Battle of the GPUs: Is power efficiency the new must-have?

[andybird123]

Features and performance are 2 different things.
Money figure is not subjective as much as 4+4=8 is not subjective, 8 not being your favorite number does not change that fact that 4+4=8

You can put a factual monetary figure of performance, pounds per fps.
You can put a factual monetary figure on features, pounds per feature.

Which ever gives the most for the less pound is the better bang per buck, dont confuse individual preference, want or desire for a feature or being more popular and selling more with better bang per buck.

Whether what anything is worth to and individual is entirely different.

I didnt say anything about features, you talked about reviewers doing bang for buck based on fps, fps in what? The games the reviewers chose.
Even fps is not an objective measurment as there are dozens of different ways to present the fps figure used

 

[triss]

Final8y;27232416]Features and performance are 2 different things.
Money is not subjective as much as 4+4=8 is not subjective,8 not being your favorite number does not change that fact that 4+4=8

You can put a factual monetary figure of performance, pounds per fps.
You can put a factual monetary figure on features, pounds per feature.

Which ever gives the most for the less pound is the better bang per buck, dont confuse individual preference, want or desire for a feature or being more popular and selling more with better bang per buck.

Whether what anything is worth to and individual is entirely different.

You can put a factual monetary figure of performance, pounds per fps

Also some dont like stutter and say one side or the othr is better EG mantle seems to be quite good for reducing it , doesnt stutter count as performance?
Oddly enough most reviews get different results on fps from other reviews quite often
Then you have different results on games, look at a certain game on release on one or the other should we use that and say well the side doing bad is really bad BFB and should be avoided?

You can put a factual monetary figure on features, pounds per feature.

So one pound per feature and when that feature is worth more to someone else than you choose to put on it there wrong?
Mantles say worth 2 pounds, physix is 1 pound DSR is 5 pounds?

Value (economics), a measure of the benefit that may be gained from goods or service

Without knowing the value which really is the monetary figure someone places on a feature you cannot place a value on a feature,, The only value you can place on it is what its worth to you

 

[Final8y]

I didnt say anything about features, you talked about reviewers doing bang for buck based on fps, fps in what? The games the reviewers chose.
Even fps is not an objective measurment as there are dozens of different ways to present the fps figure used

Multiple quotes and you assumed it was all a reply to you specifically.

Which is no difference than the price which will be set is subjective, but the price you will pay is not when you accept the price when you pay.

 

[Final8y]

Without knowing the value which really is the monetary figure someone places on a feature you cannot place a value on a feature,, The only value you can place on it is what its worth to you

Its easy you dive the cost by the fps, you dive the cost by how many features, you then get the bang for buck.


Again you are confusing what something cost to what and individual thinks is worth it which are 2 different things.

Bang for buck is based on cost comparison and not on what people think is worth it.


£200 is less than £400, its not subjective its not about do people think its worth it to whether £200 is less then £400, it is what it is.
Whether something is worth pay £400 for over £200 is subjective, what you are actually getting for it is not.

 

[andybird123]

Its easy you dive the cost by the fps, you dive the cost by how many features, you then get the bang for buck.


Again you are confusing what something cost to what and individual thinks is worth it which are 2 different things.

Bang for buck is based on cost comparison and not on what people think is worth it.

Multiple quotes and you assumed it was all a reply to you specifically.

Which is no difference than the price which is will set is subjective, but the price you will pay is not when you accept the price when you pay.

Regardless of which bit was aimed at me, you said bang for buck is an objective measurement because it involves dividing one number by another
both numbers however are massively subjective, fps especially, but even price as this thread shows people are willing to play all sorts of games on price to justify a decision

Any result based on subjective results is itself subjective and not objective just "because it involves maths"

 

[triss]

Its easy you dive the cost by the fps, you dive the cost by how many features, you then get the bang for buck.


Again you are confusing what something cost to what and individual thinks it worth which are 2 different things.

Bang for back is based on cost comparison and not on what people think is worth it.

£200 is less than £400, its not subjective its not about do people think its worth it to whether £200 is less then £400, it is what it is.
Whether something is worth pay £400 for over £200 is subjective, what you are actually getting for it is not

£50 pound is less than £200 aswell i think if you are going down this road you need to be going along this line of thought the best bang for buck card is the cheapest gpu you can fit which is say a gtx 750 or a amd 260 something?

