Nvidia GeForce GTX 980 Ti 6GB Review

[Madmaxneo]

$650
http://www.guru3d.com/news-story/amd-releases-radeon-r9-fury-x-details-exclusive-photos.html

http://videocardz.com/56579/amd-radeon-r9-fury-x-official-specifications

Only 4GB VRAM, but it's HBM.

That sounds awesome! But here lately the guru3d site has been reporting contradicting numbers to what Tom's hardware reports. It originally reported the 390 and 390x to have better performance than the 980Ti and the reality is the 970 beats them both. Well at least per Tom's hardware. But I will wait for a few other reviews before actually deciding.

 

[loki1944]

They are basically overclocked 290Xs with more VRAM than most 290Xs.

"The 8GB of VRAM on this video card won't show its true potential and benefits until you install two of these video cards in a CrossFire configuration and run games at 4K. That is what it will take to experience the benefits of having 8GB of VRAM on this video card versus 4GB on the 290X. It will take multiple cards, running at 4K with high in-game settings to show us how smooth performance can be when we aren't bottlenecked by memory." -source: http://www.hardocp.com/article/2015/06/18/msi_r9_390x_gaming_8g_video_card_review/11#.VYc-PvlVhBc.

Not sure on the rendering part though, but in the hardcop review they said that if you o/c a 290X to the same speed as a 390X performance is the same. You might want to see what the Fury and Fury X do; might give you some better options. I really wish toms had stuff like rendering for GPUs in their benchmarks. I've thought about getting into 3D modelling, but time is a cruel mistress; would be nice to know though. From the benchmarks I've seen it seems like it puts the 390X roughly on par with a 980/780Ti depending on the game and resolution; usually the 980 wins. You may find this thread of interest: http://www.tomshardware.com/answers/id-2687108/cad-computer-build.html.

The RAM, both system and graphics, have an impact on the performance of graphics programs. Much less system RAM than graphics RAM these days but I have seen a lot of people recommend no less that 16gb of system RAM for rendering with 32gb being the max you might need. The 980Ti has 6gb of RAM and in the Tom's Hardware reviews more than blows away the 390x. In fact on those same charts the 970 outperforms the 390x in some tests but not by much. Your right it would be nice to have rendering benchmarks also listed but that would add a whole new set of specs with more time and money, and the people interested in the rendering benchmarks are very few compared to the rest. I can't get anything right now but I hope that when I can the choices are not so convoluted.

If I had the money right now I would get the 980Ti,,,

$650
http://www.guru3d.com/news-story/amd-releases-radeon-r9-fury-x-details-exclusive-photos.html

http://videocardz.com/56579/amd-radeon-r9-fury-x-official-specifications

Only 4GB VRAM, but it's HBM.

That sounds awesome! But here lately the guru3d site has been reporting contradicting numbers to what Tom's hardware reports. It originally reported the 390 and 390x to have better performance than the 980Ti and the reality is the 970 beats them both. Well at least per Tom's hardware. But I will wait for a few other reviews before actually deciding.

Yeah, my take is that the 390X is a hair better than the 290X and has more VRAM (aside from the few 8GB 290X variants). Also I'm sure drivers are hurting the 390X on a lot of games, particularly like Witcher 3; as I said elsewhere, the overall performance of my 780Tis is better than my 290Xs; same for Watchdogs and RAGE. AMD is not on the ball with their drivers or crossfire profiles lately. At its best the 390X roughly matches the 980 and at it's worst it gets beat by the 970. I'm not upgrading my 290Xs to 390Xs; I'm just going to slide my 780Tis to replace them and get 2 980Tis to go in my main rig; I'm getting three ROG Swift monitors and the VRAM on the 780Tis won't cut it. If the 780Tis were 6GB apiece then I probably wouldn't upgrade at all.

 

[Madmaxneo]

Yeah, my take is that the 390X is a hair better than the 290X and has more VRAM (aside from the few 8GB 290X variants). Also I'm sure drivers are hurting the 390X on a lot of games, particularly like Witcher 3; as I said elsewhere, the overall performance of my 780Tis is better than my 290Xs; same for Watchdogs and RAGE. AMD is not on the ball with their drivers or crossfire profiles lately. At its best the 390X roughly matches the 980 and at it's worst it gets beat by the 970. I'm not upgrading my 290Xs to 390Xs; I'm just going to slide my 780Tis to replace them and get 2 980Tis to go in my main rig; I'm getting three ROG Swift monitors and the VRAM on the 780Tis won't cut it. If the 780Tis were 6GB apiece then I probably wouldn't upgrade at all.

