Why no older cards used in reviews?

[R-T-B]

I think OP has a point. Just recently the 780 stopped being in the comparison list. There is no way such a massively popular card suddenly has no one using it. So now, I have look at the 780Ti and guesstimate where my card is by imemwnting approximatwly 10% worse fps. Still not really a good method though.

imemwnting? Tablet/phone keyboard speak?

 

[rtwjunkie]

imemwnting? Tablet/phone keyboard speak?

LOL! Crap, yeah, phonespeak. I swear I wrote out "subtracting"! I'll amend my post. Have I mentioned I love PC's and hate phones?

 

[SonicZap]

I think my HD7950 is around as fast if not tiny bit faster than vanilla HD7970 so that's quite comparable directly. I guess I was reading the graphs correctly after all, GTX 980 is basically 100% faster than HD7970.

Hard to say what driver version is used in Anandtech's Bench though. The HD 7000 series cards got a lot more performance out of drivers during their lifetime. I think there's a difference of 15% or so between the original (late 2011 / early 2012) release drivers and the latest drivers. Basically, I'd mostly trust those definitely newer benchmarks there (like Shadow of Mordor and Dragon Age: Inquisition).

 

[RejZoR]

Then again GTX 980 also had time to improve since launch in October 2014... So in the end they both have settled down I think.

 

[CrAsHnBuRnXp]

I will admit, I kinda wish that there were more older (5-6 years old) cards to compare. Not everyone upgrades as much as us. Personally if I was still running a GTX 580 or even a 680, Id like to see how much a performance gain id be seeing if I went to my now 980.

I feel the same way in the CPU department. I am still rocking a 2500k overclocked to 4.5GHz 24/7 and i would really like to see the performance (stock and oc) compared to a 4690k and the upcoming 6500k. But I will never see this comparison unless I build the system myself and run tests which is really depressing.

EDIT: Ive been wanting to upgrade my system for years but people keep saying that if I have a 2500k im good for another 2 years. I want to see BENCHMARKS. I dont want someones word of mouth. I am not good at math. At all. When someone says it's only a 5-10% increase and it isnt worth it, it doesnt tell me anything. I want to see encoding benchmarks. I want to see unzipping and zipping of files using winrar. I want to see the performance gains or lack thereof in games. For all the lack of information out there regarding Skylake about how it's going to be this huge improvement, I am still seeing people say that if you are on Sandy Bridge, that you still dont need to upgrade for another two years. How the hell can SB be that good? I want to see NUMBERS backing that up. Give me a 2500k vs 6500k comparison. Stock vs stock. OC vs OC.

 

[RejZoR]

Yeah, I agree about CPU's as well. I'm with Core i7 920 @ 4,2GHz, but if I'd be to look for a CPU now, I have no clue which one would make a significant difference. It's nothing worse to spend tons of money just to find out you haven't really gained much if anything...

 

[Frick]

Yeah, I agree about CPU's as well. I'm with Core i7 920 @ 4,2GHz, but if I'd be to look for a CPU now, I have no clue which one would make a significant difference. It's nothing worse to spend tons of money just to find out you haven't really gained much if anything...

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/47?vs=837

No games there though, I assume that's what you're after, but that is still 19 benchmark scores.

 

[R-T-B]

Yeah, I agree about CPU's as well. I'm with Core i7 920 @ 4,2GHz, but if I'd be to look for a CPU now, I have no clue which one would make a significant difference. It's nothing worse to spend tons of money just to find out you haven't really gained much if anything...

RejZoR, I upgraded to Haswell-E and I want to let you know what I felt:

Nothing.

The chipset is nice but it was expensive... if you want my advice, here it is:

Don't.

 

[CrAsHnBuRnXp]

RejZoR, I upgraded to Haswell-E and I want to let you know what I felt:

Nothing.

The chipset is nice but it was expensive... if you want my advice, here it is:

Don't.

But why though? I see people say this ALL the time but dont give any reason for it.

 

[R-T-B]

But why though? I see people say this ALL the time but dont give any reason for it.

Because I tried it and it made about a 1FPS difference, if that.

For gaming it's not worth it.

LGA1366 may be old, but Intel has made about a 20% advancement since then. If you have a good overclocking Nehalem, it's likely it might even OUTPERFORM a modern haswell that OC's badly.

 

[newbsandwich]

I am still rocking a 2500k overclocked to 4.5GHz 24/7 and i would really like to see the performance (stock and oc) compared to a 4690k and the upcoming 6500k. But I will never see this comparison unless I build the system myself and run tests which is really depressing.

Ha, I feel the same as you, I've got a 2600k at only 4GHz and I don't see the need to upgrade that CPU. Now my 6970 on the other hand is getting really long in the tooth. It still does fine for 1080p, but I want to be able to use the 1440 my monitor can provide and not have a slide show. Don't really want to pay $650 for a video card though... was hoping AMD would spark some competition and drop card prices.

 

[XSI]

i wanted to upgrade to.....:
gtx 260..somehow missed that.
then gtx 460...missed that
then i wanted 560ti...hm missed that too..
what about 650ti boost or 660 gtx...what a beast almost 4 of 8800gt... nah didn't happen
same with cpu...
e8400 to 920-->2500k..
damn im still on that 8 years old system, oh and its not even in my house, its in my friends house, so im using even more retarded laptop

back to the topic, i like new vs old system benchmarks and some like ocaholics, anandtech or others do it time to time...
e8400 vs 2500k, 8800gt vs 660 gtx etc. there is somewhere 4 generations of graphics card compared, so its possible to find those articles, you just need to spend some time.

 

[R-T-B]

Ha, I feel the same as you, I've got a 2600k at only 4GHz and I don't see the need to upgrade that CPU. Now my 6970 on the other hand is getting really long in the tooth. It still does fine for 1080p, but I want to be able to use the 1440 my monitor can provide and not have a slide show. Don't really want to pay $650 for a video card though... was hoping AMD would spark some competition and drop card prices.

980 or 390/290X is an option, but yeah, I hear you. Kinda sucky performance for even $300-500...

 

[HWTactics]

GTX 980 should be roughly 80-100% faster than my HD7950.

http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/gpu.php?gpu=Radeon+HD+7950+/+R9+280

There's your answer. You're exactly right.

 

[newbsandwich]

980 or 390/290X is an option, but yeah, I hear you. Kinda sucky performance for even $300-500...

Yeah, to me there is a big gap between price and performance. I think AMD should have a price reduction across the board to stir up some sales. If the Fury X was 500 or $550, I'd buy it. But not interested in rebranded cards.

 

[RejZoR]

Vanilla R9 Fury is suppose to be that. Slightly slower than Fury X and slightly more noisy I presume. But then again, who is prepared to wait for god knows where in July? I know I had enough...

 

[OneMoar]

sure lets pull out the 486's a bench them against a x99 core i7
get real
if you wanna see how the old stuff stacks up get off your lazy bum and look up the old benchmarks
if you can't deduce what hardware is better then what regardless of what benchmarks where or where not run. then you are idiot anyway and thus your opinion means jackshit
one look at the paper specs will tell you strait away what card is faster then what regardless of era

 

[Aquinus]

sure lets pull out the 486's a bench them against a x99 core i7
get real
if you wanna see how the old stuff stacks up get off your lazy bum and look up the old benchmarks
if you can't deduce what hardware is better then what regardless of what benchmarks where or where not run. then you are idiot anyway and thus your opinion means jackshit
one look at the paper specs will tell you strait away what card is faster then what regardless of era

While I agree with your assessment, was the attitude really necessary? Do you need some Valium or something? You seem to always be super pissed off.

 

[OneMoar]

While I agree with your assessment, was the attitude really necessary? Do you need some Valium or something? You seem to always be super pissed off.

I am not a nice person when I encounter public stupidity
and yes I had my Valium today ;P

 

[R-T-B]

I think OneMoar's avatar is surprisingly accurate.

 

[AsRock]

I would love to see old cards against newer and the new cards , i believe i made a post about this some time ago, how ever i understand why it don't happen which would take so much time which could be spent on other things as i am sure Wizard has other shit to do.

 

[ZenZimZaliben]

I can see both sides of this. For instance if you look at Steam Store GPUs in use today you will see GTX760's and 550ti's make up a huge percentage. As a reviewer where do you draw the line? As a tech enthusiast site I am not sure you can call yourself a hardware enthusiast if you are still running and reviewing 5 or 6 generations from current and I can see why reviewers don't feel the need to cater to those people.

However for the general population I think Steam paints a different picture. http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey - As content authors and reviews shouldn't they cater to the masses?

So it really comes down to relevant content for your target audience. Most review sites are going to cater to enthusiasts...but maybe they are missing out on a TON of viewership (and potential revenue) by avoiding those less in the know, which are arguably far greater in number than the enthusiast.

10 Things the 980TI does better...
Game Developers Hate this about XX Card...
5 Easy ways to get better graphics with the XXX Card...

Tech Blog Spam for the mindless masses...Huge potential.

 

[Frag_Maniac]

As a 7970 owner, I'm fine with comparing it to a 280X, which is pretty much identical to a 7970.

 

[RejZoR]

I'd be fine if R9-280X was in there as well... I know HD7950/HD7970 are around there, especially since mine is overclocked.

 

[W1zzard]

I'd be fine if R9-280X was in there as well... I know HD7950/HD7970 are around there, especially since mine is overclocked.

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Powercolor/R9_390_PCS_Plus/7.html
There is your 280X/ 285 data