RX 580 4GB, 1060 3GB or 2nd hand 290/970

[m1dg3t]

Even Kepler is still well supported so there's absolutely no problem ahead. Remember Maxwell and Pascal are almost the same architecture as in ~95%.

I think you need to revisit nVidias driver page and reacquaint yourself with what is 'legacy' & what is not

 

[TheMailMan78]

Id go 580 honestly. Longer support and depending on the game better performance.

 

[Artas1984]

Pfffffffffff, what ever makes you happy Mr "Amd better for future" ...
thats the crappiest statement i have ever read... period...

peche, but that is partially true. NVIDIA drops support for previous generation video cards, just as new generation video cards come out. AMD tends to do that only after many many years. Of course i am not talking about crippling performance in games, but in the specific modern games, for which they have new advertisements on their new line of video cards - NVIDIA tend to increase performance of that new product line specifically more and do not include optimizations for the old hardware. That's why stock R9 290X is now on par with stock GTX780 Ti at 1080P and beats it in 1440P, which was never the case in 2013/2014, even in 2015. Hell, even R9 390 could not beat GTX780 Ti on it's launch day July 1 of 2015 at 1080P, but look now R9 390 leading the way.

 

[Kanan]

R9 290X was always scaling better on high resolutions than Kepler. Remember amd always was and still kinda is the king of high resolution scaling wise. This started all the way back with GCN 1, 384bit and 3 GB Tahiti chips.

@peche I'm not impressed when you still have a hard time understanding my post.

I think you need to revisit nVidias driver page and reacquaint yourself with what is 'legacy' & what is not

I think you need to do that because I know it first hand via my own gpu I use every day. Stating Maxwell will be "legacy" soon is laughable at best without providing proof for it. The userbase is still quite big they couldn't afford to drop support even when they wanted.

 

[peche]

a

peche, but that is partially true. NVIDIA drops support for previous generation video cards, just as new generation video cards come out. AMD tends to do that only after many many years.

Agreed, they also rebrand everything, do crappy drivers... all brands have some minor details, bug and other, but AMD ? come on, give a break, its understood that performance upgrades via drivers are a must, but with older chips? bigger power consumption? heat? no thanks, totally understood the point but generally intel & Nvidia still moving forward on several interesting fields, better power usage, great performance no matter if the brands still charging premium but i prefer to stick with what already shown progress and innovation, i do respect you point, but not share it,

@peche I'm not impressed when you still have a hard time understanding my post.

i just dont care about it....

Regards,

 

[Kanan]

i just dont care about it....

Then simply never quote me again, fanboy. I'm fed up with you guys. In the other thread it's the same with the AMD fanboys, both sides fanboys are just annoying as fuck.

 

[notb]

peche, but that is partially true. NVIDIA drops support for previous generation video cards, just as new generation video cards come out. AMD tends to do that only after many many years.

AMD tends to use the same architecture for many years, so clearly they keep optimizing the drivers and improve the performance.
But... this could all change with VEGA if it turns out to be significantly different from previous GCN (which seems less and less likely...).
Basically it seems like people are praising AMD for supporting their products longer forgetting that lately this is purely a result of AMD not releasing anything new.
Yes, AM3 was alive for half a decade, because the CPUs had a performance from half a decade ago.
Yes, GPUs from 2013 (R9 290 etc) are aging better than competitors, but at the same time modern AMD GPUs perform like they used to in 2013.

Both Zen and Vega are expected to be a new start for AMD, which could mean that the older products are going to lose support and quickly become obsolete.
We have no guarantee that AMD will do the same in the future, e.g. that Ryzen and Vega will be regularly refreshed for next 5 years until AMD - once again - falls vastly behind the competition. If they decide to change approach - regularly updating products to keep up - the "long lifetime of AMD products" could not be true anymore.

Of course i am not talking about crippling performance in games, but in the specific modern games, for which they have new advertisements on their new line of video cards - NVIDIA tend to increase performance of that new product line specifically more and do not include optimizations for the old hardware. That's why stock R9 290X is now on par with stock GTX780 Ti at 1080P and beats it in 1440P, which was never the case in 2013/2014, even in 2015. Hell, even R9 390 could not beat GTX780 Ti on it's launch day July 1 of 2015 at 1080P, but look now R9 390 leading the way.

True, but then again... if you're in the NVIDIA camp, you had reasons to update since 780Ti. And if you're fine with the performance, you could go for a cheap 1060 (that beats it) or 1050Ti (which is not far behind) - both of these cards are also much quieter, consume 1/2 or 1/3 of electricity compared to 780Ti and would have a warranty.
If you're in AMD camp and unwilling to switch to green, R9 290 is still close to the best of AMD offer. Again, you could replace it with a modern RX, but (unlike with NVIDIA) there is hardly any benefit other than the better AIB designs (fans, new interfaces etc) and the warranty, because the GPU itself hasn't changed much.
And with incoming Vega and changes in AMD strategy, you can't really expect RX580 to age as well as R9 models.

tl;dr
Please don't praise AMD for not updating their technology for years. This is just silly.

 

[Artas1984]

True, but then again... if you're in the NVIDIA camp, you had reasons to update since 780Ti. And if you're fine with the performance, you could go for a cheap 1060 (that beats it) or 1050Ti (which is not far behind) - both of these cards are also much quieter, consume 1/2 or 1/3 of electricity compared to 780Ti and would have a warranty.

GTX1050 Ti is FAR BEHIND GTX780 Ti. I had GTX960, which is an equal to GTX1050 Ti as you can see here:

http://www.pcgamer.com/gtx-1050-ti-review/

It was absolutely demolished by my GTX780 Ti GHz Edition a year ago. A nice factory overclocked GTX780 Ti can match custom factory overclocked GTX980 no problem and can beat GTX970 OC and GTX1060 3 GB OC as you can see here:

https://www.techpowerup.com/forums/...g-vs-gtx780-ti-ghz-edition-benchmarks.226668/

I was referring to the stock GTX780 Ti compared to the stock R9 390. With both custom overclocked to their best, GTX780 Ti would beat R9 390 no problem these days.

 

[notb]

GTX1050 Ti is FAR BEHIND GTX780 Ti.
(...)
A nice factory overclocked GTX780 Ti can match custom factory overclocked GTX980 no problem and can beat GTX970 OC and GTX1060 3 GB OC as you can see here:

https://www.techpowerup.com/forums/...g-vs-gtx780-ti-ghz-edition-benchmarks.226668/

You're supporting your claims with your own results, which are very different to what everyone else gets. Honestly, how do you expect me to take this seriously? :/
Here's another "780Ti in 2016" review. Care to comment?

 

[R4E3960FURYX]

Why not trying Fury X ?

 

[Artas1984]

You're supporting your claims with your own results, which are very different to what everyone else gets. Honestly, how do you expect me to take this seriously? :/
Here's another "780Ti in 2016" review. Care to comment?

Now read carefully what i have to say!

No disrespect to the awesome work that Gaming Nexus does, but that benchmark was GARBAGE. They were testing stock GTX780 Ti vs all possible overclocked video cards of the world!!! WTF!!!

DO YOU TRULY YOURSELF BELIEVE THAT GTX780 Ti is that low? The same is with GTX980 Ti stock being somehow slightly below R9 Fury X level, but when both are tested in factory overclocked configs, R9 Fury X gets beaten considerably. Who owns stock GTX780 Ti and GTX980 Ti and anyway? And if you do, do you keep them at basic frequency levels? Of course not! Why don't you take a look at this:

https://www.techpowerup.com/forums/threads/benchmark-for-fun-gt-630-vs-gtx960-vs-gtx780-ti.221043/

This is the real picture of how GTX960 is pathetic compared to GTX780 Ti. There plenty of such comparisons in internet where GTX780 Ti is not humiliated by unfair benchmarking.

 

[FordGT90Concept]

GTX 960 has 1024 shaders (120 watts) and it debuted for $200. GTX 780 Ti has 2880 shaders (250 watts) and debuted for $700. A 165 watt, 2048 shader GTX 980 gives GTX 780 Ti a thrashing and it debuted at $549. Need I say more?

GTX 7## and down need to go away. They're expensive, power hungry, cards that struggle in D3D12/Vulkan. You can buy new cards for $150~200 that put them to shame in every metric.

 

[Artas1984]

GTX 960 has 1024 shaders (120 watts) and it debuted for $200. GTX 780 Ti has 2880 shaders (250 watts) and debuted for $700. A 165 watt, 2048 shader GTX 980 gives GTX 780 Ti a thrashing and it debuted at $549. Need I say more?

GTX 7## and down need to go away. They're expensive, power hungry, cards that struggle in D3D12/Vulkan. You can buy new cards for <$200 that put them to shame in every metric.

We are not talking about current worth for investments. We are talking raw numbers for those who already own GTX780 Ti cards. Anyway, WTH are talking about with "trashing":

https://www.techpowerup.com/forums/...dition-vs-gtx980-g1-gaming-benchmarks.218830/

EQUAL.

Even in this stock GTX780 Ti VS stock R9 290X rematch GTX780 Ti is not far behind GTX980:

https://www.techpowerup.com/forums/...dition-vs-gtx980-g1-gaming-benchmarks.218830/

Trashing is the exact word for GTX780 Ti beating GTX960!!!

 

[FordGT90Concept]

It's ~8% faster across the board while consuming about half the power.

The OP was looking at a GTX 1060 which is faster than GTX 780 Ti, GTX 980, and GTX 960. None of this discussion is relevant.

 

[Artas1984]

Very clearly those benchmarks were done at 1920x1080. The higher the resolution (less CPU bottleneck), the more Maxwell pulls away. At 1920x1080, GTX 980 is 8% faster.

Yes. And i also agree that in DX12 and Vulkan API GTX780 Ti OC would not be that strong compared to both: Maxwell and all equivalent Radeon cards.

I think the OP has decided on his choice anyway by now, did he?

 

[FordGT90Concept]

Hasn't said anything since April 23 so don't know.

 

[Kanan]

Too bad DX12 and Vulkan are still largely irrelevant, meanwhile the only relevant Vulkan game runs pretty fine in OpenGL on the 780 Ti. You're totally off by saying "thrashing", comparing the GTX 980 with the 780 Ti. The 780 Ti is comparable in DX11 and OpenGL. It's faster than the GTX 970.

And for the rest of what you said:

GTX 7## and down need to go away. They're expensive, power hungry, cards

Expensive? Not really, not anymore. Power hungry? Yes, but coming from a power user like yourself that sports a R9 390, which is even a lot less efficient, it's just a laughable statement to be made. That said, I'll use my 780 Ti as long as I want. Maybe even longer because you hate it so much.

 

[FordGT90Concept]

I have yet to find a game that the R9 390 can't run on ultra at 1920x1200 @ 60 Hz. UPS says I use <400 watts gaming. cough cough*

*six months newer benchmarks show reference R9 390 averages better than 780 Ti across the board

 

[Kanan]

I have yet to find a game that the R9 390 can't run on ultra at 1920x1200 @ 60 Hz. UPS says I use <400 watts gaming. cough

Multi Monitor and Youtube/Bluray usage is absolutely gruesome power consumption wise on that GPU - idle as well, afaik. I already knew that gaming consumption is comparable to the 780 Ti. But the 780 Ti is still faster. At least decent overclocked ones (yes compared to overclocked Hawaii).

 

[FordGT90Concept]

I only got one monitor plugged into it. Videos usually play on my R7 360. I don't Bluray. The 780 Ti is only faster on two year old benchmarks; GCN improves with age.

 

[R4E3960FURYX]

Second hand R 290/970 may be way too old. RX580 was RX480 rebranded performance different below 5% margin each others.

Choose R9 Fury X 300$ price tag.

+ WDDM 2.2 Support
+ HDR10 Support
+ DirectX 12
+ Vulkan
+ Update VCE Support
+ Sexy game rig build with mATX or iTX could be.
+ Solid 1440p performance

 

[krusha03]

Multi Monitor and Youtube/Bluray usage is absolutely gruesome power consumption wise on that GPU - idle as well, afaik. I already knew that gaming consumption is comparable to the 780 Ti. But the 780 Ti is still faster. At least decent overclocked ones (yes compared to overclocked Hawaii).

I neither use multi monitor nor I watch blue ray so i do not care about that. Also I do not plan to go above 1080p and 60Hz in the forceable future. As i said I have my 7950 and it runs fine for me. I just would prefer something less noisy and slightly better performance

Why not trying Fury X ?

Too expensive here. Same goes for 980Ti or a 390x. It is a much or more than a new 1060 6GB or 480/580GB 8GB. Also while I can spend 250e on a new GPU and maybe more. I do not play enough games to warrant this purchase so that's why i set a limit for myself around 200-220 and the less the better.

 

[ASOT]

@R4E3960FURYX What is wrong with your clock?

 

[P4-630]

@R4E3960FURYX What is wrong with your clock?

Looking at that year, I'd say he's from Thailand.

 

[Caring1]

@R4E3960FURYX What is wrong with your clock?

He's traveled back from the future to warn us of Skynet and how great AMD is going to be.