That sounds awesome!
Have possible breaks in the jobless atmosphere today!. I found a shop that doesn't do online applications and received two phone calls about my online resume! Someone is praying for me!!

 

[loki1944]

Yeah, my take is that the 390X is a hair better than the 290X and has more VRAM (aside from the few 8GB 290X variants). Also I'm sure drivers are hurting the 390X on a lot of games, particularly like Witcher 3; as I said elsewhere, the overall performance of my 780Tis is better than my 290Xs; same for Watchdogs and RAGE. AMD is not on the ball with their drivers or crossfire profiles lately. At its best the 390X roughly matches the 980 and at it's worst it gets beat by the 970. I'm not upgrading my 290Xs to 390Xs; I'm just going to slide my 780Tis to replace them and get 2 980Tis to go in my main rig; I'm getting three ROG Swift monitors and the VRAM on the 780Tis won't cut it. If the 780Tis were 6GB apiece then I probably wouldn't upgrade at all.

That sounds awesome!
Have possible breaks in the jobless atmosphere today!. I found a shop that doesn't do online applications and received two phone calls about my online resume! Someone is praying for me!!

That's good news, hope it goes well and it all works out for you. I've personally been wargaming the Titan X SLI, but I approach my budget limit there, I'd have to ditch a lot of other things I want to make it happen, so 980Ti SLI is the best bang for buck with good drivers for games right now (really upset about AMD falling flat on the games I mentioned, because they have great GPUs, just shoot themselves in the foot with their drivers/CF profiles). It would be a different story if AMD was keeping pace on the driver front, but they are not, I love 'em, and when they work they are on par with Nvidia, but I'm getting disillusioned after the triple headache I had with AMD drivers and Crossfire with Wticher 3/Watchdogs/RAGE. Sometimes my 290Xs are better than my 780Tis, but globally I'm finding Nvidia keeps pace much, much better on the driver front, despite my denial earlier this year.

 

[Madmaxneo]

I have heard that the worse things about the AMD cards are the sound and heat. I never thought I would be to concerned about either but with this build being so super quiet and me keeping an eye on the heat with my OCing, I think I've been spoiled.
I like the fact that the fury X comes with a water cooler and still only costs $650. I originally had my eye on the 980Ti Hybrid but decided that if I wanted to go that route I could easily do that down the road.

 

[loki1944]

I have heard that the worse things about the AMD cards are the sound and heat. I never thought I would be to concerned about either but with this build being so super quiet and me keeping an eye on the heat with my OCing, I think I've been spoiled.
I like the fact that the fury X comes with a water cooler and still only costs $650. I originally had my eye on the 980Ti Hybrid but decided that if I wanted to go that route I could easily do that down the road.

Yeah my ROG Matrix 290Xs run about 9C (48.2F)hotter under load than my ROG Matrix 780Tis. The 290Xs run fine at 94C, but it sounds like a helo about to lift off. Personally it doesn't bother me much since my hearing kinda sucks, but I can definitely see how that would drive somebody nuts. Power wise my 290X and 780Ti draw the same roughly ~750W under load, but the former has a 4770K with 16GB of RAM and 3 drives while the latter has a 5930K with 32GB of RAM and 9 drives. I find the 980Ti Hybrid takes up too much room; if it was a dual GPU with a single radiator then I would consider it.

 

[drugol]

So Fiji is out. Will there be an award for any of the two $650 cards?

 

[rdc85]

Yup result is out, 980ti is better than fiji.. (arguably)

OC-ed ver of 980ti is much more better..

 

[Madmaxneo]

Yup result is out, 980ti is better than fiji.. (arguably)

OC-ed ver of 980ti is much more better..

Where is this at?
Never mind found it.

I wouldn't say it is better I'd say it is pretty close to a tie. Though in one part of the article they did mention some visible screen spikes in one of the games.
For $650 it's not a bad deal. I just checked the 980Ti and it's only $680. I am an nVidia fan and I will be in the market to get one of these in the next 2 months (give or take). So hopefully the prices on the 980Ti will drop some.....

 

[Gurg]

Ok, I will preface this by saying I know I sound like a fanboy, but I still don't understand the point of a Titan X or now even a 980 TI. The 295x2 still beats both handily in every application at the $600 price point. Sure, two Hawaii XT GPU's on one PCB, but who cares? Not only does it run cooler, it clearly outperforms for cheaper. The 12 GB and 6GB VRAM that Nvidia chose turned out to be a gimmick. Not that anyone expected any differently, however when a 295x2 with only 4GB (VRAM doesn't stack with DX11) still handily outperforms the competition by quite a bit, I guess I don't understand going team green on this one.

Don't get me wrong, GM 200 is impressive, but its still hampered by GDDR5 and a 256 bit bus. I'm pretty excited to see what HBM will do for AMD's Fiji, if the rumors prove to be half true, then nothing Nvidia has this generation will even be remotely a competition.

@Arabian Knight - You will find that it is not really rudeness but ignorance and naiveté that really rules the day in the US. So many Americans never venture very far outside their borders, if at all, and so have no concept of what day-to-day living is really like in other countries like yours. The so-called news programs in this country are a joke as their idea of 'World News' is the President going to Camp David! The world is in chaos all around us with mass genocide going on in Africa and the Middle East and the news media is only concerned with the hundreds of morons burning and looting their own town because some idiotic thug got himself killed trying to take a cop's gun away from him. And that lunacy gets covered ad-nauseum like it is the only thing going on in the world. It's pathetic really but it all comes down to ratings. If the mainstream news organizations did cover the rest of the world like they should their ratings would plummet because Americans have become conditioned to believe that they are the center of the universe and aren't interested in the petty affairs of the others that share their world. So news about those other places would bore them and they would change the channel to something more useless like Big Brother or Survivor or one of a hundred other so-called 'reality' shows that only serve to stoke the cult of celebrity that is so popular in this country. It is an embarrassment! (Sorry this was off-topic but I couldn't help myself.)

As much as I hate off-topic discussions, Americans do not think they are the center of the universe. For one thing, you are putting a label on 300 million individuals and assuming they are all alike in their thoughts about their country and the earth. America is the one nation that is more involved in foreign affairs than any other nation. America gets involved in a lot of crap outside of the country. For instance, the Second Gulf War, Korean War, Vietnam War, and even WWII. I also hate to say it but other countries falsify their information a lot. In Russia, their textbooks teach false information. They make up their own history and teach it to the kids. In Germany, I'm sure the teachings of Hitler are much different than that of America.

but anyway, you put a label on so many people. I couldn't give a crap about celebrities, nor do I think America is the best country, but you are quite foolish in labeling us as stupid people who don't know an outside world exists.

Yup result is out, 980ti is better than fiji.. (arguably)

OC-ed ver of 980ti is much more better..

Where is this at?
Never mind found it.

I wouldn't say it is better I'd say it is pretty close to a tie. Though in one part of the article they did mention some visible screen spikes in one of the games.
For $650 it's not a bad deal. I just checked the 980Ti and it's only $680. I am an nVidia fan and I will be in the market to get one of these in the next 2 months (give or take). So hopefully the prices on the 980Ti will drop some.....

The Legit and Hardocp show the factory OC 980Ti to be clearly superior.

 

[ak47jar3d]

Yep, it's disappointing from amd to release a video card with hbm and have it lose to the gddr5 980ti. Mostly because everything else in amd's lineup are rebrands with just more vram. I guess amd still has fury and nano to go and I am uncertain which card the nano is competing against. The fury may move the poor value gtx 980 down in price since the fury card should be a cut down Fiji and should be significantly faster than gtx 980.

 

[bharathbigb]

IMHO,Fury X will outperform GTX 980 Ti and hopefully come very close to Titan X Performance Levels soon.I am talking about Windows 10,DirectX 12,Newer AMD Drivers and typical AMD Price cuts.It's gonna be a Great Deal.But of today,The 980 Ti Edges the Fury X slightly but I would still get the Fury X because,I still have some hope Windows 10,DX12 and Much Better,Newer Drivers from AMD is gonna make it much faster than What it is now.Remember the HD 4870 ? The One that Introduced GDDR5.Same thing happened.Typical AMD Hype and It didnt live up.But soon,Newer Drivers and Updates made it MUCH faster and Most People Loved it.I think the Same is gonna Happen to the Fury X,Real Soon.Fury X also NEEDS a BIOS Update that Unlocks Everything and removes Limits of OC'ing ASAP so you can OC the heck outta it.It's already Liquid Cooled so Temps are great.When Fury X is done with that,It will be the Second Fastest Single GPU just below Titan X.THEN,AMD will release the BEAST MONSTER in BOTH Performance and Power Efficiency compared to the R9 295X2 - FURY X2 For Me - Fury X Performance (Sooner or Later) > GTX 980 Ti and Fury X Price (Defenitly Soon !) < GTX 980 Ti.

