (provided your mobo has a slot) for $10. Just ask about whether it has Win8.1 drivers (it'll definitely have Win7 drivers, and if it has 8.1 it will have 10).

>buying a current gen console
Not if we're considering the PS4Pro, which is coming out in a month. That has a GPU approximately equivalent to a GTX970.

Clearly in his country the Radeons are overpriced. Not everyone lives in the good ol' US of A, so sometimes you've got to go team green simply based on economics.

It won't be. It's designed to be without a 6-pin connect, aka really low power.

AMD cards age better because they keep updating old drivers.

who's pretending. I quit buying nvidia back when they started with the proprietary physx bullshit. I bought a much more expensive card that promised physx and the first game to use it only a year later wouldnt run at 10 fps with it enabled. I've been happy with amd ever since. Nvidia has been on the 2 year upgrade scheme for a while now. and it was even worse before.

again with the asshurt which is making you lie. i know more people who are using old ass nvidia cards without issue eg kepler cards than people i know who still have their old amd cards. most of them actually upgraded to nvidia because their amd card won't do it for them anymore. i'm not joking around either. when they say nvidia is the dominant gpu company it's true as i am witnessing it myself. literally 9/10 people i know own nvidia and can vouch that their experience with nvidia has been much better than when they had amd.

>even runs the witcher 3 just fine (shame the gameplay sucks)

Not OP, but I've played 10 hours of it and I'm thinking about modding the game, because hold fuck does understanding how shit works and doing basic upgrades trivialize things. Why the fuck is Quen so fucking powerful by default in the first place though? You shouldn't be able to tank through hits, take no damage and recharge fast enough to keep doing this.

its nothing personal kid. you keep bringing up butthurt. I think you might be the one who's butthurt. there are plenty of complaints all around the internet about nvidia. I think they might be getting to you. Also didnt they just announce they arent goingto be doing gameready driver updates anymore in favor of quarterly ones?

>I think you might be the one who's butthurt
nice projection

>Also didnt they just announce they arent goingto be doing gameready driver updates anymore in favor of quarterly ones?
no

GTX 1080 FE here.

is it worth water cooling?

>no
but they did announce it.

geforce.co.uk/

nope, sorry to disappoint

newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814487263

You'll get lower temps and a bit more overclocking, but it won't be cheap, assuming you're doing a custom loop

you can buy a 980 ti from evga for 370 off their website

Why not spend a little more and get a 1070 with a newer architecture and more vram that's faster?