NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960 Gaming Performance Previewed – AMD Calls It “Unappealing”, On Par With A Rade

[Orangey]

Still can't find the source for this supposed AMD quote about the 960.

 

[Telecaster]

Cant have logic told to a nvidia buyer.
the 960 is a budget card and should be half the price.
as soon the user does an upgrade in monitor and the 2560x1440 simply isnt playable and today really common upgrade along with 4k.
suddenly you have to buy a new card also.

960 isn't aimed at perpetual upgraders, it's aimed at those who are only recently playing @ 1080p. See this is the problem on here, it's a forum full of enthusiasts commenting on non-enthusiast grade cards.

Anyone who is currently gaming at 1080p looking to upgrade soon to 1440 won't be looking at a 960, and so they shouldn't be, it's just common sense, unfortunately it's not that common.

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

Am I missing something here, I have just been looking at a bang for buck graph and the 960 offers more than a 970 in the value department.

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/ASUS/GTX_960_STRIX_OC/31.html

I also don't understand why people are disappointed with the performance of the 960, it is only logical to accept that the card was never going to beat out the bigger 970. From what I can see of the 960 it is basically half a GTX 980 and has the performance to match that.

As to gaming I have not done much for a couple of years but I used to spend 50 or 60 hours a week or more on it. The reason I mention this is when I played a lot it did not really matter what graphics card I was using as the games were the most important bit and sometimes I was using a card far worse than the 960. I sometimes think people get too hung up on the hardware at the expense of the games.

Its a rubbish upgrade and costs £30 more than my gtx660 did with a free game worth £30. Plus the gtx760 and r9 280 have been as low as £120 recently.

Even the 8600gt and 2600xt were defended. Not for long though.

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

Considering I am running a gtx660 in a mini itx system and another mate a r9 280 in another itx system.

I have been running itx and shuttle sff systems since 2005 as my primary ones

Meh to this release and the r9 285. Worst releases since the hd7790 IMHO.