Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Worth waiting for the next generation of video cards or buy now?

2

Comments

  • Elevenb4Elevenb4 Member UncommonPosts: 361
    I was asking something very similar this part summer, on another tech forum I frequent. Most of the answers were to wait a few months for some of the prices to drop a little and other sales. So I waited for Thanksgiving/Christmas, asked the same question again and they convinced me to wait until Nvidia's new stuff comes out.....

    I say just get something. I had planned on having a new rig last summer, but now it looks like i"ll be waiting till Spring. I'm not asking anyone again since i dont' want to be convinced to wait until Summer again for the new hardware lol. 

    My 2 cents

    -Unconstitutional laws aren't laws.-

  • TorvalTorval Member LegendaryPosts: 19,780
    Cleffy said:
    I think its a better idea to wait. Most likely we will see new GPUs in June 2016. Both companies have been stuck at 28nm for 3 years. Both NVidia and AMD are going to 16nm come mid next year which will have a sizable performance jump simply die shrinking the current architectures.
    An interesting, if not slightly heavy, article on Anand about Drive PX2 and new Tegra SoCs using 6nm TSMC FinFET. I know it's not GPU gaming stuff, but whatever. :)  http://www.anandtech.com/show/9902/nvidia-discloses-2016-tegra



    Fedora - A modern, free, and open source Operating System. https://getfedora.org/

    traveller, interloper, anomaly, iteration


  • TorvalTorval Member LegendaryPosts: 19,780
    Quizzical said:
    Actually, this might matter:

    http://www.anandtech.com/show/9886/amd-reveals-polaris-gpu-architecture/2

    "First and foremost, Polaris will encompass both GDDR5 and High Bandwidth Memory (HBM) products. Where the line will be drawn has not been disclosed, but keeping in mind that HBM is still a newer technology, it’s reasonable to expect that we’ll only see HBM on higher-end parts. Meanwhile the rest of the Polaris lineup will continue to use GDDR5, something that is not surprising given the lesser bandwidth needs of lower-end parts and the greater cost sensitivity.

    "Meanwhile RTG has also disclosed that the first Polaris parts are GDDR5 based. Going hand-in-hand with what I mentioned earlier about RTG’s Polaris demonstration, it seems likely that this means we’ll see the lower-end Polaris parts first, with high-end parts to follow."

    There's no guarantee that the first Polaris part will be faster than the R9 390 that you're looking at or even the GTX 670 you already have.  Nor, for that matter, that the first Pascal part will be faster.  Both vendors traditionally launched the top end card first.  With Kepler, Nvidia moved to an upper midrange card first.  With Maxwell, Nvidia actually launched the low end card first and worked up from there.

    If AMD and Nvidia launch some really nifty $100 or $150 cards in several months, that doesn't necessarily shake up the prices on $300 parts.  That could still be a big deal if your main complaint about the GTX 670 is dumping heat into your room, but that doesn't sound like it's the case.
    That is a very interesting article. It will be worth seeing what Nvidia comes up with but Polaris looks great on paper so far. Their plans for Freesync over HDMI interest me, but even more so the dramatic performance per watt they demo'd and the move to FinFET.
    Fedora - A modern, free, and open source Operating System. https://getfedora.org/

    traveller, interloper, anomaly, iteration


  • RidelynnRidelynn Member EpicPosts: 6,834
    Elevenb4 said:
    I was asking something very similar this part summer, on another tech forum I frequent. Most of the answers were to wait a few months for some of the prices to drop a little and other sales. So I waited for Thanksgiving/Christmas, asked the same question again and they convinced me to wait until Nvidia's new stuff comes out.....

    I say just get something. I had planned on having a new rig last summer, but now it looks like i"ll be waiting till Spring. I'm not asking anyone again since i dont' want to be convinced to wait until Summer again for the new hardware lol. 

    My 2 cents

    This is the danger with the current tech upgrade cycle (new hardware releases roughly every 12-18 months)

    You can always get caught in a cycle of waiting for the next tech, or waiting for the price drop.

    In my experience, the next cycle of tech is about the only thing that forces a price drop, and even then it's all relative to performance versus what's currently available for whatever price.

