GTX 960 is expected to launch next month.

[xthetenth]

They gotta give glowing reviews if they want to keep receiving product.

I've read a lot of their reviews and they consistently give 90%+ ratings to average products. Most of their ratings are super lax. Even products that disappoint across the board get at least an 80% or better. It's a joke.

I like how doing the thing that video cards get bought to do is billed as being as important as having a backplate.

It's a great video card if you don't count doing video card things well as important. I'm a bit worried by how many reviewers consider actually being a video card of middling importance to a video card.

 

[Phynaz]

I don't get the hate. I paid $180 for my GTX 660. This would be a great upgrade for me once the price drops by $20.

 

[Vesku]

average prices are not exactly like that (check some random Amazon or something), average price for a 290 can be closer to $300, average price for the 960 is close to $200

and checking the TPU numbers, playing Metro last light the 960 is using 120W, the 290 263W (for 55 vs 77FPS),

the 290 for $240 is certainly GREAT performance for the money, but it's not always that obvious of a choice... the 960 can save you some money and perform well on current games...

Roughly ~$15 a year in the US in electricity savings vs cranking up IQ and screen resolution (even more relevant now with downsampling). Have there been entire forum threads sustained by people seriously arguing that you shouldn't upgrade to a 780 because of the extra power usage vs the 680?

Anyone interested in PC gaming for the graphics would be best served stretching their dollar for the GTX 970 or if they can't quite spend that then a Radeon 290. The GTX 970 is this 2nd gen 28nm version of the Radeon 7950, as close to the ideal of affordable high IQ gaming GPU as it gets.

 

[jpiniero]

I don't get the hate. I paid $180 for my GTX 660. This would be a great upgrade for me once the price drops by $20.

If it was the 1280 core/192 bit/3 GB variant rumored at that price I would agree with that statement. But you really do not want a 2 GB card in 2015.

 

[dave_the_nerd]

If it was the 1280 core/192 bit/3 GB variant rumored at that price I would agree with that statement. But you really do not want a 2 GB card in 2015.

I can't recall a launch that people weren't disappointed because the final product was more expensive or lower specced than the rumors. I think we get too excited.

Still, this is a bit of a not-too-noticable upgrade from my 660Ti, so I guess I'll pass and wait for the 960 Ti or rebates on 970s.

 

[SteveGrabowski]

I can't recall a launch that people weren't disappointed because the final product was more expensive or lower specced than the rumors. I think we get too excited.

Still, this is a bit of a not-too-noticable upgrade from my 660Ti, so I guess I'll pass and wait for the 960 Ti or rebates on 970s.

I doubt Nvidia is going to lower the price on the 970 at all for a while. What incentive do they have before R9 300? I would just jump on that now if for whatever reason you're not interested in the R9 290, as it's still a really nice card at $340.

 

[redzo]

- Jesus! Fact: a stock 280x is faster than a 960OC. This IS FACT. Deal with it! 960OC is stupidly close to the stock 280x in terms of pricing.

- 960 SLI is pointless. You are better off with a single 290x.

- 285 is equivalent with a 960OC in terms of performance.

Nvidia is milking the cow like usual. They are overpricing their product. Nothing new here. I've praised maxwell as being highly efficient, but this is not enough to get away with this high pricing. Until the price wars start, nvidia will be milking uninformed people with the overpriced 960.

I expect a future 3GB 960ti to be only a little faster than a 280x and priced a little higher than a 290. After all, this nvidia we are talking about...

 

[el etro]

GTX 960 have a real good price, but is a too much cut-down card. Will be very hard too see a cut-down GM204 card with GTX 780 performance, at a good price.

 

[fleshconsumed]

I cannot comprehend how anyone can defend this card. Its only redeeming quality is that it hits the "magical" $200 price point. That's it.

Aftermarket R9-290 is available now for only $40 more. Sure, you can talk about MSRPs but all that matters is street pricing, and right now the street price on 960 is $200 and street price on 290 is $240. The difference amounts to the price of a single game at release time. For that money you get 40-50% more performance and better longevity due to 4GB of ram.