Its easy you dive the cost by the fps

Except as stated most reviews get different Fps from other reviews let alone in different games than run better on one side or the other and at different resolutions,
EG 290x often seem to pass the 900series at 4k but not at lower resolutions as much

BFB has to take the end user into account simple fact.

you dive the cost by how many features

http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=GX-341-SP
features
- DirectX 11.2 Support
- Open GL 4.2 Support
- Dolby TrueHD and DTS-HD Master Audio support
- Crossfire Support upto 4-way: Native software crossfire (No bridge required)
- Gaming @ 4k Resolutions (UltraHD)
- Synergy with next-gen game consoles (Mantle)
- Graphics Core Next (GCN) architecture - optimized from previous generation products

http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=GX-352-AS
- Voxel Global Illumination Technology (VXGI)
- NVIDIA® Super Resolution technology
- NVIDIA® GameWorks technology
- NVIDIA® GameStream technology
- NVIDIA® TXAA Technology
- NVIDIA GPU Boost 2.0
- NVIDIA PhysX® Technology
- NVIDIA FXAA Technology
- NVIDIA Adaptive Vertical Sync
- NVIDIA Surround
- Support for four concurrent displays including: Two dual-link DVI, HDMI and DisplayPort 1.2
- Microsoft DirectX 12
- NVIDIA® 3D Vision® Ready
- NVIDIA SLI® Ready Technology
- NVIDIA CUDA® technology
- PCI Express 3.0 support
- OpenGL 4.4 support
- OpenCL support
- NVIDIA SHIELD Ready
- NVIDIA G-Sync Ready

So what your saying is because the 900 series has way more features that your dividing into the price its BFB goes up. And ofc its a flat rate per feature


I see we get nowhere and its a waste of time so i will simply agree to disagree with you
May you have a good day

 

[Gregster]

Features and performance are 2 different things.
Money figure is not subjective as much as 4+4=8 is not subjective, 8 not being your favorite number does not change that fact that 4+4=8

You can put a factual monetary figure of performance, pounds per fps.
You can put a factual monetary figure on features, pounds per feature.

Which ever gives the most for the less pound is the better bang per buck, dont confuse individual preference, want or desire for a feature or being more popular and selling more with better bang per buck.

Whether what anything is worth to and individual is entirely different.

Of course features and performance are different things but the end result comes down to features and performance.... If I wanted to get from A to B, I could drive or bus or walk, each will get me there but what way is the better. The same works for gaming and whilst reviewers all have different testing methodology, they all aim to give their frames Found but what about the GFX? Does one game have additional features that the other doesn't? Does the game run as smooth on one over the other? Does the game have issues on both or just one vendor? These are basics that I look to before buying anything.

I want to play with ultimate smoothness, so I bought G-Sync. AMD might well have more frames than nVidia in a particular game but is it as smooth as G-Sync? So many variables, it is unfair to compare one to the other.

 

[Final8y]

Regardless of which bit was aimed at me, you said bang for buck is an objective measurement because it involves dividing one number by another
both numbers however are massively subjective, fps especially, but even price as this thread shows people are willing to play all sorts of games on price to justify a decision

Any result based on subjective results is itself subjective and not objective just "because maths"

I said bang for buck is a Comparative term/measurement. which is a completely different meaning to objective measurement, so pls get that right.

And how the fps are measured is why we read multiple reviews and benches to get our overall picture.

 

[andybird123]

I said bang for buck is a Comparative term/measurement. which is a completely different meaning to objective measurement, so pls get that right.

And how the fps are measured is why we read multiple reviews and benches.

You said "it isnt subjective, it is factual"
Something is either subjective, or it isnt, by saying it isnt subjective you are saying it is objective... None of the things you are talking about are objective, they are therefore subjective, that is how English works
There isnt a situation that exists between objective and subjective, it has to be one or the other

Money figure is not subjective as much as 4+4=8 is not subjective, 8 not being your favorite number does not change that fact that 4+4=8

You can put a factual monetary figure of performance, pounds per fps.
You can put a factual monetary figure on features, pounds per feature.
.

 

[Final8y]

Of course features and performance are different things but the end result comes down to features and performance.... If I wanted to get from A to B, I could drive or bus or walk, each will get me there but what way is the better. The same works for gaming and whilst reviewers all have different testing methodology, they all aim to give their frames Found but what about the GFX? Does one game have additional features that the other doesn't? Does the game run as smooth on one over the other? Does the game have issues on both or just one vendor? These are basics that I look to before buying anything.

I want to play with ultimate smoothness, so I bought G-Sync. AMD might well have more frames than nVidia in a particular game but is it as smooth as G-Sync? So many variables, it is unfair to compare one to the other.

Which is all down to individual preference and issues which has nothing to do with bang for buck.

 

[LambChop]

That cringeworthy term is only used by AMD fanboys. I've never seen anyone in the nvidia camp use it.

 

[Nexus18]

That cringeworthy term is only used by AMD fanboys. I've never seen anyone in the nvidia camp use it.

Emmm

It has been used by a lot of "nvidia fanboys" since the 970 came out, I think even you have used it too!