    I will sometimes advise waiting for the next generation of tech - if the tech is definitely on the horizon and it looks to make some decent amount of change. I very rarely advise to wait for price drops though, the price rarely drops unless the new generation of tech forces it to, and then your looking at the question of new tech versus cheaper old tech. 

    In general though, if you have a budget and your ready to buy, go ahead and buy. If you think it is a good deal on the day you buy it, price versus performance and feature set - and something new releases the very next day, that doesn't make what  you just bought any less. You thought it was a good deal when you bought it.

    In this case, I would say that nVidia's Pascal has been "around the corner" for a while now, although I wouldn't call it imminent. Usually within about 30-60 days of release you start to see leaks of prototype cards and benchmark scores, and those aren't really flying around yet, if you don't see a paper release from the company itself. This isn't the first I"ve heard of Polaris, but it's the first official news, and I think Polaris is probably a bit further out than Pascal is. I would expect the first Pascal stuff maybe this Spring/Summer, and Polaris Fall/Winter.

    I would not wait at all on CPUs. Those are moving much more slowly than GPUs, and there isn't enough competition for there to be any real price drops when a new generation is released.

    If your willing to wait that long on a GPU before you rebuild, that's your call. Right now, playing DX9/11 games what is available now is overkill for 1080p, but not quite strong enough to drive 4K or VR except on the very high end, and nVidia has some DX12 optimizations I expect to come about over the current Maxwell line. But DX12 isn't widespread and won't be for several years.

    If your sticking with 1080p, buy now, there is no reason to wait. If your wanting to do VR or 4K now, then I would wait until we see Pascal or Polaris. I wouldn't buy anything based on DX12, "futureproofing", or the possibility of maybe getting into 4K/VR sometime down the road, because by the time it becomes a relevant factor, we may well be two or three generations removed from now and you'd be looking to upgrade again anyway.
  • MalaboogaMalabooga Member UncommonPosts: 2,977
    Quizzical said:
    Another thing to consider is whether a Radeon R9 390 is faster than a GeForce GTX 670 by enough to justify the upgrade.  My rule of thumb is, don't upgrade until you can double the performance.  The 390 doesn't get you there unless your problem is running out of video memory, which it probably isn't.  The 390 might be 50% faster, but it's nowhere near double.

    To double your performance, you'd need to look at something more like a GeForce GTX 980 Ti or Radeon R9 Fury.  That's a different price range entirely.
    wut?

    670 performs somwhere above 950 and below 960. 390 is right there at double performance.
  • TanonTanon Member UncommonPosts: 176
    Thanks for all the insights guys. As it happens, I'm Canadian, and with the way our dollar is going (just hit 1.41 CAD:USD) I'm going to be buying now since I predict that by the time Polaris/Pascal release our dollar will be even worse and getting something of similar performance will cost even more.
  • QuizzicalQuizzical Member LegendaryPosts: 21,151
    Wait for the new generation of GPU, HBM 1.0 for AMD and HBM 2.0 + NV-Link for Nvidia will be game changers for the industry.

    I'll be waiting for Pascal (Nvidia) to release because HBM (High Bandwidth Memory) 2.0 has the ability to expand HBM to 8, 16, and even 32GB of HBM on a single card while HBM 1.0 on AMD's new GPU (Polaris) only supports a maximum of 4GB of HBM. NV-Link is also supposed to be a major player in terms of improving communication between GPU and CPU.

    I won't fully explain all of the features the new GPU's will bring in 2016. You should do some research in regards to what the new technology will bring to make your final decision.

    Whether you're Nvidia or AMD both next generation graphics solutions are intended to release in 2016.
    What makes you think that Nvidia is going to use HBM 2 and AMD will only use HBM 1?  Remember that HBM itself was invented by AMD and Hynix; if Nvidia uses HBM, that's just coming along later and copying what AMD did.  Not that that's a bad thing; it's much better for both GPU vendors to use the same memory standards than for everyone to have their own proprietary memory standard.  But my point is that it isn't terribly plausible that AMD will abandon updated versions of HBM just as Nvidia adopts it unless you expect AMD to invent something else that is better to replace it so soon.

