# Anybody regret going red?



## Champ (May 28, 2016)

So it wasn't until I saw Jayz 2 Cent recent aftermarket 1080 vid, that I realized I made a huge mistake. I need to stop trying to go against the grain and support the underdog. Nvidia is dominating for a reason and I saw it. I regret paying almost 500 for my nano months ago and I'm definitely regretting getting a freesync monitor now. We gotta be realistic. AMD will probably never catch Intel/Nvidia. Processor or graphics wise.


----------



## Kursah (May 28, 2016)

No but for what you got for the money at the time the R9 Nano was a good deal I'm sure, it's still no slouch now. Plus hindsight is always 20/20. I go for what works in my budget at that time...this last run the deal I got on a 980 Ti from a friend was the only thing stopping me from getting an R9 Nano around New Year's.

NV is the big dog....but AMD has some tricks up their sleeves coming into the future. NV also knows they can charge a hefty premium...so it depends on what performance you feel you need and how much you are willing to pay for it. You have a nice build and I'm sure it games like a beast.


----------



## AsRock (May 28, 2016)

Should of waited is all, and as seen as you have a nano i think that you should just wait for what AMD release as lets face it what you have now is pretty dam good anyways.

You can just send me your $$$ instead of just wasting it.


----------



## tabascosauz (May 28, 2016)

The appeal of the Nano wasn't even its performance; it was the performance for its 750 Ti size, so why it is of any surprise to you that Nvidia offers superior performance is something I don't understand.

You put the Nano in an ATX midtower. There were plenty of compelling options from AMD, some faster, some cheaper but you chose to spend more money on a niche card meant for <20L SFF.

I'd kill to have a Nano at my disposal; it's not a slow card.

If more raw performance is what you want, Nvidia had and still has what you need. AMD has not produced a single product in the past 5 years aside from the 7970 that had actually taken the crown in high end single GPU gaming.

That said, we're on the cusp of another huge new GPU season, so maybe you should wait it out. It's not like you're sitting on a 550 Ti, desperate to play games at decent fps.

I regretted going red, but for the reason that AMD completely lacked a directly comparable counterpart to the GTX 750 Ti, forcing me to choose a poorly built Club3D R7 265 that could not withstand the rigors of travelling across the Atlantic upwards of 5 times a year. Now, my GTX 750 Ti does most of what the R7 265 could, with no need for external power, less noise and lower temperatures, and much stronger construction with the help of a shorter PCB and a solid backplate.


----------



## GLD (May 28, 2016)

Champ, you have some great gear there, nothing to be bummed about. That kit makes some others jealous (like me). So fire that up on some triple A title's and be happy.

Do I regret my "red" rig? Not one bit. I may even upgrade my cpu to a 8350/8370 Wraith before ZEN. I will be going ZEN when it's that time. I like my pc's, and feel the need to have two at all times. A gamer and a lower powered daily driver, both 100% AMD of course.  I don't throw a lot of money at my rigs though because I have other hobbies, as can be seen in my avatar. I have two of those also, but want  to upgrade to a third, but that will be about a $13k purchase. Anyway... I am 100% happy with my red components.


----------



## Kursah (May 28, 2016)

Correct me if I'm wrong but I thought the 290X took the crown for a little bit?

Beyond size, having a full Fury X in a micro package where you could significantly reduce power consumption and use air cooling I feel were good points as well. Or increase power consumption adjustments and achieve Fury X performance or damn close seems like a solid move in my eyes.

Granted I didn't get to enjoy one in my personal build as I said before. I hope AMD continues to push that trend and I'm hoping to see them make more waves in higher performance categories while allowing more budget limited gamers to enjoy competitive products.


----------



## Disparia (May 28, 2016)

No, I don't. Mostly because who is ahead doesn't matter much when you buy mid-range. When I upgraded about 8 months ago I got the wife a GTX 960/4GB and myself a 380X. Practically identical with a few games favoring one or the other.


----------



## tabascosauz (May 28, 2016)

Kursah said:


> Correct me if I'm wrong but I thought the 290X took the crown for a little bit?
> 
> Beyond size, having a full Fury X in a micro package where you could significantly reduce power consumption and use air cooling I feel were good points as well. Or increase power consumption adjustments and achieve Fury X performance or damn close seems like a solid move in my eyes.
> 
> Granted I didn't get to enjoy one in my personal build as I said before. I hope AMD continues to push that trend and I'm hoping to see them make more waves in higher performance categories while allowing more budget limited gamers to enjoy competitive products.



On very literal grounds, that is true. But when most (less experienced) reviewers were hesitant to offer the clearly superior 290X on the basis that it sounded like a jet engine and was as hot as an oven, it clearly wasn't the champ that it could have perhaps been. Its time as #1 was very short-lived too.

I'm not saying that those aren't valid reasons for buyign the Nano. However, if you do, you also pay more for what is essentially a niche card. It doesn't matter what you use it for; at the end of the day, it doesn't change the fact that you paid for a product with a poorer performance to price ratio than its siblings, and it would seem a little bit odd to complain about "regretting paying 500 for the nano" as there were clearly other viable choices, OP just didn't choose to take them.

Not so doom-and-gloom though. As I said, we have a lot to look forward to this summer and fall. Now's not the time to make impulsive buying decisions on last-generation tech.


----------



## MrGenius (May 28, 2016)

I never intended on ever going red. Until I went searching for the fastest AGP card ever made. Which turned out to be the HD 3850 AGP. I was so impressed with that card mainly because of how well it overclocked. Which compared to my previous green cards was mind boggling(not to mention being cheaper than the nearest green competition). It made such a good impression on me I decided to stay red until given a good reason not to. I want a card that's fast enough and cheap enough. I'm not interested in something too expensive or too fast. I just want to play games at what I consider good framerates as cheaply as possible. My budget is typically no more than $300 or so. But if Nvidia wants to play ball at $380 for the GTX 1070. Game ON!! That gives me very good reason to switch back to green. And so I shall.

EDIT: What are we calling Intel? Blue? I finally went blue there because it's just stupid not too. In the beginning I was all about red there. I never even considered blue until Core 2 Duo. And I won't consider red there again unless they pull some pretty amazing trick out of their bag to take a step ahead of Intel. Yeah right. Like that's ever going to happen. Money is not an object for me there so much. I know AMD will always be cheaper. But will always be weaker. There's no probably about it.


----------



## the54thvoid (May 28, 2016)

Kursah said:


> Plus hindsight is always 20/20. I go for what works in my budget at that time...



Ding dong - right answer right there - close thread.

But seriously, you cannot live in the IT age and hold off until the next thing.  As @Kursah says, you budget for your hardware and (you research your hardware) and you buy your hardware.  No regrets.  My Kingpin 980ti is now slower than an overclocked 1080.  I spent >£800 on card plus imported water block.  I budgeted and I bought the fastest thing (and the sexiest hardware thing) that I wanted.  Happy.  

Is you Nano shit?  No.  Is it good - yes.  Does it do what you want it to do?  Yes, I imagine.

Tech hardware becomes old real fast - don't regret what you buy unless you bought it for weird brand loyalty reasons (that's the real mistake).


----------



## FordGT90Concept (May 28, 2016)

Champ said:


> Nvidia is dominating for a reason and I saw it.


Only one reason: TSMC 16nm.  All AMD cards available now are still on TSMC 28nm.  This is literally the only reason why GTX 1080 looks good.  It's going to largely vanish when Polaris launches on Samsung 14nm.



Champ said:


> I regret paying almost 500 for my nano months ago and I'm definitely regretting getting a freesync monitor now.


The former, well yeah.
The latter, well no.  Adaptive sync (which FreeSync is an implementation of) is the future.  Intel's going to start supporting adaptive sync soon which means G-Sync's days are numbered.  Hell, GTX 1080 should be able to support adaptive sync monitors if NVIDIA got off their asses and added support for it in their drivers.

Considering my monitors are over five years old and still running strong.  That Freesync monitor should be a good investment unless you've already made up your mind to go back to G-Sync.



Champ said:


> AMD will probably never catch Intel/Nvidia.


GCN is vastly superior to Pascal at DX12 and Vulkan (the present and future).  Where Pascal falls in FPS switching off of DX11, GCN gains FPS.  AMD is in a _very_ good position right now because of their close relationship with Microsoft, Sony, and (to a lesser extent) Nintendo.



Champ said:


> Processor or graphics wise.


The jury is still out on Zen.

On the graphics side, GCN is undeniably the best architecture out there; the problem is was that developers were coding for GeForce so they didn't put GCN to work.  That's changing and Pascal looks like a dinosaur because of it.  The _only_ thing going for Pascal is the ridiculously high clock speeds (1.8 GHz) compensating for the lackluster architecture.


----------



## Tsukiyomi91 (May 28, 2016)

in honesty, it's very hard for most of us to catch up with what Intel, AMD & Nvidia are pushing out of the factory... With Computex coming close, I think the new bloods will find the latest offering from both major & minor vendors to build their desktop rigs an interesting thing to do OR buy one from reputable PC builders from names like OCUK or CyberPowerPC.


----------



## P4-630 (May 28, 2016)

In the past I started with Ati x300, then x1600pro, GeForce 6800xxx and back to Ati x1950Pro, HD3870, HD4870, at that time I never regret that I bought Ati.
After those Ati cards I didn't had a desktop anymore for several years. I had Nvidia laptops. Years ago in my opinion Ati had better image quality than Nvidia in gaming, 
nowadays it all looks good to me for both brands, I prefer Nvidia now, also Nvidia had a better record for better drivers. I will be buying a GTX1070 soon.


