No Man's Sky GPU Test (GameGPU)

[Thinker_145]

And you are saying you shouldn't have sold your 970? The 1070 is 65% faster and more so in cherry pick scenarios which is the biggest generational leap in a long long time. So the argument of not selling the 970 does not work at all.

I would argue the 1070 actually provides better value than the 6GB 1060. 40% faster and 33% more VRAM for 50% higher price seems a great deal to me. Even if we give the 1080 25% it still remains poor value.

Sent from my HTC One M9

 

[Thinker_145]

As per the latest chart 17.6% difference between 970 and 980. The 980 also has 15% more VRAM.

Just because a max OC 970 matches stock 980 means nothing because the 980 overclocks just as well making the difference all the same.

Sent from my HTC One M9

 

[Head1985]

And you are saying you shouldn't have sold your 970?

I dont like cripled cards.I would buy either Vega or Volta.As you can see cripled cards like 1070 have inconsistent performance.In 1 game they are 20% slower than GTX1080 and in another 5 games they are 30% slower.And i hate that.I want consistent performance in all games.
Look at 390 vs 390x they have pretty much consistent performance in all games.You dont see 390x 10% faster in one game and then 35% faster in another.

EDIT:
BTW GTX1070 didnt bring bigest jump in long long time.Not even close.
GTX980-1080 +60-70%
GTX960-1060 + 90-100%
GTX970-1070 +50-55%
Gtx1070 brings worst jump of all pascal cards + it cost in my country 50% more than 970.

 

[Thinker_145]

I dont like cripled cards.I would buy either Vega or Volta.As you can see cripled cards like 1070 have inconsistent performance.In 1 game they are 20% slower than GTX1080 and in another 5 games they are 30% slower.And i hate that.I want consistent performance in all games.
Look at 390 vs 390x they have pretty much consistent performance in all games.You dont see 390x 10% faster in one game and then 35% faster in another.

EDIT:
BTW GTX1070 didnt bring bigest jump in long long time.Not even close.
GTX980-1080 +60-70%
GTX960-1060 + 90-100%
GTX970-1070 +50-55%
Gtx1070 brings worst jump of all pascal cards + it cost in my country 50% more than 970.

The only difference between 390 and 390X is shader units where as there are more differences between the 1080 and 1070. Differences //=// crippled. I could just as well say that the 1080 is crippled or inefficient since it's not always that much faster even at 4K.

I meant biggest jump for x70 cards. The 970 was easily the best value card between the 3 you listed hence it is not surprising that the 1060 and 1080 beat their predecessors by a bigger margin.

Let's see the 1080Ti pulling those numbers....

By the way it's funny you are advocating for the 970 while talking about crippled cards.....

Sent from my HTC One M9

 

[Head1985]

By the way it's funny you are advocating for the 970 while talking about crippled cards.....

i dont advocate GTX970.But fact is GTX970 is less cripled than 1070.Its much closer to GTX980 than 1070 is to 1080.
Even with 3.5GB and only 224bit bus.Still no where near 30% gap between them.

 

[Thinker_145]

i dont advocate GTX970.But fact is GTX970 is less cripled than 1070.Its much closer to GTX980 than 1070 is to 1070.
Even with 3.5GB and only 224bit bus.Still no where near 30% gap between them.

I wouldn't use the word "much" as I have provided hard data which says otherwise. If you want to cling to the 30% number because of cherry pick scenario then I can't help you.

Sent from my HTC One M9

 

[Thinker_145]

You sure you wanna do this?

The 980 is fifty freaking percent faster in Tomb Raider DX12 at only 1080p.

If we start defining every high end card by its best case scenario win then that changes the whole price performance equation entirely. But that's not how it works and has ever worked.

Sent from my HTC One M9

 

[Bacon1]

You sure you wanna do this?

The 980 is fifty freaking percent faster in Tomb Raider DX12 at only 1080p.

If we start defining every high end card by its best case scenario win then that changes the whole price performance equation entirely. But that's not how it works and has ever worked.

Sent from my HTC One M9

Looks like the joys of the "4"gb of VRAM. How else could it be slower than the 470, or heck even the 1060 3GB @ 1440p

Maybe Nvidia forgot to fix it in DX12.

Here is it on launch.. much faster

 

[Head1985]

Yeah dx12 is broken it eats almost 8 GB Vram in 1080p.

 

[Thinker_145]

Here is it on launch.. much faster

That's DX11. TPU only recently started using this game at DX12.



Sent from my HTC One M9

 

[Thinker_145]

Yeah dx12 is broken it eats almost 8 GB Vram in 1080p.

GTX 980 is beating all the 8GB AMD cards so that doesn't really hold up in this game.

Sent from my HTC One M9

 

[Bacon1]

That's DX11. TPU only recently started using this game at DX12.

I know, hence:

Maybe Nvidia forgot to fix it in DX12.

It looks like Nvidia failed to fix the 970 for the DX12 version. Using DX11 (like anyone using the card would!) you get much closer to 980 performance and not the 50% gap you mentioned.