    The reason Fiji used HBM 1 because that's what was commercially available in time to launch a part last June.
  • MalaboogaMalabooga Member UncommonPosts: 2,977
    edited January 2016
    Not a bad decision, i sold my 1,5 years old GPU recently for almost what i paid for it back then because of $ currency exchange influencing prices in my country.

    Youll need better CPU with it,

    FX 8300 can be found for as low as 92$

    http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/SearchTools/search.asp?keywords=fx+8300

    and youll be set for next 2-3 years.
  • MalaboogaMalabooga Member UncommonPosts: 2,977
    edited January 2016
    Quizzical said:
    Wait for the new generation of GPU, HBM 1.0 for AMD and HBM 2.0 + NV-Link for Nvidia will be game changers for the industry.

    I'll be waiting for Pascal (Nvidia) to release because HBM (High Bandwidth Memory) 2.0 has the ability to expand HBM to 8, 16, and even 32GB of HBM on a single card while HBM 1.0 on AMD's new GPU (Polaris) only supports a maximum of 4GB of HBM. NV-Link is also supposed to be a major player in terms of improving communication between GPU and CPU.

    I won't fully explain all of the features the new GPU's will bring in 2016. You should do some research in regards to what the new technology will bring to make your final decision.

    Whether you're Nvidia or AMD both next generation graphics solutions are intended to release in 2016.
    What makes you think that Nvidia is going to use HBM 2 and AMD will only use HBM 1?  Remember that HBM itself was invented by AMD and Hynix; if Nvidia uses HBM, that's just coming along later and copying what AMD did.  Not that that's a bad thing; it's much better for both GPU vendors to use the same memory standards than for everyone to have their own proprietary memory standard.  But my point is that it isn't terribly plausible that AMD will abandon updated versions of HBM just as Nvidia adopts it unless you expect AMD to invent something else that is better to replace it so soon.

    The reason Fiji used HBM 1 because that's what was commercially available in time to launch a part last June.
    The only case AMD would use HBM 1 is on lower end high end parts that would need no more than 4 GB memory since HBM 1 is limited to 4 GB, and, of course, if its cheper than HBM 2, which depends on quite a few things.

    People forget that AMD and Hynix invented HBM lol. And now, somehow, AMD wont use its own invention on its cards (even if its confirmed high end parts will use HBM 2)

    If im to look at my crystal ball, no 300$ GPU will use HBM of any kind in the next generation, theres rumors of GDDR6, but it will still be GDDR5 most likely.
  • Elevenb4Elevenb4 Member UncommonPosts: 361
    edited January 2016
    Ridelynn said:
    Elevenb4 said:
    I was asking something very similar this part summer, on another tech forum I frequent. Most of the answers were to wait a few months for some of the prices to drop a little and other sales. So I waited for Thanksgiving/Christmas, asked the same question again and they convinced me to wait until Nvidia's new stuff comes out.....

    I say just get something. I had planned on having a new rig last summer, but now it looks like i"ll be waiting till Spring. I'm not asking anyone again since i dont' want to be convinced to wait until Summer again for the new hardware lol. 

    My 2 cents

    This is the danger with the current tech upgrade cycle (new hardware releases roughly every 12-18 months)



    If your sticking with 1080p, buy now, there is no reason to wait. If your wanting to do VR or 4K now, then I would wait until we see Pascal or Polaris. I wouldn't buy anything based on DX12, "futureproofing", or the possibility of maybe getting into 4K/VR sometime down the road, because by the time it becomes a relevant factor, we may well be two or three generations removed from now and you'd be looking to upgrade again anyway.
    Just kept the part I wanted to point out, but yes, this is the main reason I'm waiting. I'm really wanting to get into the VR stuff, and move away from 1080p. I'm thinking I want to keep my budget around $1500, but that has to include Windows 10 and a monitor. After that, we're talking my budget for the PC build alone will be around $1150 or less. But again, I'm not buying now, but definetly by Spring break, in fact that is probably what i'll be doing during spring break.

    One other thing, i"m really debating on just getting like a case this month, then a PSU next month, they just a few little things that the wife wont' notice or wont' care that I just spend 50-$100 on. Then I can stretch that $1500 we've agreed on even just a little further when the time comes. 