 

[loki1944]

IMHO,Fury X will outperform GTX 980 Ti and hopefully come very close to Titan X Performance Levels soon.I am talking about Windows 10,DirectX 12,Newer AMD Drivers and typical AMD Price cuts.It's gonna be a Great Deal.But of today,The 980 Ti Edges the Fury X slightly but I would still get the Fury X because,I still have some hope Windows 10,DX12 and Much Better,Newer Drivers from AMD is gonna make it much faster than What it is now.Remember the HD 4870 ? The One that Introduced GDDR5.Same thing happened.Typical AMD Hype and It didnt live up.But soon,Newer Drivers and Updates made it MUCH faster and Most People Loved it.I think the Same is gonna Happen to the Fury X,Real Soon.Fury X also NEEDS a BIOS Update that Unlocks Everything and removes Limits of OC'ing ASAP so you can OC the heck outta it.It's already Liquid Cooled so Temps are great.When Fury X is done with that,It will be the Second Fastest Single GPU just below Titan X.THEN,AMD will release the BEAST MONSTER in BOTH Performance and Power Efficiency compared to the R9 295X2 - FURY X2 For Me - Fury X Performance (Sooner or Later) > GTX 980 Ti and Fury X Price (Defenitly Soon !) < GTX 980 Ti.

At this point I'm definitely getting 980Tis,the lack of crossfire profiles and generally poor performance of my 290Xs vs my 780Tis on a slew of demanding games this year is enough to dissuade me from going AMD again, driver updates are just too slow or, in the case of crossfire profiles, sometimes nonexistent. Overall smoothness on my Nvidia cards is better and more consistent as well. I'd love for AMD to match the current Nvidia gaming experience, but they don't, especially this past year, GTA V, TW3, Watchdogs were all much smoother on my 780Tis. Even AC4 and 2011's RAGE played much better on Nvidia. The only titles where AMD was clearly smoother for me were Thief and Shadow of Mordor, undoubtedly due to the VRAM being breached on the 780Tis. Smooth gameplay means FAR more to me than average FPS, and this year has been a heartbreaking highlight on how AMD is killing themselves with poor driver support compared to Nvidia. Unless AMD changes its ways they will absolutely get demolished by Nvidia's version of HBM. I sincerely hope AMD turns this around, but the underwhelming showing by their newest flagship product seems to say otherwise; the Fury X needed to handily beat the 980Ti/Titan X, and it did not.

 

[alidan]

IMHO,Fury X will outperform GTX 980 Ti and hopefully come very close to Titan X Performance Levels soon.I am talking about Windows 10,DirectX 12,Newer AMD Drivers and typical AMD Price cuts.It's gonna be a Great Deal.But of today,The 980 Ti Edges the Fury X slightly but I would still get the Fury X because,I still have some hope Windows 10,DX12 and Much Better,Newer Drivers from AMD is gonna make it much faster than What it is now.Remember the HD 4870 ? The One that Introduced GDDR5.Same thing happened.Typical AMD Hype and It didnt live up.But soon,Newer Drivers and Updates made it MUCH faster and Most People Loved it.I think the Same is gonna Happen to the Fury X,Real Soon.Fury X also NEEDS a BIOS Update that Unlocks Everything and removes Limits of OC'ing ASAP so you can OC the heck outta it.It's already Liquid Cooled so Temps are great.When Fury X is done with that,It will be the Second Fastest Single GPU just below Titan X.THEN,AMD will release the BEAST MONSTER in BOTH Performance and Power Efficiency compared to the R9 295X2 - FURY X2 For Me - Fury X Performance (Sooner or Later) > GTX 980 Ti and Fury X Price (Defenitly Soon !) < GTX 980 Ti.

