Do you not see the irony in your comment/response?

AMD have 100% of the console market where AAA games are made for.

Surely that depends on the game?
In the new Deus Ex, even the 470 beats the 1060. Nvidia since at least Kepler (and Ferni I guess if we consider the 1.5GB GTX 580) have aged poorly.
Of course, the past does not predict the future (and a lot of the poor ageing was due to less VRAM, although in the case of Kepler the poor compute performance didn't help). But with AMD in both the consoles, games will continue to design for GCN and those PC ports tend to run well on Radeon cards unless sabotaged by Nvidia's Gameworks binary blobs.

no they wont, stop talking rubbish.

Heat, heat price but you need to add the seller to the title

14 in stock

Thanks mod who did that, my bad

is this one or the 8gb any better than the r9 390x ?? explain possibly, please. Consumption is not an issue

Got this for £210 from Overclockers a few weeks ago and I'm very happy with it.

When you add it to basket, look in the basket and it tells you the stock level.

Note: Sometimes it's not reliable because they don't update it correctly.

1 Less now.

Nice one OP!

thank you, so how do the NVidia compare with the more or less same equivalent? and if worse, does it mean that they will/will not eventually be on par with the right drivers?

The 1060 has a slight edge in older games. All the latest games will be running on this better though.

no they wont, stop talking rubbish.

put your peckers away gentlemen please...

anyway can confirm this stock is real as mine is being dispatched as we speak, as confirmed by their online CS agent, just had to make sure after the Scan, OCUK debacles.

These were hot at £170 last month, but at £200? May as well spend the extra £30 on a 6GB 1060 - far less power usage, broader support (SteamOS, Linux, less CPU dependence), and a better performer.

Surely that depends on the game?
In the new Deus Ex, even the 470 beats the 1060. Nvidia since at least Kepler (and Ferni I guess if we consider the 1.5GB GTX 580) have aged poorly.
Of course, the past does not predict the future (and a lot of the poor ageing was due to less VRAM, although in the case of Kepler the poor compute performance didn't help). But with AMD in both the consoles, games will continue to design for GCN and those PC ports tend to run well on Radeon cards unless sabotaged by Nvidia's Gameworks binary blobs.

That's the AMD-sponsored game that released less than 48 hours ago with a wealth of technical issues, isn't it..? (And the benchmarks I saw showed the 1060 ahead of the 470 at higher quality settings - so, at the risk of pointing out your comment's hypocrisy, "surely that depends on the settings?" :wink:)

But I do apologise for keeping my original comment so brief. Perhaps I should have been clearer: out of over 10,000 games available, the 480 outperforms the 1060 in, what is it now? Five games? (Assuming a high-end CPU and Windows, of course!)

I'm sorry, all games without bloatworks I mean.

could just as easily say AMD only have decent frame rates in games they 'sponsor'.

Yes because AMD sponsor DX12 and Vulkan.

I'll think you will find the core of Vulkan is that failed experiment, Mantle, that was in loads of games, wasn't it :smile:

end of the day Nvidia have a huge market share and devs will have no choice but to cater for that.

AMD have 100% of the console market where AAA games are made for.

I pre ordered with scan to begin with, was made promises I would be next. 3 weeks went past with 3 emails being told my order is important.
Had a chat with someone on facebook that said he ordered 2 days before me and got his 2 weeks before.
The last promise from Scan of a schedule of stock to be in came and past without an update email telling me they didn't get any on that day so I asked for a refund as I saw Overclockers had some in stock and got it dispatched 2 days later.
Will never use Scan again, even after being told I'd get a refund had to email them again asking for it a week later which they payed by paypal automatically.

Didn't know this post was about consoles?

Didn't know that games are developed for consoles and then ported to PC?

Well now you do I guess.

Think you will find they all start life on a PC then ported over to the dev kits.

I think you will find they will be developed to make best use of the AMD architecture which is in the consoles.

just paid £209 from overclockers, oh well at least that included next day delivery as I'm impatient :smiley:

hate to agree with muffins but he's technically got you here, start with lowest possible outcome and scale up to better equipment is the route most devs will take. Make a game that runs on consoles, most PC will easily run the equivilant

Ahh, you are conveniently forgetting that the console APU is very dissimilar to the 400/300 cards.

The PS4 uses GCN 1.1 (gen 2).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graphics_Core_Next#second

If you truly believe that development is done for 7 year old tech and then ported to current tech, you may be in for a surprise.