    -Unconstitutional laws aren't laws.-

  • Loke666Loke666 Member EpicPosts: 21,441
    Malabooga said:
    Not a bad decision, i sold my 1,5 years old GPU recently for almost what i paid for it back then because of $ currency exchange influencing prices in my country.

    Youll need better CPU with it,

    FX 8300 can be found for as low as 92$

    http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/SearchTools/search.asp?keywords=fx+8300

    and youll be set for next 2-3 years.
    Listen, the FX 8300 is hardly something that would make any gamer happy for 2-3 years, no card even close to that priceclass will do that unless you just plan to play old games like Wow. A R9 290 or a GTX 970 would last most  gamers 3 years but they are in a different price range.

    Below that I would only upgrade if I was poor and had an ancient card, it is better to wait a while and save up money for a good card then to buy old crap that are rather sad already when you get it.

    There are 2 things a gamer never should cheap out on with their computer: The GPU and the PSU. A bad PSU could fry your entire system (a good one will  last you 10 years) while the GFX card will have far greater impact then anything else.

    Now, you could go somewhat cheaper then the cards I recommend but then you will need to update sooner. And yeah, I assume most gamers enjoy playing games with the highest possibly graphics settings. 
  • NevardlrowNevardlrow Member UncommonPosts: 19
    And the correct answer is...

    Wait for DisplayPort 1.3 cards + 4K monitors with 120Hz
  • MalaboogaMalabooga Member UncommonPosts: 2,977
    Loke666 said:
    Malabooga said:
    Not a bad decision, i sold my 1,5 years old GPU recently for almost what i paid for it back then because of $ currency exchange influencing prices in my country.

    Youll need better CPU with it,

    FX 8300 can be found for as low as 92$

    http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/SearchTools/search.asp?keywords=fx+8300

    and youll be set for next 2-3 years.
    Listen, the FX 8300 is hardly something that would make any gamer happy for 2-3 years, no card even close to that priceclass will do that unless you just plan to play old games like Wow. A R9 290 or a GTX 970 would last most  gamers 3 years but they are in a different price range.

    Below that I would only upgrade if I was poor and had an ancient card, it is better to wait a while and save up money for a good card then to buy old crap that are rather sad already when you get it.

    There are 2 things a gamer never should cheap out on with their computer: The GPU and the PSU. A bad PSU could fry your entire system (a good one will  last you 10 years) while the GFX card will have far greater impact then anything else.

    Now, you could go somewhat cheaper then the cards I recommend but then you will need to update sooner. And yeah, I assume most gamers enjoy playing games with the highest possibly graphics settings. 
    FX 8300 is a CPU...
  • Loke666Loke666 Member EpicPosts: 21,441
    Malabooga said:
    Loke666 said:
    Listen, the FX 8300 is hardly something that would make any gamer happy for 2-3 years, no card even close to that priceclass will do that unless you just plan to play old games like Wow. A R9 290 or a GTX 970 would last most  gamers 3 years but they are in a different price range.

    Below that I would only upgrade if I was poor and had an ancient card, it is better to wait a while and save up money for a good card then to buy old crap that are rather sad already when you get it.

    There are 2 things a gamer never should cheap out on with their computer: The GPU and the PSU. A bad PSU could fry your entire system (a good one will  last you 10 years) while the GFX card will have far greater impact then anything else.

