The 7970 came out 4 years ago next month. From $550 to $230 in 4 years.
28nm is a disease.
So it basically took AMD and NV 3 years to release their 2012 top tier cards for >$200?
You'll like this then: https://steamcommunity.com/app/208650/discussions/0/490124466457324535/#c485622866434485906
Shameless AAA studio abandons SLI/CF support because it's too much effort.
UE4 doesn't support multi-GPU either. If you want a single GPU for 4K gaming at ultra quality, it'll be a long wait.
The 7970 came out 4 years ago next month. From $550 to $230 in 4 years.
28nm is a disease.
The 7970 came out 4 years ago next month. From $550 to $230 in 4 years.
28nm is a disease.
Newegg has a 2-day Flash Sale on R9 290 for $180. Add a $1-2 filler, get $25 off $200 with AMEX and this card is ~$157. Even after buying an after-market AIO to cool it, still way better deal than any card in the $150-240 space right now.
According to the pic it's an AMD reference board too. Not some cut back AIB replacement. That's actually a great deal. Even with the stock cooler.
Paying that much & not caring about $ for a gaming rig, may as well go all out and get the 4K experience with multi-GPUs.
What a silly release. This card costs 300 in my country atm but you can get 390 for 30 more.
Even more silly is the fact that you can get used 280X with warranty still left for about 100-130 and 280X performs the same when compared to these.
(I remember when efficiency was a huge reason to buy a card. What's happened?).
Yea, suddenly its all about perf/$ again
r9 380x : the gpu of no purpose
First, you shouldn't compare list price with sale prices. The card is new. It will have sales as well.
Second, the 280X is old stock, they need to move them. It is lacking in AMD's more modern feature set and has less (slower) RAM and is less energy efficient (I remember when efficiency was a huge reason to buy a card. What's happened?).
r9 380x : the gpu of no purpose
Of the major hardware forums that I visit, there is relatively little chit-chat about the 380X, that's for sure.
Not surprising, as most PC gamers buy NV and most newcomers to PC gaming just listen to what's popular, what famous YouTubers and Twitch gamers use, and what "professional" reviewers recommend, which usually also happens to be NV in these cases because NV sends them the most free review samples and given NV's market share, recommending AMD cards for them means going against the market which is bad for their ad revenue/clicks. Even if R9 380X was $149, it would still never outsell 950/960. When after-market R9 290 was selling for $250-260, it didn't even make a dent against a $199 GTX960 2GB. So why would a $229 R9 380X 4GB be any different? It won't.
Come on now. You often have very well reasoned and thought out arguments and then you pull this kind of nonsense.
The 380X gets no attention because its basically the 280X/285. Has absolutely nothing to do with Nvidia. AMD also launched very quietly.
280X may be old stock but still going strong, I've one(OC version I got a year ago virtually new for half-price) and looking at the cards only 970 and 390 would be the upgrade option for me.
I'll probably hold on longer since I'm not having any issues with my games even with Fallout 4 in ultra mode.
380x is a big disappointment in pricing period!
You shouldn't be wowed, but if this card has $20 MIRs moving it closer to $209, it's the clear winner in the $170-220 space where NV's line-up consists of the extremely weak GTX960 2-4GB cards. Right now with $200 R9 280X and $220 R9 290, of course a $230-249 R9 380X isn't a good deal.
Remember the launch prices of R9 390/390X? They weren't a good deal vs. 290/290X but right now a $275-280 R9 390 is arguably in the top 2 of the best cards in the mid-range, along with the 970. When R9 380X drops to $180-200, GTX960 would need to drop even more, which is a win-win for consumers.
The problem is that AMD cards have so many caveats that they are completely unusable for many - perhaps a majority - of buyers.
The fundamental problem is that AMD is selling outdated crap, and not surprisingly, it isn't winning the war for marketshare. Unfortunately, Raja Koduri indicated there will be only two new GPUs next year, so it's likely that AMD will continue to limp on with at least some of their lineup filled with 28nm crap. Hopefully not Pitcairn, but honestly at this point I'm starting to doubt AMD will ever kill that damn thing.
- If you primarily run GameWorks games, AMD cards are a bad deal.
- If you care about performance/watt, AMD cards are a bad deal.
- If you have an OEM system with no PCIe power connector, or with only one 6-pin PCIe power connector, then AMD isn't even trying to compete in that subfield; your only realistic choice is a Maxwell card.
- If you want to use a 4K TV as your monitor (HDMI 2.0), then none of AMD's cards will work properly.
- If you care about H.265 (HEVC) decoding, then GTX 950/960 is your only choice. Fiji-based cards are the only AMD offerings that support HEVC at all, and these only do 8-bit, lacking the 10-bit support that will be needed for 4K Blu-Ray and various other applications.
The problem is that AMD cards have so many caveats that they are completely unusable for many - perhaps a majority - of buyers.
- If you primarily run GameWorks games, AMD cards are a bad deal.
- If you care about performance/watt, AMD cards are a bad deal.
- If you have an OEM system with no PCIe power connector, or with only one 6-pin PCIe power connector, then AMD isn't even trying to compete in that subfield; your only realistic choice is a Maxwell card.
- If you want to use a 4K TV as your monitor (HDMI 2.0), then none of AMD's cards will work properly.
- If you care about H.265 (HEVC) decoding, then GTX 950/960 is your only choice. Fiji-based cards are the only AMD offerings that support HEVC at all, and these only do 8-bit, lacking the 10-bit support that will be needed for 4K Blu-Ray and various other applications.
Looking at the 380x -> 390 -> Fury X, it becomes immediately apparent that not increasing ROP count on the Fury X was a terrible idea. 380x -> 390 nets you a huge performance increase yet it doesn't actually have all that many more shaders or much greater clock speed. The 32 -> 64 doubled ROPs are clearly making up a big chunk of this performance increase. So why then they decided to massively increase shaders on the Fury X but leave ROPs the same as on Hawaii -- I don't know. Maybe they overestimated how much GCN 1.2 + the Fury modifications were supposed to help the ROP throughput? It seems like even just moving to 80 or 96 ROPs would have completely changed the Fury X performance profile for the better, even if it needed to lose some shaders in the process.
You are kidding right?
Here in Canada, @ NCIX, 7/10 best selling GPUs are GTX970, not a 390. There isn't a single AMD card in the top 10, period.
No, it's not the same as a 285. There is a 16% performance difference for reference models. I am not trying to defend the 380X as I think it should have been $199-209 and I already provided reasons why buying a 280X/7970Ghz for $270-300 2 years ago was better. However, to say that 380X and 285 2GB are basically the same is ridiculous and I am shocked you used that line of thinking, even ignoring the 2GB VRAM limits on the 285. You realize there is a higher difference in performance between a 380X and a 285 than there is between a $330 GTX970 and a $550 GTX980?
You see how 960 is 75%, 285 is at 83% and 380X is at 96% at 1080P. That makes the 380X "the same" as a 285 to you?
The reason almost no one cares about the 380X is the exact same reasons the majority of the market didn't care for $180-200 280X or $250 R9 290 - because it's not an NV card. Most objective/brand agnostic PC gamers already purchased an HD7970Ghz/R9 280X or an R9 290, while the rest couldn't care less about the 380X since they only buy NV. 380X is not a 960Ti so it's irrelevant.
If 380X was called 960Ti and was $229, it would be hailed as a great filler between a 960 and a 970 unless according to you most people think almost 30% higher performance over the 960 is "the same thing as a 960/285". I highly doubt that's the case as people online have been begging/asking for a 960Ti.
You say my comments were nonsensical, but I disagree because market share and user interest speak for themselves. There is no way in an objective and unbiased PC market would a $230 after-market R9 290 not be selling out almost instantly given the gigantic performance increase over the $170-200 GTX960 4GB cards and its likely more future-proof DX12 and driver support.
You are telling me if $230-240 R9 380X/290 were NV cards, i.e., had 30-70%+ more performance over the $170 960 4GB, it wouldn't be a HUGE deal?
You just have to read the reviews of biased sites to see that they do everything possible to diminish the value of AMD cards for months and months and then switch standards to suit their agenda when suddenly price/performance matters.
Who do you think the average PC gamer is going to believe, a "professional" review site or a random person such as myself on a forum? Get the picture?
Although it started life at $249, recent price cuts have dropped the Radeon R9 285's price on Newegg down to $209.99, the same price as the Asus Strix GTX 960 card we used for the bulk of our testing.
At price parity, the GTX 960 and R9 285 are very evenly matched. The R9 285 has a slight advantage in the overall FPS average, but it falls behind the GeForce GTX 960 in our time-sensitive 99th percentile metric. We've seen the reasons why the R9 285 falls behind in the preceding pages. I'd say the 99th percentile result is a better indicator of overall performanceand the GTX 960 leads slightly in that case. That makes the GTX 960 a good card to buy, and for a lot of folks, that will be all they need to know.
It's a close race overall, though. Either card is a decent choice on a pure price-performance basis. AMD and its partners have slashed prices recently, perhaps in anticipation of the GTX 960's introduction, without making much noise about it. Heck, the most eye-popping thing on the plot above is that R9 290 for $269.99. Good grief. In many of these cases, board makers are offering mail-in rebates that effectively take prices even lower. Those don't show up in our scatter plots, since mail-in rebates can be unreliable and kind of shady. Still, AMD apparently has decided to move some inventory by chopping prices, and that has made the contest between the GTX 960 and the R9 285 very tight indeed.