----------



## Frick (May 28, 2016)

Kursah said:


> I go for what works in my budget at that time...



Aye this! The Nano was a great deal, and they've always had good stuff at various prices. Nvidia rule at the high end, but that's about it. Personally I've mostly been with AMD because they've offered the best bang for the buck I'm willing to spend (my current GPU was a gift).

The CPU bit is correct though. The only marketable AMD CPUs these days are some FM2+ stuff and AM1.


----------



## EntropyZ (May 28, 2016)

I feel similarly when I bought the R9 380 for 230 euros (new) from my local hardware retailer, when I got it it had fan issues for a month before AMD fixed it in the drivers, and even then the thing would downclock like crazy all the time and made some poorly optimized games macro-stutter. I thought the raw power of Red team was going to win over the GTX 960 which was cheaper and ran all games smooth at my monitors resolution.

I was always running an nVidia card since the Geforce 2 MX, from there it goes to 7200GS and then finally I got a good mid-range card for the first time in my whole life, it was the GTX 460 768MB in 2011 (for 100 pounds) which pretty was solid for 3 years before I sold it off and went looking for my next big jump in performance. (Most people probably think the GTX 460 is a damn dinosaur now, but hey it plays some recent ports from Square Enix at 1080p60FPS! Namely FFXIII)

Found a Gigabyte GTX 660 2GB last year for (for 100 euros) which doubled the performance in most games and I could finally play Skyrim w/ heavy graphical mods, but it it didn't have enough power even when OC'd to GTX 660Ti levels.

So in my mind the logical choice was which mid-range GPU to pick for 2016, should I keep the GPU that I spent money well on for once, or try to find an upgrade that might satisfy the ability to play heavily modded games without frame drops. I researched quite a bit before making the conclusion that on average the Red team was faster in most games so I began using the R9 380. Which is... decent, but for 230 euros a 20% FPS increase was worth it? Hell no.

But with AMD making their drivers really awesome nowadays (and they better keep at it) I think their cards hold up longer ever since the 7000 series came out. 28nm had a good run but overstayed it's welcome IMO.

I want to address something though, there's some FUD going around that nVidia is either dropping support for their GPU's really fast once a new generation comes out, or they deliberately are gimping their own GPU's since Maxwell architecture came out. The R9 280X/380 are now gnawing at GTX 780's heels in certain games, AMD hasn't made big changes since Pitcairn I think.

Though most GPU's start to really shine when OC'd. You can gain about 10 extra FPS from OC'ing a 750Ti. Which is impressive by my standards.

Anyway, I think the Nano really good, but for that kind of money... Ehhh. It seems like the software/games don't really take advantage of AMD GPU's. I still wish my old DX9 and DX11 titles had multi-thread for AMD GPU's, but Red team wussed out on better DX11 support for some reason, don't remember why.

Maybe I should try and sell the R9 380 and get the R9 480 which will have DX12_1 support when current Tonga GPU's have only 12_0. But the prices in my country are scary. You're expected to pay over 250 euros for a brand new mid-range GPU. Though in general the prices of newly released GPU's have been rising have they not?

There's just something about Radeon GPU's that makes me think they are being held back! I hate this feeling. It's the first time I've ever owned a Radeon card, and the experience in the beginning wasn't the best, but now I am enjoying the gaming bliss after a sequence of entry and mid-range cards not being able to run at 60 FPS for a modded game.

All in all, I believe I made the right choice in the end. I can OC my Gigabyte R9 380 G1 Gaming to 1200MHz rock-solid. Which brings it in terms of performance to about R9 380X levels. Which quite frankly should make this card last another 2-3 years before being replaced. Let's be fair, it is going to happen because I'm waiting for Elder Scrolls VI, Skywind, FF7 Remake and Resident Evil 2 Remake.

Sorry for not having tl;dr, I suck at making concise sentences.  human.exe stopped responding.


----------



## lZKoce (May 28, 2016)

@Champ  , does your PC do what you want it to do ? Don't compare with others - it destroys the joy in anything you do.

If you do animation and it renders as fast as you want it - what's the problem then ? 

I see elder people publish 3 books per year writing on a 15-year-old laptops with Windows XP and I have SSD's, 2nd monitors and can't get myself to finish a master thesis.....

Just focus on the purpose and enjoy your rig in my opinion.


----------



## Beertintedgoggles (May 28, 2016)

Wow, so this thread brought some good conversation but zero revelations......  sorry to be such an ass but lets be honest and not some touchy lovey feely bullshit for once.  The OP gave zero reasons for feeling like they were let down.  If your purchase left you wanting in any way, maybe you should have researched it *yourself* a bit better.


----------



## MrGenius (May 28, 2016)

FordGT90Concept said:


> GCN is vastly superior to Pascal at DX12 and Vulkan (the present and future).  Where Pascal falls in FPS switching off of DX11, GCN gains FPS.  AMD is in a _very_ good position right now because of their close relationship with Microsoft, Sony, and (to a lesser extent) Nintendo.


All of which are the reasons I won't be getting rid of my 280X. It's just about to become the card it was really meant to be. And with DX12 my GTX 1070 will complement it nicely in a dual card configuration.


----------



## the54thvoid (May 28, 2016)

FordGT90Concept said:


> Only one reason: TSMC 14nm.  All AMD cards available now are still on TSMC 28nm.  This is literally the only reason why GTX 1080 looks good.  It's going to largely vanish when Polaris launches on Samsung 16nm.
> 
> On the graphics side, GCN is undeniably the best architecture out there; the problem is was that developers were coding for GeForce so they didn't put GCN to work.  That's changing and Pascal looks like a dinosaur because of it.  The _only_ thing going for Pascal is the ridiculously high clock speeds (1.8 GHz) compensating for the lackluster architecture.



Man, you usually seem so reasonable.  Listen to what you just wrote.  Pascal is so good because of how high it clocks.  So if Nvidia make an architecture that can run such high clocks, it's NOT good?  WTF?  Read it again man.  What are you saying?  If Nvidia made the shittest most basic arch but it clocked at 4Ghz and blew the competition away, it would still be the fastest. 

Also, Pascal is not a dinosaur - you seem to be coming at this from an AMD will save the day standpoint.  They wont.  GP 104 is not the top offering.  It's all Nvidia needed to take the high ground again - until AMD release Vega.  Then Nvidia release GP102.  Also, if the custom cards crank up the power and GP104 hits the mid 2000's (who knows but rumours suggest it can) then Pascal's equivalent of 980 is going to be about 40% faster than a 980ti.  That's about 60% faster than Fury X in DX11 and 40% faster in DX12.

This is the GTX680 all over again.  And GCN is not the be all and end all.  If Pascal can beat GCN (Fiji) in a heavily Async game when Nvidia apparently can't do Async.... what does that say about GCN?  Use some logic.  AMD have said that Polaris is not about the high end.  So Nvidia have months and months of Pascal now before Vega hits.  Then it'll be GP102's turn.  I don't think Pascal will vanish at all when Polaris appears.  Remember as well that when they were both on 28nm, Nvidia had clocks at 1500 against AMD's 1200.  So we'll need to see how fast AMD can go at the lower size lithography.



Beertintedgoggles said:


> Wow, so this thread brought some good conversation but zero revelations......  sorry to be such an ass but lets be honest and not some touchy lovey feely bullshit for once.  The OP gave zero reasons for feeling like they were let down.  If your purchase left you wanting in any way, maybe you should have researched it *yourself* a bit better.



Ah - was it you that suggested Sam Adams Rebel IPA?  If so, my local store sells it - it's awesome...... Drinking some right now.


----------



## jboydgolfer (May 28, 2016)

ive never regretted my AMD gpu's, and regarding theyre CPU's, I only stay away from theyre Desktop CPU's.buy what u need , not what u want.  it takes control, but it works.


----------



## Beertintedgoggles (May 28, 2016)

the54thvoid said:


> Ah - was it you that suggested Sam Adams Rebel IPA? If so, my local store sells it - it's awesome...... Drinking some right now.



It's a good possibility.  Sam Adams also has Rebel Rouser at 8.4%.  Another good punch to sobriety is Rampant by New Belgium.  Another strong IPA @ 8.5%.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (May 28, 2016)

the54thvoid said:


> If Pascal can beat GCN (Fiji) in a heavily Async game when Nvidia apparently can't do Async.... what does that say about GCN?


Fiji is on 28nm and Pascal is on 16nm.  The fact Pascal doesn't do better in DX12 exposes Pascal's vulnerability.

There's also the distinct possibility that AMD could move some orders to TSMC 16nm.  If they do, it could largely (if not completely) erase the NVIDIA clock speed advantage.



the54thvoid said:


> So Nvidia have months and months of Pascal now before Vega hits.


NVIDIA needs a new architecture that's fully compliant with the paradigm shift (many commands in the processor simutaneously) caused by DX12, Mantle, and Vulkan.  Maxwell and Pascal are achitectures designed for DX11/OpenGL (one command at a time).


----------



## EntropyZ (May 28, 2016)

FordGT90Concept said:


> NVIDIA needs a new architecture that's fully compliant with the paradigm shift (asynchronous multithreading) caused by DX12, Mantle, and Vulkan.  Maxwell and Pascal are achitectures designed for DX11/OpenGL.