    Now, you could go somewhat cheaper then the cards I recommend but then you will need to update sooner. And yeah, I assume most gamers enjoy playing games with the highest possibly graphics settings. 
    FX 8300 is a CPU...
    Duh, 24 hours awake and I read HD instead of FX... *facepalm to me*
  • MalaboogaMalabooga Member UncommonPosts: 2,977
    get some sleep...NAU ;P
  • KiyorisKiyoris Member RarePosts: 2,130
    edited January 2016
    Tanon said:
    AMD having just revealed their new Polaris architecture that basically doubles performance per wat
    You're drinking a bit too much AMD Kool-Aid, this isn't the 90s anymore where you did see an 2x or more performance gain from gpu to gpu. Those days are long gone.
  • azarhalazarhal Member RarePosts: 1,356
    Kiyoris said:
    Tanon said:
    AMD having just revealed their new Polaris architecture that basically doubles performance per wat
    You're drinking a bit too much AMD Kool-Aid, this isn't the 90s anymore where you did see an 2x or more performance gain from gpu to gpu. Those days are long gone.
    Going from 28nm to 16/14nm die size achieve the 2x performance per Watts increase. It is also how it was done in the 90s, die shrink was just faster back then. Now it is slow because semiconductors manufacturers have been having issues getting stable process for under 20nm production.
  • Jean-Luc_PicardJean-Luc_Picard Member LegendaryPosts: 8,061
    edited January 2016
    azarhal said:
    Kiyoris said:
    Tanon said:
    AMD having just revealed their new Polaris architecture that basically doubles performance per wat
    You're drinking a bit too much AMD Kool-Aid, this isn't the 90s anymore where you did see an 2x or more performance gain from gpu to gpu. Those days are long gone.
    Going from 28nm to 16/14nm die size achieve the 2x performance per Watts increase. It is also how it was done in the 90s, die shrink was just faster back then. Now it is slow because semiconductors manufacturers have been having issues getting stable process for under 20nm production.
    The person you quote apparently missed the "per watt" part... selective reading, as usual. Kool-Aid, yeah, talk about the story of a black pot and kettle.

    A good read from Intel about this, for those who want facts and not just opinions coming from their own, wrong personal beliefs... and since it doesn't come from AMD, there's no "Kool-Aid" involved, right?

    http://www.intel.com/content/dam/www/public/us/en/documents/pdf/foundry/mark-bohr-2014-idf-presentation.pdf
    "The ability to speak doesn't make you intelligent" - Qui-gon Jinn in Star Wars.
    After many years of reading Internet forums, there's no doubt that nor does the ability to write.
    CPU: Core I7 9700k (4.90ghz) - GPU: Gigabyte GTX 980 Ti G1 Gaming - RAM: 16GB Kingston HyperX Savage DDR4 3000 - Motherboard: Gigabyte Z390 Aorus Ultra - PSU: Antec TruePower New 750W - Storage: Kingston KC1000 NVMe 960gb SSD and 2x1TB WD Velociraptor HDDs (Raid 0) - Main display: Philips 40PUK6809 4K 3D TV - Second display: Philips 273v 27" gaming monitor - VR: Pimax 8K headset and Razer Hydra controllers - Soundcard: Sony STR-DH550 AV Receiver HDMI linked with the GPU and the TV, with Jamo S 426 HS 3 5.0 speakers and Pioneer S-21W subwoofer - OS: Windows 10 Pro 64 bits.

  • JustAHermitJustAHermit Member UncommonPosts: 75
    I think there are a variety of factors that come into play such as what resolution do you want to play on, how much FPS do you actually need, etc.

    I've waited for a while (only rocking a GTX 660) because for the games I play (MOBA's), I'm able to get decent FPS and use a 144hz gaming monitor therefore it's difficult to get 144 FPS in the triple AAA games even with a high-end $$$ card but for MOBA's I seem to clock in around 100+. My girlfriend is using a GTX 660 TI but it's even more difficult for her to get 120/144 FPS at 1440p if you're talking about non-MOBA/MMORPG.
  • laxielaxie Member RarePosts: 1,052
    edited January 2016
    I bought a GTX970 over a year ago and am more than happy with it. A year ago, it was a brilliant purchase in my opinion.

     The sad thing is, today, the price is nearly identical to what I paid a year ago.

    I suspect the price will drop significantly once they are close to releasing the new range. You'll then have more options to choose from (cheaper GTX970-ish cards, or the band new ones). Right now the only viable option is to buy 2 year old models for their launch prices.
  • Elevenb4Elevenb4 Member UncommonPosts: 361
    laxie said:
    I bought a GTX970 over a year ago and am more than happy with it. A year ago, it was a brilliant purchase in my opinion.

     The sad thing is, today, the price is nearly identical to what I paid a year ago.

    I suspect the price will drop significantly once they are close to releasing the new range. You'll then have more options to choose from (cheaper GTX970-ish cards, or the band new ones). Right now the only viable option is to buy 2 year old models for their launch prices.
    Totally agree. When I was told to wait until prices dropped, they didn't drop much if at all, even during large sales. Again, just more support for the "Buy it now" suggestion.

