1060 or 480

OBS is significantly worse than ShadowPlay. There is a lot of evidence on YouTube proving this.

I´ve both had AND witnessed nothing but fucking problems with AMD shit in the past 9 years I´ve done PC gaming. Meanwhile, my ancient Nvidia cards and the current 560ti have worked flawlessly since day 1, and I barely update drivers more than once a year, tops.

I got a GTX 1060 to replace the gtx 550ti that I got for free. It's good enough for now and I'm planning on getting something better next year. Let's me play games like Witcher 3 with no issues. Cant speak for the RX 480 though.

Don't you need two 480's to technically pass the performance of the 1060?

the 1060 is probably one of nvidias best x60 cards, especially when you look at price/performance

I didn't say they have no drivers. Check your reading comprehension. I said it's lacking compared to nvidia currently. Just look at the quantum break video I mentioned. I have many friends who own amd, who have told me of issues concerning terrible driver support from amd. One friend with a r9 390 told me about the problem where it took amd 6 months to fix the gta5 and ff14 crashing problem. I didn't even believe him till I Googled it and found it to be true.

well youre the exception.

It's well-known that AMD hardware is subpar compared to Intel + Nvidia hardware. This is also further compounded by the fact that Intel + Nvidia have better drivers and a better relationship with game developers. Intel + Nvidia is well-supported and well optimized.

AMD is the budget-bin bargain thrift-store 2nd-rate bottom-bucket off-brand no-name poor-people choice. AMD tried to make up for this with Mantle, but Mantle failed.

Why would you go to McDonalds for a hamburger when you can go to 5 Guys or In and Out?

There's a lot of bullshit on youtube but in any real-world application there is very little difference between the two when used for the same purpose. The main difference is that OBS requires setting it up, which for amateurs is much harder than going with nVidia's defaults. It's not that OBS and Shadowplay are the only recording tools though. The respecitve GPU APIs are supported by many tools - some good, some bad. At the end it comes down to what one wants to do.

I dont know how up to date your info is but AMD got a new driver like 2 weeks back which improved performance greatly

OP do you really want to be in the same basket as this faggot?

>AMD being inferior is a fact
>Intel and nVidia are best buddies with every developer on the planet
>Higher cost is always better
>Mentioning an API without relation to anything
>strawman food analogy
Good post. You should have included a few memes to make it fun to read though.

AMD
>have sub optimal performance for X amount of time after game releases
>driver comes out week/month later and improves performance to the optimal level

Vs

Nvidia
>game comes out
>day one drivers to have optimal performance right from launch

As I said, amd are lacking compared to nvidia currently. Funny thing is amd are actually more expensive here. It's a loss/loss if you buy amd in every way imaginable.

they're basically the same, go with whichever is cheaper.

>980 weaker on new games than 1060

Never fucking trust Jewvidia. Dirty company that uses planned obsolescence.

your an idiot fanboy.
youtube.com/watch?v=TtguubFmCwo

you're* before this thread gets derailed.

if the price difference is less than 15% get a 1060

why pay more for less performance in dx12 and vulkan and even dx11 on some games.

>amd sponsored game

I can provide games biased towards each gpu company like the wealth of gameworks games which make a 480 worse than a gtx 970. However I am not an asshurt little child like you who would defend a company even if they murdered your family.

Let's look at a neutral game which has actually been a very good game for amd in the past, shall we?

youtu.be/-PK55-kCviA

You're not going to defend amd being 20-30 fps behind because they haven't released drivers for this game yet, are you?

this videos old 2 weeks ago amd came out with a driver that greatly improved its performance.

And you are being ignorant, tell me do you read what you reply to or just look for the words that trigger you?

lol says it crashes the driver with nvidia on dx12. good example.

Are you actually this stupid?

store.steampowered.com/app/474960/

>Release Date: 29 Sep, 2016

It came out yesterday on steam you twat. How can they release drivers for a game 2 weeks before it even came out? Are you claiming amd to be some supernatural company now?

did you even watch the video I linked or was it too scary?
>I dont know what drivers are.

1060. Get the 6gb version and enjoy proper support on older games, emulators and dx11 titles. Amd cards really only catch up on dx12 titles but only to NVIDIAS level.

None. Save up extra 200 dollars and buy a GTX 1070.

I know. Thanks for mentioning that actually because I forgot. They blamed the shoddy dx12 implementation by remedy games for that. It just goes to show how shit dx12 is and how we should all stick to dx11 till devs can actually utilise the new api properly.

durp. incompetent devs kiddo they said themselves they are more comfortable deving with dx11. translation: we dont know what the fuck we are doing.

Please explain to me how

1. This video is 2 weeks old when the game being featured in the video came out ONE DAY AGO

2. amd 480 performance is still utter dogshit (worse than a 970 lmao) in this game which you claim that drivers released 2 weeks ago were supposed to fix

I just recently bought a GTX 1080, but whenever I start a game it starts making a buzzing sound, not unlike coil whine, just a bit deeper. Now is there any way to fix that other than to swap out the PSU? I do have a good PSU that is not a no-name product and I get no coil whine with a 970. Now I'm not sure whether to RMA my 1080 or just plain return it to the retailer.

buy which ever one you can find cheaper

I guess its because its a cherry picked example.

this was before the new drivers came out. and it was still beating it in live games.
youtu.be/gcNgLyRTMuo

>AMD sponsored and featured game

amd.com/en-us/markets/game/featured/battlefield-1

hmm, i guess you really are stupid then. see i guess you can't win this so you're only using vendor biased games right? you want me to post all the gameworks games now?

More like 1080, Jensen

Funny thing is the 1060 still wins.

AMD's crimson drivers are surpassing Nvidia's in stability and features

I think what you are falling for is the gameworks meme. nvidia adds a shit ton of tessellation to the games they sponsor amd doesnt pull that kind of shit. Its ludicrous ammounts of tesselation that doesnt make it look any better.

youtube.com/watch?v=tz85_GqYbR8
is forza3 amd sponsored? I'm just picking random games man.

Get the AMD or nvidia will cuck you

funny thing is, 95% of games have the 1060 on average 10% ahead. (see: literally every review).

>game comes out with that 10% 1060 advantage reduced to the point of a 480 win
>game suddenly is bundled with all amd cards
>game is featured on amd's website

it's called vendor bias. amd and nvidia pay these companies to optimize for their own hardware. see all gameworks games (assassins creed, crysis etc) and all gaming evolved titles (hitman, ashes of the singularity).

it's the neutral games which show the real performance gap. the games where the vendors aren't able to influence development. games like gta 5 or quantum break which both show massive leads on nvidia hardware.

forza h3 is another neutral game with a nice lead on nvidia hardware.

youtube.com/watch?v=ofFpnArXbJ8

see

I forgot about the underwater tessellation what a bunch of dicks.

>another neutral game
>literally runs like shit on AMD and nvidia 900 series
>shilling for free
>on Cred Forums

Can you sum up the reasons why it's worse?

If you buy a Nvidia card you'll have to pay a $200 extra if you plan on getting a G-Sync monitor, compared to its AMD equivalent.

runs fine on my 980 and on my buddies 1070. haven't had a single issue yet.

plays.tv for amd automatically bookmarks highlights in a couple games but for sure more will integrate it.

Working things carry a premium.

As opposed to what, FreeSync not working?

Why do amd fans now a days assume people are going to buy a monitor for a low-endish card?

Do you guys not realize how stupid that is?

Lack of other substantial selling points.

fucking this. all i hear about are problems with software support on freesync monitors. the latest issue is that if you have a 144hz freesync monitor you have to lower it to 120hz in windows otherwise you get this random flickering and shit. also you can't even play in windowed borderless or even windowed on a freesync monitor so it sucks if you have a dual monitor setup. gsync is the way to go 100%.

>why do people upgrade anything?
because free-sync is the shit?

Nothing is as good as shadowplay bruh, not afterburner not obs, nada.

t. guy who uses afterburner and has tried several other things to not use shadowplay due to gfe

bigger performance hit. i guess obs application is a bigger hit to cpu usage than geforce experience when running in the background, even though both applications are utilizing a hardware encoder. don't know exactly how this is the case but i just know shadowplay is much less of a hit to fps in the exact same scenario.

he asked for reasons

Having G-Sync enabled on non-fullscreen exclusive programs, including the desktop, is pointless since Windows applied triple-buffered V-sync since Aero was introduced.

mostly, it's the performance taking a hit, but as far as actual capturing is actually just as good, and can be better due to more options.

Interesting. Given the low impact on CPU usage with hardware encoding with both softwares I wouldn't really call OBS "signifcantly worse" though.

I have the 1060. I like it a lot except for

>that fucking coil whine that sometimes happens when a game starts.

AMD has more compute units than Nvidia which are clocked at s lower frequency. Nvidia has less and are clocked a lot higher. The better value is with AMD since they support their cards a lot longer than Nvidia and do not incorporate crippling technologies like hairworks which is an anti competitive practice.

youtube.com/watch?annotation_id=annotation_4276449983&feature=iv&src_vid=1DTEgeSqwRs&v=gYXl8FQHdCY

it actually is quite a bit worse. obs caused a massive 18 fps performance loss compared to just 3 fps when using shadowplay. i dont know why this is happening but they really need to fix it because there really shouldn't be a gap that big when doing essentially the same thing.

I use plays.tv and theres no performance hit withj my R9 290

>optional extra eyecandy is an anti-competitive practice
AMDrones everyone

its because it makes the game run like shit for amd and even their own cards.

Wow, things are worse than I thought.
I'm guessing the bigger hit is due to OBS devs relying on NVENC's API's documentation which leads to a less efficient implementation than Nvidia devs having access to NVENC's source code directly.
Anyway, performance impact is (almost literally) 0 with QuickSync (Skylake) so I don't really mind.

That reminds me, AMD VCE has finally recieved an official implementation in OBS Studio 0.16, and it has a meaty amount of options. Someone should run a benchmark on it.

If it saps too much performance just turn it off.
Or are you going to argue it would be better to not have the option of having better hair at all?

I do have a RX 480 and is a fine card, but this alternative to shadowplay doesnt exist. Raptor is something you wouldn't want to use.

480
AMD is a better company overall too, nvidia are almost as bad as Intel when it comes to being jews

AMD actually has better hardware, but they don't have the software devs to put out constant driver updates.

turning it off doesnt remove all of the extra tessellation and they run like shit even with it turned off. Now some games like fallout you have to have it turned on for sun shafts and whatnot it looks absolutely horrible on anything but ultra and there is no alternate option considering there are way better ways to implement sun rays you can see how this can be a problem.

>Nvidia products run better on most games and have less issues in general
>Don't want to give them money because they're maximum overjews compared to AMD, who makes a push for open source software
PC gaming sucks.

>turning it off doesnt remove all of the extra tessellation
It does.
>run like shit even with it turned off
It doesnt.

The godrays in Fallout are the only visually impressive feature in the game. The volumetric fog in Far Harbor is nice too.

>who makes a push for open source software
The only reason the do this is because they cant afford to develop it in-house.
Notice how AMD is always playing catch-up in features, delivering alternatives about a year late while making big ruckus about muh open-source.

the 160 and 480 perform nearly identical in that title.

the reviewer even states "the 1060 and 480 performance is nearly identical."

the 970 does struggle (which the reviewer acknowledges as well) and the only amd card that appears to struggle is the 390 which is odd and the reviewer states it as odd as well.

480 is better

it does on older cards. even with everything turned off. games that dont have gameworks run better on both cards. even if you turn off all the gameworks features in games that do have them, those games still run like shit.

They make their shit open source because it's literally their only option. They are trying to claw back market share by giving away stuff for free on gpu open with the hope people will take it upon themselves to use those free tools, which will ultimately benefit amd. They can't pay devs to use it like nvidia pays devs to use gameworks. They're not in a good enough economic position to go up toe to toe against nvidia.

They could have literally kept mantle for themselves and advertised it as a benefit of owning an amd card, because we know amd cards gain a lot of performance with low level apis. However they couldn't do that as they knew they didn't have enough market share and influence to do that so they ended up giving it away for free to the khronos group with the hope that devs will work and improve on the mantle code and create games using said code which will again ultimately benefit amd in the long run.

>Buying mid Range shit
>Not just buying the top of the line card from the generation before

R9 Fury or Fury X

>AMD is a better company overall too
Jesus christ

>it does on older cards. even with everything turned off. games that dont have gameworks run better on both cards. even if you turn off all the gameworks features in games that do have them, those games still run like shit.

nigga you don't even know what you're talking about. even old ass cards like the gtx 770 (rebranded 680 i believe) can get a consistent 50+ fps on fallout 4 ultra settings. if there really was some sort of gimping going on, this old ass shit card would crumble at ultra settings on a modern gameworks game.

I guess ill have to go with the 1060. The 480 is significantly more expensive right now even though they were about the same price just a week ago.

