• 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.

Radeon RX 480 "Polaris" Launched at $199

humbug said:
Straw clutching, both of you, i expected better from you Bru.
Click to expand...

Another 1080 review that I have just run the numbers on which features the 980Ti and 390x:

http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/nvidia-geforce-gtx-1080-pascal,review-33557.html


This is in no way cherry picked. It is just the next review I have found that has numbers for both cards.

1440p

22%
32%
46%
5%
86%
41%
25%
22% (980Ti limited by v sync in Witcher 3, likely therefore would be larger)

Average puts the 980Ti at 35% faster.

I don't really have the will to go through any more reviews but that is two reviews with actual numbers on recent games from both cards that show it is over 30% faster, 33.5% taking the average of both.

Just wanted to confirm in my head that you were wrong with that comment as I had always ( it seems rightly) had the 980Ti down as 30% or more faster than the 390X and I have now seen that it is, so thanks for making me do the research :p
 
Last edited:
Jono8 said:
Indeed. The 390x isn't even featured in that techpowerup 1080 review. If you look at all the framerate graphs, it isn't there but then suddenly appears in the relative performance graph.

Anyway I did crunch of the numbers earlier in the thread from the guru 3d 1080 review which actually did have 390x numbers, showing it was 32% faster in 1440p. Although that wasn't good enough because of gameworks features apparently, even though it included Ashes and Hitman which are hugely AMD affiliated/engineered...seemed a pretty fair comparison to me.
Click to expand...

I would argue that guru 3d never retest anything except when an oc card comes out. They still use the old fallout 4 bench results where the FuryX is beaten by a 970. And yes that goes for the 980 as well.

I don't know for sure but id imagine when techpowerup retested the Fury's they retested the 980 as well.

Just sayin. Its difficult to tell without in game benchmarks that we could all use for the bench threads.
 
Jono8 said:
Another 1080 review that I have just run the numbers on which features the 980Ti and 390x:

http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/nvidia-geforce-gtx-1080-pascal,review-33557.html


This is in no way cherry picked. It is just the next review I have found that has numbers for both cards.

22%
32%
46%
5%
86%
41%
25%
22% (980Ti limited by v sync in Witcher 3, likely therefore would be larger)

Average puts the 980Ti at 35% faster.

I don't really have the will to go through any more reviews but that is two reviews with actual numbers on recent games from both cards that show it is over 30% faster, 33.5% taking the average of both.

Just wanted to confirm in my head that you were wrong with that comment as I had always ( it seems rightly) had the 980Ti down as 30% or more faster than the 390X and I have now seen that it is, so thanks for making me do the research :p
Click to expand...

mirrorsedgebench_zpsiubnndph.jpg


http://www.gamersnexus.net/game-ben...st-graphics-card-benchmark-gtx-1080-1070-390x


I just took the latest released game as an example Mirrors edge?
980Ti slightly less than 20% over the 390x.


Why are you defending historical benchmarks from the 980Ti original release?
Most people know the gap decreased shortly after release and onward.
I wonder if Nvidia told reviewers to use a 'press driver' for the 980Ti?



....wait for it....
 
Last edited:
Lokken86 said:
I would argue that guru 3d never retest anything except when an oc card comes out. They still use the old fallout 4 bench results where the FuryX is beaten by a 970. And yes that goes for the 980 as well.

I don't know for sure but id imagine when techpowerup retested the Fury's they retested the 980 as well.

Just sayin. Its difficult to tell without in game benchmarks that we could all use for the bench threads.
Click to expand...

Well yes it is difficult, but at least there are numbers there for both reviews I have done the percentages on now.

Maybe we should come to an accord to get the thread back on topic

The average of techpowerups relative performance graph, guru 3d's review and toms hardware's review is 29.3% :)
 
Ferrari100 said:
mirrorsedgebench_zpsiubnndph.jpg


http://www.gamersnexus.net/game-ben...st-graphics-card-benchmark-gtx-1080-1070-390x


I just took the latest released game as an example Mirrors edge?
980Ti slightly less than 20% over the 390x.


Why are you defending historical benchmarks from the 980Ti original release?
980Ti Most people know the gap decreased shortly after release and onward.
I wonder if Nvidia told reviewers to use a 'press driver' for the 980Ti?
Click to expand...

