• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

[H]-Alien: Isolation - Video Card Performance Review

shankly1985 said:
No because price made me very happy. :p and mantle even happier. :D

This happened at one point last time think the 780ti was getting compared to 7970's till 290s came out.

It's wrong, it's not how we should be doing things tbh.. They no doubt though the 290's are doing very well.
Click to expand...

oOGVatsec.gif


:D

Nope, the 780Ti was released the same time (or thereabouts) as the 290X
 
shankly1985 said:
No because price made me very happy. :p and mantle even happier. :D

This happened at one point last time think the 780ti was getting compared to 7970's till 290s came out.

It's wrong, it's not how we should be doing things tbh.. They no doubt though the 290's are doing very well.
Click to expand...
You got the history wrong there I'm afraid. Nvidia was milking with their overpriced 780 at £550-£620 till AMD released the 290/290x, then Nvidia dropped the prices of the 780 down to £480-£500 (still more expensive than the 290x), and then launched the 780Ti to claim back the performance crown from the 290x.
 
Marine-RX179 said:
You got the history wrong there I'm afraid. Nvidia was milking with their overpriced 780 till AMD released the 290/290x, then Nvidia dropped the prices of the 780 (still more expensive than the 290x), and then launched the 780Ti to claim back the performance crown from the 290x.
Click to expand...

You are wrong also, as the 780 was cheaper than the 290X by a long way when the 290X was launched.
 
AMDMatt said:
We're extremely proud of the work we did with Creative Assembly on this title. As you can see, even at 4K it's very well optimised and performance is good all round. :cool:

IVXxn5w.gif
Click to expand...

Of course AMD are extremely proud (not you) with the work they did with creative assembly to get the highest benchmark. That's all AMD seem to be doing these days.
 
Gregster said:
You are wrong also, as the 780 was cheaper than the 290X by a long way when the 290X was launched.
Click to expand...
Nope, although the price slash from Nvidia came quite quickly, it still took 3 weeks to nearly a month before the 780 eventually matched the 290x price at average of £430, most definitely not right away at 290x launch as you said.

I'm throwing the "You are wrong also" right back at you.
 
Last edited:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AMD_Radeon_Rx_200_Series

$549 for the 290X at launch (which was October the 14th 2013).

And you are quite correct (apologies) and the 780 didn't get the price cut till 2 weeks after.

You could fry an egg on AMD's Radeon R9 290X chip and it gobbles up power like a volt-starved Pikachu, but its speedy performance has forced Nvidia's hand - find out why in our 290X review . AnandTech report that they're dropping the price of the GTX 780 by $150 to $500, and the price of the 770 by $70 to $330. The former just undercuts AMD's new flagship GPU, and the latter puts the 770 in a competitive range with the AMD 280X.
Nvidia's counter-punch, the GTX 780 Ti, will hit the streets on November 7 and will cost $700, 150 more than the 290X, but will it have 150 bucks worth of bonus power? Here's what our hardware expert Dave James
Click to expand...

http://www.pcgamer.com/gtx-780-and-...of-amd-290x-release-780-ti-gets-release-date/

So in effect, we were both wrong and right :D
 
Gregster said:
You are wrong also, as the 780 was cheaper than the 290X by a long way when the 290X was launched.
Click to expand...

Gregster said:
oOGVatsec.gif


:D
Click to expand...

Correct Marine, the 780's never dropped in price until they tried to counter(the later launched equivalent performing 290).

Gibbo said:
In short I think out of the box the R290X is the best card on the market, it beats literally every other card out the box and is a good deal cheaper than the cheapest GTX 780's, even at launch without any promotions or deals in place.
Click to expand...
 
LambChop said:
Of course AMD are extremely proud (not you) with the work they did with creative assembly to get the highest benchmark. That's all AMD seem to be doing these days.
Click to expand...

what? providing performance for games? how very dare they as a graphics card company do such a thing.


rabble rabble rabble.
 
Gregster said:
There is a couple of resolutions that most gamers will play. Check out the sound beating the 290X gets in SLI. :D
Click to expand...

Sound beating, only read as far as here to see the trolling. 2x980 sli 83 minimums, 290x xfire minimums 133......