You can also talk about power consumption, but the fact is any quality 500W PSU will run 290, and increased power consumption only happens when you game, and it only amounts to a single 100W conventional light bulb. How many hours does one typically game on any given day to make the cost savings be really worth it? And if you're that worried about 100W, how diligent are you turning off lights in the room when you're not there?

This card is overpriced and underperforming. Even if one cannot stomach paying extra $40 for 290, 280x still makes a lot of sense due to 3GB of ram instead of 2. This card is just not worth the asking price. Although I am sure it will sell very well having nvidia tag attached to it.

 

[raghu78]

- Jesus! Fact: a stock 280x is faster than a 960OC. This IS FACT. Deal with it! 960OC is stupidly close to the stock 280x in terms of pricing.

- 960 SLI is pointless. You are better off with a single 290x.

- 285 is equivalent with a 960OC in terms of performance.

Nvidia is milking the cow like usual. They are overpricing their product. Nothing new here. I've praised maxwell as being highly efficient, but this is not enough to get away with this high pricing. Until the price wars start, nvidia will be milking uninformed people with the overpriced 960.

I expect a future 3GB 960ti to be only a little faster than a 280x and priced a little higher than a 290. After all, this nvidia we are talking about...

well said. Any smart PC gamer will not touch this card even for 1080p gaming. For now Nvidia is going to enjoy milking record margins. Once we get to Q2 and AMD starts releasing the R9 3xx series we will see price changes.

imo AMD will be very aggressive with their pricing and perf on R9 3xx series. AMD will drive performance higher with new products (at current price points) and force pricing lower (on existing Nvidia products). I will not be surprised if we see GTX 970 performance at USD 250 within 3 - 4 months. Anybody buying a product now at USD 200 with GTX 960 / R9 285 perf and 2GB VRAM is making a huge mistake. :thumbsdown:

 

[tential]

Roughly ~$15 a year in the US in electricity savings vs cranking up IQ and screen resolution (even more relevant now with downsampling). Have there been entire forum threads sustained by people seriously arguing that you shouldn't upgrade to a 780 because of the extra power usage vs the 680?

Anyone interested in PC gaming for the graphics would be best served stretching their dollar for the GTX 970 or if they can't quite spend that then a Radeon 290. The GTX 970 is this 2nd gen 28nm version of the Radeon 7950, as close to the ideal of affordable high IQ gaming GPU as it gets.

Or I could take an R9 290x for less than a GTX 970? Faster Cheaper card? Why would you not take an R9 290x?

 

[raghu78]

I cannot comprehend how anyone can defend this card. Its only redeeming quality is that it hits the "magical" $200 price point. That's it.

Aftermarket R9-290 is available now for only $40 more. Sure, you can talk about MSRPs but all that matters is street pricing, and right now the street price on 960 is $200 and street price on 290 is $240. The difference amounts to the price of a single game at release time. For that money you get 40-50% more performance and better longevity due to 4GB of ram.

You can also talk about power consumption, but the fact is any quality 500W PSU will run 290, and increased power consumption only happens when you game, and it only amounts to a single 100W conventional light bulb. How many hours does one typically game on any given day to make the cost savings be really worth it? And if you're that worried about 100W, how diligent are you turning off lights in the room when you're not there?

This card is overpriced and underperforming. Even if one cannot stomach paying extra $40 for 290, 280x still makes a lot of sense due to 3GB of ram instead of 2. This card is just not worth the asking price. Although I am sure it will sell very well having nvidia tag attached to it.

well said. Any card which has less than 3GB is a serious mistake for 1080p gaming in 2015. But whats disappointing is Nvidia has done the bare minimum by just matching R9 285 performance at USD 200 which was in itself a disappointing card. I look forward to R9 3xx series to bring true next gen performance at all price points.

