• 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

martin363 said:
As according to the Overclock3d review of the Asus GTX960 Strix;

There are two main targets for the GTX960, those who own a GTX750 or under, and its AMD rival is the R9 280. When it comes to power efficiency it's no contest at all. The GTX960 Strix draws 200W less than its Radeon opponent. In other words you could SLI the GTX960 and still not get close to the power requirements of the AMD offering.'

and

'In nearly every title the GTX960 comfortably outperforms the GTX750Ti, GTX760 and, more often than not, the GTX770. We know that nVidia are aiming this at an even older card in their range but if it can beat the last generation ones it's worthy of mention. As for the Radeon cards you need a R9 290 before you regularly get ahead of the GTX960, and that takes twice the power and costs half as much again.

We desperately want strong competition between the two main GPU manufacturers but it's clear that the Maxwell architecture has moved the goalposts. The GTX980 is blisteringly fast, the GTX970 dominates the bottom of the top end, and now the GTX960 happily takes over the crown of the fastest, most efficient midrange card around. Given that sub £200 cards are the easily most popular ones it's almost a license to print money.'

Job Done. Perfect for a low power MITX, a secondary gaming setup / office machine. It is likely a great mid-range card, and the prices will settle as with all cards - want more, spend more.

For me great product and will be well positioned.

Martin
Click to expand...

+1
 
Mei said:
lol yeh the card really shines at 1600x900, a res i thought we waved bye bye to in 2005 or something
it was unrealistic to think nvidia would do anything to upset the apple cart i agree, but i duno to me they are just making playing games on the pc look bad right now

in nvidia's world if you want to play games at 1080p they expect you to pay for the 970 & a overpriced screen to go with it to take advantage of their best feature

new levels of milking in 2015
ripping off people at the high end i dont have much problem with, holding back the whole pc scene not so much!
Click to expand...


We are talking about a mid range card here not the top of the range flagship card.

I also don't think that it is too difficult for a 960 to game at 1080p, the user may have reduce the settings a little but it is not the end of the world.

People should also remember that gaming at 2160p with a top of the range 4 way GPU setup is no more fun than gaming at 1080p with a bargain basement card. The only difference between the two setups is 2160p looks nicer for about the first couple of minutes of gaming and then you ignore it.

I started gaming back in the early MS DOS days and the graphics were really bad but the games were actually more fun than a lot of the garbage around today.
 
Kaapstad said:
We are talking about a mid range card here not the top of the range flagship card.

I also don't think that it is too difficult for a 960 to game at 1080p, the user may have reduce the settings a little but it is not the end of the world.

People should also remember that gaming at 2160p with a top of the range 4 way GPU setup is no more fun than gaming at 1080p with a bargain basement card. The only difference between the two setups is 2160p looks nicer for about the first couple of minutes of gaming and then you ignore it.

I started gaming back in the early MS DOS days and the graphics were really bad but the games were actually more fun than a lot of the garbage around today.
Click to expand...

hey i grew up poor and played on some really bad graphics too, old games like ut & quake, there's no doubt in my mind that some the best games ever made have pretty bad graphics, hell i play a lot of cheap and not so cheap indie games now that have bad graphics & are a lot of fun!

but thats no excuse for a company that sells gfx cards to charge us more for less, thats just insane lol
maybe if i could think of a nvidia game recently that played well on low end hardware i could see your point but im struggling to

hmhm lol still love u kaap <3
 
Kaapstad said:
We are talking about a mid range card here not the top of the range flagship card.

I also don't think that it is too difficult for a 960 to game at 1080p, the user may have reduce the settings a little but it is not the end of the world.

People should also remember that gaming at 2160p with a top of the range 4 way GPU setup is no more fun than gaming at 1080p with a bargain basement card. The only difference between the two setups is 2160p looks nicer for about the first couple of minutes of gaming and then you ignore it.

I started gaming back in the early MS DOS days and the graphics were really bad but the games were actually more fun than a lot of the garbage around today.
Click to expand...
I think the biggest issue with the 960 is that it replaces the 770 at the same price point, but traded off performance for in the name of "efficiency".

