Fury vs 980Ti

[layte]

Don't pretend like you havent already reported my posts. How about you act like an adult and get a thicker skin... You realise your constant Nvidia peddling isn't helping anyone.

Sometimes, the lack of self awareness from this forum boggles the mind.

 

[tommybhoy]

And yet no mention of the same guy getting in the same arguments even mutiple times each day over various threads now, it's always everybody elses fault, eh layte?

 

[LoadsaMoney]

Fury 4GB HBM VS 8GB RX 480 GDDR5 both AMD cards as not interested in fanboyism

http://hwbench.com/vgas/radeon-rx-480-vs-radeon-r9-fury

I dont know what textures are being used but the Fury with lesser Vram performs better than the card with higher Vram at all resolutions

I think with my limited knowledge that perhaps devs dont code for HBM and therefore when stating 4GB is not enough for Ultra settings they havent taken HBM into account at all, just GDDR

Fps shouldn't come into it, as would you honestly buy a dearer card, just because it gives you more frames at lower graphical settings, you would rather pay for the top tier cards at £500 a pop, that give 100fps low settings, over the next card down in the tier, at £350/£400 a pop, because they only give you about 60/70fps, at ultra/high settings.

 

[Relentless81]

I'm not sure I understand you, I wouldn't spend more than £350 absolute max on a GPU so I want the best card I can for that or below

FPS comes into it 100% of course it does, I would rather have slightly better FPS than slightly better shadow quality but thats my opinion, everyone is different

 

[Marine-RX179]

Not sure how many times this has been stated but I am sure you have read it and just trying to be deliberately ignorant or trolling? Nvidia do not cripple performance but rather AMD get the performance that their GPUS are capable of. More recently, AMD had the crimson drivers which gave some great gains and then people look at the performance graphs and wrongfully assume some form of foul play by Nvidia. Show me any graph that shows performance degradation and you might have a point however, if you can't, I will have to consider the first two options.

Look here...780Ti lagging behind the 970 in Witcher 3 by a fair margin, despite it is faster than it for older games in general:
http://www.techspot.com/review/1006-the-witcher-3-benchmarks/page3.html

I never said Nvidia release crippling driver like some suggested, all I have ever said was performance for games released after the card become EOL will not have the the same peak performance as older games that were release before the card became EOL.

You don't really expect or believe Nvidia will maintain the same level of resource toward optimising for EOL cards that are going off the shelf, and that they have an whole new team working supporting on the new gen card? I think you know very well that the strenghth of Nvidia cards are driven by optimisation, which require people that constantly working on it; but at soon at this human resource is being diverted toward higher priority such as new gen card, the EOL card simply won't get the same level of optimisation and support as before.

The AMD cards GCN base architecture is not power efficient and is clearly showing its age, but it is precisely because of new AMD cards are still base around the same core architecture, that their old cards still consistently improve in performance as they age. So as I once said, the GCN design of AMD is both blessing and a curse; Nvidia on the other hand have made architectural designs that are quite different from one another over the pass few gens that require different approach for optimising, so it's only natural that they would focus their resource and priority on new gen cards instead of old EOL cards.

 

[BaZ87]

And yet no mention of the same guy getting in the same arguments even mutiple times each day over various threads now, it's always everybody elses fault, eh layte?

If the other person is the one throwing insults around, yes. If you can debate things like adults then stick each other on ignore.

 

[Gregster]

Look here...780Ti lagging behind the 970 in Witcher 3 by a fair margin, despite it is faster than it for older games in general:
http://www.techspot.com/review/1006-the-witcher-3-benchmarks/page3.html

I never said Nvidia release crippling driver like some suggested, all I have ever said was performance for games released after the card become EOL will not have the the same peak performance as older games that were release before the card became EOL.

You don't really expect or believe Nvidia will maintain the same level of resource toward optimising for EOL cards that are going off the shelf, and that they have an whole new team working supporting on the new gen card? I think you know very well that the strenghth of Nvidia cards are driven by optimisation, which require people that constantly working on it; but at soon at this human resource is being diverted toward higher priority such as new gen card, the EOL card simply won't get the same level of optimisation and support as before.

The AMD cards GCN base architecture is not power efficient and is clearly showing its age, but it is precisely because of new AMD cards are still base around the same core architecture, that their old cards still consistently improve in performance as they age. So as I once said, the GCN design of AMD is both blessing and a curse; Nvidia on the other hand have made architectural designs that are quite different from one another over the pass few gens that require different approach for optimising, so it's only natural that they would focus their resource and priority on new gen cards instead of old EOL cards.

That's a fair point and I can see where you are coming from but you have to take into account that a new architecture is certainly going to improve over an older arch. Like I have said before, NVidia tend to get the best early on and that is what you get (as can be seen from the babeltechreviews testing), so it isn't uncommon for a new architecture to see more gains.

 

[Tommy_Here]

If I was in the market for either card id get the Ti why? Because I don't want to base my decision on oh well next year when dx 12 etc becomes more mainstream the fury will start to shine but instead base it on today's performance and like gregster said the fury can't match a 980 Ti especially when both are overclocked heck oc vs oc the 980 Ti matches the 1070 something a fury most definitely can't do

 

[Mayh3M]

And here is a video from a guy you, yourself have posted videos from on this very forum within the last week...

http://www.gamespot.com/forums/syst...hows-nvidia-gpus-losing-performance-32925136/

I mean just google "Nvidia planned obsolescence" brings up hundreds of posts. Wow and to think I took your posts seriously once upon a time. I would suggest people that come to this forum in the future take what some people here say with a pinch of salt (even me!) and do their own research. The information here in this forum is tainted by fanboys.