In the long run, RX 480 will outperform the 1060 with DX12 games. Plus AMD's tendency to support older cards is neat.
Otherwise 1060

New videocards still being made? WHy ? graphics are stalled theres no need for new hardware

well it sure gimps amds comparable cards to shit. I cant say that its on purpose but I do know nvidia sponsored games use quite a bit more resources than any game without them. even when turned off.

there's a shit ton they can do with gaseous gases

4K and higher resolutions.

its called optimization. games that are nvidia sponsored are optimized for nvidia gpu architectures and the same goes for amd. just look at what gcn optimization did for amd in hitman even when running in dx11. amd cards were way ahead of the nearest nvidia competitor.

this new generation of gpus is worth it because of dx12/vulkan and more vram. i don't think you'll need to upgrade anytime soon with a 10xx/480 card.

optimization means it will use less resources though. nvidia sponsored games always use more resources than comparable titles. Its because they need to justify people paying twice as much money for a card that essentially would be doing the same thing as amd without these resource hog "features". Its anti-competitive and in any other industry they would get sued. They are esentailly trying to create a platform war within a platform and thats bad for everyone. nobody else does anything like this that makes hardware.

770 gets to 35 fps anywhere there's lots of shadows and trees.

they can't keep getting away with it.

youtube.com/watch?v=ZcF36_qMd8M

Worth keeping in mind that while this is rather true. amd keeps updating their stuff while nvidia tends to not give a fuck about older cards.

You forgot the rx 480 also has 2gb vram more on it. That coupled with the fact that nvidia quickly dumps support of their low end shit makes the 480 a no brainer

now i know you're just speaking out of butthurt and buyers remorse.

>nvidia sponsored games always use more resources than comparable titles

you've got to be trolling. nvidia sponsored games are some of the best optimized games out there, especially when compared to amd sponsored games like day sex or star citizen which are literal abortions in terms of optimization. day sex runs at like 40 fps maxed out on a $600 gtx 1080. a game which looks absolute fucking miles better in the nvidia sponsored witcher 3 runs at a good fps on peasant tier hardware like a 380.

>Mfw I bought an R9 380x back in January for $220
>Mfw if I had waited 6 months I could've had a gpu that's 40%+ more powerful for the same price

But I'd be waiting forever by that logic, there's always something much better within the half year or year later. I think I'm just going to upgrade my whole PC early next year when Zen and Vega are out.

I've been playing on consoles my whole life previously, so 30fps doesn't bother me. And with PC I can turn the settings down to get 60fps unlike consoles. It's not awful, but I wish I had something better. At the same time I just can't justify upgrading right now when we'll probably see a massive leap next year.

objectively false.

do you honestly believe amd are putting customers before making a tidy profit? get outta here. no company gives a shit about you. amd are doing all of this shit like gpu open because they HAVE to. not because they WANT to. no company likes giving shit away for free when there could be money made with it. i can guarantee that amd will be just as bad as nvidia if positions were swapped. we'd still be running rebrands back from 2010 if that were the case.

see

Always get the Nvidia card.

Once had an AMD card, and it was nothing but trouble.

>not waiting for the R20 4030xx
Whats wrong with you

only on Cred Forums.

where's your proof? i've never known any nvidia game which has taxed my 980 + 4690k more than any other game. i've not seen any evidence of this either and it seems nobody has since i can't find anything on the net which specifically says nvidia games require better hardware to run over any normal game eg needing a titan xp to run any nvidia game at 60 fps high/ultra compared to needing a 970 to run all other games at 60 fps high/ultra

So all memes and shitposting aside, is the GTX 1060 actually a good card to get? It's not gonna be able to run all games at 1080p/60fps on ultra settings. So in a way, it is already outdated. For games like Witcher 3, Crysis, GTA V, any demanding game, you'll have to shamefully turn down settings even though the card cost you hundreds. If current games are killing the card, will the card still be of use next year, or the year after that?

What about people that want 144hz? Can 1060 even give that much fps at 1080p on games like Overwatch and TF2?

The 1070 does exist. But it's only for the people with money, the ones that can actually afford a core i7.

I have the 1060 and it's running Witcher 3 on ultra beautifully.

I bought a GTX 1070 and I didn't have problems up until the geforce experience 3.0. It fucked with a lot of shit. First time I've had problems with my graphics card. I went from an AMD 7870 to this and it was my first problem.

1060

amd is shit

Hairworks is pretty fine, you lose a couple fps on high end cards with it on, the problem was in project cars and Crysis 2 (or 3?) with the tesselation that done nothing to the visuals but degraded performance a lot on amd side.

Specs please

Also if you're being serious. Can you tell me which games 1060 can't run on ultra at 1080p/60fps? Besides Witcher 3, GTA V, Crysis, etc.

whats wrong with geforce experience 3? i downloaded it and i think it looks way better than the old one and i haven't had any issues myself. the only thing that used to happen was when i was using the beta version sometimes when i'd reboot my pc the nvidia share would stop working in windows when first logging in but now with the full release of 3.0 that issue seems to have gone.

fallout 4 runs like ass on a 770. meanwhile it can run gtaV on very high at solid 60.

