Are you a member of the GTX 900 club?

What is a water block...

Fans are always on, pump is always on. No thanks. My GTX 970 has fans that dont even spin at iddle. It's completely inaudible when idle and thats important to me as it serves as a HTPC.

No ones hearing is that sensitive but whatever floats ya boat.

Nope. Nothing right now is worth an upgrade to from Trifire 7970s.

Will look into the 390X and see how AMD fares from now till it's launch. If they don't show anything convincing enough, I'll wait another year for Arctic Islands or Pascal.

I had to check my wallet, but as it turns out, I'm a member of the stfu club.

I'm putting together a new desktop in the next couple of months, I'm planning a 5820K/X99 build, but I might wait to see AMD's offerings on the R9 3xx series before I make my choice on GPU (or GPUs).

I kind of agree with him on this one, for a HTPC, a fan sound can be rather annoying. Of course there are limits on how far I'm willing to compromise, price and performance still takes the priority.

New build is only about 3 weeks old with an EVGA 970. No issues so far playing @120/1080

@ryangcnx-2: Well I'm pretty okay with my purchase. I was fully aware of the BS Nvidia pulled and they should get some ramifications for lying to the consumers, but I don't play my games in 4K. I just wanted a DX12 ready graphics card and wasn't willing to spend $500+ on it.

Still, going from a Radeon 6770 1GB 128bit GDDR5 to GTX 970 4GB3.5GB 256-Bit GDDR5 is a HUGE difference to me.

its true tho.

salty

The 3.5gb thing is overblown, Ive seen multiple examples of 970's allocating 4gb without an issue. Ive tested myself seeing no issue with modern games, older games/engines tend to see the limit. Battlefield hardline for example at 1600p maxed with 150% scale 970 was still only 20% behind the 980.

It's provably wrong. That being said, burden of proof is on you.

Own a 980 with a 1440p monitor I love it.

Also have a PS4 but it's getting no action until Bloodborne comes out on Tuesday

Ha! I was originally going to buy a GTX 970 as it was the best price/performance GPU of 2014 IMO and was browsing on newegg 2 - 3 days before news broke. After the fiasco NO THANKS! If I am going to shell out that kind of money I want NO STUTTERING whatsoever in any games at least for the first year of purchase.

Well, for someone who plays at 1080p (like me) I probably wouldn't even run into the issue, but for people at 1440p and above it's definitely a real disappointment. I'm still tempted to get a 970 just because of the Witcher 3 free promo......

... I would actually tell you not to do that.. Your FX 6300 is going to bottleneck the crap out of that video card.. Even like the 8350 is having bottlenecking problems with these gpu's.. AMD really needs to release new chips pronto.. Because the sandy bridge i5's and i7's released in 2011 are more powerful than anything AMD has to offer..

It's not just not affecting games at 4K but newer games that pushes graphics at 1080P people are seeing MASSIVE stuttering. Newer games that push graphics like Total War Attila @1080P.

MASSIVE stuttering when maxed out at 1080P making the game unplayable maxed out on a 970:

No Stuttering maxed out a R9 290X :

http://www.pcgameshardware.de/Total-War-Attila-PC-259548/Specials/Test-Benchmarks-1151602/

One can see why people are upset about the "future proof" side of things when it's struggling in some games that came out this year. Not to mention older modded games like Skyrim. Hence the 300+ page plus complaints on nVidia's GeForce forums. nVidia also lied about the specs of the GTX 970 64 ROPs as opposed to 56 ROPs, 2 MB L2 cache vs the actual 1.75 MB. Maybe not from where you are in the UK but here in the US we laws against deliberate false advertising. Especially since it affects performance like shown above in Total War Attila. This is not the first time nVidia got sued and lost, go look into "bumpgate", I lost a lot of money because I had 17" Gaming laptop which died as a result of "bump gate" which I am still p***** off at nVidia as I didn't get any compensation. I would have still used that laptop today.

