lol why do you even believe tonester
and 12fps at what!? some benchmark or all computer games known to man!?
cmon now...
-
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.
Possible Radeon 390X / 390 and 380X Spec / Benchmark (do not hotlink images!!!!!!)
- Thread starter Boomstick777
- Start date
- Status
lol why do you even believe tonester
and 12fps at what!? some benchmark or all computer games known to man!?
cmon now...
lol why do you even believe tonester
and 12fps at what!? some benchmark or all computer games known to man!?
cmon now...
http://hexus.net/tech/news/graphics/77701-benchmarks-purported-amd-radeon-r9-390x-published/
there you go, sorry only 10fps faster
but if true it's 15fps faster than the 290X , as said, it's only the Reference card; but it only has 4GB RAM so that's not so good
Last edited:
its also a load of b...
but whatever
it could be right but its just as easy a guess, personally I like see some proof before I believe something!
you'd think they be able to squeeze an extra 10% with proper drivers, so maybe you can go to bed dreaming it will be 20% faster than a 980
mmm think I will too
but whatever
it could be right but its just as easy a guess, personally I like see some proof before I believe something!
you'd think they be able to squeeze an extra 10% with proper drivers, so maybe you can go to bed dreaming it will be 20% faster than a 980
mmm think I will too
Caporegime
Ah... of course yes.
Man of Honour
This thread went a bit off topic a few posts back. I'm not going to remove any of these posts but if you wish to continue the discussion can you please start a new thread or wish to discuss anything other than the topic in hand. Anything posted unrelated hereafter will be removed. Thanks
Caporegime
We
If its faster than the GTX980 and it costs £350 its still better value than a gtx980.
Edit!!
The cheapest gtx980 is £420 so amd is meant to have a faster card but be a third cheaper?? I really doubt it.
You do realise exchange rates are at a 7 year low? Gibbo indicated prices increases as a result on most cards.
I doubt its going to be under £300 - more likely £350 at least if its faster.
I can only see a £300 price if it has horrendous power consumption or something like that.
Tonester0011 wasn't it?
On a separate note I am expecting the 380X to be faster than a 980 and priced under £300. If not, it will be disappointing, unless it very cheap.
If its faster than the GTX980 and it costs £350 its still better value than a gtx980.
Edit!!
The cheapest gtx980 is £420 so amd is meant to have a faster card but be a third cheaper?? I really doubt it.
You do realise exchange rates are at a 7 year low? Gibbo indicated prices increases as a result on most cards.
I doubt its going to be under £300 - more likely £350 at least if its faster.
I can only see a £300 price if it has horrendous power consumption or something like that.
Last edited:
They can charge whatever they want. But if they want gain market share from nvidia and gain my money, they best be competitive. Besides, by your logic, if every time a new tech came out and was better than the old one charged more, today's graphics card prices would be £1000's.
I recall when the Radeon 4870 came out it faster than GTX 8800 Ultra and was like half the price. All in the space of around a year or so. By your logic the 4870 should have been £500 instead of £200. Which is what I recall snapping one up for on release.
The 7970 came out in 2011, we should be having a single card solution with double the performance for under £300 by now. But things are changing it seems. Shrinking tech and getting more transistors is only going to get harder and slower
Caporegime
So basically its OK for Nvidia to charge more then?They can charge whatever they want. But if they want gain market share from nvidia and gain my money, they best be competitive. Besides, by your logic, if every time a new tech came out and was better than the old one charged more, today's graphics card prices would be £1000's.
I recall when the Radeon 4870 came out it faster than GTX 8800 Ultra and was like half the price. All in the space of around a year or so. By your logic the 4870 should have been £500 instead of £200. Which is what I recall snapping one up for on release.
The 7970 came out in 2011, we should be having a single card solution with double the performance for under £300 by now. But things are changing it seems. Shrinking tech and getting more transistors is only going to get harder and slower
Its funny logic that you are defending the £420 price of the gtx980 and yet if the r9 390x is faster and costs 20% less that is not good enough.