 

[Gregster]

Which is all down to individual preference and issues which has nothing to do with bang for buck.

You are not looking at anything from an objective point of view and using individual bias to justify your reasoning. If someone asks what GPU gives the best bang per buck in BF4, I would say AMD. If someone asks the same for Batman, I will say nVidia. You can't wrap everything in a blanket and claim it as the defacto, when there is so many variables to take on board and mull over.

Like I say, look at the features, what the purchaser is after, what resolution, rest of the system spec.... And then decide what is the best purchase for his/her money.

 

[Final8y]

You said "it isnt subjective, it is factual"
Something is either subjective, or it isnt, by saying it isnt subjective you are saying it is objective... None of the things you are talking about are objective, they are therefore subjective, that is how English works
There isnt a situation that exists between objective and subjective, it has to be one or the other

No it is not one or the other hence factual 4+4=8 is not subjective or objective its factual, subjective or objective can be used to determining if something is factual or not but once its determined its factual.

Subjective or objective if one has cancer because the signs can be many things, but once investigation has determined that it is cancer it is not subjective or objective, it is factual.


And that's all i have time for.

 

[LambChop]

Emmm

It has been used by a lot of "nvidia fanboys" since the 970 came out, I think even you have used it too!

£100 I have never used that.

 

[Gregster]

No it is not one or the other hence factual 8+8=4 is not subjective or objective its factual, subjective or objective can be used to determining if something is factual or not but once its determined its factual.

Subjective or objective if one has cancer because the signs can be many things, but once investigation has determined that it is cancer it is not subjective or objective, it is factual.


And that's all i have time for.

Well, if that is how you see 8+8, no wonder you are not making sense

 

[Final8y]

You are not looking at anything from an objective point of view and using individual bias to justify your reasoning.

Bias for what, there is no bias for anything because i have not mentioned brands at all, im talking about bang for buck which is not exclusive to gfx cards and all you have done is shown your own bias in your assumption and dropped to your usual level which im no longer going to entertain.

 

[Final8y]

Well, if that is how you see 8+8, no wonder you are not making sense

LOL yep a typo.
\Good day.

 

[Final8y]

£50 pound is less than £200 aswell i think if you are going down this road you need to be going along this line of thought the best bang for buck card is the cheapest gpu you can fit which is say a gtx 750 or a amd 260 something?



Except as stated most reviews get different Fps from other reviews let alone in different games than run better on one side or the other and at different resolutions,
EG 290x often seem to pass the 900series at 4k but not at lower resolutions as much

BFB has to take the end user into account simple fact.



http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=GX-341-SP
features
- DirectX 11.2 Support
- Open GL 4.2 Support
- Dolby TrueHD and DTS-HD Master Audio support
- Crossfire Support upto 4-way: Native software crossfire (No bridge required)
- Gaming @ 4k Resolutions (UltraHD)
- Synergy with next-gen game consoles (Mantle)
- Graphics Core Next (GCN) architecture - optimized from previous generation products

http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=GX-352-AS
- Voxel Global Illumination Technology (VXGI)
- NVIDIA® Super Resolution technology
- NVIDIA® GameWorks technology
- NVIDIA® GameStream technology
- NVIDIA® TXAA Technology
- NVIDIA GPU Boost 2.0
- NVIDIA PhysX® Technology
- NVIDIA FXAA Technology
- NVIDIA Adaptive Vertical Sync
- NVIDIA Surround
- Support for four concurrent displays including: Two dual-link DVI, HDMI and DisplayPort 1.2
- Microsoft DirectX 12
- NVIDIA® 3D Vision® Ready
- NVIDIA SLI® Ready Technology
- NVIDIA CUDA® technology
- PCI Express 3.0 support
- OpenGL 4.4 support
- OpenCL support
- NVIDIA SHIELD Ready
- NVIDIA G-Sync Ready

So what your saying is because the 900 series has way more features that your dividing into the price its BFB goes up. And ofc its a flat rate per feature


I see we get nowhere and its a waste of time so i will simply agree to disagree with you
May you have a good day

You know better than to going by the listings when you know full well that AMD dont list all of theres features.

And no its nothing about flat rate and good day to you to.

 

[Gregster]

Bias for what, there is no bias for anything because i have not mentioned brands at all, im talking about bang for buck which is not exclusive to gfx cards and all you have done is shown your own bias in your assumption and dropped to your usual level which im no longer going to entertain.

I never said you used brands What I did say is price/performance is very subjective and you need to look from different perspectives. As for the rest of that, what usual level have I dropped to? I thought I was very objective and polite? I took on board what you said and disagreed. I try to look at things in a big picture mode and not a sole bias and if people can give me something objective to see from, I won't get huffy/stroppy and will take it on board.