GTX 960 is expected to launch next month.

Page 27 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Qwertilot

Golden Member
Nov 28, 2013
1,604
257
126
I doubt it. AMD might do something clever at the top end but I don't think anyone is expecting efficiency miracles further down.

There's the 750ti to consider. Obviously even less noise/power, comes short and might be fast enough for what you're after. Asus have done a short 970 too, which seems like it might be cooled quite well/quietly but finding reliable noise information seems hard

The 960 strix is given as 21.5 (L) X 12.1 (H) X 4.1 cm (W) and has a very quiet cooler so if that fits definitely not a bad option.

Otherwise there's only 2 really short 960's that I can see - so far - and I've really no idea how good the coolers are hence asking ASUS might be expected to do one too to go with their 970, but maybe they won't.
 

Paul98

Diamond Member
Jan 31, 2010
3,732
199
106
No, they don't. Please read the provided links.

They are, fps = 1000/frametime (edit frame time in ms)
frame time=1000/fps

So 16.66 ms frame time is the same as 60 fps.

Both describe same thing
 
Last edited:

ShintaiDK

Lifer
Apr 22, 2012
20,378
145
106
Then you go to the Canadian pricing on the same site for the same card and get bent over. Seems like they got it setup so that Canadians and other countries are subsiding America pricing. http://www.newegg.ca/Product/Product...82E16814121842

Its not that bad considering the current volatile currency situation.

300USD is 376CAD.

I can also show you an example the other way around.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...-372-_-Product
http://www.newegg.ca/Product/Product...-372-_-Product

4690K cost 240USD in the US and 223USD in Canada.
 
Feb 11, 2015
140
0
0
Its not that bad considering the current volatile currency situation.
That's easy to say when you don't have to put up with outrageous pricing. Even when the Canadian Dollar was at parity with the US Dollar we still got bent over on pricing up here. Also the 4690K you linked is $280 + $8 shipping in Canada and in the States it's $239 and Free Shipping for the same CPU.
 
Last edited:

ShintaiDK

Lifer
Apr 22, 2012
20,378
145
106
That's easy to say when you don't have to put up with outrageous pricing. Even when the Canadian Dollar was at parity with the US Dollar we still got bent over on pricing up here. Also the 4690K you linked is $280 + $8 shipping in Canada and in the States it's $239 and Free Shipping for the same CPU.

You still save 10USD buying it in Canada.

And it was just one example.

Until the currency situation between USD and CAD stabilises. You will see random differences both ways.
 
Feb 11, 2015
140
0
0
You still save 10USD buying it in Canada.

And it was just one example.
What do you mean exactly ? The same CPU on the same Etailer is $288 in Canada and $240 in the sates. The point I was making is that Canadians get bent over on pricing. The 290X is well over $100 more and so is the 970 as compared to the States.
 

iiiankiii

Senior member
Apr 4, 2008
759
47
91
What do you mean exactly ? The same CPU on the same Etailer is $288 in Canada and $240 in the sates. The point I was making is that Canadians get bent over on pricing. The 290X is well over $100 more and so is the 970 as compared to the States.

At this moment, Canadian dollars is worth less than American dollars. If you do the conversion, it is comparable in price. For example, $288 Canadian is equal to $230 American. Since it cost $240 American, that means it cost more in the U.S than Canada. That's what he's trying to say.

1 Canadian Dollar equals
0.80 US Dollar
 
Last edited:

Phynaz

Lifer
Mar 13, 2006
10,140
819
126
That's easy to say when you don't have to put up with outrageous pricing. Even when the Canadian Dollar was at parity with the US Dollar we still got bent over on pricing up here. Also the 4690K you linked is $280 + $8 shipping in Canada and in the States it's $239 and Free Shipping for the same CPU.

