GTX 970 or wait for AMD R9 300 series?

[AHMKHA97]

Right now I have an AMD Radeon HD 6870 and it's done, it can't keep up anymore. So I want to upgrade as soon as possible, and the GTX 970 seems like the perfect jump. But yesterday a friend told me that I should wait a couple of months until AMD releases their new GPU series which is supposed to be absolutely amazing, because they use a '20 nm' design. My question is: Should I wait for AMD's new GPU series or should I go ahead and buy a GTX 970 for Christmas? It would be heartbreaking if I dropped €350, and then seeing AMD unveil a glorious new GPU for the same price.

 

[Horrux]

AMD *IS* releasing price/performance leading cards, amazing performers in the space currently occupied by the 970.

Don't buy it just yet, wait for the AMDs to be released. I think they're revealing them next weekend? The 970 will have to go down by $100 to just barely keep up.

 

[Reaper_7799]

AMD *IS* releasing price/performance leading cards, amazing performers in the space currently occupied by the 970.

Don't buy it just yet, wait for the AMDs to be released. I think they're revealing them next weekend? The 970 will have to go down by $100 to just barely keep up.

I'm in this predicament right now too, I'm going to wait till we get real pricing on these cards. They're doing it at e3 I believe, on the 16th. If they are able to truly beat nvidia, I will consider buying one but if it's same performance for same price like it is now...I'll go with either a 970 or talk myself into a 980ti. I think the 980 is too much of a jump for $200 and the performance increase it brings with it isn't worth it unless you are running 1440p. The 980 TI, however is a monster.

The fury x needs to obliterate the 980 ti and beat the titan at whatever price point well below the titan. The regular fury needs to at least have the same performance as the 980ti or beat it by a small margin and needs to be priced well below the 980ti ($500-$549), depending how much it beats the 980ti. The 390x needs to solidly beat the 980 and fall somewhere short of the 980 ti and be priced less than the 980 ($400ish). The 390 needs to solidly beat the 970 and come close to the 980 in performance and be priced at $300.

 

[Horrux]

I think it's a given, since AMD has admitted that the 390X would likely perform just a hair under the 980ti. That leaves the Fury to perform about the same as a Titan X and the Fury X as the world-beater.

 

[Bossyfins]

Either get a 970 or an r9 290x. R9 300 series are rebrands, except the 390x if I am correct, and you will have to pay more for the same performance. Which usually happens.

 

[CooLWoLF]

Either get a 970 or an r9 290x. R9 300 series are rebrands, except the 390x if I am correct, and you will have to pay more for the same performance. Which usually happens.

Has it actually been confirmed that the R9 300 series will just be rebrands? If so, just wow. The R9 200 series already was a re-brand for the most part.

 

[Bossyfins]

http://www.digitaltrends.com/computing/amd-radeon-300-series-will-fleshed-rebranded-cards/

http://hexus.net/tech/news/graphics/81853-amd-radeon-300-series-may-largely-consist-rebrands/

www.lazygamer.net/pc-hardware/amd/rumour-drivers-suggest-amd-r9-300-is-a-series-of-rebrands/+r9+300+rebrands&cd=5&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us

http://videocardz.com/55289/amd-radeon-rx-300-series-rebrands-spotted-in-drivers



**While there is a chance that they might won't be a re brand, so hold your breath, but these may be false information. I'd wait actually.

 

[Horrux]

Either get a 970 or an r9 290x. R9 300 series are rebrands, except the 390x if I am correct, and you will have to pay more for the same performance. Which usually happens.

This is not correct. The 390 as well as the 390X are not rebrands. Moreover, the Fury and Fury X are also new.

As for paying more for the same performance, I don't know what world you live in, but that is also false, as demonstrated by every single year that there have been 3D accelerator cards...

At the end of the day, a rebranded Radeon R9 290X into a 380X that costs $100 less is a pretty sweet deal to me...

 

[Bossyfins]

Like what? For insance, the 7970 1ghz was rebranded to a 280x. They were both similar in performance.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E51XQ-bIu-g#t=78

As seen here, the only difference is probably 2-6 fps.


However, the 380x is a 290/x. So there will be an improvement in performance, however, if the rebrands does occur, more specifially, the r9 - 370 and below will be pure re brands. the 270 is still a 370.


NOTE THIS IS BASED ON RUMORS.

So I am still saying to wait.

 

[Horrux]

Like what? For insance, the 7970 1ghz was rebranded to a 280x. They were both similar in performance.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E51XQ-bIu-g#t=78

As seen here, the only difference is probably 2-6 fps.


However, the 380x is a 290/x. So there will be an improvement in performance, however, if the rebrands does occur, more specifially, the r9 - 370 and below will be pure re brands. the 270 is still a 370.


NOTE THIS IS BASED ON RUMORS.

So I am still saying to wait.

So you got the SAME performance (oops, except 2-6 fps more) for HIGHER price? Ooops the 280X was significantly less than the 7970 ghz...

So... Your "facts" are not what *I* would call facts...

 

[Reaper_7799]

I think it's a given, since AMD has admitted that the 390X would likely perform just a hair under the 980ti. That leaves the Fury to perform about the same as a Titan X and the Fury X as the world-beater.

They said that already? I must have missed it, was that straight from AMD official?

 

[Horrux]

I think it's a given, since AMD has admitted that the 390X would likely perform just a hair under the 980ti. That leaves the Fury to perform about the same as a Titan X and the Fury X as the world-beater.

They said that already? I must have missed it, was that straight from AMD official?

It was in a conversation between a reporter and an AMD official, and not said in such terms. If I recall correctly, the AMD official stated that the 390X pre-production chip would gain X percent, putting it "just below the 980ti" in terms of performance.

So it seems that's what they predict. Or what they are letting on that they predict, but no OFFICIAL STATEMENT, of course. They don't do that, no one does.

Still, it's a pretty good indication, because AMD knows well that major disappointment from what they lead the crowd to believe involves major backlash on sales, and profits.

 

[Bossyfins]

Backlash on sales is what drove the 280x sales down as well. I wasn't following AMD when I first dabbled in computers because I had saw a video that said AMD is crap. Don't buy it. While that doesn't hold entirely true now, AMD in my opinion is trying to gamble with a new line up like NVIDIA's titan line. They would EASILY make a comeback in the midrange GPU market.

 

[Reaper_7799]

I think it's a given, since AMD has admitted that the 390X would likely perform just a hair under the 980ti. That leaves the Fury to perform about the same as a Titan X and the Fury X as the world-beater.

They said that already? I must have missed it, was that straight from AMD official?

It was in a conversation between a reporter and an AMD official, and not said in such terms. If I recall correctly, the AMD official stated that the 390X pre-production chip would gain X percent, putting it "just below the 980ti" in terms of performance.

So it seems that's what they predict. Or what they are letting on that they predict, but no OFFICIAL STATEMENT, of course. They don't do that, no one does.

Still, it's a pretty good indication, because AMD knows well that major disappointment from what they lead the crowd to believe involves major backlash on sales, and profits.

Okay, I gotcha, thanks. I wonder if that was before the official 980ti specs were released and we see how much of a monster it is now? Either way, I'm waiting till E3 to find out real benchmarks and prices and go from there. I'm actually considering buying the 980TI for future 1440P purposes but I'm hoping AMD drops a few cards in between the 970 and 980TI, I'm not interested in the 980 at $500.

 

[Reaper_7799]

Backlash on sales is what drove the 280x sales down as well. I wasn't following AMD when I first dabbled in computers because I had saw a video that said AMD is crap. Don't buy it. While that doesn't hold entirely true now, AMD in my opinion is trying to gamble with a new line up like NVIDIA's titan line. They would EASILY make a comeback in the midrange GPU market.

And yeah, I agree with ya there, IF they price everything right.

 

[Horrux]

Okay, I gotcha, thanks. I wonder if that was before the official 980ti specs were released and we see how much of a monster it is now? Either way, I'm waiting till E3 to find out real benchmarks and prices and go from there. I'm actually considering buying the 980TI for future 1440P purposes but I'm hoping AMD drops a few cards in between the 970 and 980TI, I'm not interested in the 980 at $500.

I think it's about a week old, meaning after the 980 ti was released. And yeah a 980 at 500 is ridiculous. I'm upgrading my 670s to 970s after AMD releases its cards and drives the prices down. I prefer the AMD GPUs generally, but I am a sucker for stereo 3D and nV reigns supreme in that specialty.

 

[Reaper_7799]

I think it's about a week old, meaning after the 980 ti was released. And yeah a 980 at 500 is ridiculous. I'm upgrading my 670s to 970s after AMD releases its cards and drives the prices down. I prefer the AMD GPUs generally, but I am a sucker for stereo 3D and nV reigns supreme in that specialty.[/quotemsg]


Okay Thanks. 970 SLI should be pretty powerful, especially 1440P. I'm scared of going SLI or crossfire just because of any issues with certain games that might crop up. But SLI 970s in a good environment with a game that runs it well, is a good set up and powerful.

 

[Horrux]

I currently run GTX 670s SLI and it works great. Sure, 1% of games don't do that well with SLI, but that means the 99% that remains do awesome.

Upgrading them to 970s as soon as AMD releases them here cards.

 

[Reaper_7799]

I currently run GTX 670s SLI and it works great. Sure, 1% of games don't do that well with SLI, but that means the 99% that remains do awesome.

Upgrading them to 970s as soon as AMD releases them here cards.

Sweet, that's something good to know for future. And yeah, they need to release those cards now so I can go ahead and buy whatever...waiting when you want now is not a good thing but at least I'll make sure I'm not missing out on something really good.

 

[Azfar Siddiqui]

HMB or HBM? is not being released in 300 Series

http://www.maximumpc.com/amd-radeon-300-series-prices-leaks-ahead-of-launch/

 

[Bossyfins]

That was a given that AMD wouldn't have HBM in their fury lines. Since most are rebrands, no need for HBM.

 

[Reaper_7799]

That was a given that AMD wouldn't have HBM in their fury lines. Since most are rebrands, no need for HBM.

The Fury lines are not 390x, 390, 380 etc...I think you know this, you're just wording it wrong, so the Fury XT and Fury Pro, if that's what they end up being named, will have 4GB HBM1 but the rest of the lineup wont for now. 390X with 8GB ddr5 and so on.

 

[Salvinha]

Only the fact that the 300 series (not all of them) will use another interface of memories, called HBM and not DDR, which almost double the memory bandwich, I don't think it can be a rebrand.
I think the 390x, 390 and 380 will also use this new technology, although it is not confirmed yet. If yes, AMD won.

 

[kvourakis]

Even if the amd's new gpus are worst than their opponent,since amd tend to sell cheaper than nvidia you will eventually benefit from their release as when they will be out,nvidia will drop the price for their gpus.
So in my opinion wait a week or two and u will see

 

[Horrux]

Even if the amd's new gpus are worst than their opponent,since amd tend to sell cheaper than nvidia you will eventually benefit from their release as when they will be out,nvidia will drop the price for their gpus.
So in my opinion wait a week or two and u will see

What you write makes no sense. How are AMD's GPUs worsE (not "worst") than nVidia's?

The only valid comparison is at a given price point. So if you say, at the $499 MSRP price point, AMD GPUs underperform nVidias, then you are clearly wrong. Once they release their new lineup, they don't, and once nVidia releases their new lineup, yes, they do. It's called leapfrogging, and it happens every time a new product is released. That is how prices come down.

As far as the very top end segment, AMD has decided to give that to nVidia most years, as the sales volume is not sufficient to interest them. Again, that's a business decision, and in no way does it mean that AMDs are "worst"? than nVidias...

Oh wait, I think I get it: When nVidia releases new cards, you feel they are MORE POWERFUL at the same prices. When AMD releases new cards, you feel they are CHEAPER for similar peformance. I can't do anything for you here, your vision is simply skewed. It's the same thing, no matter if it's nVidia or AMD, you are just choosing to look at it wrong.

 

[Salvinha]

Even if the amd's new gpus are worst than their opponent,since amd tend to sell cheaper than nvidia you will eventually benefit from their release as when they will be out,nvidia will drop the price for their gpus.
So in my opinion wait a week or two and u will see

What you write makes no sense. How are AMD's GPUs worsE (not "worst") than nVidia's?

The only valid comparison is at a given price point. So if you say, at the $499 MSRP price point, AMD GPUs underperform nVidias, then you are clearly wrong. Once they release their new lineup, they don't, and once nVidia releases their new lineup, yes, they do. It's called leapfrogging, and it happens every time a new product is released. That is how prices come down.

As far as the very top end segment, AMD has decided to give that to nVidia most years, as the sales volume is not sufficient to interest them. Again, that's a business decision, and in no way does it mean that AMDs are "worst"? than nVidias...

Oh wait, I think I get it: When nVidia releases new cards, you feel they are MORE POWERFUL at the same prices. When AMD releases new cards, you feel they are CHEAPER for similar peformance. I can't do anything for you here, your vision is simply skewed. It's the same thing, no matter if it's nVidia or AMD, you are just choosing to look at it wrong.

What you said is totally reasonable, I have nothing to add.

I already had 3 NVidia GPUs, and now I'm in the third AMD GPU as well, and I tell you, I have nothing to complain about. As you can see in my signature, I have a 7950, it is 2 years old, but it was released even before, today I play Witcher 3 in 1080p with all settings to Ultra (except for Hairworks, NVidia technology which sucks the performance, so I have to leave that off). My FPS? Average of 35-40 FPS, it never goes below 32 FPS even in the most action scenes. So I do not think AMDs GPUs are worse than NVidia, it can be a little bit slower, but not worse.

Sometimes you are on the bottom, sometimes you are on the Top, I had a 4870x2, it was my first red card, I remember in that time, HD 4000 was crushing NVidia hard, I remember my Radeon 4870x2 was the faster card of the world. After HD 4000 series, NVidia took the first place in performance, and have been like this since then, so I'm not surprised if AMD turn the table again. Mainly now that AMD has contract with Sony (PS4) and Microsoft (Xbox One), so I think lack of money for to develop something new and better is not a problem.