At this point I'm definitely getting 980Tis,the lack of crossfire profiles and generally poor performance of my 290Xs vs my 780Tis on a slew of demanding games this year is enough to dissuade me from going AMD again, driver updates are just too slow or, in the case of crossfire profiles, sometimes nonexistent. Overall smoothness on my Nvidia cards is better and more consistent as well. I'd love for AMD to match the current Nvidia gaming experience, but they don't, especially this past year, GTA V, TW3, Watchdogs were all much smoother on my 780Tis. Even AC4 and 2011's RAGE played much better on Nvidia. The only titles where AMD was clearly smoother for me were Thief and Shadow of Mordor, undoubtedly due to the VRAM being breached on the 780Tis. Smooth gameplay means FAR more to me than average FPS, and this year has been a heartbreaking highlight on how AMD is killing themselves with poor driver support compared to Nvidia. Unless AMD changes its ways they will absolutely get demolished by Nvidia's version of HBM. I sincerely hope AMD turns this around, but the underwhelming showing by their newest flagship product seems to say otherwise; the Fury X needed to handily beat the 980Ti/Titan X, and it did not.

you realize the only reason the 980ti exists is because of the fury right? look at the performance between the ti and titan x, its miniscule at best in nearly all circumstances, the only reason that came out so soon after the titan x is because they got wind of what amd was putting out.

the fair comparison right now is fury x and the 980, and it handedly beats it, and looking at every other amd gpu damn near ever, a driver update or two and they will increase performance but a significant margin.
its also hard to discount the watercooler that is really overkill for that gpu.

the only reason you would need to crossfire with this card is if you were pushing 4k, and even than barely.

 

[loki1944]

IMHO,Fury X will outperform GTX 980 Ti and hopefully come very close to Titan X Performance Levels soon.I am talking about Windows 10,DirectX 12,Newer AMD Drivers and typical AMD Price cuts.It's gonna be a Great Deal.But of today,The 980 Ti Edges the Fury X slightly but I would still get the Fury X because,I still have some hope Windows 10,DX12 and Much Better,Newer Drivers from AMD is gonna make it much faster than What it is now.Remember the HD 4870 ? The One that Introduced GDDR5.Same thing happened.Typical AMD Hype and It didnt live up.But soon,Newer Drivers and Updates made it MUCH faster and Most People Loved it.I think the Same is gonna Happen to the Fury X,Real Soon.Fury X also NEEDS a BIOS Update that Unlocks Everything and removes Limits of OC'ing ASAP so you can OC the heck outta it.It's already Liquid Cooled so Temps are great.When Fury X is done with that,It will be the Second Fastest Single GPU just below Titan X.THEN,AMD will release the BEAST MONSTER in BOTH Performance and Power Efficiency compared to the R9 295X2 - FURY X2 For Me - Fury X Performance (Sooner or Later) > GTX 980 Ti and Fury X Price (Defenitly Soon !) < GTX 980 Ti.

At this point I'm definitely getting 980Tis,the lack of crossfire profiles and generally poor performance of my 290Xs vs my 780Tis on a slew of demanding games this year is enough to dissuade me from going AMD again, driver updates are just too slow or, in the case of crossfire profiles, sometimes nonexistent. Overall smoothness on my Nvidia cards is better and more consistent as well. I'd love for AMD to match the current Nvidia gaming experience, but they don't, especially this past year, GTA V, TW3, Watchdogs were all much smoother on my 780Tis. Even AC4 and 2011's RAGE played much better on Nvidia. The only titles where AMD was clearly smoother for me were Thief and Shadow of Mordor, undoubtedly due to the VRAM being breached on the 780Tis. Smooth gameplay means FAR more to me than average FPS, and this year has been a heartbreaking highlight on how AMD is killing themselves with poor driver support compared to Nvidia. Unless AMD changes its ways they will absolutely get demolished by Nvidia's version of HBM. I sincerely hope AMD turns this around, but the underwhelming showing by their newest flagship product seems to say otherwise; the Fury X needed to handily beat the 980Ti/Titan X, and it did not.

you realize the only reason the 980ti exists is because of the fury right? look at the performance between the ti and titan x, its miniscule at best in nearly all circumstances, the only reason that came out so soon after the titan x is because they got wind of what amd was putting out.

the fair comparison right now is fury x and the 980, and it handedly beats it, and looking at every other amd gpu damn near ever, a driver update or two and they will increase performance but a significant margin.
its also hard to discount the watercooler that is really overkill for that gpu.

the only reason you would need to crossfire with this card is if you were pushing 4k, and even than barely.