Gotta pay for that "free" healthcare
 
Feb 11, 2015
140
0
0
At this moment, Canadian dollars is worth less than American dollars. If you do the conversion, it is comparable in price. For example, $288 Canadian is equal to $230 American. Since it cost $240 American, that means it cost more in the U.S than Canada. That's what he's trying to say.

1 Canadian Dollar equals
0.80 US Dollar
Still when the Canadian Dollar was at parity with the US Dollar we still got bent over on pricing. I said this before already.
 

Paul98

Diamond Member
Jan 31, 2010
3,732
199
106
Fps is an average, frame time is instantaneous.

no, they are just different units to measure the same thing. You can have average frame time, or instant fps just as easily.

You can just as easily make a graph with instantaneous fps as frame time and they will both tell you the same thing.
 

shady28

Platinum Member
Apr 11, 2004
2,520
397
126
no, they are just different units to measure the same thing. You can have average frame time, or instant fps just as easily.

You can just as easily make a graph with instantaneous fps as frame time and they will both tell you the same thing.

Exactly. Thinking you have to wait a full second to measure FPS is like thinking a cop has to radar you for a full hour to get MPH.
 
Feb 11, 2015
140
0
0
Sure you remember it? Because that was roughly 2 years ago.
It was actually a year or 2 before the first economic collapse so that would have been around 2006/07. People were spending like there was no tomorrow the Banks were giving away ... "Free Money" LOL credit debts were being jacked up to oblivion and then 2008 came and it was all over LOL. Canada is going thru another recession right now and the US will follow in 2015. Dam it's been almost ten years since Canada's Economy was booming ... When I was making 80 grand a year. Now in days I am having a hard time justifying a new mid range graphics card purchase LOL.
 
Last edited:

skipsneeky2

Diamond Member
May 21, 2011
5,035
1
71
Over a month now since the GTX 960 launch.., where is the AnandTech review?

At this point it's going to come to the same conclusion as all the other sites.Unless new drivers have improved performance?That would be something to see lol.
 

RussianSensation

Elite Member
Sep 5, 2003
19,458
765
126
I assume you missed the 285 in your graph. Not to mention its an AMD optimized title. Before making the usual nonsense about VRAM.

And 280X is more expensive than GTX960.

Not in US/Canada. Even the R9 290 is within $50-60 of the 960. The entire US GPU market is probably as large as all of Europe's.

Not only does 960 fall apart in modern titles that use > 2GB of VRAM, which means the card is already obsolete for 2015-2017 games, but it performs horribly in retro gaming where you can use R9 280X/290's brute force to run higher resolutions OR enable more AA/super-sampling. This means for gamers who have a backlog of titles, the 280X will crush a 960/deliver superior IQ because you will be able to use higher AA modes.

40% faster in Mass Effect


62% faster in Fallout 3


It would get crushed in older games where R9 280X's raw performance matters even more.



You have also blindly ignored that not only does having > 2GB of VRAM matter for 2015-2017 titles, but it also matters for gamers who mod games like Skyrim, Quake 4, Crysis 2, GTA IV/V, etc. 960 2GB is a horrible purchase at the $200-210 price bracket for any gamer that cares to mod their games with high resolution texture packs, etc. We already have games like SoM that push 3.5GB to the limits, nevermind 2GB. HardOCP and many sites/videos online show very poor performance with 2GB videocards in sames like SoM or Watch Dogs or Titanfall. Unless you plan on gaming selectively, how would you know if some great game coming out in 4-6 months won't run way better with 3GB of VRAM? Not to mention the raw performance advantage of the 290 for not much more $.

In the states an XFX R9 280X is $205 and it comes with lifetime warranty. Considering 960's crippled VRAM, bombing performance in retro gaming, and worse overall performance than a 280X on average, it's simply a worse gaming videocard. You can defend it all you want and there is no doubt the 960 will outsell all 280/280X/290s combined, but it's still a garbage videocard at the $200 mark when 280X is $200-210 and R9 290 is $250-260 USD or $270-300 CDN vs. $270 CDN for the 960.