 

[Vesku]

Or I could take an R9 290x for less than a GTX 970? Faster Cheaper card? Why would you not take an R9 290x?

I'd consider it if I thought I'd be 4K gaming in the next year or so.

 

[SimianR]

The Geforce 970 was already pretty competitive price wise for NVIDIA. You don't necessarily want to release a budget card that starts eating into your higher performance cards sales either. There's only so many times a generation that a company is going to release a card that redefines the whole pricing structure and product line. Having a super competitive, high performing card at $200 probably wouldn't have left much room for any margin on the higher tiered products if those prices had to be adjusted for both NVIDIA and AMD. I think 2GB is a little weak but I'm guessing this was also a choice to cut costs and increase margins on this card, which is disappointing. I wouldn't doubt it if a 960 Ti gets released at $249 at some point, though maybe not if they figure they can just sell you a 970 for $330-350.

 

[SteveGrabowski]

I will not be surprised if we see GTX 970 performance at USD 250 within 3 - 4 months.

You're almost there already with the 290.

 

[fleshconsumed]

well said. Any card which has less than 3GB is a serious mistake for 1080p gaming in 2015. But whats disappointing is Nvidia has done the bare minimum by just matching R9 285 performance at USD 200 which was in itself a disappointing card. I look forward to R9 3xx series to bring true next gen performance at all price points.

When 285 came out, pretty much everyone universally agreed that it was a horrible card that made little sense, that includes people in the AMD camp. I do not see the same kind of objectivity in this thread. There are quite a few very vocal people making ridiculous excuses like comparing MSRB prices instead of street prices, refusing to admit that paying extra $40 for R9-290 goes a long way towards performance and longevity, complaining about throttling and noise when $240 gets you aftermarket solution that solves both of those problems, or even comparing 960 to 660, a card two generations behind instead of 760. On one hand it's astonishing to see this kind of myopic behavior, on the other hand it's par for the course. I just think it's just sad, that's all...

 

[preslove]

So, when are people expecting the 960ti to be released? 3 months, 6 months?

 

[blake0812]

well said. Any card which has less than 3GB is a serious mistake for 1080p gaming in 2015. But whats disappointing is Nvidia has done the bare minimum by just matching R9 285 performance at USD 200 which was in itself a disappointing card. I look forward to R9 3xx series to bring true next gen performance at all price points.

Agreed, though I can't say i'm not gonna miss PhysX. Such a beautiful thing, it is.

 

[Phynaz]

I cannot comprehend how anyone can defend this card. Its only redeeming quality is that it hits the "magical" $200 price point. That's it.

Aftermarket R9-290 is available now for only $40 more. Sure, you can talk about MSRPs but all that matters is street pricing, and right now the street price on 960 is $200 and street price on 290 is $240. The difference amounts to the price of a single game at release time. For that money you get 40-50% more performance and better longevity due to 4GB of ram.

You can also talk about power consumption, but the fact is any quality 500W PSU will run 290, and increased power consumption only happens when you game, and it only amounts to a single 100W conventional light bulb. How many hours does one typically game on any given day to make the cost savings be really worth it? And if you're that worried about 100W, how diligent are you turning off lights in the room when you're not there?

This card is overpriced and underperforming. Even if one cannot stomach paying extra $40 for 290, 280x still makes a lot of sense due to 3GB of ram instead of 2. This card is just not worth the asking price. Although I am sure it will sell very well having nvidia tag attached to it.

And for those of us running OEM systems with 450w PSU's?

 

[Ranulf]

So, when are people expecting the 960ti to be released? 3 months, 6 months?

A month or two after whenever AMD releases their new stuff, 4-6 months minimum I'd guess.

 

[exar333]

Still no AT review, not that it really changes much. The 960 would be a decent buy on-sale for $150. It's not terribly-priced at $200, but definitely a tough buy compared to the 280/280x/285, as they can be found cheaper. Only a solid choice if absolutely PSU-limited...