I am not, I am using 1080 reviews like Humbug did. :confused:

Thanks for the one graph but I would rather take the averages I have worked over a myriad of different games :p

Here we go, very new game:

http://www.kitguru.net/gaming/matthew-wilson/tom-clancys-the-division-pc-game-analysis/

980Ti is 37% faster at 1440p.

Just showing one game is useless on it's own.
 
Last edited:
Jono8 said:
How is mine straw clutching? You have posted a graph with numbers from nowhere, just one graph where the 390x suddenly appears yet doesn't feature in the same review.

I have provided you with an average over 16 games/benchmarks from the guru 3d review which has some AMD DX12 affiliated games and NVidia game works affiliated games. It is 32% faster at 1440p on average.

Why is yours more valid than mine? If anything it is the other way around.
Click to expand...

I already agreed that the gap between the 390X and 980TI is greater when Gameworks is used and with older drivers.

As for TPU.
There are 10 or more GPU's from both sides that don't feature in the individual graphs.
They all feature in the overall graphs.

So what is your argument with that? That TPU only test those few and then make up the performance for the rest when summing up the overall performance?
 
Ferrari100 said:
I just took the latest released game as an example Mirrors edge?
980Ti slightly less than 20% over the 390x.


Why are you defending historical benchmarks from the 980Ti original release?
Most people know the gap decreased shortly after release and onward.
I wonder if Nvidia told reviewers to use a 'press driver' for the 980Ti?



....wait for it....
Click to expand...


Nice cherry picking, lowest settings.
Just look at the next graph, 1440 at ultra setting. The 980ti is 73% faster.
 
Last edited:
humbug said:
Straw clutching, both of you, i expected better from you Bru.
Click to expand...

The whole point as I have said loads of times now.

It is easy to find benches that show your point of view if you went too.


That still doesn't make the 980ti only 20% faster than the 930X.

You made the statement and showed benches that backed up your point. Several people would agree with you one minute then disagree the next, if it suited their current point, with benches to prove the point.
 
humbug said:
So what is your argument with that? That TPU only test those few and then make up the performance for the rest when summing up the overall performance?
Click to expand...

I don't know where they get the numbers from, or whether that relative performance graph includes all the games in the review or not.

I'm sure it is all above board though, as you say, so regardless, as I said, lets take the average of all three we have done so far, techpowerup, Guru 3d and toms hardware. That puts it as 29.3% faster over all those reviews.
 
bru said:
The whole point as I have said loads of times now.

It is easy to find benches that show your point of view if you went too.


That still doesn't make the 980ti only 20% faster than the 930X.

You made the statement and showed benches that backed up your point. Several people would agree with you one minute then disagree the next, if it suited their current point, with benches to prove the point.
Click to expand...


Yet you can't find any review as extensive as TPU and with the latest drivers.
So you keep falling back on TPU but with old drivers, in one case a year old.

Your smart enough to know its a flawed argument yet you keep repeating it, seemingly in the hope that if you say it enough times it will somehow stick.
 
bru said:
Drivers, ok Ill agree that things will have changed since last year.

I was going to use this review.

July 3rd 2015
https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/MSI/GTX_980_Ti_Gaming/30.html

1440p 980ti 100% 390X 68% somebody else can do the maths but it is definitely a good bit more than 20% faster. but as you say drivers and that review is also quite old.

So here is a more modern one.


Mar 31st 2016
https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Gigabyte/GTX_980_Ti_XtremeGaming/23.html

1440p 980ti 100% 390X 66% again not doing the maths but definitely way more than 20%.


It just goes to show that you can find benchmarks to support just about any position. ;)
Click to expand...

Which part of stock 980Ti you have trouble understanding ;)
 
...Nice to see the threads headline 'AMD 480x at $200' still sitting at the top of the Graphics card section.

People notice that sort of amazing deal as they pass by.

AMD RX480 FTW!
 
Last edited:
So after tomorrow when GTX1070 pricing is released on there NON-FE edition.AMD may leak some benches.
Does Nvidia know something about AMD cards.Holding back and trying to fix drivers for
poor SLI support and no HB SLI bridges yet.Rushed there launch for 1070/1080.
Nvidia phasing out 3/4 SLI and maybe in the near future getting rid of SLI after that.

AMD may show there hand with some nice crossfire leaked benchmarks,new multi GPU support for games,so looks like Nvidia may know something about AMD after all.

Hmmmm could be interesting in the next couple weeks.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom