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.
You paid how much ?I suppose I'm kinda lucky I paid $3500 for my 980ti, it makes the leaked Vega pricing look super appealing hahaha.
Eeep some bad auto corrects there... If you have no competition it makes sense¿Que?
I can't even understand your first sentence![]()
Best not to believe in fairy tales, tbh
I can't see how it makes any sense to have 2x 1080 perf in your product, but deliberately hold it back.
I can understand making a product that's not as good as you can theoretically make it, so you have another product you can release later which is better.
To to make the absolute best product you can, then deliberately reign in its performance so it's only 50% as good as it should be... that doesn't make sense. To put it this way: it's like building a Ferrari with a V8 engine (I'm not a car person btw), then drilling some holes in the radiator and the engine block, putting a load of contaminants in the fuel, and leaving the hand-brake on a little.
You could have made a small hatchback much cheaper, but instead you made a sports car, only to intentional sabotage its performance. It doesn't make sense. You still spent a lot of money making that sports car, when you could have saved a ton making a small hatchback.
It's not how people do things in the real world, because it costs you too much money.
I had an 8500. Good card with great picture quality. Precursor to the seminal 9700(Pro).
~1 Bitcoin back when OCUK accepted BTC payments ($3500 today), seemed good at the time haha.You paid how much ?![]()
That was a great card, I had a FireGL 8800 which was basically just an overclocked 8500, UT2003 looked the sexI had an 8500. Good card with great picture quality. Precursor to the seminal 9700(Pro).
Seen this posted on hardocp, if true what is the major difference that results in amd on paper being more powerful but not in practice. I can even remember back to the radoen 8500, that was meant to be a beast of a card but fell behind the competition.
1080TI - tflops = 11.3
Vega - tflops = 12.6
980TI - tflops = 5.63
Fury X - tflops = 8.7
780TI - tflops = 5.04
290x - tflops = 5.6
680 - tflops = 3.1
HD7970 - tflops = 3.8
Seen this posted on hardocp, if true what is the major difference that results in amd on paper being more powerful but not in practice. I can even remember back to the radoen 8500, that was meant to be a beast of a card but fell behind the competition.
1080TI - tflops = 11.3
Vega - tflops = 12.6
980TI - tflops = 5.63
Fury X - tflops = 8.7
780TI - tflops = 5.04
290x - tflops = 5.6
680 - tflops = 3.1
HD7970 - tflops = 3.8
Seen this posted on hardocp, if true what is the major difference that results in amd on paper being more powerful but not in practice. I can even remember back to the radoen 8500, that was meant to be a beast of a card but fell behind the competition.
1080TI - tflops = 11.3
Vega - tflops = 12.6
980TI - tflops = 5.63
Fury X - tflops = 8.7
780TI - tflops = 5.04
290x - tflops = 5.6
680 - tflops = 3.1
HD7970 - tflops = 3.8
IIRC (correct me if I'm wrong) the Nvidia TFLOPS are calculated using base clock not the actual boost clock. While it would still look bad for AMD in comparison, it is not as large a gap is these numbers suggest. As an example a stock 980Ti would sit around 1160-1200MHz on the core depending upon the model.
proper tessellation
Ehhhh .... ? I'm not sure why the ability to tessellate 4x more than anything that provides any visual improvement is "proper" ? I mean, for sure it's not a negative but it's a hard sell as a positive no?
Flops is a measure of compute performance and AMD GPU's are always shader heavy that's why they're generally better for compute. NVidia focus more on pixel throughput, geometry, proper tessellation which benefits games more.
Seen this posted on hardocp, if true what is the major difference that results in amd on paper being more powerful but not in practice. I can even remember back to the radoen 8500, that was meant to be a beast of a card but fell behind the competition.
1080TI - tflops = 11.3
Vega - tflops = 12.6
980TI - tflops = 5.63
Fury X - tflops = 8.7
780TI - tflops = 5.04
290x - tflops = 5.6
680 - tflops = 3.1
HD7970 - tflops = 3.8
also any 1070 overclocked to 2.2ghz (Not many hit this) is only 8.4Tflops so my 980ti is faster than any 1070 like i was saying repeatedly but people kept telling me 1070 is faster unless nvidia purposely gimp my performance.
Ahh ok, you paid that way.. thought it was a tad much for a graphic cards otherwise..~1 Bitcoin back when OCUK accepted BTC payments ($3500 today), seemed good at the time haha.