A 960Ti with 50% more bandwidth and 3GB for maybe $250 would be an actual solid product and more competitive with AMDs 290.

 

[fleshconsumed]

And for those of us running OEM systems with 450w PSU's?

One, those who run OEM 450W PSUs typically never upgrade their computer, they buy it off the shelf at best buy/dell/whatever and then leave it alone until they buy a new one. Two, the total system power consumption of a system with 290x does not exceed 400W out the wall so as long as it's a semi-decent 450W power supply, it will work just fine.

Yes, I will admit that people who are severely PSU limited, as in less than 400W will have to take it into account. They will either have to get a less power hungry card, or spring an extra $50 on Corsair CX500. However, you will also have to admit that this is an atypical situation, people who buy off the shelf typically do not upgrade their computers, and people who build their own typically have at least 400-500W PSUs.

 

[HumblePie]

I cannot comprehend how anyone can defend this card. Its only redeeming quality is that it hits the "magical" $200 price point. That's it.

Aftermarket R9-290 is available now for only $40 more. Sure, you can talk about MSRPs but all that matters is street pricing, and right now the street price on 960 is $200 and street price on 290 is $240. The difference amounts to the price of a single game at release time. For that money you get 40-50% more performance and better longevity due to 4GB of ram.

You can also talk about power consumption, but the fact is any quality 500W PSU will run 290, and increased power consumption only happens when you game, and it only amounts to a single 100W conventional light bulb. How many hours does one typically game on any given day to make the cost savings be really worth it? And if you're that worried about 100W, how diligent are you turning off lights in the room when you're not there?

This card is overpriced and underperforming. Even if one cannot stomach paying extra $40 for 290, 280x still makes a lot of sense due to 3GB of ram instead of 2. This card is just not worth the asking price. Although I am sure it will sell very well having nvidia tag attached to it.

Uhh, 960 street price is $175 right now off newegg. Not that hard to get either. Which does put it cheaper than a r9 280 which it is faster than.

Not sure what all the fuss is over. At resolutions of 1440p or lower it keeps up slightly behind a 280x and for quite a bit less. I don't really see the card as a failure or priced that badly, especially when they can be had for $175 right now pretty easy.

 

[Phynaz]

One, those who run OEM 450W PSUs typically never upgrade their computer, they buy it off the shelf at best buy/dell/whatever and then leave it alone until they buy a new one. Two, the total system power consumption of a system with 290x does not exceed 400W out the wall so as long as it's a semi-decent 450W power supply, it will work just fine.

Yes, I will admit that people who are severely PSU limited, as in less than 400W will have to take it into account. They will either have to get a less power hungry card, or spring an extra $50 on Corsair CX500. However, you will also have to admit that this is an atypical situation, people who buy off the shelf typically do not upgrade their computers, and people who build their own typically have at least 400-500W PSUs.

You are so wrong on everything in your post it's difficult to reply to it.

I don't know a single person that hasn't upgraded an OEM system in some way.

Those OEM systems also don't provide enough amperage on the 12v rail to power a 290x. It's not just about total wattage.

Also, those OEM systems also only come with one six pin PCIe connector, so a 290x is out of the picture.

You need to re-think your assumptions before telling people what's right for them.

 

[Arachnotronic]

You are so wrong on everything in your post it's difficult to reply to it.

I don't know a single person that hasn't upgraded an OEM system in some way.

Those OEM systems also don't provide enough amperage on the 12v rail to power a 290x. It's not just about total wattage.

Also, those OEM systems also only come with one six pin PCIe connector, so a 290x is out of the picture.

You need to re-think your assumptions before telling people what's right for them.

A lot of people aren't "enthusiasts" who follow hardware as closely as many of us on the forums do.

In fact, I suspect that a good chunk of GPU buyers at this price point do have OEM systems and, when they find that they want to play games, think that buying a card and sticking it into their desktops will allow them to game.

The GTX 960, given its fairly low PSU requirements, seems to serve that market quite nicely.