Gtx 1080

[mrgreenthump]

The Fury X beats the 980ti.

I'd still argue for the fact that 980ti can be overclocked a lot more, it kinda still is ahead in DX11, but certainly true if you don't want to overclock or buy factory overclocked cards.

nope .

Nice proof you got there

[Fascinate]

Except the games where the nvidia cards beat the AMD ones lol. People like to make sweeping generalizations with everything in life, but that isnt how life works. I bet if i went out and tested each one of those cards on a multitude of titles and genre's nvidia would have just as many wins as AMD....this is by design. While you saw one benchmark suite from one website and ran with it, i am sure i could find plenty of sites stating 5% wins for nvidia on many titles. This generation does not matter anyways anymore, lets wait a month and see where everything stands.

[Deleted]

I never said stomping all over,

Well...

.. and the facts are that AMD pretty much stomped all over nVidia this past gen, except at the really low end. .

No big deal though - I just don't share the optimism about AMD being able to keep up with nVidia in 2016.

[Life-Binder]

proof was posted some pages ago, for games like Witcher 3, GTA 5 etc.

in DX11 980 Ti OC >> 980 Ti > Fury X(which cant be OCed nearly as good as 980 Ti)


but keep believing what you believe

[Lathais]

Well...



No big deal though - I just don't share the optimism about AMD being able to keep up with nVidia in 2016.

Yeah, because they beat them at all price levels. I never said that the Fury X specifically stomped all over the 980ti. Just that as a whole, AMD beat nVidia across the board.

- - - Updated - - -

proof was posted some pages ago, for games like Witcher 3, GTA 5 etc.

in DX11 980 Ti OC >> 980 Ti > Fury X(which cant be OCed nearly as good as 980 Ti)


but keep believing what you believe

You cherry picked a couple games and Evildeffy pointed that out and cherry picked a few where tit went Fury X > 980ti. In the end, the results I posted were an average over all the games, none of which used DX12, and the Fury X averages out ahead of the 980ti.

[Fascinate]

Lathais just likes to wrap things up neatly in tight little packages so he can understand them, but we all know its not as simple as "fury x faster than 980ti all game". Id bet a large amount of money nearly every MMO in existence will perform better on a 980ti than a fury x, just as an example.

Psst:
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/A...Gaming/27.html

WoD 1440p benchmark:

980ti: 196 FPS
Fury x: 127 FPS

I picked the asus card as you cannot compare stock 980ti's against fury x, there is SOOO much room for overclocking and the stock AMD card has a watercooler! Not to mention you cant even buy stock 980ti's anymore. Ya, lathais you need to chill with your AMD love.....because you have a lot of what you write on here wrong.

[Lathais]

Lathais just likes to wrap things up neatly in tight little packages so he can understand them, but we all know its not as simple as "fury x faster than 980ti all game." Id bet a large amount of money nearly every MMO in existence will perform better on a 980ti than a fury x, just as an example.

I never said that, however, if you look at the averages, the Fury X comes out on top for more games. Then if you consider DX12 in the coming 2-4 years which these cards should reasonably last, the Fury X has better lasting potential.

I bet nearly every MMO will run about the same on the two honestly as a 970/390 is enough to max out most of them so they are both in to overkill territory.

- - - Updated - - -

Psst:
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/A...Gaming/27.html

WoD 1440p benchmark:

980ti: 196 FPS
Fury x: 127 FPS

I picked the asus card as you cannot compare stock 980ti's against fury x, there is SOOO much room for overclocking and the stock AMD card has a watercooler! Not to mention you cant even buy stock 980ti's anymore. Ya, lathais you need to chill with your AMD love.....because you have a lot of what you write on here wrong.

psssst: My GTX 960 can max out WoW and stay above 60FPS, so who really cares. You are so far in to overkill territory that it doesn't even matter.

Also, those benchmarks are before the Crimson drivers so here:
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/A...Gaming/27.html

The 980ti still beats it slightly, but nothing to write home about, they are both performing above anything that is needed. In addition, it's kida weird that the 980tis performance dropped over time while the AMD got better. Another trend that you can see when looking at older nVidia cards compared to older AMD cards.

But anyway, citing WoW benchmarks, which are known to be highly inaccurate anyway, that a 970 can max out and stay above 60 FPS with when discussing top end cards is pretty silly.

[Fascinate]

Oh so now your argument changes, sorry bro that does not fly here i wont allow it. You cant just say something that isnt true like "fury x beats 980ti across the board" because it simply does not.

[Vash The Stampede]

~25% faster in raw power and likely more so in DX12 since Pascal has improved DX12/Vulkan/Async than Maxwell .. and even significantly more so in VR

Numbers from Nvidia directly, which are of course going to be biased. The 25% value is best case scenario, and most likely from cherry picked games. I fully expect a lot of biased reviews, as I'm sure the whole event that Nvidia held where they handed YouTube reviewers sample cards will be benchmarked in their favor.

Few things to consider here, cause I can extrapolate a lot from the little info that is released.

• Why the founders edition card? It's a reference card, and nothing is special about it. It's probably because Nvidia doesn't have many of these 1080's and 1070's in supply. The only way to get these cards is to buy from Nvidia directly for a few months, which means that any early adopters who want these cards will have to pony up that extra dough. Nobody sane will buy a Founders Edition card when aftermarkets are going to be cheaper and better.
  
• Now why such a limited supply? Remember that the GDDR5X memory is very new. Probably too new. Not enough to supply demand. And Nvidia certainly using their marketing to build up even more demand. And we know that Nvidia probably just taped out the Pascal chips recently. Not enough time to manufacture enough.
  
• Another question is why now? If they can't supply for the demand, why release it now? Just seems like Nvidia is trying to take the thunder away from AMD which is about to release the 480 and 490. Which if these cards are priced accordingly, could destroy Nvidia's $200-$300 market. As it is the 1070 is going to disturb that market, as the trickle down effect is going to occur.
  
• Last one is why is Nvidia scared of AMD's Polaris? Even though AMD probably has working samples with NDA's all over the place, it doesn't mean that Nvidia hasn't learned some info about the new Polaris cards. Info that might scare them. Also the new Polaris cards aren't meant to compete with the performance of the 1070 and 1080, which just kinda works out nicely. A little too nicely. Nvidia knows something about Polaris. Much more than what info floats on the internet.

1080 is going to be an amazing card and the fastest until 2017

We talk about how amazing the 1080 is, but the really interesting card is the 1070, cause it's a game changer. Every Nvidia mid to high end graphics card needs to be priced cheaper. But if supply of the 1080's and 1070's are limited, this might not take effect for a while.

Another thing to think about is if Nvidia did fix Async Compute with these cards. Cause if they did, then the AOTS benchmark between it and the Fury X is not that impressive. We assume that if AC is broken still, that the 1080 is just brute forcing its way to the top. But if Async Compute isn't broken, then it isn't brute force. That means the card isn't really that much faster than the Fury X at DX12/Vulkan games.

The 1080 would be faster just because it's an Nvidia card and lots of games have Gameworks in them. Most favourable benchmark for Nvidia right now is Project Cars. Which I expect these games to show the 25% speed increase over a 980 Ti. But those are Gameworks games. Hitman and AOTS are the titles we should really be paying attention to, as well as Doom when that game is released.

[Frozenbeef]

Going to be getting a 1080, are the reference cards or the custom ones better?

[Lathais]

Oh so now your argument changes, sorry bro that does not fly here i wont allow it. You cant just say something that isnt true like "fury x beats 980ti across the board" because it simply does not.

No my argument doesn't change, you cherry picked a single game, that is known to favor nVidia, that even a 970 is already performing so far beyond what you'll see any difference in that it doesn't matter at all. I am talking about overall.

Here, I'll cherry pick a few games too:
http://www.sweclockers.com/test/2133...wDkKtA#content
http://www.sweclockers.com/test/2185...W_nemQ#content
http://www.sweclockers.com/test/2138...OaD9kQ#content

[mrgreenthump]

Going to be getting a 1080, are the reference cards or the custom ones better?

Nobody(without NDA) knows anything outside the Nvidia PR speak. And well take that with a grain of salt, last year Pascal was 10x the power of Maxwell. Haven't seen that yet have we?

Continuing with your question though, it depends how well built the founder's editions are. Are they actually better with better parts or is Nvidia just fishing for money out of people willing to pay premium to be the first? Nobody knows.

In the end there will definately be a better card than the Founder's edition is. Just when is it and will it be worth the money is a topic on it's own.

[Fascinate]

No my argument doesn't change, you cherry picked a single game, that is known to favor nVidia, that even a 970 is already performing so far beyond what you'll see any difference in that it doesn't matter at all. I am talking about overall.

Here, I'll cherry pick a few games too:
http://www.sweclockers.com/test/2133...wDkKtA#content
http://www.sweclockers.com/test/2185...W_nemQ#content
http://www.sweclockers.com/test/2138...OaD9kQ#content

I didn't cherry pick anything dude, merely contradicting your original statement that the fury x beats the 980 ti across the board which you CANNOT say because it isnt true. Sheesh.

[Life-Binder]

last year Pascal was 10x the power of Maxwell

maybe in AMD fanboys heads only

[AztechZero]

Nobody(without NDA) knows anything outside the Nvidia PR speak. And well take that with a grain of salt, last year Pascal was 10x the power of Maxwell. Haven't seen that yet have we?

Continuing with your question though, it depends how well built the founder's editions are. Are they actually better with better parts or is Nvidia just fishing for money out of people willing to pay premium to be the first? Nobody knows.

In the end there will definately be a better card than the Founder's edition is. Just when is it and will it be worth the money is a topic on it's own.

I'm pretty sure the founder's edition is just a reference card.

[Fascinate]

Ya the founder's edition thing is absolutely ridiculous, its basically nvidia making sure they dont sell out in a month by jacking up prices so they can make more cards in the meantime.

[Lathais]

I didn't cherry pick anything dude, merely contradicting your original statement that the fury x beats the 980 ti across the board which you CANNOT say because it isnt true. Sheesh.

I never said the Fury X beats the 980ti across the board, I said that AMD beats nVidia across the board at all price points because, on average, the Fury X does beat the 980ti, the 390x on average does beat out the 980 and the 290/290x on average do beat out the 970. At all price points, except the low end 950, on average AMD beats nVidia. The facts are facts. Sure, there are some games that perform better on nVidia, but overall, more games perform better on AMD at all price points. Sheesh.

[FluFF]

Nobody(without NDA) knows anything outside the Nvidia PR speak. And well take that with a grain of salt, last year Pascal was 10x the power of Maxwell. Haven't seen that yet have we?

Yup, also the 970 GTX had 4GB of fast memory until they came out and said it didn't, only thing I believe from Nvidia is black on white independent benchmarks by tech sites from their 1070/1080 cards.
Still gonna stick out to hear about Polaris and then see head to head benchmarks as well, AMD is more trustworthy for me especially after the solid performance I got from my 280x and their current lead in Async computing, DX12 support and the fact they never make wild claims they cannot keep.

[mrgreenthump]

maybe in AMD fanboys heads only

No it was actually in a PR slide from Nvidia, granted not in gaming applications. But the point is more that they do cherry pick numbers quite heavily. The only thing we know that is true is that the 1080 is roughly 20-25% faster than a Titan X. But in what? In DX11 presumably, why wouldn't they post numbers about DX12 or Vulcan?

[Fascinate]

Except they don't lathais. You can't keep peddling misinformation on here, unless you take a week and gather all the benchmarks from every reputable review site and tally the wins for each card you are simply generalizing. I am only playing devils advocate here making sure you stop posting nonsense by linking clear wins in games a LOT of people play (which also happens to be the game forum you are posting on).

Heck just off the top of my head i know in fallout 4 nvidia has a clear lead against a 390, thats just from memory but im not gonna take the time to dig thru benchmarks when all im saying here is you cant say AMD wins across the board because they dont. How you cannot comprehend that is all i am trying to get through your head is beyond me.