Bottom line is, reasons don't matter; performance and price do. The Fury X is AMD's new top card, so obviously it is tossed in with the 980Ti; especially since the Fury X's price point is even with the 980Ti. The performance is underwhelming ESPECIALLY when combined with how bad AMD drivers and profiles were this past year, undoubtedly due in no small part to their sluggish driver updates. As to CF, you need it more than "barely" @ 2160p for the most demanding games if you want to hit 60FPS+

Dragon Age Inquisition 2160p: Fury X 35.4 FPS, 980Ti 40.7 FPS, Titan X 41.7 FPS
Crysis 3 2160p: Fury X 37.9 , 980Ti 40.9 , Titan X 42.1
GTA V 2160p: Fury X 25 , 980Ti 27.8 , Titan X 28.6
Shadow of Mordor 2160p: Fury X 48.3 , 980 Ti 47.9 , Titan X 48.9
Source: http://www.anandtech.com/show/9390/the-amd-radeon-r9-fury-x-review

Metro Redux 2160p: Fury X 31, 980Ti 32, Titan X 34
Tomb Raider: Fury X 49, 980Ti 60, Titan X 68
Witcher 3: Fury X 29, 980Ti 30, Titan X 32
Watch Dogs: Fury X 40, 980Ti 43, Titan X 47
Battlefield Hardline: Fury X 40, 980Ti 42, Titan X 44
Source: http://www.techspot.com/review/1024-and-radeon-r9-fury-x/page5.html

Just look at the benchmarks on this website; a single of any card won't be enough to max demanding games at 4K, and not just by a little. At its price point Fury X was never designed for anything less than competing with Nvidia's top card(s); that much is obvious by how close the performance is. The competition for the 980 is the 390X which is underwhelming but priced competitively. To be honest after the aforementioned lack of effort in their drivers I don't care, I want smooth gameplay; Nvidia has proven this past year that they are more dedicated to refining their drivers than AMD is. If AMD was on the ball with the drivers then it would require some thinking required to choose between it and the 980Ti, but they're not , so there isn't. The fact that AMD has to resort to AIO just to manage their temps to be competitive with Nvidia's AIR coolers is also not a good sign; in addition, having to find a spot for two AIOs on top of CPU AIO isn't exactly great for a lot of people. So the way I see it, I can get smoother performance, often better performance, without having to jam a bunch of AIOs in my case, for the same price. That's like a win-win-win-win. The only part of their current lineup I'd be remotely interested in would be their dual GPU version of Fury for my secondary rig I keep for friends and family to play on. But only if it was cheaper than Nvidia's response.

 

[deuce_23]

IMHO,Fury X will outperform GTX 980 Ti and hopefully come very close to Titan X Performance Levels soon.I am talking about Windows 10,DirectX 12,Newer AMD Drivers and typical AMD Price cuts.It's gonna be a Great Deal.But of today,The 980 Ti Edges the Fury X slightly but I would still get the Fury X because,I still have some hope Windows 10,DX12 and Much Better,Newer Drivers from AMD is gonna make it much faster than What it is now.Remember the HD 4870 ? The One that Introduced GDDR5.Same thing happened.Typical AMD Hype and It didnt live up.But soon,Newer Drivers and Updates made it MUCH faster and Most People Loved it.I think the Same is gonna Happen to the Fury X,Real Soon.Fury X also NEEDS a BIOS Update that Unlocks Everything and removes Limits of OC'ing ASAP so you can OC the heck outta it.It's already Liquid Cooled so Temps are great.When Fury X is done with that,It will be the Second Fastest Single GPU just below Titan X.THEN,AMD will release the BEAST MONSTER in BOTH Performance and Power Efficiency compared to the R9 295X2 - FURY X2 For Me - Fury X Performance (Sooner or Later) > GTX 980 Ti and Fury X Price (Defenitly Soon !) < GTX 980 Ti.

its a bit of a long shot but for AMD i hope your right.

 

[burek]

Do the Specviewperf12 on the Fury X too and compare it to 980Ti plase !

 

[Herkety]

Since the 980 is in my price range, I will definetly be splurging.