>And the omega

What a boss.

>coupon

Lame

are you sure you are not looking at different versions? There are versions with double the amount of vram for both, as well as versions with different amount of coolers

>fallout 4 runs like ass
yes

was meant for

A GTX 780 performs better than the 480, let alone a 1060.

480 is overpriced.

Nvidia "optimized" title.

...

bullshit.

I just bought a 1070 because of your post, thank you for letting me know if I buy AMD, I won't be able to play games properly.

>it can run an xbox 360 game at very high solid 60
>it can run a game which was specifically optimized for the pc platform in an extra year of development

shit argument. compare games with a similar amount of development time. fallout 4 gtx 970 vs hitman gtx 970 on ultra for example

...

>core i5
>144hz monitor
>1060
>no optical drives detected

Are there games that you can't run at 60fps? And also TN monitors apparently have "inaccurate colors", does your monitor ever?

passmark is a bad way to benchmark you should benchmark games and not in benchmark mode either. the problem with these tests is they all use highest settings.
heres one that says your wwrong but I wouldnt use it as an example I'm jsut showing you why these benchmark programs are shit.

gpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Nvidia-GTX-780-vs-AMD-RX-480/2164vs3634

nvidia has shadowplay

We sharing specs here?

I have no idea what you're saying.

I can play games I couldn't play just a few weeks ago and I like it.

Problems?

Thinking about getting a 1060 or 1070. Should I also upgrade my 4690k if I only want to play games maxed at 1080p/60fps? Don't know if it'll be a bottleneck or not.

>"optimized"
you keep using that word but I dont think you know what it means.

Who still uses optical media in 2016?

A PS4, so you can actually play good exclusives you couldn't play otherwise without it, unlike with highend GPU.

>when you could have built a brand new (decent) rig but you had to pay car insurance

not him but Blue-Rays and cd's are still the best way to enjoy their respective media.

u wot m8?

>optimize
>ˈɒptJmʌJz/
>verb
>past tense: optimized; past participle: optimized
>rearrange or rewrite (data, software, etc.) to improve efficiency of retrieval or processing.

wccftech.com/rockstar-gta-v-pc-delay-development-polish/

>4K MEME STREAMS
>Lossless copied from a CD.

so why are you saying fo4 is optimized?

>buying a UHD TV
>FLAC

I'm thinking of getting a 1060 too but I remember benchmarks where it couldn't run games at 1080p and 60fps. Makes me nervous because the newer games would just destroy this card

I mean, if you're gonna by such a shitty card you might as well continue your journey to plebville instead of setting up camp on the road halfway there.

no one is talking about fallout 4 being optimized you spastic. the point being made was don't compare some mainstream game with the typical slap dash pc port (f4) to a game with years and years of extra development and refinement for the pc platform (gta) and say that this difference in performance on so and so graphics card is due to nvidia games being more demanding to run.

>Motherboard at 114°C

JUST FUCKING TELL ME WHICH GPU TO BUY FUCK!

its called graphics card u falseflagger

This, faggot.

Blue-rays are always higher quality than a .mkv
flac is fine.

I thought you mean f4 had more time in development. my point is gtaV looks great and runs great because it doesnt have gameworks. witcher III runs like shit too on the pc also a gameworks title.

specs thread?

...

that's just stable, with chrome running
the highest i've seen it go was 128
i'm just waiting for this to melt

both are good choices
whichever is on sale

>witcher III runs like shit too on the pc also a gameworks title.

witcher 3 is one of the best pc ports in recent history and many reviewers have said this including digital foundry who test this shit thoroughly.

destructoid.com/pc-port-report-the-witcher-3-wild-hunt-292553.phtml

good god man just pick up a new cooler
they're like $20 tops

it's a mobile toaster from the last decade
i'm just riding it into the ground

then at least get yourself one of those cooling pads, they're even cheaper

wouldn't the money be better suited to saving for an actual rig?

Here is you meme list, pick the one that has the most memes you know.

