Technician
Posts: 677 +115
Not here, the fanboys will start crying again.
Nvidia stock surges after company posts record sales
- Thread starter midian182
- Start date
Evernessince
Posts: 5,469 +6,158
Yep but from the most part you can get away with disabling options that have little to no visual impact and get a great 1440p experience. Motion blur, lens flair, and anything from Nvidia (of course, this last one goes for nearly everyone).
treetops
Posts: 3,064 +784
They can barely push 60 fps at 1080p with some new games. What games are you 2 playing?
https://www.techspot.com/review/1006-the-witcher-3-benchmarks/page3.html
https://www.techspot.com/review/1060-metal-gear-solid-phantom-pain-benchmarks/page2.html
Cant even hit 60 fps on arkahm knight... at 1440
https://www.techspot.com/review/1022-batman-arkham-knight-benchmarks/page3.html
fallout 4 1440 barely hits 60 fps on the 390x, if you bought the 390x for 1440, I guess if you only plan on maxing some new games at 1440 for a year or so..
https://www.techspot.com/review/1089-fallout-4-benchmarks/page3.html
Dying light
https://www.techspot.com/review/956-dying-light-benchmarks/page4.html
You guys playing pokemon island adventures? League of legends?
Last edited:
Technician
Posts: 677 +115
Vulkan
cliffordcooley
Posts: 13,141 +6,441
Vulkan? Yes!!! Cross-platform for the win.
Evernessince
Posts: 5,469 +6,158
I'd just like to point out the irrationality of some of those benchmarks you posted. Anti-Aliasing at 1440p, Nvidia features enabled? benchmarks are to test a graphics cards limits and not a real representation of the actual FPS you will be getting. 1440p doesn't require AA and that alone will give you a good 20 fps. Fallout 4 has Nvidia GodRays which tanks performance. Once again disabled without any visual degradation and excellent FPS.
Now are your actually reading these benchmarks and thinking to yourself "hey these would be settings I would use in real life if I had that video card" or are you just desperately clawing for any shred of evidence? Why would any sane AMD user turn features on that give then no benefits while greatly reducing FPS?
Technician
Posts: 677 +115
Why would they be using AMD to start with?
Evernessince
Posts: 5,469 +6,158
Could you please stop harassing everyone in this thread? If everyone followed this line of thinking Nvidia cards would be $500 for the entry level.
I have GTX 770 and play GTA V @ 4K.
Technician
Posts: 677 +115
Nonsense, plus all the shareholders would be even happier.
treetops
Posts: 3,064 +784
You ignores benchmarks\reality. I can't argue with your "beliefs" on how cards should be graded at 2k 4k.
Here is another fact about 4k. Put up real numbers or don't talk.
Source
https://www.techspot.com/community/...s-for-every-budget.223244/page-2#post-1520898
Last edited:
Evernessince
Posts: 5,469 +6,158
There's a couple problems with your post that makes me question if you were following the conversation at all. We were talking about the 290x / 390x, not the 390. Nice try at cherry picking results though. You also neglected to mention that the benchmarks you gathered your data from used different models of GTX 970s and R9 390s, which is going to add variability not attributed to the stock card.
Here, how about this
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-r9-390x-r9-380-r7-370,4178-6.html
One link so it's impossible to cherry pick like you tried 3-4 times and it's from a top tech website. The R9 390x beats the GTX 970 at every resolution but 1080p (which is really irrelevant because they both get over 60 fps).
treetops
Posts: 3,064 +784
The site you link shows 5 video games, 4 of the 5 do not have 60 fps at 1440p.
Evernessince
Posts: 5,469 +6,158
You really cannot follow a conversation, eh? This is the last time I'm going to repeat myself, if I have to do it again, I'm just going to ignore you.
BENCHMARK. This is pushing the settings to the max regardless of the impact of each setting. In real life, smart users know to disable a couple of settings that make no difference in graphics and give them more FPS.
Your obviously grasping for straws as anyone who's every PC gamed would know this. Tell me, does anti-aliasing make sense for 4k? Is 2x MSAA worth half your frames? Do you know how hard it even is to see jaggies at 4k?
Burty117
Posts: 5,108 +3,689
No but he is talking about 1440p... NOT 4k.
at 1440p anti-aliasing is actually quite nice to have on...
Technician
Posts: 677 +115
Why are you so excited about a top of the line card beating a second tier card anyway? It does pitifully against the top of the competition where its supposed to compete.
Evernessince
Posts: 5,469 +6,158
Subjective at best and your marginalizing the conversation. It wasn't only about Anti-Aliasing so stop trying to make it seem that way.
Matti
Posts: 14 +7
GTX970 performs perfectly fine @2K.
Evernessince
Posts: 5,469 +6,158
True, it does but not as well as the R9 290x / 390x
treetops
Posts: 3,064 +784
I'm sorry that your own link disagreed with your point and that no one made a benchmark based off your personal settings.
Evernessince
Posts: 5,469 +6,158
And I'm sorry that you have resorted to fallacies to try take a shot at me after you failed to prove your point. /Blocked
Technician
Posts: 677 +115
Considering that the leader in Graphics over all is Intel with about 75% of all computers running it, I wouldn't worry about nVidia becoming a monopoly, besides, there are already laws in place to prevent that. Ever hear of the Sherman Anti-trust Act?
AMD certainly has the cheapest products, best?, I don't think so.
Similar threads