 

[JackNaylorPE]

After looking through those numbers I have a need to add them up and see which one has an overall smaller number (I may do a total and an average in excel). It seems when looking at that chart there are more games with lower numbers on the windows 8.1 side. But to be honest those numbers are so small it does not make a difference at all. The difference between them never reaches more that 2 FPS! I have been using windows 8.1 pro (64 bit) for a while now and since installing it everything seems to run quicker and smoother than it did before. especially boot up times.

In that chart the only one that leaves a big margin is Firestrike, and I am not even sure what those high numbers represent.

The issue is that MS and everyone who knew how to use google was posting everywhere that 8.1 was faster than 7. It clearly was not.... No MS OS has ever been faster than the previous one. If you take existing hardware and put on a newer OS, it's a misnomer to call it an upgrade when the machine goes slower. Vista might be called an exception because it was a mes but it's successor could as easily been called Vista .1

 

[Mugglensu1984]

With the Gigabyte G1 GTX 980 Ti which CPU should I go for:

i7-4790K? or i7-6700K?

I mean will there be any noticeable difference in performance between these two quads?

 

[MetalSparks]

With the Gigabyte G1 GTX 980 Ti which CPU should I go for:

i7-4790K? or i7-6700K?

I mean will there be any noticeable difference in performance between these two quads?

4790k:
. (slightly) lower TDP at stock
. less money spent on DDR3 RAM vs DDR4 RAM

6700k:
. better chipset
. better integrated graphics (which you'd be (hopefully) disabling)
. (speculated) better maximum clock speeds
. DDR4 over DDR3; RAMDisks are reported to reach about 7GB/s read/write vs DDR3's speeds are about 5GB/s
. motherboards with M.2 x4 port(s) are cheaper than typical Z97 chipset boards with those ports
. (assuming Intel's CPU architecture for this CPU is equal to or greater than Devil's Canyon) 14nm lithography is more efficient than 22nm lithography and will perform faster (if high, efficient clock speeds are required on the CPU instead of simply using the frequency as a processor 'bandwidth' (better for emulating consoles and rendering video when CPU frequency is the bottleneck))

If you can utilize more features out of Skylake and have more money to spend on DDR4 RAM then go for it.

 

[Mugglensu1984]

With the Gigabyte G1 GTX 980 Ti which CPU should I go for:

i7-4790K? or i7-6700K?

I mean will there be any noticeable difference in performance between these two quads?

4790k:
. (slightly) lower TDP at stock
. less money spent on DDR3 RAM vs DDR4 RAM

6700k:
. better chipset
. better integrated graphics (which you'd be (hopefully) disabling)
. (speculated) better maximum clock speeds
. DDR4 over DDR3; RAMDisks are reported to reach about 7GB/s read/write vs DDR3's speeds are about 5GB/s
. motherboards with M.2 x4 port(s) are cheaper than typical Z97 chipset boards with those ports
. (assuming Intel's CPU architecture for this CPU is equal to or greater than Devil's Canyon) 14nm lithography is more efficient than 22nm lithography and will perform faster (if high, efficient clock speeds are required on the CPU instead of simply using the frequency as a processor 'bandwidth' (better for emulating consoles and rendering video when CPU frequency is the bottleneck))

If you can utilize more features out of Skylake and have more money to spend on DDR4 RAM then go for it.

A very succint reply. Thank you very much.

Actually I am on a rather tight budget.

I was decided on a X99-5820K-GTX980 build but after the 6700K and 980 Ti came out I am weighing the skylake route against my previous X99 build.

 

[JackNaylorPE]

My issue with 170 / skylake is that we have seen so many issues in recent generations with 1st stepping boards , .... some industry wide like P67, we all MoBos were affected with SAT problems .... to vendor specific issues like Asus's Z87 external drives wouldn't wake up and MSI's bad initial NIC firmware (at least that was fixed) that I am reluctant to recommend jumping in early. We recommend that users wait for at least the 2nd stepping to drop and let other on the bleeding edge deal with the "birthing issues".

 

[Alpha3031]

I think the GTX 980 can beat the Fury X in gaming if decently overclocked. Wonder which one can put out more kHashes/W though, since Maxwell is ok at mining and has much better power consumption.

 

[Madmaxneo]

I think the GTX 980 can beat the Fury X in gaming if decently overclocked. Wonder which one can put out more kHashes/W though, since Maxwell is ok at mining and has much better power consumption.

The last I heard was that the Fury X barely beat the GTX 970....