Google 'UFO sightings' and you'll get thousands of posts. The truth of something isn't determined by how many posts there are out there claiming it to be true. Do not insult other members : someone who believes things because it reinforces their own agenda rather than because of any tangible evidence.

Also that AdoredTV guy has no credibility whatsoever. His level of bias puts to shame even the most vociferous AMD fanboys. Just google his name and read some of his posts on other forums. The fact that he's articulate and has a Scottish accent doesn't remove the fact that he is what he is.

 

[Cleeecooo]

well at 4k it looses pretty often just saying

Fair enough

For older games at bench suites may be, but what about new games (and I ain't even talking about dx12)? Pretty sure Nvidia's software team already packed up and left the Maxwell old office and move to their new Pascal headquarter (so to speak)

The Fury Nano at £330 seem to strike the good balance in terms of moving forward, considering ongoing driver support and dx12; but if all people want to do us play games before the release of Pascal, then the 980Ti is no-brainer.

I get what you're saying, but the issue is:

If I was in the market for either card id get the Ti why? Because I don't want to base my decision on oh well next year when dx 12 etc becomes more mainstream the fury will start to shine but instead base it on today's performance and like gregster said the fury can't match a 980 Ti especially when both are overclocked heck oc vs oc the 980 Ti matches the 1070 something a fury most definitely can't do

In addition to that, whilst we can speculate about future improvements, I'm yet to see any evidence convincing enough to recommend an AMD card over an NV card which is currently outperforming it.

With the 480 vs 1060 they're so close that I'd tend to recommend the 480 based ont eh future arguments, but with the Nano vs 980Ti I'd take the Ti because for £10 more you get a better cooler and a factory OC.

A bird in the hand is better than two in the bush, especially when you're not 100% certain about the birds in the bush!

 

[LoadsaMoney]

I'm not sure I understand you, I wouldn't spend more than £350 absolute max on a GPU so I want the best card I can for that or below

FPS comes into it 100% of course it does, I would rather have slightly better FPS than slightly better shadow quality but thats my opinion, everyone is different

The Furys are AMDs top tiered cards though, their flagship ones, they shouldn't have less vram than the cards below them, or have to run at lower settings than those cards below them.

 

[layte]

And yet no mention of the same guy getting in the same arguments even mutiple times each day over various threads now, it's always everybody elses fault, eh layte?

I'll let somebody else field this one old chap.

If the other person is the one throwing insults around, yes. If you can debate things like adults then stick each other on ignore.

I've realised that getting salty over somebody being mean about my favourite faceless multinational or quantifying my self worth over what make of GPU is in my PC is a big fat waste of time. /shrug

 

[Dave2150]

The Furys are AMDs top tiered cards though, their flagship ones, they shouldn't have less vram than the cards below them, or have to run at lower settings than those cards below them.

Fury's are all EOL (End of life) - AMD are not making any more of them, for good reason. 4GB VRAM limitation is completely silly in 2016 on a supposed high end card.

 

[Telecaster]

Basically, if you want to hang on for 3 years for the driver to unleash the full potential of the card then go with AMD.

However if you just want the fastest card out of the box from day one then go with nvidia.

 

[bigjimmyauk]

Basically, if you want to hang on for 3 years for the driver to unleash the full potential of the card then go with AMD.

However if you just want the fastest card out of the box from day one then go with nvidia.

think this sums it up nicely to be honest. Was the same when i owned my 5770,5850 and 6950 they got faster over time.

right now as it stands go with nvidia plus all the overclocking headroom on the 980Ti it just increases the lead. Only exception being some of the direct x 12 bench marks. but i wouldn't buy a gpu based purely on that. both cards have there pro's and con's only you can decide which is for you.

 

[tommybhoy]

If the other person is the one throwing insults around, yes.

I'll let somebody else field this one old chap.

It's only their fault if they throw an insult, didn't admonish anyone else.

 

[Relentless81]

The Furys are AMDs top tiered cards though, their flagship ones, they shouldn't have less vram than the cards below them, or have to run at lower settings than those cards below them.

HBM memory isnt the equivalent in performance to GDDR like for like, you already know that, you're choosing to ignore it. Look at my post and the link on the previous page. Just because a lower spec card has more Vram it doesnt mean it performs better than a card with a lesser amount of HMB Vram

As to why games/devs cant get around it, I cant answer that but it doesnt bother me in the slightest, I'll happily take 4GB of HBM on a Fury over 8GB on the RX 480, it is quite simply the more powerful card in terms of performance per £

 

[Thaifood]

So in a nut shell on a non free sync monitor the 980ti at 1080p and 1440p but fury at 4K.

 

[Gregster]

So in a nut shell on a non free sync monitor the 980ti at 1080p and 1440p but fury at 4K.

I seriously wouldn't want a 4GB card for 4K.

 

[Kaapstad]

I seriously wouldn't want a 4GB card for 4K.

4gb card + 2160p + ROTTR maxed is not a pretty sight.

The other day I watch the fps tank on an 8gb card doing the above benchmark.