I'll hop in my Deloren and get one. Any one else want one bringing back?

Talking about GPU performance without FPS is not a good way to compare as some users might be happy with 30FPS and others want 60FPS minimum.

960 is ideal for 1080p gaming. It'll run pretty much anything you throw at it on max or near max settings. For the price it's a contender vs other brands. If you want decent but cheap look at a 750 ti. It'll run most games at decent settings but maybe not maxed out. Depends how much is going on in-game. 970 is a brute that'll run virtually anything maxed at 1080 without blinking, it's also happy at 1440p in most cases. It might seem expensive but it'll outlast the 960 as things move on and higher res becomes the norm. As with most tech, you get what you pay for.

Would there be a world of difference between this and Palit GTX 750Ti KalmX Graphics Card? I'm looking for something that runs modern games well but not a hardcore gamer but most importantly is quiet or silent when in use or not in use. Thanks

Rev6 never claimed he watched all of your videos.

And frankly, a video review that takes over 30 minutes is a terrible review format. Very few people will sit still for 30 minutes of review.

I don't honestly see your 'homework' you mention, because you are extrapolating DX12 from 2 games, one of which is an AMD showcase title.

Surely everyone should wait till more games have came out on DX12 to choose sides, especially if it means purchasing an accompanying SYNC monitor that supports only 1 card.

I am waiting on pascal, personally, to see if NVIDIA are pushing the boat out or if they are just rebranding (like AMD did for the 390/390x).

I would honestly be shocked if NVIDIA's pascal doesn't splatter the market. But if it doesn't, I will purchase the best GPU for playing the majority of games I want with the least amount of hassle.

1% FPS for 100% more headache is not ok (SLI/Crossfire) and if it sounds like a lawnblower, that's a no go as well.

The 980 TI, right now, is the best high end graphics card that matches the above statement (I will accept the Titan X Black, or the dual GPU setups AMD offer as slightly better overall performance, but the cost of the Titan, and the required dual GPU aspect of the AMD Fury x2 when it comes out puts a damper on my thoughts http://wccftech.com/amd-r9-fury-x2-dual-gpu/)

Anyway, I'm loyal to nobody, I want the best bang for my buck. NVIDIA have delivered that for the last 5 years, but AMD caught up with the 7xxx and 2xx series. So I'll take whatever is better at the time, around mid year mark, maybe later.

It's the monitor divide that has me in a predicament right now. Having to choose a monitor based on the GPU is frustrating :smile:

Fanboy behaviour either way is idiot at best and downright destructive at worst.

Buy what is right for you at the time, based on the sort of games you play.

I haven't made up my mind about 2016 GPU's because there's no evidence either way. Only current GPU's which DX12 games are few and far between. No taking sides here.

lol ok then seams pretty clear to me since NVidia is missing some stuff and those benchmarks say it all that's whats to come but clearly you have your mind made up for NVidia, so its your money do what you want but the video is very clear on the early tests and a good idea of whats to come, amd with the xbox/ps4 work and mantle which ii in effect dx12 will be far better cards under dx12 than NVidia the video can't be any more clear with charts and info and descriptions and the hardware I've watched it 3 times now to make sure I could understand his points and put all the pieces together clearly.
if you can't see whats in front of you then you clearly in the NVidia camp in which case I'm not gonna waste my time further with you, picking sides is stupid loyalty to green bla bla, the best value for money is the camp people should be in why you get bent out of shape over one is bizzare, if NVidia can pull a rabbit i'll buy there card but going by all the info and experts NVidia are way behind, but we'll find out soon and i'll be here, but I'm guessing people will come up with excuses why NVidia are behind, games are developed for amd etc. like NVidia are just now you mean then there's the fact that most game developers chose amd why? cause they had the better hardware.
nothing more I can say or do and to be honest I don't care my money will be going to amd this year unless NVidia get very lucky, and all there lying and fudging the fact and trying to hide results speaks volumes, but again you haven't really got your ears on.
All the best.

The video doesn't mean anything for the next generation of GPU's which should be better designed for low level API's more so than now.

watch the last video right through and listen to it all this mirrors everything I've been reading just watch the video.
here.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hLOAQFpaGh8

I didn't watch all of the first and skipped the second video as i know about aost.

I'm not favouring any of them as of right now there's no proof of a winner. You're doing current generation DX12 comparisons with 2 games and predicting the future with it.

Examples here.

https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=fable+legends+benchmark&client=ms-opera-mobile&site=webhp&prmd=nvsi&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwj6zd-qgIzKAhXEcA8KHd7jCeMQ_AUICigE

then you haven't looked the last video shows more and the fable test have already been done mate and NVidia failed but i'll leave it at that as I'm getting the impression it won't matter what I say you really favour NVidia, what you buy is up to ou but the info is out there and it's clear and I know were I'm spending my money this year, it's all there you keep saying it nothing predicted yet 2 of those vids say the same as do all the experts they can easily predict how thing are going.
Ill leave it at that cause I've found when it comes to the red vs green thing sometimes there just is no winning, I was green for 2016 until I did my homework and now without doubt I'm going red.
Also how can you say they say nothing or the vids mean nothing when just the last video runs 30 mins yet you responded saying you watched all of then in only a few minutes you should really watch the videos, but buy what you want it's your money m8.

Aost is an AMD sponsored showcasing game, better to look at Fable Legends for less biased numbers.
None of the above really predicts anything accurate about next generation GPU's. And i doubt the DX11 CPU overhead will be improved much either unless Polaris is not an incremental update for GCN.

@ rev6 check this just a small example and this guy makes points that being shared by expert tech guys, there's loads more about mantle &dx12, async etc.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RTd0zglP_qI
here's more just quick picks
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5zxkqdqYwGs
this is one of the better ones this guy knows more what he's talking about
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hLOAQFpaGh8
in-fact I believe there is another video of his you should watch but it explains pretty well what I'm reading on these sites there all saying the same thing, if it was just one or two I'd be ye ok but when there's 8 or 9 its harder to ignore.

Can you link me to benchmarks comparing 2016 GPU's in games? Or to where you're reading AMD will outperform NVIDIA. As right now NVIDIAS flagship GPU cut down is outperforming AMD's flagship. I'd be surprised if their 2016 flagship (not multiple GPU) outperforms the next Titan.

Plenty info and test done buddy info is out there top reviewers getting all the info every week as it comes in loads of youtube vids under amd vs NVidia 2016 all saying the same stuff test results further backed by the likes of anandtech and others all saying the same stuff, seriously check out I found it helpful and interesting and learned a little new stuff, I'm not a fan of one over the other to me it's just 1st who's doing the best and why, then i'll have to decide to I want to pay the money.

Why not, why do you care?
last week I had a conversation with rev6 & Ferrari100, I was sharing my results with them but given they were both on different posts for different cards and wanted to give both the info I'd found I pasted almost the same info on both.
I thought that would be clear given that my posts were directed straight to them, it's strange that with everything go on in these sites, all the posts and the very busy life's we all lead you manages to point out and ask something that doesn't matter to anyone, I'm curious what answer could I give you to make you question sound even remotely interesting or important, I mean what does it matter to you why, did you even read it?

How do you know of 2016, very little information on Artic Islands.

no for the 2016 models amd looks to destroy NVidia as for the cards that are out now ye NVidia is got the upper hand, but that will all be over when the new cards come out 8-12 top reviewers and experts all saying the same thing puts thing in perspective, ye async for the new Greenland will help with the advantage in power fps, they have now optimized cpu cores something amd has failed all trhese years which most believe gave NVidia a big leg up.

But plz don't take my word for it seriously look into mate.

Why the copy paste on multiple threads?

I don't believe it's an Async compute thing as AMD's top end GPU's aren't outperforming NVIDIA's, like the Fury and Fury X. I think it's a matter of AMD's mid to high end GPU's are just more powerful compared to the 980 for example. Fable Legends was said to not be using much Async compute unless that's false i don't know. I believe DX11 was seriously crippling for AMD and DX12 is allowing for the power to be taken advantage of. I could be wrong :smiley:

No ta, just been in the Tardis and got myself an iPhone 3GS

Okay I need to get my 14 year old a graphics card. We've just got the i6 6600K and MSI M7 motherboard. nVidia or AMD type card? I've been looking at the MSI nVidia GTX 970 but I don't think he deserves that card. Anything reasonable out there?

should have gotten this card instead of my 980ti...im not even using 20% potential of current card....

Ye everything you say is true since we last spoke I have been looking into it a lot saw those benchmarks heard the comments of various top reviewers.
and if what we are seeing is true and NVidia can't fix async then it looks like amd this time around, but you would expect NVidia to come back pretty soon over the next few years, fable was expected to be at very least promising for NVidia but it showed it's failure, the amd gpu's are utilizing the cpu cores better and is believed to be what's helping with the huge performance boost (instead of being single core dominant), interesting day of youtube if you have the time to learn it and understand it.
Nvidia have been very quiet apart from snarky comments from the PR department also being caught asking to limit the results on ashes is not a gd sign, its not over but time ticks away and NVidia are struggling even if they do get something done it will be a tack on and rushed job imo.

the fact that Samsung is now doing some of the work for amd helps and is a big deal when it comes to quality, I was all for a green team in 2016 but I have to say after doing a lot of research (and I'm glad I did) on what info's available at the moment I'm defo going red for 2016 by a mile, no contest, I'm really glad I looked into it cause as impressive as the green gpu's look the red chips look superior.

FYI I don't have a side preference I go with per/price I always like NV for power savings and recently performance and with AMD you sacrifice power saving for a cheaper initial cost and use the xtra ££ to bump up a level on the gpu (maybe), so I don't care, even if amd are everything they look like then ye its an easssssy buy, but lets hope there prices are still good and lets hope they fixed the huge power issues (talk is they have) if so 2016 is amd's year and they will take back some market share and force NVidia's hand to push for more, which is good for everyone.

Can you tell I've been studying :confused::smirk:

Cold for me,you can get an asus R9 380 4Gb for the same price with Overclock.co.uk
https://www.overclockers.co.uk/pc-components/graphics-cards/amd/radeon-r9-380

4gb versions of this card aren't worth it, the 128 bit memory stops the 4gb being useful. I think the only reason they aren't dropping the price of the 2gb version is because it then falls into the same price range as the newer 950, which they obviously want to be selling.

Ha. Love it... :smiley:

Hero's of the Storm is an abysmal game.

got this exact same card on Ebuyer for £149.98 in November.

Damn... Well here's hoping!

It does appear that the 290/x/390/x benefit a lot from some of the benchmarks I've seen. Up to Fury performance in some cases.

Agh okay, thanks for the quick response. Have a R9 390 coming soon to finish up my skylake build so i'm quite excited :stuck_out_tongue:

Fable Legends (DX12 only benchmarks) and Ashes of the Singularity. Neither are fully released yet and one is AMD sponsored. It's all we have though apart from the odd indie game.

Out of curiosity, what are those two games? Can't find any info on the net it seems.

Slightly lower performance than the R9 380 posted the other day for roughly the same price. Consumes a lot less power though and runs quieter. Both cards are a very good price and great value for money so voting hot. Just personal preference for the green team or the red team - though AMD chips seem to be seeing much higher jumps in power from DX12 which may be a game changer.

this is the usual price on Amazon isn't it though?