I bought an EVGA 970 around 6 months ago for less than $300 off newegg on sale. That was a great deal then and would be a good deal today. However if you could find a 1070 for a decently close price to a 970 then the extra money for a 1070 would be well worth it.
vast majority of people dont use their hom PC for anything productive lol
IF you need a pro card youll buy a pro card, and those are beyond the scope of this thread.
Even then i didnt see any productivity benchmarks in that video, and if youre mining AMD has always been better choice lol
performance/watt matters little to none, that 0,5$/month youll save...yeah lol that whole crap is overrated mostly by those who have no clue what theyre talking about
passmark is irrelevant, most of sythetic benchmarks are irrelevant except as a fun point with little to no value
we know the specs of 1070.
actually 390 has much more compute power, 1070 cant even do double precision lol
Oh I do care, just doesnt it seem steange to not test a 1070?
And why test 1070? 1070 is 400$ card, it would only prove how bad it is comapred to 970/390 in performance/price (especially 390) lol
Depends on what you do with your card. If it is just for gaming? Sure pick the 390 (8 gig of course) If you do other things besides gaming (and that too) the 1000 series or 400 series are great performance per watt cards. Passmark is better. Lower TDP Higher texture rate Higher memory clock speed The floating point performance is better (which as a developer is important to me) Much better direct compute power Higher pixel rate
Who cares about Passmark? It's a synthetic benchmark of who knows what that doesn't even measure an illuminating corner case.
Memory clock speed isn't relevant in isolation. Memory bandwidth is the salient consideration, and there, the Fury cards are still king because of HBM, and the R9 390 has far more bandwidth than even a GTX 1080 because of the wider memory bus.
If you're comparing the top of the line from a previous generation to the top of the line today, then of course the latter is going to be better at most things. But that's not the comparison most people make. Usually it's the best $300 card from a previous generation to the best $300 card today, or $200 or $100 or whatever.
And if that's what you want, the comparisons get more complicated. The Fury cards still blow away all else on the market at local memory bandwidth and capacity, for example. If you want double precision compute in a sub-$1000 card, the venerable Radeon HD 7970 is still the best there is, as it was the last card where the consumer version didn't cripple the double precision compute.
I purchased a Galax 970 Hall of Fame 1-2 months ago for 200-210 €. Went with the 1060 to my girlfriend's computer. Not only the 970 is way quiter and colder during load than the 1060 (during playing around 50-52 Celsius degree on the 970 and around 65-75 on the 1060), all this value as the 970 doesnt spin the fans over 40% while the 1060 is around 70%. Due the plastic crap on the 1060 to look stylish, at this speed as the fans control themself, the fans also give a strange noise, which is like a HDD loading, now this is a particular issue with the superawesome Gigabyte products due the overused plastics on them...
What I wanted to say, that 970 runs everything fine for what I do, I play Black Desert Online, Grand Theft Auto V...etc. On full graphics of course, now take it with a grain of salt, but I do not care about FPS, as long as my game runs smooth as shit I dont care if its 50 or 500 fps. And I have no issues so far (and if I will, due the nature of the Hall of Fame, I'll tuning the shit out of the card...)
That kind of broad statements are useless. You bought cheapest 1060 and then compare it to one of most expencive 970.
My 480 Gaming X doesnt even spin up fans in old(er) games (i use frame limiter at 70 FPS+Freesync) or tehy spin up at 19% for ~30s every now and then and is passively cooled. And in games like Witcher 3 (which is pretty much most demanding game) it hovers between 1100-1200 RPMs which is ~25% (fans start to spin at 60c). I presume 1060 Gaminc X behaves similar.
Hovering at 50 FPS actually has 2 drawbacks - either you exprience screen tearing (which can be quite drastic) or you turn on VSync an experience quite noticable frame drops to 30 FPS. Thats why people chase 60 FPS (on 60 Hz monitors) and thats where Freesync/GSync kick in and make gameplay buttery smooth.
Outside of folding, bitcoin mining, and maybe
trying to find prime numbers what sort of workstation graphics
processing are we talking about that need double precision?
every single engineering application. Engineers dont deal in "approximate" or "good enough" values lol
it wasnt the cheapest 1060, and i bought them almost at the same price like I said, thats why I compared the two, I also have to mention that the 1060 boost itself to around 1950ish Mhz core clock vs the 1400ish factory of the HoF. Regardless, the 970 gives better fps in games. Then again, both card provide smooth gameplay in given games without noticing fps drop or low fps (the 50-500 FPS was a number, not experience, as I do not track fps in games with 3rd party softwares, and yes V sync is on.)
(also 200 € for the most expensive 970 is also a good deal when u can buy brand new 1060s around 220-250 €)
And i dont know any that use those cards, but then, im in real engineering, you know, sturctural, mechanical, geotechical, geological, electrotechnical... .... ....
A 1070 cost 500 euro here not even going to mention a 1080....
AMD always age so much better then Nvidia and gamers do get more performance over the lifespan from AMD GPU's.
I wait for Vega and Zen as i want AMD to survive as they realy do amazing work with their limited budget.
Nvidia is pooping out so many gpu's and are currently dominating the charts with their monster gpu's but they also ask premium prices and theur gpu's age realy realy bad, not to mention their performance or lack thereoff in Vulkan / dx12.