1060
>shadow play
>physX
>dx11
>1080p
>gimp drivers
>3gb RAM
>superior nvidia compression
>CUDA
>super cooler

480
>bitmining
>muh thermal throttle
>never need 8gb vram
>undervolt
>dx12
>vulkan
>nitro cool
>lifetime driver support
>no hairworks

i have a 480 and a 1070
the 480 is a fantastic gpu if you can get it at list price and lower the Vcore. default is way too high and causes instability.
1070 is vastly better if you have a high res monitor

Not shilling or anything...
>bought a 1060
>feeling excited
>DDU the old drivers
>install new GPU
>install new drivers
>reboot
>PC won't start
I'm kind of at a loss right now as to what I should do, I've tried almost everything

Equally good in specs and supporting stuff, but 1060 has better drivers iirc. AMD for colors though

there is 6gb version of 1060 though, and 4gb version of 480

If you're gonna buy one of them get the 1060, everyone who isn't retarded knows to stay away from AMD.

they're like $10 or even cheaper if you order on ebay from china
that's like a fast food meal

1060 has 6 gb, nitro cool on the 480 isn't actually that good last I heard.

This fucking thread again. Go for which ever you can get a better deal on FFS. 1060 or the 480. And don't go for that dumbass 3gb 1060 either, the only real option is the 6gb from Nvidia.

6gb 1060, fuckface.

Budget system.

1060 or 480?

i5 6500
16gb DDR4

I'm cool with 1080p60 high settings.

Yeah. Consider the 1060 3gb a 1050, it's not just vram they cut.
It actually does perform alright... until you hit vram limit and everything goes to shit

On that note, an RX 470 aftermarket are close to reference 480

reboot with the hdmi/dvi/vga plugged into you gpu

>I'm cool with 1080p60 high settings.
better get the 1070 or 1080 then, because of all the shit ports.

Is this the hardware advice thread?

Should I get a 6700 or 6700k?

Is the performance increase in cpu intensive games noticeable?

Will you be overclocking it?

if yes, the k, if not then normal.

I use plays.tv and there's a clear performance hit with my 390X, CPU usage increases to a point where I can't record CPU bound games with decent framerates

Just wait a bit, OP.

Nvidia is gonna list a 1050 and that will be the sweetspot as was the 750.

look at it this way. GTAV on ultra with distances turned all the way up looks amazing. Witcher looks good too but uses a shit ton more resources. Also just fuck Nvidia right in the pooper

>We expect stunning visuals as Konami recommends an Intel Core i7 and GeForce GTX 760 -- interestingly, no AMD hardware is mentioned and you can probably thank Nvidia's influence for that. Using the latest AMD and Nvidia drivers, we tested 26 DirectX 11 graphics cards covering most price ranges. Our test rig was outfitted with an Intel Core i7-5960X to remove CPU bottlenecks that could influence high-end GPU scores.

plugged in the entire time, turns out this is a fairly common problem

what the fuck are you even talking about? konami?

At high? Either works. Freesync is cheaper than gsync but at that fps isn't hugely significant I think. 1060 will probably keep performing better on dx11 games which are rather eol, 480 depends on dx12 and vulkan getting adopted and being good.

its from MGSV benchmark. the point is they wont even tell you recommended specs for amd because nvidia's chickenshit business tactics.

Guess I might as well ask here.

Does anyone know when the Vega is coming out? I hate not being able to 1440p/144hz games and the only option at the moment is the gtx 1070 and 1080.

Then again I don't even know if the Vega can do 1400p/144hz...

dx12 and vulkan are good havent you seen the performance gains? oh thats right nvidia thinks asynch is a meme tech while all the way back to the 7800 series will be seeing significant performance increases.

guys

GUYS

nvidia are le evil corporation because konami didn't include a recommended spec for an amd card. truly evil because i forgot that people actually judge whats written on the box over the actual in game content and performance.

480 won a few fps in a few DX12 games, not as much as 1060 won in DX11, didn't it?
In Doom vulkan yeah, it destroyed.

>Using R9 290
>start playing mafia 2
>everything maxed out at 1440p going 80 fps and can probably go higher but my monitor is at 80hz
>decided to turn on physx.
>drop to about 10-15 fps
>turn that shit off everything is butter

Gimpwerks at its finest. This is the kind of shit that makes me not support jewvidia

I like the way the 480 looks way, waaaay better but I simply can't justify choosing it on looks. I decided on a gtx1060, it just seemed better according to user feedback. They don't seem that far off from each other though. Maybe just get whichever is cheaper over there, dunno.

I don't care the least bit about brand rivalry.

144hz 1080p gsync/freesync monitors worth it for 1060/480?

>dx12 and vulkan are good havent you seen the performance gains?

pcgamer.com/total-war-warhammer-dx12-boost-for-amd-still-cant-match-nvidias-dx11-performance/

>amd sponsored game
>amd specifically asks devs, and works with them to implement dx12 mode (gamersnexus.net/news-pc/2349-amd-and-total-warhammer-enter-dx12-partnership)
>still worse than nvidia dx11 performance

ULTIMATE keks

do you know how easy it is to put minimum specs on the box? you goofball.
dx12/Vulkan is the new hotness and every game with it does better with the 480 by about 10 frames or so.

>just stop this shit I've never had a driver problem in 8 years of owning amd.

That's because you haven't had any drivers to update.

nvidia is the planned obsolence company, not amd

and i buy nvidia

this article is out of date a new driver just gave amd a significant boost to performance.

If you plan on upgrading frequently get the 1060 6gb. If you want to use the same card for a while get the 480 8gb. The lower end models are pointless unless you're poor.

480 is more future proof, since it uses the architecture that all of DX12 is based on.

Just make sure you get a 8-pin version and you are set.

you do realise the whole point of dx12 and similar low level api's are to remove any driver overhead problems, right? the amd cards running with the lowest overhead possible in their own amd sponsored game can't even beat an nvidia card which probably has higher driver overhead due to dx11. stop acting like a retard.

thats over now they fixed it in that particular cherry picked instance.

>480 is future proof

It's already obsolete. Can't even run all current games at 1080p 60fps on ultra let alone at higher resolutions. Future games destroy that shit.

By the time devs get their heads out of their asses and properly implement DX12 the 480 will be beyond worthless.

DX12 is a meme and D44M is the only game you're going to see for a long time with proper vulkan support.

'no'

the last driver fixed tomb raider only.

no it gave the 480 an across the board performance increase. came out 2 weeks ago.

so you're telling me that the 480 was given a massive boost to performance via a driver, but still gets blown the fuck out by 35 fps when compared to a gtx 1060 in a game which has favored amd heavily in the past? ok.

also explain to me how it has literally 0 (ZERO) performance increase with these new drivers when comparing dx11 to dx12 ()?

so if i'm in a budget i get a rx 470, and if i get some more moni i jump to the gtx 1060 and pay no mind to either 480?

So, basically you need a minimum of a 1070 if you want to max out every game at 1080p/60fps?

Because apparently the 1060 and 480 struggle.

I never overclock since I dont have easy or cheap access to cooling options
So 6700 it is

If you want a card you can bin in three months get nvidia, if you want a card that's still good three years down the road get AMD.

>people always tell me I should get proper pc since I mostly use my laptop
>tell me it's not that expensive, it's like "800 tops to buy a top end pc"

I just made a list off all the stuff and I'm at nearly 1000 euro without even counting a case, ssd, monitor, cables and peripherals

For fucks sake, please don't fool people into thinking they can build a decent pc on a budget. It's mean.

I don't want to make a thread just to vent this so there

480 has 8GB VRAM, what fucking idiot would settle for less nowadays? LMAO.

My 770 is still going strong after 2 years

Fuck off AMD is worse value, always was

Worse performance, worse support for the very fucking price

>decide I don't want to cheap out on parts like I did in 2012
>gather everything
>buy the case first
>look at the rest of my list
>still 750 dollars more to spend

I know this feeling user

I cant even buy a 1070 and 6700k + motherboard without cleaning my bank account

Logical Increments

they probably thought you were living in america.
cherry picker as fuck.

There's no card that can "max out" every game because each game uses ultra to test out random shit which may or may not run well. Trying to stay on the bleeding edge of graphics is a waste of money since you end up buying cards overpriced for 1080p.

PC hardware in Western Yurop is notoriously overpriced. See if you can import from Britain or something.

Im just incredibly tempted to buy a mobo and 6700 and run it alongside my old 2 gb 770 (I got memed)

But the bottleneck would be surreal

most tests show that that are pretty much identical and you should just choose it based on brand loyalty or whichever brand you are more used to. If I were to get one i would stay with nvidia since i don't want to uninstall all my nvidia drivers

I'd say the 1060 solely because it's newer, and BARELY more expensive.
And honestly, it's a great fucking card. Has no issue with anything so far from what I've seen. It's just not built for 4k and whatnot.

Yeah I just checked and bought on the US it's like 200euro cheaper. 50 on the UK. I dunno how shipping would work for this kind of thing though, never imported parts. I'll look it up.

I saved up some money and was cheerful about finally building a pc but this is kinda killing my drive, I don't want to spend 1500euro on it. Plus I never put a pc together, I still have to earn about that.

daily reminder that amd have already ditched support for the r9 3xx series. just look at fh3 and the 390 which is over 10 fps worse than the 970 in a dx12 game which actually benefits amd hardware. imagine the abysmal dx11 performance if the 390 was running fh3 in dx11.