    -Unconstitutional laws aren't laws.-

  • Jean-Luc_PicardJean-Luc_Picard Member LegendaryPosts: 8,061
    edited January 2016
    If you always wait until the prices drop, you never buy anything...
    My now older 290x is still an excellent card running everything I throw at it with maxed out settings. SW:battlefront and Witcher III look gorgeous on it, with all settings to ultra and with smooth framerates all over the place.
    My only advice would be, if you buy something, buy one of the upper tier cards... for nVidia, that would be 970 or 980, and for AMD the 390x, Fury or Fury X. Get at least 4gb of onboard memory, too. That way, you're sure you won't have to change card again in one or two years when new games become too demanding for an older entry level and mid range card.
    "The ability to speak doesn't make you intelligent" - Qui-gon Jinn in Star Wars.
    After many years of reading Internet forums, there's no doubt that nor does the ability to write.
    CPU: Core I7 9700k (4.90ghz) - GPU: Gigabyte GTX 980 Ti G1 Gaming - RAM: 16GB Kingston HyperX Savage DDR4 3000 - Motherboard: Gigabyte Z390 Aorus Ultra - PSU: Antec TruePower New 750W - Storage: Kingston KC1000 NVMe 960gb SSD and 2x1TB WD Velociraptor HDDs (Raid 0) - Main display: Philips 40PUK6809 4K 3D TV - Second display: Philips 273v 27" gaming monitor - VR: Pimax 8K headset and Razer Hydra controllers - Soundcard: Sony STR-DH550 AV Receiver HDMI linked with the GPU and the TV, with Jamo S 426 HS 3 5.0 speakers and Pioneer S-21W subwoofer - OS: Windows 10 Pro 64 bits.

  • Elevenb4Elevenb4 Member UncommonPosts: 361
    If you always wait until the prices drop, you never buy anything...
    My now older 290x is still an excellent card running everything I throw at it with maxed out settings. SW:battlefront and Witcher III look gorgeous on it, with all settings to ultra and with smooth framerates all over the place.
    My only advice would be, if you buy something, buy one of the upper tier cards... for nVidia, that would be 970 or 980, and for AMD the 390x, Fury or Fury X. Get at least 4gb of onboard memory, too. That way, you're sure you won't have to change card again in one or two years when new games become too demanding for an older entry level and mid range card.
    Great advice and something I wish I had heard years ago. 

    -Unconstitutional laws aren't laws.-

  • GorweGorwe Member EpicPosts: 6,234
    edited January 2016
    Quizzical said:
    Another thing to consider is whether a Radeon R9 390 is faster than a GeForce GTX 670 by enough to justify the upgrade.  My rule of thumb is, don't upgrade until you can double the performance.  The 390 doesn't get you there unless your problem is running out of video memory, which it probably isn't.  The 390 might be 50% faster, but it's nowhere near double.

    To double your performance, you'd need to look at something more like a GeForce GTX 980 Ti or Radeon R9 Fury.  That's a different price range entirely.
    I've a question for you(or anyone who is willing to answer):

    What is the double of 7850 or 7870? Fury / 980Ti?
  • QuizzicalQuizzical Member LegendaryPosts: 21,151
    Gorwe said:
    Quizzical said:
    Another thing to consider is whether a Radeon R9 390 is faster than a GeForce GTX 670 by enough to justify the upgrade.  My rule of thumb is, don't upgrade until you can double the performance.  The 390 doesn't get you there unless your problem is running out of video memory, which it probably isn't.  The 390 might be 50% faster, but it's nowhere near double.

    To double your performance, you'd need to look at something more like a GeForce GTX 980 Ti or Radeon R9 Fury.  That's a different price range entirely.
    I've a question for you(or anyone who is willing to answer):

    What is the double of 7850 or 7870? Fury / 980Ti?
    A Radeon R9 390 or GeForce GTX 970 is a little more than double a Radeon HD 7870.  Doing further up the chain gets you something faster yet, and I'm not saying that you shouldn't try to more than double performance.  I am saying that I'd avoid small upgrades.
Sign In or Register to comment.