Of course Dave. I have every intention of doing max stable bench tests with and without volts.
-
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.
Fury X Vs Titan X - Performance compared
- Thread starter Gregster
- Start date
Of course Dave. I have every intention of doing max stable bench tests with and without volts.
Soldato
- Joined
- 21 Sep 2009
- Posts
- 5,267
- Location
- London
Thanks, i'm holding off buying until I know if these are overclocking beasts or already at the raggedy edge.
A massive thanks to everyone who liked what I did and my sincere apologies for my mistakes. I am still new to this and sorry for the confusion.
To those that just picked fault and used this thread as a means to be a fanboy, I am disappointed.
To those that just picked fault and used this thread as a means to be a fanboy, I am disappointed.
Indeed they have both done great work on this node and i had a tough time choosing between 980ti and Fury X but the 1080p performance was a major factor, now that may or may not improve but i couldn't take the risk given the cost. All else considered i do think Maxwell has the edge but am hoping that AMD can do something about it and give me a reason to go back at the next die shrink as i did love my 290 (first venture into PC gaming) dearly.
I still can't believe that people were using them to argue over image quality rather than using them compare performance as you intended. Good job by the way, i noticed an improvement with each new one you put up as you seemed to learn more about the recording software you were using.
Cheers. Once I had learned the settings for the capture card, got the drivers correct and got the monitor settings correct, it was just a case of taking my time with Sony Vegas and getting the runs matched up as best as possible and in the best quality possible. It does take a great deal of work and time but it is something I enjoy doing and therefore don't mind. It just disappoints me when people we're picking faults (justified) but when everything was set right, not a single word.
The arguments are not exactly about image quality since internet videos are compressed but more about certain settings (AA, AF, texture rendering distance, etc) being enabled or disabled which give fps advantage due to less workload.
At the end of the day fps performance does get affected by what is being rendered or not.
Soldato
- Joined
- 24 Sep 2013
- Posts
- 2,890
- Location
- Exmouth, Devon
If people cant see the value and difference in having an honest enthusiast having a go at some enthusiast reviews then they aren't worth worrying about. Lets see their pro level review in their style.
I liked the discussion around the mistakes. I was informed by those explained caveats etc. Even the pros dont get it right all the time if you read the comments section.
To produce your reviews has cost you considerable time and money and it's been very refreshing to see the live debate and ideas for you to extend your review/comparison via the thread. Given me insight on what and how things are comapered and reviwed and particularly the caveats in them.
More please Gregster!
Cheers Woodsta and I am always happy to be corrected when I have made mistake. And always happy to have new ideas requested. As far as I am aware, I am the only person on the Internet who is showing exactly what is what and what frames you can expect.
Thats what it ended up turning into but the original argument was about image quality iirc.
Constructive critisism is fine, but i did notice a lot of the comments were claiming bias on your part which was harsh considering you were upfront about the mistakes you made originally.
I have been thinking about commentary and doing commentary with an AMD fanboy but that would be boring, so decided it would be new and exciting for a Nvidia fanboy to commentate with an AMD fangirl. You up for that Mei?
The results speak for themselves now that they've been done right.
lol i guess we could do it over skype
u should maybe pick some1 with better english tho
+ ive argued with u b4 id start breaking things!!!
Something to consider doing next time I am off work. Trust message me some of your most played games and maybe we can get an idea between us.
200% scaling on these runs - cut a bit short as the only other player on the server wanted to be a hero
Anyways, the Titan X is roughly 20% faster in this.Also, I did a Mantle run with the same settings and you can see for yourself what happens
Titan x certainly looks smoother in most of these comparisons.
Could you add the frame latency reading as well please greg. imo it is a better reading than FPS + it gives people an idea of "smoothness", anything below 20ms is smooth where as over 20ms, you notice the micro stutter.
Could you add the frame latency reading as well please greg. imo it is a better reading than FPS + it gives people an idea of "smoothness", anything below 20ms is smooth where as over 20ms, you notice the micro stutter.