>amd fans spam QB benchmarks when nvidia hardware gets beaten by amd hardware in dx12 mode (with all having shit performance anyway)
>tables turn and nvidia takes the lead in the same game in both dx11 and dx12
>c-cherry p-p-picker as f-fuck

neck yourself.

I live in Argentina. Everything's overpriced as shit, can't buy outside, didn't know how to build. Still did it. You can pull it off too user.

is it the same game you posted before? with 30 fps lower or is it a different game? because if its the same game you have used it as an example twice and have not shown any more examples thats cherry picking.

What do you think I used

>not shown any examples
>thread is full of dx12 and amd favored games being blown the fuck out by nvidia cards in both dx11 and dx12
>total war warhammer
>quantum break
>forza horizon 3

what, you want me to post gamework games instead?

Thanks man. I will do it for sure, it's a matter of time. I simply wish I didn't have to spend so much money on it, I don't have that much leftover each month and I hate working so each hour of it is suffering; makes me really treasure every cent.

The gimp is real. I just switched from Nvidia and I'm never going back.

>It's well-known that AMD hardware is subpar compared to Intel + Nvidia hardware
Intel, sure. My CPU is fucking 6 years old and it shits all over the FX-9590, the best AMD has to offer.

Nvidia, no. All Nvidia has going for them is drivers. Problem with that is, when a new architecture comes out they basically tell you to fuck off and buy a new card. In raw power, AMD cards are generally better and they have a hardware scheduler for doing DX12 Async compute that Nvidia lacks. Their drivers also get better over time instead of stagnating. I've gotten a greater performance increase from drivers in the last 2 weeks of owning an AMD card than the last 2 years of Nvidia.

this picture is severely flawed and if you can't figure out why you should really commit suicide mate.

forza horizzon isn't beating it by much and it actually said the performance is identical.

total war has been fixed with the patch that just came out couple weeks ago.

quantum break is the only one showing 30 fps lower performance.

So is the only reason to get a 1070 over a 1060 to use 1440 resolution?

>Shitty Let's Player that gave up

>nvidiot "reasoning"

>forza horizzon isn't beating it by much and it actually said the performance is identical.

what happened to big gains on amd cards in dx12? all i'm seeing recently is the supposedly "inferior" dx12 cards by nvidia matching or even beating the "superior" amd cards with full dx12 hardware support. now you see what the problem is.

>total war has been fixed with the patch that just came out couple weeks ago.

source?

480 beats the 1060 in FH3.

>they aren't the same GPUs
Rebrands

>they aren't the same games
Obviously. Nvidia isn't going back and actively making performance at old games worse, they're just not optimizing older cards' drivers for newer games

>They aren't the same CPUs
That undoubtedly accounts for some of it.

Most of the difference is just down shit drivers, and Kepler being a shit architecture that can't into compute.

And holy shit it was so bad at DX 12 and Vulkan. Literally single digit FPS in the 3DMark Time Spy demo and D44M was totally unplayable with either API.

>lists 3 discrepancies whilst also not mentioning difference in resolution
>still manages to come to the same retarded conclusion even with 4 discrepancies

please, go and be a retard somewhere else.

Why exactly did you use DDU? that shit is the lamest shit every man, NVidia installer has an option to get rid of all the old shit.

check out this beast

lower voltage
better cooling

I'm obsessing over this shit but I know when I buy the PC all I'll do is play indieshit, old games and low resource stuff. Fuck

>difference in resolution from 1920x1200 to 1920x1080
Fucking inconsequential, not worth mentioning.

Throw an overclocked i7 870, 4gb more ram, and a new GPU in there and it would actually be a somewhat competent PC.

>overclocked i7 870

For what purpose.

well that and so you can be better than everyone else in middle school.
then you are ignoring all the videos I posted.

Already has the motherboard and they're worth next to nothing these days. Should have said and equivalent Xeon though, they're cheaper. $18 for a used X3440, OC it to >4.0GHz and you're golden.

BUY SOME FUCKING THERMAL PASTE OR SOMETHING JESUS FUCK

are you memeing again? why isnt it thermal throttling yet?

$0.17 has been deposited in your account.

heres the newest drivers. theres no comparison to dx11 here but you get the idea.

guru3d.com/articles-pages/total-war-warhammer-directx-12-pc-graphics-performance-benchmark-review,6.html