2017 is hopefully going to be a fantastic year both in cpu and gpu hardware
I purchased a Galax 970 Hall of Fame 1-2 months ago for 200-210 €. Went with the 1060 to my girlfriend's computer. Not only the 970 is way quiter and colder <snip>
Noise has been a key consideration for me for years. It usually comes down to the "packaging" / "board design" / "cooling solution" - who has built the card basically - rather than NVidia vs. AMD. There are tests done these days comparing designs and they can make a huge difference.
MSI Twin Frozr designs for example are usually very solid.
Makes "discussions" about cost vs. cpu performance difficult as well !
To understand that you have to look at broader picture and look at revenue structure of PC entertainment and youll see thta vast majority of that revenue comes from F2P games/MOBAs/facebook games and biggest earners are WoW/Dungeon Fighters/LoL/Lineage 2/Dota2... ... ... which can be literally played on a toaster.
And its rumored that Zen APU will have graphic capabilities of RX460, which would pretty much eliminate the need for low end dGPUs. Intel iGPU is not really a contender since theyre so much behind.
There are other people participating too and from what ive seen vast majority dont understand. AAA games (games that actually require something more than an APU) are not selling all that well on PC. Even NVidia themselves published their own statistics that 80% of NVidia users are < PS4. Pushing price hikes and badly optimized games aint gonna help that lol
Comments
And no mention of the RX4XX line? I have an RX480 and it is working quite well, thank you...
The world is going to the dogs, which is just how I planned it!
거북이는 목을 내밀 때 안 움직입니다
거북이는 목을 내밀 때 안 움직입니다
IF you need a pro card youll buy a pro card, and those are beyond the scope of this thread.
Even then i didnt see any productivity benchmarks in that video, and if youre mining AMD has always been better choice lol
performance/watt matters little to none, that 0,5$/month youll save...yeah lol that whole crap is overrated mostly by those who have no clue what theyre talking about
passmark is irrelevant, most of sythetic benchmarks are irrelevant except as a fun point with little to no value
we know the specs of 1070.
actually 390 has much more compute power, 1070 cant even do double precision lol
Memory clock speed isn't relevant in isolation. Memory bandwidth is the salient consideration, and there, the Fury cards are still king because of HBM, and the R9 390 has far more bandwidth than even a GTX 1080 because of the wider memory bus.
If you're comparing the top of the line from a previous generation to the top of the line today, then of course the latter is going to be better at most things. But that's not the comparison most people make. Usually it's the best $300 card from a previous generation to the best $300 card today, or $200 or $100 or whatever.
And if that's what you want, the comparisons get more complicated. The Fury cards still blow away all else on the market at local memory bandwidth and capacity, for example. If you want double precision compute in a sub-$1000 card, the venerable Radeon HD 7970 is still the best there is, as it was the last card where the consumer version didn't cripple the double precision compute.
거북이는 목을 내밀 때 안 움직입니다
거북이는 목을 내밀 때 안 움직입니다
What I wanted to say, that 970 runs everything fine for what I do, I play Black Desert Online, Grand Theft Auto V...etc. On full graphics of course, now take it with a grain of salt, but I do not care about FPS, as long as my game runs smooth as shit I dont care if its 50 or 500 fps. And I have no issues so far (and if I will, due the nature of the Hall of Fame, I'll tuning the shit out of the card...)
My 480 Gaming X doesnt even spin up fans in old(er) games (i use frame limiter at 70 FPS+Freesync) or tehy spin up at 19% for ~30s every now and then and is passively cooled. And in games like Witcher 3 (which is pretty much most demanding game) it hovers between 1100-1200 RPMs which is ~25% (fans start to spin at 60c). I presume 1060 Gaminc X behaves similar.
Hovering at 50 FPS actually has 2 drawbacks - either you exprience screen tearing (which can be quite drastic) or you turn on VSync an experience quite noticable frame drops to 30 FPS. Thats why people chase 60 FPS (on 60 Hz monitors) and thats where Freesync/GSync kick in and make gameplay buttery smooth.
every single engineering application. Engineers dont deal in "approximate" or "good enough" values lol
(also 200 € for the most expensive 970 is also a good deal when u can buy brand new 1060s around 220-250 €)
거북이는 목을 내밀 때 안 움직입니다
AMD always age so much better then Nvidia and gamers do get more performance over the lifespan from AMD GPU's.
I wait for Vega and Zen as i want AMD to survive as they realy do amazing work with their limited budget.
Nvidia is pooping out so many gpu's and are currently dominating the charts with their monster gpu's but they also ask premium prices and theur gpu's age realy realy bad, not to mention their performance or lack thereoff in Vulkan / dx12.
2017 is hopefully going to be a fantastic year both in cpu and gpu hardware
거북이는 목을 내밀 때 안 움직입니다
MSI Twin Frozr designs for example are usually very solid.
Makes "discussions" about cost vs. cpu performance difficult as well !
거북이는 목을 내밀 때 안 움직입니다
And its rumored that Zen APU will have graphic capabilities of RX460, which would pretty much eliminate the need for low end dGPUs. Intel iGPU is not really a contender since theyre so much behind.
거북이는 목을 내밀 때 안 움직입니다
거북이는 목을 내밀 때 안 움직입니다