Also according to techpowerup's review the 960 draw up to 147W max, so I have no idea where Overclock3d's 200W less than the 280 is from...cause honestly if that was the case, the 960 would have been a bus-powered card without need additional external PCI-E power...
 
srsly dont even give oc3d the click money
the graphs are all over the place and dont match anywhere with other reviews
& a huge self opinionated conclusion slapped on the end of it
the guy should be ashamed of that review
its click bait. i refuse to even look again! lol
 
martin363 said:
As according to the Overclock3d review of the Asus GTX960 Strix;

There are two main targets for the GTX960, those who own a GTX750 or under, and its AMD rival is the R9 280. When it comes to power efficiency it's no contest at all. The GTX960 Strix draws 200W less than its Radeon opponent. In other words you could SLI the GTX960 and still not get close to the power requirements of the AMD offering.'

and

'In nearly every title the GTX960 comfortably outperforms the GTX750Ti, GTX760 and, more often than not, the GTX770. We know that nVidia are aiming this at an even older card in their range but if it can beat the last generation ones it's worthy of mention. As for the Radeon cards you need a R9 290 before you regularly get ahead of the GTX960, and that takes twice the power and costs half as much again.

We desperately want strong competition between the two main GPU manufacturers but it's clear that the Maxwell architecture has moved the goalposts. The GTX980 is blisteringly fast, the GTX970 dominates the bottom of the top end, and now the GTX960 happily takes over the crown of the fastest, most efficient midrange card around. Given that sub £200 cards are the easily most popular ones it's almost a license to print money.'

Job Done. Perfect for a low power MITX, a secondary gaming setup / office machine. It is likely a great mid-range card, and the prices will settle as with all cards - want more, spend more.

For me great product and will be well positioned.

Martin
Click to expand...

Lmao Tom needs to check his power meter as it way off!!

An over clocked 7950/7970/280/280x will easily see one of these off, and they all have more memory so will last longer.

The Sapphire 280x Vapour-X is the best card in that price bracket.
 
JustCallMeVlad said:
If only amd's drivers were as good as Nvidia's
Click to expand...
I think you mean if only AMD drivers and new Nvidia drivers were as good as how Nvidia's drivers use to be :D

On the more serious note, I never really had and issue with ATI/AMD drivers...people that do in general seem to be related to using driver sweeper when it is not needed.
 
Last edited:
I was expecting them to be a little cheaper also, they might be really nice overclockers but most people i know that would buy this mid range card would not overclock anyway, and the people i know that do overclock would just save a little longer and get the 970.
 
varies when the overclock kicks in too im sure
thats not the point tho, he wasnt even close and based his whole messed up conclusion on it

the guy is ridiculous and just pandering to the nvidia fans
i dont believe true hardware enthusiasts can sink so low, not when your opinion effects what people buy

if you care about the pc as a platform at all you just dont do it
 
almighty15 said:
Lmao Tom needs to check his power meter as it way off!!

An over clocked 7950/7970/280/280x will easily see one of these off, and they all have more memory so will last longer.

The Sapphire 280x Vapour-X is the best card in that price bracket.
Click to expand...

It's fun to see all the people defending this release, and likewise which review sites are getting paid for their reviews :p

So now we know that a 960:

Is on par with/beats a 770/280X
Draws 200W less than a 280X
Is the best VFM card on the market right now
Represents a 20% boost in mid-range performance

Well, in that case I withdraw all my criticisms, this is clearly the new 460/7850.
 
FoxEye said:
It's fun to see all the people defending this release, and likewise which review sites are getting paid for their reviews :p

So now we know that a 960:

Is on par with/beats a 770/280X - When overclocked heavily ( Overclocked 770/280x are faster )Draws 200W less than a 280X
Is the best VFM card on the market right now
Represents a 20% boost in mid-range performance

Well, in that case I withdraw all my criticisms, this is clearly the new 460/7850.
Click to expand...

Fixed
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom