New GPU for the boy?

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

lol



When you say soon is this a real soon(2015) or and AMD soon(2018)

TBF the 970 sould like a play but if the 380x will be here soon and fill the £100 price gap with 380-390 it may be worth looking at
do we have any idea what gpu will be used?

http://videocardz.com/57518/amd-allegedly-preparing-radeon-r9-380x-with-full-tonga-gpu

 

[bloodkil]

I would suggest waiting for 380X as other have suggested, as it will have all the bells and whistles an AMD GPU has since it will be using GCN 1.2

 

[TwsT]

Record for biggest bottleneck?>

among other things.

 

[Sencha]

 

[fs123]

thanks you look to have understood the question. i will look in the team green choice and see what we like

Before going for a 970 consider the R9 390 8GB which is the same price range but generally considered to be faster and more future proof with DX12 hardware async compute support. The 8GB VRAM will definitely come in use for future games and even some existing ones like Shadow of Mordor and GTA5.

 

[Dave2150]

Before going for a 970 consider the R9 390 8GB which is the same price range but generally considered to be faster and more future proof with DX12 hardware async compute support. The 8GB VRAM will definitely come in use for future games and even some existing ones like Shadow of Mordor and GTA5.

Agreed, the 390 is far superior to the 970 in terms of the hardware you're getting.

Over DOUBLE the VRAM, fantatic DX12 performance, async compute support (important for future games) and generally faster in DX11 games also.

 

[Gregster]

What you have to remember is that AMD are tougher on the CPU because of the API overhead and being that the I3 4150 is a very weak CPU, he will need all the help he can get to alleviate the CPU bottleneck.

Now another thing.... I keep seeing this video posted and whilst it is fine, I think it only fair to show a roundup of several games and as you can see, the 970 is faster overall.



https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/R9_Fury_X/31.html

So taking that the I3 will perform better with Nvidia and that the overall performance between the 2 is favouring the 970, I will leave it up to P4Clock to decide

 

[Lokken86]

How many times have ignorant people got to pull up that performance summary on techpowerup, it means nothing. All the games making nvidias overall score look good also run very well on the 390, whereas if you look closer the 390 seems to win more when it counts. Plus a 3% advantage isn't much to shout about when considering that 3 of those games run vastly superior on NVIDIA hardware.

Nontheless I wouldn't buy either unless you get a better cpu. Yes the nvidia card performs better with a low end cpu but it will still get bottlenecked badly.

 

[Dave2150]

What you have to remember is that AMD are tougher on the CPU because of the API overhead and being that the I3 4150 is a very weak CPU, he will need all the help he can get to alleviate the CPU bottleneck.

Now another thing.... I keep seeing this video posted and whilst it is fine, I think it only fair to show a roundup of several games and as you can see, the 970 is faster overall.



https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/R9_Fury_X/31.html

So taking that the I3 will perform better with Nvidia and that the overall performance between the 2 is favouring the 970, I will leave it up to P4Clock to decide

DX12 will soon alleviate the driver bottleneck, and we've already seen that AMD's DX12 performance is worlds ahead of NVIDIA's. Also important to remember that NVIDIA lack async compete, a big feature for future games.

Also any graphs posted can be selected to paint the picture the poster wants.

For example, I can post this graph where the 390 decimates the 970:

https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Powercolor/R9_390_PCS_Plus/24.html

The JayzTwoCents video gives a good roundup of games, done by a professional reviewer - IE not amateurs like us. They have access to all the cards in question and tested them thoroughly.

At the end of the day, there really is no competition between the 970 and 390. 8GB vs 4GB(3.5GB full speed, 0.5GB reduced speed), fantastic DX12 performance, async compute support, much more futureproof.

 

[nashathedog]

Burp

 

[nashathedog]

They haven't made any changes to the chip, all of the things you mention are just a result of improving yields or small changes to the PCB, not the chip

You're quite right, I've made the exact same point in other threads when it's come up so I should have written it better, Yes it is more about other changes made to it's platform as a whole and not the chip itself as I implied in the first sentence, Sorry for not being exact enough but it's the end result that I was trying to highlight this time not the finer details.

 

[Amatsubu]

Agreed, the 390 is far superior to the 970 in terms of the hardware you're getting.

Over DOUBLE the VRAM, fantatic DX12 performance, async compute support (important for future games) and generally faster in DX11 games also.

When will people understand that the 8GB of vram on the 390 is useless because the card is far too weak to tap into all of that (unless you trifire, which..umm...yeah, makes a lot of sense)? You can't max some new games on it without even using a half of that. And all that talk about being future-proof on a card that's a rebrand of a 2-year old gpu The 970 and 390 are almost identical performance-wise and I wouldn't call either future-proof. When DX12 games become the standard there will be far better options to choose from.

I'd just buy a used 970/290x. If you want new, then get a 390.

 

[Gregster]

DX12 will soon alleviate the driver bottleneck, and we've already seen that AMD's DX12 performance is worlds ahead of NVIDIA's. Also important to remember that NVIDIA lack async compete, a big feature for future games.
The JayzTwoCents video gives a good roundup of games, done by a professional reviewer - IE not amateurs like us. They have access to all the cards in question and tested them thoroughly.

At the end of the day, there really is no competition between the 970 and 390. 8GB vs 4GB(3.5GB full speed, 0.5GB reduced speed), fantastic DX12 performance, async compute support, much more futureproof.

Right firstly, how many DX12 games are out?

Secondly, when do games use over 4GB at 1080P and still have enough frames to be playable?

Thirdly, what makes the Jay2cents (who I like) any more accurate than TPU (whom I also like)?

You are pinning a lot of hopes on the future with your Async support, which incidentally works with Nvidia (why you and others think it doesn't is beyond me) and even in the DX12 AOTS bench, clearly the ACE isn't giving AMD any advantage and it is lagging behind.

Anyways, I feel I have given P4Clock something solid to base his purchase on and I am not trying to convince you what to buy, so will let him go with whatever he feels best from the facts.

 

[TNA]

970 or 390. I would get 390 due to the extra vram myself, but 970 is a very good card for it's price too if you are not planning on going above 1080p. Can't go wrong with either of them

 

[whyscotty]

and we've already seen that AMD's DX12 performance is worlds ahead of NVIDIA's.
Also important to remember that NVIDIA lack async compete, a big feature for future games.

 

[thebennyboy]

A 390 is more "future-proof" than a 970 due to it's large amonut of VRAM. Neither are fully "future-proof" in reality though. Going with a 390 would allow you to go crossfire should you want to go 4k later down the line. Don't know why everyone is getting heated about it. I personally would recommend the 390 for the reasons stated above, everyone has their opinions and has given the OP some great advice and i'm sure he'll make the decision of which way he wants to go.

Between the 970 and 390 the only real difference is the feature set you want. i.e. AMD Mantle and Nvidia Shadowplay. Both options will serve the OP well.

 

[Dave2150]

A 390 is more "future-proof" than a 970 due to it's large amonut of VRAM. Neither are fully "future-proof" in reality though. Going with a 390 would allow you to go crossfire should you want to go 4k later down the line. Don't know why everyone is getting heated about it. I personally would recommend the 390 for the reasons stated above, everyone has their opinions and has given the OP some great advice and i'm sure he'll make the decision of which way he wants to go.

Between the 970 and 390 the only real difference is the feature set you want. i.e. AMD Mantle and Nvidia Shadowplay. Both options will serve the OP well.

+1. A much more 'futureproof' card with superior DX11 and DX12 performance. Lets hope the OP gets the card he wants, based on all the highly intellectual points raised in this thread

 

[Amatsubu]

A 390 is more "future-proof" than a 970 due to it's large amonut of VRAM. Neither are fully "future-proof" in reality though. Going with a 390 would allow you to go crossfire should you want to go 4k later down the line. Don't know why everyone is getting heated about it. I personally would recommend the 390 for the reasons stated above, everyone has their opinions and has given the OP some great advice and i'm sure he'll make the decision of which way he wants to go.

Between the 970 and 390 the only real difference is the feature set you want. i.e. AMD Mantle and Nvidia Shadowplay. Both options will serve the OP well.

It's not something to be heated about but some people simply tend to vastly overblow the 390 potential and try to cajole everyone into believing that it's a lot better than it really is (this is not aimed at you of course as you seem to have a lot more common sense than some).

It's a good card but nothing more and the vram is pointless as two of those still won't give satisfactory performance at 4k if you want to play close to maxed (and that's assuming perfect scaling which, quite frankly, won't always be the case). Honestly, who's going to bother crossfiring 390s in a year's time?
When I read that it's vastly superior to the 970 and "decimates" it, it just makes me laugh It's a direct competitor to the 970 with more ram tacked on for marketing purposes (released a year too late, on top of that). Max Witcher 3 or GTA5 on it at mere 1080p and watch it melt without vram usage even hitting 4gb;p
The same goes for the 970.

However, If I were buying a new card now I'd probably get the 390 if similarly priced but I don't exactly know why. Maybe because of all the brainwashing I've been through due to the whole "OMG!! 3.5gb ram, 970 suxxx!!!" dribble which has turned out to be a complete non-issue.