You may also be in for a surprise if you actually think game companies do heavy optimization on x86 architecture.

Hint, this isn't the PS3, x86 is very mature and there is very little specific optimization done.

Well, actually Hawaii (290/390) is pretty similar to Bonaire (7790 etc). And a lot of console ports do show this especially with low-level APIs where Hawaii has aged really well.

For future games, the question is what PS4Neo (PS4 v1.5) will use. Current rumours are it will be some kind of Polaris based GPU but that might make it hard to guarantee backward compatibility with the current PS4. Another possibility is to keep the current PS4 APU and add a 2nd GPU. Previous rumours said that neither Microsoft or Sony were willing to pay to port their respective APUs to 16/14nm but the new XBoneOne S (and possible the new PS4 Slim) show that at least Microsoft were willing to pay. So it possible that PS4Neo could have a 16nm version of the PS4 APU plus an extra GPU. Would be strange for developers but might ensure better Crossfire support for new games.

Microsoft's XboneOne v1.5 aka 'Project Scorpio' is still far enough way that it could conceivable use some kind of Vega rather than Polaris.

Of course, just because the consoles use AMD GPUs does not mean all games will perform better with AMD GPUs. The console version of Rise Of The Tombraider would have had async compute but due to sponsorship the PC version did not at release. When it comes to sponsorship, Nvidia do have way deeper pockets...

I think you'll find GCN is much more future proof than that nvidia shill ****.

So is the deal any good? I think that's the point of the site :confused:

DX12 and Vulkan both stem from Mantle.

Having said that this is the nitro+ cooler
:smile:

Is the 4gb version a bit of a pointless buy with more and more memory demand likely to happen with the next generation of games?

decided to order this last night. also 1.5% top cash back
Only getting 20-30 fps on deus ex with my old nvidia 670 card. So hoping to double that now

Not had an AMD card for while but find it hard to go nvidia with their g-sync monitor price premium Vs AMD freesync and further consumer rip off with their founder editions premium price scam.

And I think you will both find that all people on here see are some rabid fanboys foaming in the mouth.........

Do you not see the irony in your comment/response?

There are other comparisons that don't really agree.

I think the issue here is the 2GB of VRAM on those cards. All cards with 2GB of VRAM are struggling with DE. Check out the brand new AMD 460 falling to the levels of the 670. They both have 2 GB.

http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/hardware-canucks-reviews/70125-gtx-780-ti-vs-r9-290x-rematch-8.html

http://www.babeltechreviews.com/nvidia-forgotten-kepler-gtx-780-ti-vs-290x-revisited/4/

A few other reviews show almost no difference over time.

If anything, Deus Ex shows us that skimping on VRAM may cost you in future games.

Garbage, as are all AMDead products these days. I hope Zen is decent. Never forget the FX series.

AMD sucks. Nvidia sucks.










...and now we wait :man:

Well, yes once a card runs out of VRAM it's performance will nosedive. But up until this generation (excluding the 3GB GTX1060*), Nvidia in their quest for max margins and planned obsolescence were hardly generous with VRAM. Even GTX580 with 1.5GB ran out of VRAM long before it ran out of power so it's hardly new. Nobody seems to have tested any Kepler 4GB cards though.

PCGH.de did included the GTX 780 Ti though and the R9-290 (non :laughing: beats it. GK110 was a far larger chip than Hawaii and the two used about the same power. So the real perf/watt and perf/mm² between AMD and Nvidia only really changed with Maxwell. (Although the later is really only of interest to shareholders but that doesn't stop it getting debated all the time on certain forums...)

However, I've said this before when those two retrospectives were linked: all the show is that performance hasn't regressed. They say nothing about how future-proof GCN1.0 and Kepler were. Of course, having 100% of the consoles means AMD were able to ensure current games took advantage of GPU compute and so on rather when Nvidia would try and force excessive tessellation or PhysX.

*(For some reason reviews of 3GB version fo GTX1060 are still scares - nobody sampling review sites and none of them good enough to go and buy their own cards.)

Both faceless greedy corporation.

However, while that is true, one of them is greedier and lives by the adage 'business is war'.

Consumers may not care but a company which plays so aggressively is hardly the consumers friend as witnessed by how poorly their cards age (planned obsolescence? poor reading of how the industry is going?), or how they react when something goes wrong (the solder defects which affected millions of parts in the 8800GT era).