Your generalized claims that 280X costs way more than a 960 are not even true. Even in the UK, a market way larger than Denmark, 960 is grossly overpriced compared to the 280X/290:

MSI Gaming 960 = 175 pounds
XFX R9 280X = 179 pounds (15% more performance vs. the 960, way better performance in retro gaming and 3GB of VRAM for 4 pounds more)
MSI Gaming 290 = 222 pounds (27% more expensive for double the VRAM and 45-50% more performance than a 960).
Palit 970 Jetstream = 275 pounds (just 5% more performance than an after-market 290 card)

Your arguments are totally contradictory and inconsistent in nature. Your posts insinuate that 280X/290 aren't worth the money over the 960 but yet nowhere did I ever see you claiming that 970 is a poor value compared to the 290 either. One trend is always consistent in all of your posts - you favour Intel/NV in all cases and bash anything AMD. It doesn't even register for you that for barely more money an after-market R9 290 ~ GTX960 SLI.
https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/NVIDIA/GeForce_GTX_960_SLI/23.html

Fortunately, on the Internet there is data that allows people who care to learn to find out factual information.

At this point it's going to come to the same conclusion as all the other sites.Unless new drivers have improved performance?That would be something to see lol.

I remember AT used lower settings on purpose for cards that had less than 2GB of VRAM because 470/570/580 wouldn't be able to run Total War games with Ultra textures without stuttering otherwise. I hope they have learned from user feedback and actually push settings to the max because more and more titles will start exposing the 2GB VRAM limitation. TechReport seems totally oblivious to this. The author is completely brushing aside 2GB of VRAM as a big issue because in his very narrow and limited gaming selection and his own gameplay testing he not once ran into 2GB of VRAM bottlenecks even at 2560x1440....or so he says.

That's why we should generally read 5-10 reviews that give us a much broader viewpoint.
 
Last edited:

Mem

Lifer
Apr 23, 2000
21,476
13
81
Originally Posted by ShintaiDK
I assume you missed the 285 in your graph. Not to mention its an AMD optimized title. Before making the usual nonsense about VRAM.

And 280X is more expensive than GTX960.
I got my 280X OC last year before 970 series was out and even then got it for the price of a 270 card off ebay,all relative on pricing,my old Nvidia 560Ti 2GB was getting a bit slow so my 280X OC for the price of a 270 card was a smart buy,still holding its own even today.

The question is would I buy a 960 card today if I was still on my 560Ti card?..Answer is simple ie No,plenty of better cards then 960 out there in its price range.
 

ShintaiDK

Lifer
Apr 22, 2012
20,378
145
106

You keep posting rubbish and cherrypicks in your desperate crusade. 4K res, a single 280X on an extreme offer that differs substantial from the rest in the 230-260$ area. Yes if you spend more you also get more, what a freaking surprise.

But since you are so happy about 4K gaming on lower end cards, can you watch a 4K movie on the 280X? No.

MSI Gaming 960 = 175 pounds
XFX R9 280X = 179 pounds

Palit 970 Jetstream = 275 pounds


Again you cant even get basic prices right.

The GTX 960 can be had for 159£
http://www.scan.co.uk/products/2gb-palit-gtx-960-oc-pcie-30-7200mhz-gddr5-gpu-1165mhz-boost-1228mhz-cores-1024-dvi-i-dl-dvi-d-dl-dp
http://www.scan.co.uk/products/2gb-gainward-gtx-960-oc-pcie-30-7000mhz-gddr5-gpu-1165mhz-boost-1228mhz-cores-1024-dvi-i-dvi-d-dp-12

The GTX970 for 260£
http://www.scan.co.uk/products/4gb-msi-gtx-970-4gd5-oc-reference-fan-pcie-30-7010mhz-gddr5-gpu-1076mhz-boost-1216mhz-cores-1664-3xd

But again, it wouldnt look so good would it? All you do is manipulation.
 
Last edited:

ShintaiDK

Lifer
Apr 22, 2012
20,378
145
106
I got my 280X OC last year before 970 series was out and even then got it for the price of a 270 card off ebay,all relative on pricing,my old Nvidia 560Ti 2GB was getting a bit slow so my 280X OC for the price of a 270 card was a smart buy,still holding its own even today.

The question is would I buy a 960 card today if I was still on my 560Ti card?..Answer is simple ie No,plenty of better cards then 960 out there in its price range.

If you got your 280X for the price of a 270, then no wonder
 

skipsneeky2

Diamond Member
May 21, 2011
5,035
1
71
I remember AT used lower settings on purpose for cards that had less than 2GB of VRAM because 470/570/580 wouldn't be able to run Total War games with Ultra textures without stuttering otherwise. I hope they have learned from user feedback and actually push settings to the max because more and more titles will start exposing the 2GB VRAM limitation. TechReport seems totally oblivious to this. The author is completely brushing aside 2GB of VRAM as a big issue because in his very narrow and limited gaming selection and his own gameplay testing he not once ran into 2GB of VRAM bottlenecks even at 2560x1440....or so he says.

That's why we should generally read 5-10 reviews that give us a much broader viewpoint.

It's a bit touchy the issue with newer games that use more memory then cards like the 470/570/580 have.They could exclude those cards with a side note about stuttering and a recommendation to lower settings.

HARDOCP was a site i honestly didn't pay much attention to but they do excellent game reviews.I just got Crysis 3 and their article was incredibly useful.They adjust settings to get each card to run in the same fps ballpark as another card,their AA break down was as good as a review can get.

I wish more reviews can do this,make a fps rule of like 30 fps min,60fps average and adjust settings for each card just to show what would be required.Some honestly can't handle higher settings do to vram.Others are obviously way to slow.
 
sale-70-410-exam    | Exam-200-125-pdf    | we-sale-70-410-exam    | hot-sale-70-410-exam    | Latest-exam-700-603-Dumps    | Dumps-98-363-exams-date    | Certs-200-125-date    | Dumps-300-075-exams-date    | hot-sale-book-C8010-726-book    | Hot-Sale-200-310-Exam    | Exam-Description-200-310-dumps?    | hot-sale-book-200-125-book    | Latest-Updated-300-209-Exam    | Dumps-210-260-exams-date    | Download-200-125-Exam-PDF    | Exam-Description-300-101-dumps    | Certs-300-101-date    | Hot-Sale-300-075-Exam    | Latest-exam-200-125-Dumps    | Exam-Description-200-125-dumps    | Latest-Updated-300-075-Exam    | hot-sale-book-210-260-book    | Dumps-200-901-exams-date    | Certs-200-901-date    | Latest-exam-1Z0-062-Dumps    | Hot-Sale-1Z0-062-Exam    | Certs-CSSLP-date    | 100%-Pass-70-383-Exams    | Latest-JN0-360-real-exam-questions    | 100%-Pass-4A0-100-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-300-135-exams-date    | Passed-200-105-Tech-Exams    | Latest-Updated-200-310-Exam    | Download-300-070-Exam-PDF    | Hot-Sale-JN0-360-Exam    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Exams    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-JN0-360-exams-date    | Exam-Description-1Z0-876-dumps    | Latest-exam-1Z0-876-Dumps    | Dumps-HPE0-Y53-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-HPE0-Y53-Exam    | 100%-Pass-HPE0-Y53-Real-Exam-Questions    | Pass-4A0-100-Exam    | Latest-4A0-100-Questions    | Dumps-98-365-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-98-365-Exam    | 100%-Pass-VCS-254-Exams    | 2017-Latest-VCS-273-Exam    | Dumps-200-355-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-300-320-Exam    | Pass-300-101-Exam    | 100%-Pass-300-115-Exams    |
http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    | http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    |