Let's look at the gtx970 - a bit faster than a r9 290,slightly cheaper ,consumes less power and had dx12.
However using your absurd logic,it should have been under £200 since the r9 cards were already under £300 for the last year.
AMD tried what you said with the hd4000 and hd5000 series - Fermi despite being 6 to 9 months delayed and consuming loads of power reversed the marketshare gains in desktop within a year or so.
But then amd is not a superbrand is it?
Edit!!
Even looked what happened with the custom cooled r9 290 cards - people were still willing to spend £50 to £100 more on similar speed gtx780 cards.
AMD is buggered either way. They price low and are seen as the budget brand and if they price higher are seen as being too expensive.
Last edited:
lol. Wut??
I think you have me confused with someone else mate. I have never defended gtx 980 and it's pricing.
I am actually thinking you did not even read my post properly. Either that or your own aggressiveness is getting in the way logic.
Caporegime
Its getting rather annoying that nobody keeps expecting Nvidia to bargain basement price things the same way amd does.
If Nvidia reversed desktop gains with fermi ,then it shows that unless amd can improve their perception nothing is going to change.
An example - ati could not go past Nvidia with the 9700 pro despite it being cheaper, faster and consuming less power than the top fx GPU from Nvidia which also had horrible issues with games like HL2.
ATI/AMD did not exceed Nvidia market share with the hd5000 and hd4000 series being bargain priced.
Last edited:
Have you ever heard of the saying preaching to the choir?
I have no idea myself why people pay more for nvidia. I have had both brands several times over the years. I personally see no difference. I always go for whichever card offers more price for performance. Historically that has been ati cards, therefore I have owned a lot more of those than nvidia. Not because I care which card I have in my PC.
I do want nvidia to lower prices, but I do not expect that they will. They have hardly ever been the one's offering best price for performance. Last card I remember them pricing well I think was the GTX 460.
If Gibbo went mad and did a today only 980 for £200, I would buy one for sure, as it would represent value for money to me at that price point.
Though reading your posts you make it sound like I am some fanboy. lol. No idea where it is coming from. Look at my sig for starters
You simply are not taking into account that with time same performance should be cheaper or you should get more performance at the same price. This is one of the reasons why I am expecting that if 380x is on 20nm process to be no more than £300. They can go mad and charge £500 for the 390x if they wish. I am sure people will buy them if they are able to offer a lot more performance than a 980
AMD's new cards won't be cheap if they beat the 970/980 comfortably. The 7950/7970 weren't cheap at launch, the 290/290X weren't cheap at launch. No reason for the 390/390X to be cheap either.
I do not recall, but was 7950 over £300?
its also a load of b...
but whatever
it could be right but its just as easy a guess, personally I like see some proof before I believe something!
you'd think they be able to squeeze an extra 10% with proper drivers, so maybe you can go to bed dreaming it will be 20% faster than a 980
mmm think I will too
well there you go it wasn't Bull, i didn't make it up.........but it'll be roughly right.....15 to 20 fps faster than a 290X is quite a lot...........but 10fps faster than a 980 isn't that exciting.
lets hope i'm wrong and it's more powerful, because if it's less powerful AMD are screwed
.
yes but only if it's much more powerful than the 980........finally, at launch you say ????............ the 290X was still way too expensive 3 months ago
it'll beat the 980 but by how much is crucial............NOT FOR ITS PRICE AT ALL......but if it's worth the bother, you'll be better off waiting to see what Titan is like, you wont see anything from Nvidia now until they've seen the 390X.
Is 10fps increase over the 980 worth the bother..............NO it's dissapointing, esp if you're after a single card only for Daz 3D
Last edited:
Most likely. Hopefully the 390 with a good custom cooler will be £300 or not much more for just a little less performance than the 390x and that they will offer a sizable increase in performance over the 290.
- Status