For the record to give that some percentages, 290x xfire has 50% higher minimums than the 980. That is a sound and absolute spanking from AMD. The minimum FPS stays above a frame rate you could see on a 120hz screen.

Averages minimums and maximums are important. Nvidia has a higher max, higher average but ridiculously slower minimum. It means the variation in frame rate is much higher for Nvidia and AMD will be a smoother experience with less dips.

Performance matters in the most intensive scenes, not the least intensive. AMD focus on the most intensive, Nvidia focus on the least intensive.... and that is in DX11. AMD is spanking the living hell out of Nvidia with minimum frame rates lately.

Oh, and once again a game with multiple high end graphics features and AMD did nothing to either lock them out from Nvidia NOR gimp performance for Nvidia.

If only Nvidia would do the same. Imagine if every game getting help by Nvidia or AMD was getting improved graphics, improved effects, improved performance with no lock outs and no performance hurting of the other side, EVERY game would be good.

One of the two companies has done that, proven to do that with every title they work on. AMD have even gone along and helped fix games Nvidia left for dead(Stalker.. 2, whatever it was called, got dx11 and helped fix all the bugs after Nvidia gave up on it post launch). Instead Nvidia focuses on lock outs which by design will only happen for some games for some dev's who care about money and nothing else(Ubisoft). Nvidia's biggest partner now is one of the most anti PC gaming devs out there. They are making increasingly poor games that are increasingly buggy, Watchdogs was a joke performance wise, a stuttery mess on many systems both AMD and Nvidia and a joke in sli/xfire.

Nvidia is both pushing features that many dev's are completely unwilling to use precisely because they aren't hardware agnostic meaning guys might be working on gameworks for one game they make and ignoring it on the next game they make, thus a complete waste of time in terms of pushing the industry forward. Where hardware agnostic effects are used, anything that works gets carried forward to the next game and improved, there is no reason not to. The industry would move forward faster if devs can work on features that will stay an integral part of their engine they improve over years rather than tacked on paid for effects that don't end up in every game even that one dev makes. Learn to do X effect under gameworks, then code a new version for the next game..... rather than work on one effect and improve it game on game.

Nvidia practices hardware locking out, bad coding practice, slows the industry down for their own benefit(not their users) and has tied their flag to the worst current dev in the industry......... yay.
 
Last edited:
drunkenmaster said:
Sound beating, only read as far as here to see the trolling. 2x980 sli 83 minimums, 290x xfire minimums 133......

For the record to give that some percentages, 290x xfire has 50% higher minimums than the 980. That is a sound and absolute spanking from AMD. The minimum FPS stays above a frame rate you could see on a 120hz screen.

Averages minimums and maximums are important. Nvidia has a higher max, higher average but ridiculously slower minimum. It means the variation in frame rate is much higher for Nvidia and AMD will be a smoother experience with less dips.

Performance matters in the most intensive scenes, not the least intensive. AMD focus on the most intensive, Nvidia focus on the least intensive.... and that is in DX11. AMD is spanking the living hell out of Nvidia with minimum frame rates lately.

Oh, and once again a game with multiple high end graphics features and AMD did nothing to either lock them out from Nvidia NOR gimp performance for Nvidia.

If only Nvidia would do the same.
Click to expand...

If anything, if you look at the graph, those low minimum spikes probably end up flattering the AMD cards by bringing the average down for the Nvidia cards!
 
This game got me hooked on DSR, on goes DSR, off goes AA.

4K > 1080p, locked @ constant 60fps on a single 970 (Single... for now)

Though I will add, going over a certain res with DSR provided diminishing / possibly non existent gains beyond a certain resolution point with a 1080 panel.
 
Tonester0011 said:
Check the graphs, Nvidia tank at the same part of the bench everytime regardless of SLI etc. From the graphs both Nvida and AMD look similar up until that part, so would offer (at a guess) similar levels of perceived smoothness.
Click to expand...

Jono8 said:
If anything, if you look at the graph, those low minimum spikes probably end up flattering the AMD cards by bringing the average down for the Nvidia cards!
Click to expand...

Oh don't worry, he already knows that. But like most people on the forum they only argue with the points which suit their agenda.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom