So, AMD think it is unappealing (fair enough) and the price will be $199 - That puts it at ~£157. It could well be a winner for 1080P gaming. Not a beast by any standard and I was expecting a little more.
Last edited:
-
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.
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960 Gaming Performance Previewed – AMD Calls It “Unappealing”, On Par With A Rade
- Thread starter Gregster
- Start date
So, AMD think it is unappealing (fair enough) and the price will be $199 - That puts it at ~£157. It could well be a winner for 1080P gaming. Not a beast by any standard and I was expecting a little more.
2GB?
Yep, this isn't aimed at the top end of the market (hence the price) and 2GB is plenty for what this card can do.
I am kinda drifting away from the enthusiast market and looking to hold what I have for as long as possible. Whilst GFX are great and smooth gameplay is paramount (G-Sync FTW!!!), I can't help but feel that chuffing up for another 28nm GPU leaves me feeling flat. If I was starting out and wanted a basic card, something like this would do a treat for 1080P and you can probably pop it under the TV in a tiny box and never have to worry about heat.
Maybe the market is just stale and needs a boost of something.
Maybe the market is just stale and needs a boost of something.
Has the 128bit bus dragged down the performance then? I have seen nothing that shows it has and do you think a 512bit bus with 8GB of memory will suddenly put it to the top of those charts? You need to read up on what is what when it comes to GPUs really before making such silly statements.
It certainly will for anyone using any level of AA or higher res texture- it's been proven again and again that low memory bandwidth will lead to greater frame rate loss when AA is applied; while yes it is true 512-bit bus most probably won't benefit comparing to say 384/256-bit at 1920 res, as having higher than memory bandwidth than required for the data throughput will not see increase in performance, but have less that what's required will result in poorer performance immediately.
You arguement is like saying "4GB of vram offer no benefit over 3GB of vram for 1920 res, so how can you say 1GB of vram is not enough"
And please don't use the generic arguement of "this card is not meant for maxing gamings out", as people that use cards such as GTX770 or 7970/280x will use AA as well, so there's not reason why this card should be running games without it. Provided that if the 960 had both the model of 128-bit and 256-bit version, at 0xAA the chance are the frame rate would be the same, but as soon as 4xAA or 8xAA is applied (even in the not so demanding games), the 128-bit model will lag far behind and end up being much lower in frame rate than the 256-bit model.
Right, first things first... This card isn't aimed at you or me but aimed at mid level gamers. I don't particularly care for this card although I do want a very small and very quiet HTPC for under my main TV to do some fun family gaming, so if this card was to sit under my TV, can it do what I want? Of course the answer is "Yes". Do I need to have AA maxed out and settings fully up? The answer is "No".
Now the average gamer who is on a budget would be looking at this card and seeing what it can do and what it can't do. I built a gaming PC for a mates boy and gave him all my old bits, including a Q8200 and 4GB of DDR ram and I made him pay for a MM 560Ti 1GB and once I built it and gave him a few game codes, he was over the moon and hasn't stopped saying how good it is. That is the sort of person this card is aimed at.
Sometimes you need to look outside at what others do and want and then you can see what is what easier.
For the record, I think this card is underwhelming and if it does come in at £170, overpriced but I can see the uses for it and 2GB is plenty for the market this card is aimed at.
And another thing, those who already own a 770/7970/280X shouldn't even be considering this card, so your point is pointless really. They bought top end and would be downgrading....Silly thing to say really.
Last edited:
Fixed
In fairness, you are pretty much spot on. I remember paying £220 for a Gigabyte 560Ti, as that was all I could afford at the time and that couldn't cope with games fully maxed out (or modern AAA titles at 1080P) and I accepted that and accepted that I wasn't prepared to pay the extra for a 580 at the time.
I am not sure what people expect from a midrange card in honesty and seems some want a Ferrari but only prepared to pay for a Mondeo.
So the obvious solution is to re-release the 760 at the same price 18 months later?
Whichever way you look at it, this release is no better than AMD's 285 release. Both are dire.
Well, release tomorrow and we will see the true figures. I am not defending it btw (although it does look that way) but more looking at it from a midrange card and what it can do/achieve.
bad experience when u were younger?
Yer, I find them a little itchy
Did you not have a bit of a goatee going on before xmas?
Yep and I refused to look in a mirror
Yer, a 150W TDP and some of them are tiny, which makes it perfect for a Media PC and some light gaming. If they go under £150, I could be swayed for one for a lan/TV system.
It doesn't, as for a start your 285 had/has a 256 bit bus.
That would be a gtx 285 greg not an AMD 285.
http://www.geforce.com/hardware/desktop-gpus/geforce-gtx-285/specifications
Edit beaten to it.
Ahhh my bad, I have been arguing all day over the damned R9 285 and had it in my head
Apologies.The 960 uses better memory compression techinques over the 285 and gives a bandwidth of 149GB/s, which is pretty damned good for such a lowly bus. For 1080P gaming, that will cope pretty well and I am hoping to grab one in the next few weeks to see how it actually copes
lol Greg you should feel ashamed. Even I recall the GTX285 was on 512-bit on the top if my head (though there were only on GDDR3 memory)
Your anti-AMD mindset must be clouding your vision
I hold my head and shoulders low and head off to the naughty corner