Looking forward to it. Was playing the earlier game in the series Arkham Asylum. Very well made game with excellent voice acting. Can see why people praised it. Arkham Knight looks good, glad the original makers are making it instead of Ubisoft who didn't do a very good job with Origins.

Even now if he jumped on a 4670K from Intel his FPS would jump.

Yeah my first choice was GTX 970 as I think that had the price/performance coming out of nVidia in years (at least in the high end range). After that "ramgate" fiasco thought about getting a R9 290X but might as well wait for a R9 390X and get a full DX 12 GPU.

It's really disheartening that AMD is so far behind.. I mean their newest chips still can't even compete with even the second gen i5's and i7's..

I have 2 GTX 970s.

I thought about returning them for a full refund but there really isn't anything out by Nvidia with the same bang for buck and I don't want to go for AMD and lose out on Nvidia features.

@Xtasy26 said:

@clyde46 said:

@ryangcnx-2 said:

@clyde46 said:

@nyadc said:

@LegatoSkyheart said:

The gtx 970 really is a nice upgrade from my Raedon HD 6770

It's a nice card, shame about that memory parsing though, that shattered a lot of people relationship with Nvidia and greatly tarnished their image.

Thats what you get for buying the cheaper card. All the *70 series have been gimped in some way.

This is the issue though, Originally we all though it was only gimped on Cuda Cores and at that who would buy the 980. But when then saying everything else was false, its memory bandwidth was a lie, its ROP count was a lie, is LV2 cache was a lie. This info makes it very different from the 980. Personally my dilemma was 2 970's VS 1 980 based on the original specs, they seems so close. So now people are learning the true differences, should be taken care of. I say refund or a pay the difference upgrade to the 980 or Titan X.

Personally, I will still vote green team. Mainly because 3ds Max is pretty much reliant on Nvidia, but that in gaming I have had much better driver support. My history is SLI GT 7900's, SLI 8800 512 GTS, Crossfire 5870, GTX 680, GTX 970 SLI ( sold both to upgrade) and now SLI GTX 980's. As far as drivers go AMD was the worst. I couldn't play skyrim as Crossfire would make it flash seizures of death in the sky, or disabling to single would cause a instant crash upon launching. I had to literally remove the second card to get it to work. I have went back to nvidia since, and even with the 970 blunder, I will still stick with them. Again, mainly for 3DS Max support and SLI drivers.

Nvidia don't owe you shit brah. This whole "Ramgate" is just a means of trying to get money out of Nvidia by a few butthurt owners and AMD fanboys. The card still works? As it was found out, its when you start pushing serious resolutions that you get problems. The 970 was never designed for 4K...

It's not just not affecting games at 4K but newer games that pushes graphics at 1080P people are seeing MASSIVE stuttering. Newer games that push graphics like Total War Attila @1080P.

MASSIVE stuttering when maxed out at 1080P making the game unplayable maxed out on a 970:

No Stuttering maxed out a R9 290X :

http://www.pcgameshardware.de/Total-War-Attila-PC-259548/Specials/Test-Benchmarks-1151602/

One can see why people are upset about the "future proof" side of things when it's struggling in some games that came out this year. Not to mention older modded games like Skyrim. Hence the 300+ page plus complaints on nVidia's GeForce forums. nVidia also lied about the specs of the GTX 970 64 ROPs as opposed to 56 ROPs, 2 MB L2 cache vs the actual 1.75 MB. Maybe not from where you are in the UK but here in the US we laws against deliberate false advertising. Especially since it affects performance like shown above in Total War Attila. This is not the first time nVidia got sued and lost, go look into "bumpgate", I lost a lot of money because I had 17" Gaming laptop which died as a result of "bump gate" which I am still p***** off at nVidia as I didn't get any compensation. I would have still used that laptop today.

@gameofthering said:

Waiting until Batman Arkham knight before I upgrade my PC.

Looking forward to it. Was playing the earlier game in the series Arkham Asylum. Very well made game with excellent voice acting. Can see why people praised it. Arkham Knight looks good, glad the original makers are making it instead of Ubisoft who didn't do a very good job with Origins.

I've had no problem running Total War: Attila completely maxed out and it didn't get huge stuttering although the SLI support is bugged right now.

Maybe a patch fixed the stuttering for the 970 because I just don't get it.

The stuttering on the GTX 970 was definitely not due to vRAM because Total War: Attila can't use more than 3GB of vRAM since it's a 32bit application.

If you don't believe me I could record the benchmark running my 2 GTX 970s at 1440p max settings.

Also Total War games have been known to be some of the buggiest and most unoptimized games at release so I wouldn't use them at the end all be all for GPU performance.

Also trying to say the 290x is better in Total War: Attila is a joke since AMD performs very badly compared to Nvidia in this games.

Well you need to get a full overhaul, your better off getting a 970 and new cpu/mobo&ram then a very expensive AMD gpu.

You holding onto the "bumpgate" but ignore that AMD is just as bad not replacing or fixing their laptop gpu issue a few years ago and kept on producing the gpus for years even though the issue was known.

The 390x will be most likely a $700 gpu that's only on average 30% faster then 970 below 1600p from the recent benchs .

I don't think they will price the 390x at 700USD.

Most likely it will be something like 600USD or 550USD.

Anyway the big jump in GPU performance won't be until next year when Pascal comes out on a 16nm process.

It won't be 10x like Nvidia exaggerates but it will be larger than going from a 980 to Titan X.

All the rumors and leaks are suggesting the 390x to be $700 or more

Something like this price tier from the info online

R9 390X - $700 +

R9 390 - $700

R9 380X - $400

R9 380 - $330

R9 370 - $200

R9 360X - $150

R9 360 - $110

@True_Gamer_ said:

Notice how there water cooled extreme overlocked FX-9590 at 5.0ghz can't even beat a stock clocked i7 4770k.

That 9590 is massively power hungry. I could have 2 separate computers each with and i7 4770k running CPU intensive tasks an still uses a lot less wattage compared to a single computer with an FX-9590.

The 9590 also gets super hot and requires a liquid cooling solution to bring down temps which adds to the expense.

Then take into account that not many games take advantage of all it's cores and even then it gets beaten by a stock i7.

It will be $700 on launch. AMD would have the market to themselves as the only thing that really dukes it out with a 390X is a Titan X which is $1000 retail. $300 less for a GPU that if rumours are true that is faster and has this new HBM or whatever is it stacked VRAM.

400 to 700 is way too big a gap.

Isn't the 380x just a 290x rebadge?

Why price the 380x at 400 if the 290x can be as cheap as 300.

The 390x should be priced around 600USD.

The 390 will probably be 450-500USD.

The 380x will probably be 350USD and below that I don't really care.

We will see.

I can't remember the last time AMD priced a single GPU that high (not counting the bitcoin mining craze).

Look what AMD did for the 280x 280 etc they charged more then what the 7970 and 7950 were worth at released. 280x was suppose to be $300 vs what happened with mining, while you could pick up a 7970 for $250 or less around 280x release.

Not from the info that is out the price list I posted is in the right ballpark.

History has no bearing on price points as markets change daily. How many times have we seen prices go up since products were launched.

All I know it that it would be dumb to purchase either the Titan X or 390x if they are priced that high.

Next year is when the true big change happens with the die shrink and HBM allowing for higher than 4GB of vRAM.

Besides GPUs priced that high usually drop quickly in price or are replaced by something just as good but much cheaper.

@RyviusARC: 8GB of VRAM in HBM is already happening. The 390X WC edition is having that. You can't really compare the prices for the Titan X and the 390X. The 390X is or will be a straight gamers card rather than a high end luxery item. This is indeed an odd year for GPU's as we are still clinging onto 28nm as either less is proving harder to make so both card makers are trying to stretch out what they already have.

As for better GPU's, many are thinking Nvidia will do what they did with the original Titan/Titian Black and the 780Ti. I'm glad I waited after the original Titan was launched as the Ti had the full fat GK110 chip and it cost almost half of the Titan Black. All that was missing was the extra 3GB of VRAM. Will we see Nvidia do the same with a 980Ti? Maybe, does seem plausible though doesn't it.

In less your one of the fortunate few in which money is never a obstacle I would say the newest Titan is dumb to purchase no matter what at that price.. It is only about 40% faster than the 980 gtx stock (single card).... And for the amount of performance it pushes it produces ALOT of heat, sucks up a lot more energy, and isn't very overclockable.. To me the card from what I have read is a novelty item in which Nvidia pushed their 9X0 chipset as far as there could, far beyond their reducing returns point. It reminds me of the Asus MARS series like the MARS 760.. Really cool looking and cool on paper, but in reality it not worth getting 99% of the time.

All the reviews I've seen have shown very good OC'ing results and the power levels are well within reason. I do love it when people dismiss the Titan X. Just because you can't afford one doesn't make it any less of a awesome card. It IS the fastest single GPU on the planet.

From what i have seen the 9 series is a dissapoitment from the 4gb ram issues to the dissapointing 960, ill wait for the next one.

With the release of the steamboxes later this year.. I am hoping for both companies to start focus on more compact technologies in providing kickass cards that run cooler, take up less energy and are more efficient that can be used in all builds including ITX.. I think we are starting to see that with the Nvidia 980m as fast as a GTX 780 desktop gpu!

My 780 is more than enough for me, and still the best bang for the buck.

The 9 series wasn't a disappointment for me since I upgraded from a single GTX 570 to 2 GTX 970s.

And the only games that I have received a lot stuttering in was Skyrim loaded with 4k texture mods at 1440p and Watchdogs (but I fixed it with some mods).

I ordered a GTX 970 today.

This isn't about affording one, but being able to justify said purchase.. Just because for instance I can afford a $80 steak, doesn't mean I think it would be a good purchase.. My point went over your head. No where did I say it was too expensive, merely at that price range (in less money isn't a obstacle of any kind) it isn't that a wise investment.. The 295x2 by Radeon for instance outperforms it and that can be had for just over $600..

To you... Why should I have to justify buying something? Your point went nowhere sunshine.

The 295x2 outperforms the Titan and can be had at just over $600.. I was merely pointing out from a cost vs performance stand point there are better options out there.. And for most the Titan is pretty much a novelty item if anything for either the price range it is in, or the fact there are cheaper alternatives that perform better.. But hey if you want to buy it more power to you, I really don't care.. And do I really need to say IMO after every statement like this? Here I thought it was pretty much already assumed that..

I know the 295x2 out performs it in graphs and benchmarks but how well does that translate into actual performance for the end user. You can have a graph that shows X card is doing 60FPS but it won't show you that the experience was riddled with microstutter. The 295X2 also produces more heat, uses more power and has limited mounting options when compared to the Titan X. Thats before we launch into the whole single GPU vs dual debate and what that entails. I do agree that the pricing of the Titan is nuts but its a luxary item. Its not made for the average Joe. Hell it costs more than what most people spend on their entire rigs! But I don't let that stop me from seeing what the Titan really is.

Huh? I never stated that the Titan X was a bad card performance wise.. My original statement was always about the cost vs performance, that it is a novelty/luxury item..

Yea I know that my 6300 won't be enough for a dual gpu setup, it's a good cpu for a single card like the 280, but when I upgrade my gpu I'll definitely be upgrading to an Intel chip. AS far as jumping to a 4670k now, I don't think the performance increase would be worth the money atm. I only have a 1080p monitor so I built my rig so I could comfortably game at 1080p, once I get a 4k monitor then I could justify spending more money on a better setup.

Skyrim stutters on both amd and nvidia with those enbs. I've yet to find a fix for it. Oh well. :P Mine is loaded with 4k textures as well.

I'm on GTX780, it's running the latest gorgeous blockbuster games at the highest settings possible so I'm content :)

By stuttering I mean completely freezing for 5-10 seconds.

But I got it to climb up to 4GB of vRAM so it was all spent.