So you think AMD are only in business from the good of their hearts? If AMD had monstrous market share you think they wouldn't be complacent with their morals? Right now they can't afford to be, both figuratively and literally.

Of course not. But one company is consistently more aggressive and that's not just bad for their competitors but can also be bad for consumers.
Remember Nvidia's CEO has never changed so all the dirty tricks they did to get to their dominant position happened under that 'watch'. And all benchmark cheating in the early days, Nvidia focus group shill marketing, not paying for the damage their solder defects caused were under this CEO. Against that, that CEO did build them up from the beginning, created the big market for GPU compute etc. etc. Still don't like him or his tactics though.

Psssst my comment was deliberately inflammatory as a joke.. I wasn't after reasoned and/or sensible responses :laughing:

Vulkan is a direct competitor to DX12, as gamers DX12 is bad very bad as an API, forcing people to use a crappy badly bugged piece of crap that is Windows 10 which gets even worst with every major release.

If nothing more, I've learnt a great deal about the history of graphic card manufacturers here. Cheers for the insight.

heat, i will eventually invest once my two 7790s can't handle the abuse

This seems like a pretty good card. Some of the comments I'm finding very confusing though.
All the talk of planned obsolescence is pretty silly. The nature of technology is progress. Who cares about a 4 year old 670? Really?
If you move away from AMD sponsored titles and unreasonably high settings that exhaust VRAM, there's just no evidence of this so called gimping by nvidia.

It's great that the GCN architecture is flexible with different workloads, but if AMD had produced an architecture that performed well in the here and now rather than waiting for software that didn't exist, maybe they would have been able to keep things more profitable and we'd have better competition.

In the old days it used to be that some titles worked better on Nivdia cards and some worked better on Radeon. Or Matrox. Or 3dfx. Or whatever. Guess what, nothing's changed.

Don't deceive yourself. All public listed companies have one master, the shareholders. The shareholders want a return on their investment. Profit is king. Call it greed but it's a form of honesty and we're talking about a capitalist system, which is how you and I can all earn our money, pay our taxes and buy nice things that other people made for us.

If it was your pension fund that invested in one of these stocks you'd want them to make as much profit as possible too.

​Yes the difference is that I actually do research, unlike blind nvidia sheep.

Bought for 20£ on gumtree

Novidia shill confirmed.

Sure, public traded companies* do have that obligation.
However, that doesn't mean that anything goes and some companies do act far worse than others.
The range of behaviour of publicly-quoted companies range from as low as those willing to use near slave labour in third world countries.
A google (so no idea if the criteria used are the most appropriate, or if there is anything underhand going on) turns up a site like this:
http://worldsmostethicalcompanies.ethisphere.com/honorees/
So even in the UK the range of behaviour would range from Marks and Spencer Plc (which made it onto that list above) to Sportdirect Plc (which most certainly did not).
Same laws governing corporation, shareholders etc. but two totally different outlooks.
So yes, both AMD and Nvidia are publicly-quoted companies but if one company has a long history of dubious practices, surely I should support the other one?

*And especially in the Western World a public traded company can often have a very poor long-term outlook since pleasing shareholders (and CEO pay etc.) can often have a detrimental effect on long-term strategic investment as shareholder often just want return this year.

Does amd come with the ability to play 3D games built into the drivers these days? I'm currently on nvidea, and paying for tridef or something similar ups the effective cost of any Radeon card I would plump for

Is this quiet/cool? I've heard contradictory reports.

Good price. This is the real price:performance king. It would have been better if other partners did 4GB aftermarket cards as well since the Nitro cooler isn't brilliant.

Kind of missing the point. It's not so black and white and AMD are definitely more consumer friendly than Nvidia even when there's no obvious benefit to them, e.g. open source drivers.

​Stop cry.

Out of stock.

Conjecture. Nobody knows what a successful AMD would be like because AMD are not successful. :man:

Not the point. AMD's "morals" only buys them goodwill and goodwill means basically jack amongst consumers. For every AMD fanboy who responded to the open source drivers there are 100 Nvidia fanboys who respond to their endless advertising. My point is it's irrelevant to their success whether AMD keeps doing nice stuff. Whether AMD will continue doing it if they become Nvidia level successful is a red herring.

Ah okay, so what you're saying is AMD are not very good at business. Thanks that's much clearer now I understand.



:man:

Just reading that most 4gb cards are actually 8GB and locked off in the bios, which is easily unlocked, so buying 4gb.....is actually buying 8gb, bonus