Should I get an AMD GPU for future proof DX12 gaming?

[winxtec]

Hi, I am very close to build a budget PC which is intended for multimedia, 3D Rendering, and Gaming, the only component missing in the system, it is the GPU. http://pcpartpicker.com/p/J9Dhcf

I was thinking for a GTX 970 ($380 tops), the main reason why Nvidia it is more relevant for me, it's because of the CUDA technology, but it is a proprietary GPGPU framework, it is very nice to render using only the GPU and real time render with Octane and other Apps with great performance results.
Also, PhysX and Gameworks are a nice addition in games.

The thing is, I saw that article pointing out that the R9 290X performs as well as the GTX 980 Ti in the first DX12 benchmark of an RTS game. It is an unfinished game of course, but, still is a bummer, it seems AMD went ahead with more mature drivers for DX12 and better tech.
''First DX12 gaming benchmark shows R9 290X going toe-to-toe with a GTX 980 Ti.''
http://bit.ly/1HXADRF

''Oxide Developer says Nvidia was pressuring them to change their DX12 Benchmark''
http://bit.ly/1Q74DB7

Should I get an AMD card? Perhaps as a R9 390, which cost almost the same as a 970, and it has 8GB, and more capable with DX12, and for 3D Graphics rendering going all the way using OpenCL, but I would sacrifice the chance of using CUDA in many Apps I really like.

Or, should I wait for the new series of Nvidia next year? Which I think it will be designed with all the functions of DX12 and HBM as well.

Thanks in advance.

 

[Petar Raickovic]

Well Nvidia cards as they say around Net and forums arent designe for dx12. Gtx 970 is 3.5 fast vram + 512 slow. Yes amd is better on 1 benchmark vs Nvidia.. Why do you need gpu? Play games or ? If it's not for games go with nvidia quadro or amd firepro

 

[winxtec]

Why do you need gpu? Play games or ? If it's not for games go with nvidia quadro or amd firepro

The GPU is intended for both, 3D Graphics design and render via GPU and gaming. But, can't spend more than $380 on it.
And I don't when exactly Nvidia will release the new series, as far as I know, will be somewhere next year.

 

[Petar Raickovic]

Do u need new gpu? Buy used one Ati or Nvidia if u have ( weak gpu at the moment ) r9 270-280-290 + x series are cheap used Or 600-700 Nvidia series... IF u want new me personally choose r9 390 over 970 gtx coz of 3.5 vram, games eating Vram these days. But Amd is power hungry if u dont have problem with Power supply, Heat is not the problem look on benchmarks they have same.

 

[gokitty199]

Why do you need gpu? Play games or ? If it's not for games go with nvidia quadro or amd firepro

The GPU is intended for both, 3D Graphics design and render via GPU and gaming. But, can't spend more than $380 on it.
And I don't when exactly Nvidia will release the new series, as far as I know, will be somewhere next year.

personally i would go with the 390 currently for that price point( i have a 970) and for current cards i belive it is a better choice.the 390 that is.

 

[Reaper_7799]

Well, what's going around the forums and all of the amd fanboys going crazy about is one game in a pre alpha stage, nowhere near release that has better performance increase. There are NO other games out at the moment and if one would base everything on one benchmark...remember furyx launch and the ONE benchmark they sent out before release...It was far cyr4, a game that runs better on amd cards and if you based your conclusions on that one benchmark, you would have lost out in the end.

Not all games will use a synch shaders to the point that it is having an affect on nvidia performance right now, but you also never know what nvidia can do about it. Not all games ended up using tesselation at all when it was a big selling point for amd before.

 

[Petar Raickovic]

Well, what's going around the forums and all of the amd fanboys going crazy about is one game in a pre alpha stage, nowhere near release that has better performance increase. There are NO other games out at the moment and if one would base everything on one benchmark...remember furyx launch and the ONE benchmark they sent out before release...It was far cyr4, a game that runs better on amd cards and if you based your conclusions on that one benchmark, you would have lost out in the end.

Not all games will use a synch shaders to the point that it is having an affect on nvidia performance right now, but you also never know what nvidia can do about it. Not all games ended up using tesselation at all when it was a big selling point for amd before.

we will see benchmarks on deus ex it will release very soon.. and it's full DX 12 game

 

[Reaper_7799]

Yeah and until then it's useless to say either way is all I'm saying.

 

[Petar Raickovic]

Yeah and until then it's useless to say either way is all I'm saying.

Well if u didnt read first of all i told guy to wait and buy Used gpu. If he rly needs upgrade for ( gta 5 witcher or what eva )..

 

[Reaper_7799]

Right but his specific question is regarding this and I was merely stating, it wasn't directed at you it was in general.

 

[winxtec]

Currently I don't have other decent GPU. I might go with a cheap GTX 760, work with it and to deal with games at 30FPS. Hopefully further benchmarks and tests will clear some doubts.
I guess we have to wait for a benchmark when Deus Ex: MD comes out in February next year.

 

[winxtec]

we will see benchmarks on deus ex it will release very soon.. and it's full DX 12 game

Soon? Deus Ex will come out in Feb, 2016, about 6 months away. Do official benchmarks comes out early in this year?

 

[bystander]

A few things to consider here:
1) There is no such thing as future proofing. By for the now, you never know what will happen in the future.
2) DX12 will be in a limited number of games for quite a while. Most games will still be based on DX11.
3) It's hard to base the future off of one game in alpha/beta stages, that is an RTS, which is far more likely to favor asynchronous shaders than your typical game.

That isn't to say that an AMD is a bad choice, only that you shouldn't put much weight on that one benchmark. If CUDA will help you with your current tasks, then I'd stick with that plan. If CUDA is simply something you think you "might" find useful, then that is about as useful as choosing a card for DX12, when there are no games that use DX12 yet.

 

[winxtec]

A few things to consider here:
1) There is no such thing as future proofing. By for the now, you never know what will happen in the future.
2) DX12 will be in a limited number of games for quite a while. Most games will still be based on DX11.
3) It's hard to base the future off of one game in alpha/beta stages, that is an RTS, which is far more likely to favor asynchronous shaders than your typical game.

That isn't to say that an AMD is a bad choice, only that you shouldn't put much weight on that one benchmark. If CUDA will help you with your current tasks, then I'd stick with that plan. If CUDA is simply something you think you "might" find useful, then that is about as useful as choosing a card for DX12, when there are no games that use DX12 yet.

I suppose you are right. I might just order a GTX 970, it is kinda a bummer with the 3.5 VRAM, but I don't plan to play above 1080p. And with 1664 CUDA cores will do properly on these projects I'm trying to develop.

 

[Petar Raickovic]

A few things to consider here:
1) There is no such thing as future proofing. By for the now, you never know what will happen in the future.
2) DX12 will be in a limited number of games for quite a while. Most games will still be based on DX11.
3) It's hard to base the future off of one game in alpha/beta stages, that is an RTS, which is far more likely to favor asynchronous shaders than your typical game.

That isn't to say that an AMD is a bad choice, only that you shouldn't put much weight on that one benchmark. If CUDA will help you with your current tasks, then I'd stick with that plan. If CUDA is simply something you think you "might" find useful, then that is about as useful as choosing a card for DX12, when there are no games that use DX12 yet.

I suppose you are right. I might just order a GTX 970, it is kinda a bummer with the 3.5 VRAM, but I don't plan to play above 1080p. And with 1664 CUDA cores will do properly on these projects I'm trying to develop.

Try gta 5 all on ultra and it will eat that 3.5 vram