Which makes sense to NVIDIA for now because, seriously how many DX12 capable titles there will be released this year. And other loved games won't even get a half-assed DX12 patch.

Most of their cards still perform well enough anyway, so they're going to keep that full async for when they need the boost in performance. Sounds just like them to do it this way.

Edit: I am sitting at tech forum for hours again, that's not healthy is it? Or has the thread run it's course and I can go back to stalking TPU veterans? Joking, but seriously.


----------



## gasolina (May 28, 2016)

from my pov i don't think the 1080 is really much of a big step since the max overclock of a 980TI < 1080 about 15% and the 1080Ti is confirm, i go with the 1070 SLI but i will change to red team if they offer me smth interesting and a bit realistic


----------



## Champ (May 28, 2016)

Main reason I brought it was because a guy in my town had it and I could physically look at it and try it in case any issues arise. I was gonna go 980 TI or dual 980s, but didn't. It works well, don't get me wrong. I also have a 4K monitor on deck and the review I saw had the 1080 hold a steady 70ish fps maxed. SLI 1080s would probably hold anyone over for years to come. And the rumors of around 980 TI aren't too thrilling to me either. Their best efforts are NV last effort if true. Maybe I'm just rambling, but the performance of NVs cards are nothing short of amazing.


----------



## erocker (May 28, 2016)

I don't see regret between brands but more of buying a product before the product that replaces it comes out and is a better product. 

Right now one brand has the superior product. In some time the other brand will sell new products, then the other brand, then the other... and so on and so on...


----------



## natr0n (May 28, 2016)

I dont really have favorites, but nvidia does\runs opengl stuff better it seems.


----------



## Beastie (May 28, 2016)

Freesync is better value than gsync. The Nano is a decent card, though it is most useful in a smaller case, it is not bad value for money as long as you didn't buy it before the prices came down.

So I'd say your money was not squandered.

This is from someone who bought a 980ti and a gsynch monitor .


----------



## Devon68 (May 28, 2016)

I didn't regret it. Could have gone with a GTX 660 for the same price at the time but still I don't regret it.


----------



## Jack1n (May 28, 2016)

Yes lets compare an Nvidia card from a generation ahead and say how bad AMD is not being as fast with an older gen card, i regret going green and will wait for Vega to go red again.


----------



## fritoking (May 28, 2016)

These threads make me chuckle a bit. I have ALWAYS  been budget conscious when I build . I have used both Intel and amd cpus and amd/ATI and Nvidia gpus....and before everyone floods me with graphs/charts and numbers... IN MY EXPERIENCE,  I have never really been dissatisfied  with any amd product I have owned, nor have anyone I built for. Sure, your not getting max frame rates, but I've always had a smooth game play experience.  The only issue I ever had was a faulty 4830 that gave me blues screens , replaced it with a 4870 and all was right with the world, kids were happy,I was happy and the wife was happy we had nice pcs that did what we wanted for a good price.....and that was all that mattered.


----------



## Brusfantomet (May 28, 2016)

First time? yes. I got a x800xt pe when i wanted a 6800 GT, a leaky cpu block from a TT set killed that card, because i tightened the compression fittings to tight. got two 7800 GTs in SLI that was replaced with a HD4850, and that change i do not regret. After that it has been a string of nice cards (5870, CF 6950, 290x and XF 290x).

As for you, is the nano fluid in your games? if so then just enjoy it. I remember when i built my previous machine, a i7 920 with the 4850 at the time, the first news article i read was a review of the at the time brand new LGA 1156 cpus, faster, cheaper and less power hungry than the 920.
In the end, how many are still rocking a lga 1156 setup? compared to lga 1366?


----------



## Estaric (May 28, 2016)

Champ said:


> Main reason I brought it was because a guy in my town had it and I could physically look at it and try it in case any issues arise. I was gonna go 980 TI or dual 980s, but didn't. It works well, don't get me wrong. I also have a 4K monitor on deck and the review I saw had the 1080 hold a steady 70ish fps maxed. SLI 1080s would probably hold anyone over for years to come. And the rumors of around 980 TI aren't too thrilling to me either. Their best efforts are NV last effort if true. Maybe I'm just rambling, but the performance of NVs cards are nothing short of amazing.


Isnt that how it always goes though? AMD will make a push back, just gotta give it time. I for one do not regret going red i got my current 280X for $175 and i hold no regret. to me as long as its is capable of playing games then why worry about whos side your on. Isnt that why most of us buy these amazing cards to play games sure the 1080 is simply amazing but its not like its required to play games.


----------



## AsRock (May 28, 2016)

Champ said:


> Main reason I brought it was because a guy in my town had it and I could physically look at it and try it in case any issues arise. I was gonna go 980 TI or dual 980s, but didn't. It works well, don't get me wrong. I also have a 4K monitor on deck and the review I saw had the 1080 hold a steady 70ish fps maxed. SLI 1080s would probably hold anyone over for years to come. And the rumors of around 980 TI aren't too thrilling to me either. Their best efforts are NV last effort if true. Maybe I'm just rambling, but the performance of NVs cards are nothing short of amazing.



Only due to the nm shrink, if any thing you should of waited for that like i and many others will unless moneys no object.


----------



## flmatter (May 29, 2016)

Nope I am happy with my 390 and 8320  then again as long as it does what I want it to do then I will be happy.


----------



## LightningJR (May 29, 2016)

How can anyone be unhappy with buying something they really want? If there are no issues with the product when you got it then you should be thrilled.

It's not as if you were fooled in to buying something that you didn't want. There were reviews of the Nano, also it was pretty well known that the new nm shrink was on it's way.

NVidia has the new shrink out first and the price/performance ratio is off the charts yes but unless you had insider info you can't bring that in to your decision making, it's not as if you can tell the future.


Honestly I agree the one of the above posts, it's on you man, all the info was there for you about the Nano and if you browse tech sites and forums you would have known the shrink was on the way yet you bought the Nano anyway.


----------



## Fluffmeister (May 29, 2016)

There are two options in the CPU market, and there are two options in the GPU market.

Sad state of affairs frankly, but hey ho what can you do?


----------



## GoldenX (May 29, 2016)

I don't regret having a GCN GPU, even if it's the smallest one. Every new function added is compatible with it, and by now it has excellent drivers.


----------



## eidairaman1 (May 29, 2016)

No Regrets here. DX12 Compatible unit here


----------



## -1nf1n1ty- (May 29, 2016)

I feel the same when I purchased my r9 390, some regret. But I realize that I am not always going ot have the best for no more than like a week haha. always something better than what you have. I appreciate all the help that I got deciding on a r9 390, its a great card and I can run everything at max and then some!


----------



## Kanan (May 29, 2016)

I don't understand you @OP. You have a great GPU and a great monitor. AMD is slower atm yes, but that will eventually change sometime - AMD was always better in one chart though, price to performance. HD 5850/5830/5770, HD 6970/6870, HD 7870/7950, R9 270X/280X/290X custom (compared to 780 Ti it was cheaper), R9 390, R9 Nano (compared to GTX 980, faster and less expensive after price reduction). Regret is something useless. You have a good PC, enjoy it. Maybe you bought the card too late, maybe you should have waited for the 16/14nm GPUs, that's your "mistake" maybe, but not going to the "red" camp. That's basically just a color. 

Coming from a long time user of both camps.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (May 29, 2016)

Champ said:


> Main reason I brought it was because a guy in my town had it and I could physically look at it and try it in case any issues arise. I was gonna go 980 TI or dual 980s, but didn't. It works well, don't get me wrong. I also have a 4K monitor on deck and the review I saw had the 1080 hold a steady 70ish fps maxed. SLI 1080s would probably hold anyone over for years to come. And the rumors of around 980 TI aren't too thrilling to me either. Their best efforts are NV last effort if true. Maybe I'm just rambling, but the performance of NVs cards are nothing short of amazing.


SLI is another thing DX12/Vulkan makes obsolete.  SLI was implemented entirely in drivers.  DX12/Vulkan abstracts the hardware so if the game developer programs for it, it can use as much hardware as is available in the system.


----------



## HumanSmoke (May 29, 2016)

Champ said:


> I regret paying almost 500 for my nano months ago


Don't sweat it. There are plenty of people who swear that GCN is getting better with age - all you have to do is find one with money as well as that conviction.
Sell the card and bankroll the next purchase....it doesn't guarantee that you won't have buyers remorse again in a few months though.



FordGT90Concept said:


> Fiji is on 28nm and Pascal is on 16nm.  The fact Pascal doesn't do better in DX12 exposes Pascal's vulnerability.


Can't say I've seen the GTX 1080 running second in a lot of benchmarks. Care to point them out?


FordGT90Concept said:


> There's also the distinct possibility that AMD could move some orders to TSMC 16nm.


Not a trivial exercise for a monolithic IC, and bound to add delays as well as the possibility of issues in securing enough wafer starts. Still, if the persistent rumours of Polaris delays (since added to by Kyle Bennett in no uncertain terms) have some basis in fact - which looks likely given Koduri's bullish claim that AMD on 14nm was "several months ahead" of Nvidia on 16nm as little as four months ago, yet the Polaris NDA still looks to be a month away.


FordGT90Concept said:


> If they do, it could largely (if not completely) erase the NVIDIA clock speed advantage.


I think the "could", "if", "maybe" conditions are too pervasive at this point in time to start hanging the celebratory bunting. At some point, people have to face up the state of play rather than pin an argument on best case scenario.


FordGT90Concept said:


> NVIDIA needs a new architecture that's fully compliant with the paradigm shift (many commands in the processor simutaneously) caused by DX12, Mantle, and Vulkan.  Maxwell and Pascal are achitectures designed for DX11/OpenGL (one command at a time).


DX11 isn't going away, and DX12 isn't going to sweep in and change the gaming landscape in the near/medium future. By the time DX12 becomes a significant factor in gaming, both vendors will be on succeeding Volta/Navi architectures. This isn't much different to many other ATI/AMD initiatives - innovative, but introduced so early as to be almost superfluous. Remember when ATI championed tessellation a decade and a half ago?


----------



## GoldenX (May 29, 2016)

I remember ATI during the X1000 era, saying that shader count will be very important in the near future. Was true.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (May 29, 2016)

HumanSmoke said:


> Can't say I've seen the GTX 1080 running second in a lot of benchmarks. Care to point them out?


I'll show you when Polaris comes out.


----------



## MrGenius (May 29, 2016)

Snowball's chance in Hell you will. But hey...anything's possible.


----------



## TheGuruStud (May 29, 2016)

and upgrade to Vega, later. You already have the monitor. No point going backwards on that front.


----------



## AsRock (May 29, 2016)

Not at all, how ever the only reason up got the 290X was with it having 2GB extra over my 6970 which i was seeing hitting the 2GB point a lot. Other wise i would of waiting for the nm shrink.


----------



## 5DVX0130 (May 29, 2016)

Months ago =/= NOW.

There is no point in comparing new to old. Unless you want to wait forever, since there is always something better around the corner. I’m sure you got plenty of good use out of your card, and will get even more in future in case you don’t upgrade.

Off course you can get the 1080 now (if you manage to find a place that’s not sold out) and in a couple months complain how much better the 1080Ti/Vega/490x is….


With that out of the way… NO I never regretted going red.

Did I regret some of my purchases? YES, but that is 100% due to the manufacturers producing POS parts.

Nowadays I just avoid anything Asus and in some cases Gigabyte, and off course I mostly buy after the item has been out for a couple of months.


----------



## Eric_Cartman (May 29, 2016)

I don't regret going with my 390 at all.

It is faster than the 970 and cost less.

What is to regret?

Because nvidia thinks they have the lead they overprice all their crap.


----------



## GoldenX (May 29, 2016)

And I will not forgive them for promising Vulkan and DX12 on Fermi and retracting at the last moment.


----------



## Totally (May 29, 2016)

OP, your post makes no sense. Did a 1080 exist at the time you made your purchase? You say that you are regretting the purchase of your Nano because feel like the 1080 is putting it to shame but then later alternative you were considering was a 980 ti? Well guess what a 1080 also craps on too since that is the card that it is replacing? I don't feel out of line saying this thread is merely bait.


----------



## ivan375 (May 29, 2016)

Real regret would be spending $700 for the gtx 1080 reference/founders that struggles to hold a factory boost without throttling. But even with a real 1080, wouldn't you just end up regretting that when Gp102 or vega comes out?


----------



## Absolution (May 29, 2016)

I dont regret but I do want to keep an eye out on game titles being overtaken by vendors. I thought AMD backed GCN chips in consoles was going to change things, but nvidia who always has more cash manages to get games looking good for their cards through GameWorks. My next card will be a 1070 depending on benchmarks and the Polaris.


----------



## GhostRyder (May 29, 2016)

Regret going red?  No, personally this is the second generation of cards I have owned from the red team (I have had only 1 other ATI card that I purchased and it was not my main machine) and still have not regretted it.  Love my Freesync monitor (though that was something I would refer to as a gift), still like my 290X's which have served me for quite some time now without any hiccups.  I guess my only regret would be buying the third one as I have basically decided 2 cards is the best power case now since 3 and 4 card support seems to be getting more and more meh but  Idont regret the decision to purchase an AMD card.

Purchased my twin HD 6990's for dirt cheap, loved them both.  Purcahsed the 290X trio because they matched the 780ti and came with an extra 1gb of ram which to me meant better.  Right now, I will still wait a bit for Vega just to see what the big chips are (Unless I decide to get 1080's and a ultra wide G-Sync Monitor) like but for now I am still happy.


----------



## JrockTech (May 29, 2016)

EntropyZ said:


> I feel similarly when I bought the R9 380 for 230 euros (new) from my local hardware retailer, when I got it it had fan issues for a month before AMD fixed it in the drivers, and even then the thing would downclock like crazy all the time and made some poorly optimized games macro-stutter. I thought the raw power of Red team was going to win over the GTX 960 which was cheaper and ran all games smooth at my monitors resolution.



Just wanted to let you know I had that issue with my R9 380. Always downclocking in games and benchmarking apps. I use MSI afterburner with PowerPlay support and it forces a nice stable clock . Great card for the money when that issue is not getting in it's way.


----------



## Caring1 (May 29, 2016)

ivan375 said:


> Real regret would be spending $700 for the gtx 1080 reference/founders that struggles to hold a factory boost without throttling. But even with a real 1080, wouldn't you just end up regretting that when Gp102 or vega comes out?


Proof?
I haven't seen signs in reviews or benchmarks of throttling, unless you mean the CPU being the bottleneck.


----------



## RejZoR (May 29, 2016)

R9 Fury is still a very capable card even though it's slower than GTX 980Ti or GTX 1080. Going Nano, you should know it's very power conservative card. But you can OC the normal Fury's nicely. It has some gains at very small clocks. I wonder how Polaris will end up...


----------



## FordGT90Concept (May 29, 2016)

Caring1 said:


> Proof?
> I haven't seen signs in reviews or benchmarks of throttling, unless you mean the CPU being the bottleneck.


I think he's talking about this:
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/NVIDIA/GeForce_GTX_1080/29.html
Founders Edition settles at around 1.7 GHz.


----------



## HumanSmoke (May 29, 2016)

Caring1 said:


> Proof?
> I haven't seen signs in reviews or benchmarks of throttling, unless you mean the CPU being the bottleneck.


The poster is referring to some of the testing done. Basically, sites reviewed the card at stock fan profile and at default max temp setting of 83C ( 92C is the maximum thermal limit) - card utilities not being ready for primetime probably didn't help. It is similar (but not as serious as the issues that plagued the reference 290/290X at launch).
Some of the temp torture testing seemed to be a bit OTT. Gamersnexus for instance disabled airflow across the test system:


> This test was conducted over a 2-hour period (~8000 seconds). Rather than Kombustor, we used a real-world game to analyze performance and throttles in gaming scenarios. DiRT Rally was used at its maxed-out settings (4K, 8-tap MSAA, advanced blending, Ultra settings) to torture the card. To further amplify the thermal torture and create somewhat of a worst-case scenario, we also disabled all three front intake fans. This left the GPU entirely to its own devices – mostly the VRM blower fan and alloy heatsink / vapor chambers – to cool itself.


Probably not the best indicator of real world usage.


FordGT90Concept said:


> I'll show you when Polaris comes out.


So that's AMD's cunning plan - delay Polaris until the majority of games in benchmark suites are DX12. Truly masterful - Presumably, RTG stands for Rollin' Tokin' Ganja


----------



## FordGT90Concept (May 29, 2016)

No, no, Polaris cards should be arriving either in late June or July and the cards should do as well or better at DX12/Vulkan than GTX 1080 but they'll be a ways behind GTX 1080 at DX11/OpenGL.  Buying Polaris would mean buying a card for better aggregate performance a year or two down the road where buying Pascal would be for better performance now.  I'd argue people like me (who only upgrades graphics cards every 3-5 years) are better off with a Polaris card than a Pascal card.


I'm not convinced Volta will be any better than Pascal at DX12/Vulkan.  Volta is to Pascal as Fiji was to Grenada.  If NVIDIA fixes it, it's not coming until after Volta.


----------



## RejZoR (May 29, 2016)

AMD being late again to the party is really not helping. They were late with R9 300/Fury series and they are late again with Polaris. Don't they get it that everyone into higher end graphic cards is going to be rocking GTX 1000 series from NVIDIA before their Polaris gets released, everyone will already forget about Polaris as they'll already have the latest card. We know that lower end cards is what makes the revenue, but you can't sell those either no matter what if your top end is inferior. People, even total noobs only hear X brand has the fastest card on market and they want stuff from that company for money they can afford, even if those cards don't even virtually compare to the high end. It's how people think.

If AMD sped up the release to be around the same time as NVIDIA's, even if their cards are slightly slower, but they can convience people their features or power efficiency is better, there are people who will consider those despite cards being slower or whatever.

I really hope Polaris will work out well for AMD, but being slow again is not doing in their favor at all...


----------



## Kanan (May 29, 2016)

RejZoR said:


> AMD being late again to the party is really not helping.


1 month after is hardly "late", I remember GTX 680 was released 3 months after HD 7970, that is "late" (and Nvidia still had no problems). AMD will be just doing fine I think.


----------



## RejZoR (May 29, 2016)

Paper launch, sure. And cards available when? In autumn?


----------



## Kanan (May 29, 2016)

RejZoR said:


> Paper launch, sure. And cards available when? In autumn?


I thought paper launch is supposed to be in the next days? Well, in my books even 2 months isn't really late, but depends really if the GPUs are good or not. The GTX 680 was late but it was very good, that made more than up for it being late.


----------



## Hokum (May 29, 2016)

Having just bought a Fury X for less than a 970 I can honestly say no, no regrets...


----------



## 5DVX0130 (May 29, 2016)

7


Kanan said:


> I thought paper launch is supposed to be in the next days? Well, in my books even 2 months isn't really late, but depends really if the GPUs are good or not. The GTX 680 was late but it was very good, that made more than up for it being late.



Let’s see…

At CES 2016 we got a confirmation of Polaris releasing before the "back to school" season (mid-July through early/mid-September).

The “Radeon Polaris Tech Day” event has the NDA expiry date set on the June 29.

Seeing as there are still no “leaks” for Computex it’s not looking good. Which means we will most likely get more slides and nothing else.


So at the moment it looks like a paper launch at the end of June, and release late July – August.


----------



## vega22 (May 29, 2016)

so champ is this whole thread just so you can cry about your buyers remorse now a newer product has comer out?

welcome to the real world 

edit

other than the couple of issues i have had with the 16.x family of drivers my exp of the red team has been great since i got a 7950 4 years ago. during this same time i have lost count of the times a driver that worked great on my fermi would be a dog on my maxwell or kepler powered system or vice versa.

people bang on about how nv are doing the right thing by not bothering with dx12/vulcan but what about the fact most games are still dx9? nv performance tanks older games too :|


----------



## SonicZap (May 29, 2016)

I don't at all regret buying a HD 7850 for 150€ back in late 2013. The green alternative would've been a GTX 660 for 200€, which would've been as expensive as the more powerful HD 7870.

GCN has simply aged far better than Kepler. Back when I bought the HD 7850, the GTX 660 was generally 5-15% ahead in games. However, 2½ years later, in TPU's GTX 1080 review, we see the R7 370 (= HD 7850 re-brand) doing better than a GTX 760, which is significantly faster than the GTX 660. Which means that within 2½ years, the initially slower and 25% cheaper HD 7850 has surpassed the GTX 660 in performance by a good margin 

I'm looking forward to upgrading to either a Polaris-based card or a GTX 1060. The biggest risk I see with going AMD again is that their financial situation looks very bad. If AMD dies, it's likely that driver support for my valuable GPUs will come to an end.

As for my Phenom II, the alternative for the same price when I bought it would've been a Sandy Bridge Core i3. Which would've had just slightly better single-threaded performance, but far worse multithreaded performance. So I'm happy with the Phenom II as well.


----------



## the54thvoid (May 29, 2016)

SonicZap said:


> GCN has simply aged far better than Kepler. Back when I bought the HD 7850, the GTX 660 was generally 5-15% ahead in games. However, 2½ years later, in TPU's GTX 1080 review, we see the R7 370 (= HD 7850 re-brand) doing better than a GTX 760, which is significantly faster than the GTX 660. Which means that within 2½ years, the initially slower and 25% cheaper HD 7850 has surpassed the GTX 660 in performance by a good margin



It's quite unscientific to compare cards that are 2 years apart when the gaming suite has also changed.  AMD has got better at the developer relations such that the horrendous bias (WoW) of certain games becomes less obvious.  But as a nod to the topic, if the card you bought for that purpose there and then still performs as it did - no regrets.

Further, if people keep saying that AMD get it right 2 years later you need to realise that is a bad thing for the company.  The GTX660 held it's own for a year, that's all it needed to do.  Two years on it's getting beaten by a card it beat on release - that has no relevance.  If you buy a card today that performs worse than a competitor right now because in two years it will be better - you have some pretty off base buying habits.  Given that in 2 years time a similarly priced card will wipe the floor with your initially under performing card, the initial decision is illogical.

You don't buy a tech piece because in two years time it will out perform the other card you could have bought.  You might do that with shares but not technology.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (May 29, 2016)

SonicZap said:


> I'm looking forward to upgrading to either a Polaris-based card or a GTX 1060. The biggest risk I see with going AMD again is that their financial situation looks very bad. If AMD dies, it's likely that driver support for my valuable GPUs will come to an end.


AMD will likely sell off the Radeon Technologies Group before it comes to that.


----------



## the54thvoid (May 29, 2016)

FordGT90Concept said:


> AMD will likely sell off the Radeon Technologies Group before it comes to that.



To Intel.... (courtesy of reading @HumanSmoke's link).


----------



## SonicZap (May 29, 2016)

the54thvoid said:


> Further, if people keep saying that AMD get it right 2 years later you need to realise that is a bad thing for the company.  The GTX660 held it's own for a year, that's all it needed to do.  Two years on it's getting beaten by a card it beat on release - that has no relevance.  If you buy a card today that performs worse than a competitor right now because in two years it will be better - you have some pretty off base buying habits.  Given that in 2 years time a similarly priced card will wipe the floor with your initially under performing card, the initial decision is illogical.


True, buying a graphics card expecting performance gains in the future would be dumb. Getting increased performance relative to the competition over time is a nice bonus though - but you shouldn't expect it when buying a card.

However, even with the performance at the time, a GTX 660 wouldn't have been a good buy. It was as expensive as the even back then higher performing HD 7870, which now appears to be quite close to the GTX 770 in the latest games (based on the same TPU review that I linked to earlier).

About the HardOCP article, the author seems quite bitter so I'd take it with a good deal of salt. Considering that the author has participated in lots of AMD-hosted GPU events before, the information he has could be correct. But the bitter and unprofessional journalism gives the impression that part of the negativity could have something to do with the author's personal emotions towards AMD rather than actual information. In other words, I'll believe it when I see it.


----------



## Aquinus (May 29, 2016)

I like my 390, no complaints or regrets from me... granted, I spend most of my time on my tower working, not gaming. However when I do game, nothing happens that makes me want to tweak anything. When I overclock, it's because I want to, not because I need it. The only exception to that statement might be Eyefinity as it is a little bit of a push for the 390 but, it's not like I'm doing that often. The 3 monitors is more for work than play so I end up gaming at 1080p most of the time. When your GPU isn't running full tilt, there is almost never a reason to complain about it unless there are graphical glitches which I only encounter when I overclock the piss out of it.

AMD has its strong points just as nVidia does. I just think that AMD GPUs are better at compute and have a better lifespan and longevity. nVidia tends to drop driver support earlier than AMD but, that may just be hardware changes. Most GCN based GPUs still have driver support, even GCN 1.0 cards. My aging 6870s just had driver support dropped after 6 years of service. That's not too shabby. So, as someone who can no longer upgrade his machine often due to fiscal constraints due to life (having a family,) makes how much I get out of my hardware far more important than it used to be.

tl;dr: No regrets. What AMD has to offer appeals to me even if it's not always the fastest GPU you can buy.


----------



## the54thvoid (May 29, 2016)

SonicZap said:


> True, buying a graphics card expecting performance gains in the future would be dumb. Getting increased performance relative to the competition over time is a nice bonus though - but you shouldn't expect it when buying a card.
> 
> However, even with the performance at the time, a GTX 660 wouldn't have been a good buy. It was as expensive as the even back then higher performing HD 7870, which now appears to be quite close to the GTX 770 in the latest games (based on the same TPU review that I linked to earlier).
> 
> About the HardOCP article, the author seems quite bitter so I'd take it with a good deal of salt. Considering that the author has participated in lots of AMD-hosted GPU events before, the information he has could be correct. But the bitter and unprofessional journalism gives the impression that part of the negativity could have something to do with the author's personal emotions towards AMD rather than actual information. In other words, I'll believe it when I see it.



It didn't sound bitter to me.  Given he states very clearly 



> Full disclosure - HardOCP was not invited to this weekend’s launch in Macau as AMD PR has made a decision to no longer brief this site with the rest of the industry. That’s well within AMD’s rights to do, but that is telling as well.



he's simply letting rip because when a tech company shuts the door on you - you can say what you want.  AMD are doing what Nvidia did for ages and basically cutting off those that don't tow their party line.  They are also entitled to do that.  Tech sites are free PR to AMD and Nvidia so if someone doesn't play ball - you stop throwing it their way.

It's also an editorial and as such can have emotion in it.  You call it unprofessional but is it?  Editorial's by nature are sided with the editors leanings so he is able to speak freely.  And if AMD are in internal dispute (from his sources) he's free to talk about it.

Anyway, I agree with you that time will tell.


----------



## newtekie1 (May 29, 2016)

For $500 the Nano wasn't a terrible buy a couple months ago.  Of course you new things are going to come out, and usually come out quickly, that makes your new shiny high end GPU seem like a bad buy.  That is the nature of GPUs(and used to be the nature of CPUs but not so much anymore due to the slowdown in advancement).  It is this reason that all these years I have never bought the highest end GPUs.  The return on investment has always been a bad one.  The one or two steps down GPU has has always gotten my money, because they are always better values.  I bought a 9500 instead of a 9700(and unlocked to a 9700), I bought an X800GTO instead of the X850XT(and unlocked it to an X850XT), I bought the X1950Pro instead of the XTX, I bought an HD3850 instead of the HD3870, I bought an HD4850 instead of the HD4870/90(but later bought HD4890s for crossfire and did kind of regret it), I bought an HD5850 instead of the HD5870, I bought the HD6950 instead of the HD6970, a 7950 instead of a 7970.  I only bought my 290X because it was a great deal and cheaper than a 390. Every time I've bought the highest end card, the ones that cost $500+, yes I have regretted it.  This isn't just a red team issue, I've had the same experiences on the green side of the fence.  I regretted my 980Ti, I was perfectly happy with 970s in SLI, and really am happy with a single 970.  And the 970 was an awesome card for the money, so it makes sense.

The other issue is I think AMD botched Fiji.  I'm not saying the GPU is bad, it is a great GPU.  I'm saying they could have done some things differently and made Fiji a lot more appealing.  They released no one, but two halo products.  And made only one crippled SKU for board partners to use to release custom designs.  That isn't smart, IMO.  What I think they should have done is released the Fury X as it was, but allow board partners to release custom designs.  Release the Nano as well as it was, but use the crippled Fiji on it, but also allow board partners to make custom designs with that GPU as well.  Instead they made it so that the only way you can get a full Fiji GPU is to buy a reference design, and the only way to get an air cooled full Fiji is to buy a Nano with a tiny underpowered cooler.  I would have loved to see a full Fiji GPU, under a decent air cooler, and I think I'm not the only one.  Even better, I'd love to see a cut down custom designed Fiji selling for $400.  I think that would have been a winning combo right there.  And that is AMD's other issue with the Fiji cards, they overpriced them.  The Nano should not have come out at $650, that is just insane.  If they would have released a full Fiji, air cooled, with custom designs available on launch day for $500 or even $550 for custom designs it would have been a definite winner and it would have gotten a lot more wows.  Same thing with the crippled Fiji.  Why are they trying to sell the crippled Fiji for $550?  The cut down cards are the cards you are supposed to make great values.  I don't care that the Fury was noticeably faster than the GTX980, and the 980 was selling for $480 at the time.  Undercut the competition to steal some sales, offer something better for the same price.  That is how you get sales!  Don't price the card so high that the GTX980 still beats it price to performance.


----------



## Red_Machine (May 29, 2016)

I do.  Nothing but problems so far.  My computer keeps locking up, the driver crashes, I get rampant screen flickering and tearing even just browsing the web.  At this rate, I'm going to wear out my reset button.  I really wish I'd stuck with green.


----------



## Pehla (May 29, 2016)

Champ said:


> So it wasn't until I saw Jayz 2 Cent recent aftermarket 1080 vid, that I realized I made a huge mistake. I need to stop trying to go against the grain and support the underdog. Nvidia is dominating for a reason and I saw it. I regret paying almost 500 for my nano months ago and I'm definitely regretting getting a freesync monitor now. We gotta be realistic. AMD will probably never catch Intel/Nvidia. Processor or graphics wise.


i dont get it?!?! why would you regret?!?! dude its mostly all in few fps diference!! depends on the game..,its not like amd cards are runing on 20 fps and nvidia is making 60fps or more..
waaaay to much watching the benchmarks...,390/390x/fury or what ever...,most of the games runs smoth on them if not all?!?! so why would you regret?? that´s  just jelousy talking...if you think that way its never going to end...,
there are always beter and beter cards coming..,you know what ever you buy now in one year or so there is going to come a new one and beter one!


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (May 29, 2016)

Nah, not at all , I use it all day long with very few issues and most of my hardware was not made for windows 8 let alone 10, still dx 12 capable too, that's a testament to Amd forward thinking ,in a intel system i would have to pay a lot to run quad gfx cards too.
Unsound purchases lead to regret and a SFF gpu for norm desktop use is absurd imho sorry but regret was all ways the outcome, you should have got a Fury non X simples and cheaper.


----------



## mroofie (May 29, 2016)

Red_Machine said:


> I do.  Nothing but problems so far.  My computer keeps locking up, the driver crashes, I get rampant screen flickering and tearing even just browsing the web.  At this rate, I'm going to wear out my reset button.  I really wish I'd stuck with green.


----------



## jaggerwild (May 29, 2016)

Red_Machine said:


> I do.  Nothing but problems so far.  My computer keeps locking up, the driver crashes, I get rampant screen flickering and tearing even just browsing the web.  At this rate, I'm going to wear out my reset button.  I really wish I'd stuck with green.


 I never had an issue with AMD drivers wasn't my fault. If your using an app to over clock it and you can't understand why it happening, have you reset defaults? 
@OP,
 I never regret one AMD purchase I have made, haven't bought them in a couple gen's still have 2 4890, 1 4870X2 and 3 5770'S  1 6950, all great cards at there time or purpose. Also bare in mind Nvidia has only released it's mid tier card and everyone is running around saying "THE SKY IS FALLING THE SKY IS FALLING" mean while no one has one in hand(YET(think they released yesterday or so)the speculation threads are all over the place.


----------



## eidairaman1 (May 29, 2016)

Red_Machine said:


> I do.  Nothing but problems so far.  My computer keeps locking up, the driver crashes, I get rampant screen flickering and tearing even just browsing the web.  At this rate, I'm going to wear out my reset button.  I really wish I'd stuck with green.



when switching from Green to Red use DDU, follow the directions properly though.


----------



## Aquinus (May 29, 2016)

Red_Machine said:


> I do.  Nothing but problems so far.  My computer keeps locking up, the driver crashes, I get rampant screen flickering and tearing even just browsing the web.  At this rate, I'm going to wear out my reset button.  I really wish I'd stuck with green.


I think @xkm1948 had a similar issue with his Fury X. I thought I recall the problem getting solved somehow but, I'm not exactly sure how. Maybe he can chime in.


----------



## Jetster (May 29, 2016)

When bit coining was popular and it drove up AMD prices I sold all I had. Never looked back


----------



## Red_Machine (May 29, 2016)

I'm not overclocking it, and I used DDU to remove all traces of my nVIDIA drivers beforehand.


----------



## dieselcat18 (May 29, 2016)

Just upgraded to a MSI 980ti Golden Edition  from an ASUS R9 290x OC....and to be honest, I saw a small improvement in mainly lower heat and power consumption. Other than that the AMD card ran really nice for a solid 2 1/2 years. Though I did pay less for the 980ti now than when I purchased the 290x back then. (during the stupid bit-coin frenzy)

I was thinking of going with a Founder's Edition 1080 but for 170 less I didn't want to spend that much right now.

I don't have any regrets going with the 980ti at this time, it runs flawless.  other than that I'm really going to miss that 290x card....was really quiet and quite a beautiful looking card !
Not sure what I may do with it...keep it or sell it. If I keep it I might put in in the wife's PC to replace her MSI 760 4gb card (also a nice card)


----------



## 95Viper (May 29, 2016)

Late to the party, here.
I, usually, just research what specs/features I want/need.
Then, lock in on the card I desire, from my search results and get the best price on it.
I don't care what color it is made by.  Green or Red, never had much trouble with, either one.


----------



## jaggerwild (May 29, 2016)

Red_Machine said:


> I'm not overclocking it, and I used DDU to remove all traces of my nVIDIA drivers beforehand.



You also using a Intel GPU  to drive a second monitor(in yer profile) tried down clocking the AMD? Cooling better,etc? Tried disabling the Intel GPU? I'm not sure you can have both drivers together, ID assume not. Do you have extra memory for the Intel video your using?


----------



## moproblems99 (May 30, 2016)

Honestly, I have not had any real issues with either.  If Zen is at least as good as Sandy/Ivy then I will buy one for as my VM machine.  I will most likely be upgrading to Vega early 2017 as my 980 has been pissing me off.


----------



## Kursah (May 30, 2016)

jaggerwild said:


> You also using a Intel GPU  to drive a second monitor(in yer profile) tried down clocking the AMD? Cooling better,etc? Tried disabling the Intel GPU? I'm not sure you can have both drivers together, ID assume not. Do you have extra memory for the Intel video your using?



There's usually a UEFI/BIOS setting to allow Intel IGP and dedicated graphics adapters to output imges at the same time, and even without that setting you can install both drivers at the same time. Makes it nice if you need more screens that your IGP or add-in card can provide alone and you don't need all for gaming. 

It also works as a ready-to-go failover should you not use the IGP unless the add-in card fails. At least on newer-ish Intel platforms this is what I've been doing for years now. They don't require much RAM to run a screen and usually firmware is set to auto up to a certain point, 64MB-1GB by default iirc on many iirc...but it really depends on chipset and age. Should have no problem running two screens (without gaming on obviously) in such a configuration. But should the be some sort of bug or glitch between Intel and AMD drivers, it would definitely be worth trying even if to check if off the list of things tried during diagnosis of said issue. 

@Red_Machine  I agree to try downclocking the AMD, I do recall there were firmware releases for the Fury X cards, was there anything for the Nano's? Maybe we should get you to start your own thread to try and sort this out? Maybe you already have??? I'd be curious to see if you have an issue with a bad card that might need replaced under warranty or something else going awry.


----------



## Sempron Guy (May 30, 2016)

the only regret I remembered was back when I went for the HD6870 a month before the 7850 got launched. Apart from that, that is a resounding no since my first ati card, which is the 9550.


----------



## gupsterg (May 30, 2016)

No regrets having bought AMD GPUs  .

When I got the 290X it was cheaper than a GTX 970. IIRC benchmarks at the time showed some it edging ahead and others the 970. As I was paying at least 15-20% less for the 290X it was a better choice. I never owned ref cooler cards so noise/cooling not an issue, I wasn't phased by the higher power consumption either.

The 290X was sold at no loss after 9mths usage, bought a Fury X by adding ~£75 , swap done to due the promo on Fury X. IIRC at the time a 980 Ti would have been ~£200 more than Fury X deal. A 980 was also steep in price, so a no brainer to get the Fury X.

Only game I've had an issue was SWBF, texture corruption on Ice caves level. Solved within under month from either game patch or driver update.

Prior to these cards had a Sapphire HD 5850 Toxic 1GB for several years, had no regrets on buying that either. I have had nVidia at times in the past, but prefer AMD TBH for various reasons.


----------



## Absolution (May 30, 2016)

If you look at DX12 benchmarks, the Nano is still decent compared to 1080 and 1070.

4GB ram doesnt seem to be an issue for now.


----------



## CAPSLOCKSTUCK (May 30, 2016)

I have no loyalty.

I am a graphics slut..........


----------



## medi01 (May 30, 2016)

Disclaimer: not sure if serious or just trolling.


I got R9 380 to play XCOM 2 in Feb, for about 200 Euros.
Sold it in May anticipating 480, for about 160 (with shipping) on amazon.
(heck, and nothing to play at the moment. Only starcraft interests me, but it feels awkward on 40" TV anyhow, so I stick with i5 with some 5xxx AMD GPU notebook)

What should I regret?

With your budget (i.e. Nano for 500) you could have bought... 980.
Oh, that and extra 100$ for GSync.
Wouldn't you regret it more?

Comparing previous gen cards to* OVERPRICED, LIMITED COMPATIBILITY, SLOWER THAN SOME PREVIOUS GEN NVIDIA* cards is, ahem, weird to say the least.

Talking about people who regret their choice, look here (lol):


----------



## Red_Machine (May 30, 2016)

Kursah said:


> I do recall there were firmware releases for the Fury X cards, was there anything for the Nano's?


Sapphire's website doesn't have any firmware updates.

My IGP is backed up by plenty of RAM, and I need it to run my two extra monitors.  I do not have DisplayPort-equipped monitors, nor can I afford them, so I can't use my Nano to power them.


----------



## HumanSmoke (May 30, 2016)

medi01 said:


> Talking about people who regret their choice, look here (lol):


Maybe you should have actually read the "reviews". Virtually every single "review" is either someone bitching about Amazon's pricing (nobody is buying from Amazon), or someone trolling Nvidia in general. Speaking of which...


medi01 said:


> Disclaimer: not sure if serious or just trolling.


Given the stupid screencap and your obvious disregard for the content of the "reviews", I'm definitely going with the latter.


----------



## Jack1n (May 30, 2016)

Red_Machine said:


> Sapphire's website doesn't have any firmware updates.
> 
> My IGP is backed up by plenty of RAM, and I need it to run my two extra monitors.  I do not have DisplayPort-equipped monitors, nor can I afford them, so I can't use my Nano to power them.


TPU seems to have 2 different ones in the database, not sure what is the difference between them if there is one at all.
https://www.techpowerup.com/vgabios/178064/sapphire-r9nano-4096-150821
https://www.techpowerup.com/vgabios/178386/sapphire-r9nano-4096-150821-1


----------



## gupsterg (May 30, 2016)

Kursah said:


> I do recall there were firmware releases for the Fury X cards, was there anything for the Nano's?



AFAIK this is the latest, AMD Community Fury X & Nano UEFI firmware update. Currently all Fury X & Nano are ref PCB so the AMD ROMs work on all AIB cards.

Some AIBs had been updating Fury X/Nano firmware to have UEFI via ROM updates on their own support pages. IIRC Asus and Gigabyte had them, Sapphire is only via support ticket service; I gained via that route, AMD one is the newest legacy ROM P/N & compile date. The UEFI/GOP module is actually dated some month in 2015, see this post comparing. The same UEFI/GOP was used in a Sapphire Fury X UEFI ROM update but the legacy ROM section older. The UEFI/GOP can be updated via a tool on Fernados' Win RAID site, it can also do other AMD cards ROMs  .


----------



## RejZoR (May 30, 2016)

medi01 said:


> Disclaimer: not sure if serious or just trolling.
> 
> 
> I got R9 380 to play XCOM 2 in Feb, for about 200 Euros.
> ...



Ouch. What are some of the comments people left there? Anything related to quality/performanc or just complaints about availability and such?


----------



## medi01 (May 30, 2016)

RejZoR said:


> Anything related to quality/performanc or just complaints about availability and such?


Nearly all are about pricing.


----------



## Jack1n (May 30, 2016)

medi01 said:


> Nearly all are about pricing.


People seem to think they can communicate with these companies with words while all that the companies understand is the bottom line, the only way a consumer can communicate with the companies is not to buy from them.


----------



## medi01 (May 30, 2016)

Jack1n said:


> People seem to think they can communicate with these companies with words while all that the companies understand is the bottom line, the only way a consumer can communicate with the companies is not to buy from them.



Let me assure you, bad ratings on amazon do impact sales.
But it doesn't work when one is supply constrained, apparently. =)


----------



## Jack1n (May 30, 2016)

medi01 said:


> Let me assure you, bad ratings on amazon do impact sales.
> But it doesn't work when one is supply constrained, apparently. =)


When supply train start going they will simply pull those specific cards off of Amazon and put new "updated revision" ones which will restart the ratings.


----------



## Red_Machine (May 30, 2016)

gupsterg said:


> AFAIK this is the latest, AMD Community Fury X & Nano UEFI firmware update. Currently all Fury X & Nano are ref PCB so the AMD ROMs work on all AIB cards.
> 
> Some AIBs had been updating Fury X/Nano firmware to have UEFI via ROM updates on their own support pages. IIRC Asus and Gigabyte had them, Sapphire is only via support ticket service; I gained via that route, AMD one is the newest legacy ROM P/N & compile date. The UEFI/GOP module is actually dated some month in 2015, see this post comparing. The same UEFI/GOP was used in a Sapphire Fury X UEFI ROM update but the legacy ROM section older. The UEFI/GOP can be updated via a tool on Fernados' Win RAID site, it can also do other AMD cards ROMs  .


So this should be just a simple thing using ATiWinFlash?  Anything I should be aware of?


----------



## the54thvoid (May 30, 2016)

HumanSmoke said:


> Maybe you should have actually read the "reviews". Virtually every single "review" is either someone bitching about Amazon's pricing (nobody is buying from Amazon), or someone trolling Nvidia in general. Speaking of which...
> 
> Given the stupid screencap and your obvious disregard for the content of the "reviews", I'm definitely going with the latter.





medi01 said:


> Let me assure you, bad ratings on amazon do impact sales.
> But it doesn't work when one is supply constrained, apparently. =)



Having read the reviews, this one is very fitting for out troll:



> Snagged one from EVGA's website on day one - at the MSRP. *All these negative reviews are from butthurt crybabies* - and are exactly what's wrong with Amazon reviews. Awesome card from an awesome manufacturer!


----------



## medi01 (May 30, 2016)

the54thvoid said:


> Having read the reviews



770 - 280€
970 - 329€
1070 - 450€+

"Same tier". lol.


----------



## Red_Machine (May 30, 2016)

Ahhhhhhhhhhh motherhumper. I followed the instructions to the letter, and now my computer doesn't post. I just killed my GPU...


----------



## Dethroy (May 30, 2016)

Brusfantomet said:


> rocking





medi01 said:


> 770 - 280€
> 970 - 329€
> 1070 - 450€+
> 
> "Same tier". lol.



1070 - 379$
449$ is the shitty FE 1070.


----------



## medi01 (May 30, 2016)

Dethroy said:


> 449$ is the shitty FE 1070.


Most 1080 AIBs out there are close to FE pricing, so, nope:

770 - 280€
970 - 329€
1070 - 450€+

It does look bad even if you stick to 379€ though. (and considering 699$ translated into 789€ for 1080, 450$ is likely 500€)
AIB 1080's are 799€, more expensive than FockEeah edition.


----------



## Jack1n (May 30, 2016)

Red_Machine said:


> Ahhhhhhhhhhh motherhumper. I followed the instructions to the letter, and now my computer doesn't post. I just killed my GPU...


I doubt it, try putting it in another pcie slot.


----------



## Red_Machine (May 30, 2016)

How would that help? It worked fine before.


----------



## Jack1n (May 30, 2016)

Red_Machine said:


> How would that help? It worked fine before.


Worked for me when i had a bad bios flash with my 970(which only has one bios) and it would not show in devices and i could not flash it back even from the bios.


----------



## Red_Machine (May 30, 2016)

Does the Nano have have BIOS switch I could use?


----------



## Jack1n (May 30, 2016)

Red_Machine said:


> Does the Nano have have BIOS switch I could use?


Yes 
http://www.kitguru.net/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/DSC_0994.jpg


----------



## Aquinus (May 30, 2016)

Jack1n said:


> Yes
> http://www.kitguru.net/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/DSC_0994.jpg


Link is broken. Here is a TPU hosted image from a review.





@Red_Machine: I did say you should talk to @xkm1948 as he had a similar problem. If someone is known to have had the same problem, consulting them before taking matters into your own hands is almost always a good idea.


----------



## the54thvoid (May 30, 2016)

medi01 said:


> 770 - 280€
> 970 - 329€
> 1070 - 450€+
> 
> "Same tier". lol.



You're a dobber.

Here's another DX12 title.  Shall we play selective graphs all day long?  The AMD feature Pure Hair is on.


----------



## gupsterg (May 30, 2016)

Red_Machine said:


> Ahhhhhhhhhhh motherhumper. I followed the instructions to the letter, and now my computer doesn't post. I just killed my GPU...



With PC off switch the bios switch to other position, once in OS flip the bios position to the bad flash and flash with stock ROM.

When you flashed the updated AMD ROM did you have GPU OC software or monitoring software running in the background? if so this will create a bad flash to occur.

I would deem something on your system created an issue, I've owned 1x Fury Tri-X + 4x Fury X and never had a bad flash occur from my own bios modding / using factory ROMs, my OCN Fiji bios mod thread.


----------



## Red_Machine (May 30, 2016)

I made sure to close every program before doing the flash, even disabled my antivirus first. There was nothing running that could have interfered with it as far as I know, I terminated a few extra processes in Task Manager too, just to be safe.


----------



## MustSeeMelons (May 30, 2016)

Haven't regretted anything, but have been disappointed, because I did not manage my expectations correctly. That was when I bought an Asus R9 280X because it had 4Gb of VRAM and even with the mining craze cheaper than a GTX 770 4Gb. After I saw the balance between the two I was at peace knowing I just had my expectations all wrong. Was very happy with my 970 though, got exactly what I was expecting, minus the VRAM issue, hihi.


----------



## gupsterg (May 30, 2016)

Red_Machine said:


> I made sure to close every program before doing the flash, even disabled my antivirus first. There was nothing running that could have interfered with it as far as I know, I terminated a few extra processes in Task Manager too, just to be safe.


Hmmm , very strange. As we're going off topic you wanna chat via PM or start new thread to get the bottom of it?  .


----------



## Moofachuka (May 30, 2016)

Champ said:


> So it wasn't until I saw Jayz 2 Cent recent aftermarket 1080 vid, that I realized I made a huge mistake. I need to stop trying to go against the grain and support the underdog. Nvidia is dominating for a reason and I saw it. I regret paying almost 500 for my nano months ago and I'm definitely regretting getting a freesync monitor now. We gotta be realistic. AMD will probably never catch Intel/Nvidia. Processor or graphics wise.



Come back in a year when Nano becomes as fast or even faster than a 980ti..  Nvidia is known to stop optimizing "old" cards.  But AMD optimized all their GCN cards.  In time you see your card will become faster and faster in newer games.  Just like my 7970, now it's like 20-25% faster than a GTX 680 in newest games.

So unless you're expecting to upgrade once every year or two, get Nvidia.  If you want longevity, get AMD.  Don't regret buying either.  Nvidia is always faster at first, but AMD gets faster in time. (if you compare the same gen in a year or two)


----------



## RejZoR (May 30, 2016)

Polaris looks interesting and all, but I'm really looking forward for Navi. That will be the point which will ultimately define the fate of AMD. Will they go the path of 3dfx VSA100 when it comes to multi GPU-ing or will they do it right. They also taunt at next gen memory, I wonder what that might be...

I've had many AMD cards in the past, current GTX 980 is really the first GeForce after years. The last one I owned was GeForce 7600GT. Yeah, it has been a while... There were some stupid things with AMD cards, but nothing really annoying to a point where I'd want to get rid of the card asap or hated it the entire time of ownership. Especially the HD7950. That one was a beast and it really served me well. I basically sold it with the entire old system, partially because it was easier to sell that system and partially because of curiosity as everyone was raving around Maxwell. Which is certainly not bad as I like it a lot, but the god damn NV Control Panel, I hate this thing. It was designed by a moron and they haven't done anything to improve it. The list of settings keeps resetting to the top of the list after each setting selection, it takes like 10 seconds to apply them all and waiting it to load up is stupendously slow even on a high end system with top of the line SSD. Just unacceptable and there is nothing I can do about it. If they haven't fixed this crap all these years, it's very unlikely I'll get anyone's attention to fix it. Where AMD's new Crimson panel is absolute poetry. It's nice, smooth and fast even on a mid end laptop where I've first seen it (I just sold my HD7950 prior Crimson release). Crimson panel has few annoying things like fallback to old CCC for less commonly used settings, but no matter, the most often used and changed are snappy and nice.

Maybe I'll go bitch to NVIDIA forums a bit about it. Maybe I'll get attention from someone...


----------



## ThE_MaD_ShOt (May 30, 2016)

Nope never have regretted using red for both cpu and gpu. Never used Nvidia or Intel in a main rig.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (May 30, 2016)

the54thvoid said:


> You're a dobber.
> 
> Here's another DX12 title.  Shall we play selective graphs all day long?  The AMD feature Pure Hair is on.


It's technically TressFX 3.0 which runs on DirectCompute and is open source.  TressFX, as far as I can recall, has never played favoritism for either brand; on the other hand, HairWorks (NVIDIA's competing API which is proprietary and closed source) caused a ruckus with Witcher 3's release because AMD cards had framerates fall >60% when enabled compared to GTX 980s 30% (see below, TressFX is far more friendly than HairWorks).


Correct me if I'm wrong but I think you posted that RotTR graph to counter the Hitman graph.  The reason why AMD does well in Hitman and not so well in RotTR is because Hitman uses async compute which boosts AMD and hurts NVIDIA.

I'd be interested in seeing an image quality comparison on RotTR too.  AMD cards could easily be simulating more hair than NVIDIA cards do explaining the gap in performance.  The tessellation effects (which TressFX uses) can be overridden in graphics drivers.  It probably should have just been disabled for all cards because it optionally inflicts a major penalty to framerate.  It's better to isolate TressFX to its own test.

Here's a benchmark that isolates PureHair:
http://www.hardocp.com/article/2016..._graphics_features_performance/6#.V0yKnI-cFaQ

FPS gained turning it from "on" to "off":
GTX 980 Ti: 107.395%
R9 390X: 107.383%

The cost is damn near identical, as it should be.


Looking back at some history, the Crystal Engine has always favored NVIDIA:
Tomb Raider - http://www.guru3d.com/articles-pages/nvidia-geforce-gtx-titan-x-review,15.html
Deus Ex: Human Revolution -http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/deus-ex-human-revolution-performance-benchmark,3012-6.html

Background: Square Enix Montreal started working on DXHR before Tomb Raider started production.  Deus Ex: Mankind Divided is actually switching from the Crystal Engine of Tomb Raider (DX11)/Rise of the Tomb Raider (DX12) to the same engine Hitman Absolution (DX11) used and Hitman 2016 (DX12 + async) is using which heavily favors AMD.  Ironic, isn't it?


----------



## TheinsanegamerN (May 30, 2016)

Aquinus said:


> I like my 390, no complaints or regrets from me... granted, I spend most of my time on my tower working, not gaming. However when I do game, nothing happens that makes me want to tweak anything. When I overclock, it's because I want to, not because I need it. The only exception to that statement might be Eyefinity as it is a little bit of a push for the 390 but, it's not like I'm doing that often. The 3 monitors is more for work than play so I end up gaming at 1080p most of the time. When your GPU isn't running full tilt, there is almost never a reason to complain about it unless there are graphical glitches which I only encounter when I overclock the piss out of it.
> 
> AMD has its strong points just as nVidia does. I just think that AMD GPUs are better at compute and have a better lifespan and longevity. nVidia tends to drop driver support earlier than AMD but, that may just be hardware changes. Most GCN based GPUs still have driver support, even GCN 1.0 cards. My aging 6870s just had driver support dropped after 6 years of service. That's not too shabby. So, as someone who can no longer upgrade his machine often due to fiscal constraints due to life (having a family,) makes how much I get out of my hardware far more important than it used to be.
> 
> tl;dr: No regrets. What AMD has to offer appeals to me even if it's not always the fastest GPU you can buy.


Devil's advocate, the 6000 series competitor, the 500 series, is still getting driver updates. Heck, even the 400 series, the 5000 series competitor, is still getting regular updates. By that metric, AMD's performance in terms of support is much worse than nvidia's.

And AMD really had no choice but to continue optimization of GCN 1, since they were still selling them 4 years later, while nvidia had moved onto maxwell. And kepler didnt have to wait 3 years for full performance, it was performing that well days after a game came out.

To answer the OG question, I've tried red team 4 times personally. first was the 9800 pro(constantly defaulted to the wrong driver causing black screen), then the 2600xt(driver refused to install until SP3 was uninstalled), then the llano APUs(features in CCC would randomly dissapear and/or reappear on different driver revisions, auto hybrid crossfire destroyed performance), then the 5770's(crossfire issues in many newer games took weeks, sometimes months longer than nvidia to fix, random issues would pop up from time to time). Every time driver issues have popped up that were far rarer in nvidia's camp. the 5770s (in a machine I built and supported for my friend) were closest to being stable, but my 550ti's in SLI had far fewer issues, and what issues did pop up were fixed much faster than AMD's.

This was back in 2012/2013, so take it with some salt. Things may be different now, but IME, AMD has never been as stable as nvidia.


medi01 said:


> 770 - 280€
> 970 - 329€
> 1070 - 450€+
> 
> "Same tier". lol.


here in the US, the 770 launched at $400, the 970 launched at $330, and now the 1070 launches at $379 ($450 for sucker edition). Considering the 1070 comes in on a much more expensive process, I dont understand the hatred for the price. it IS the same tier as the 970 and 770. Even the 670 launched at $400, so why is everyone complaining?


----------



## Kanan (May 30, 2016)

FordGT90Concept said:


> It's technically TressFX:
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TressFX#Version_3.0
> 
> It runs on DirectCompute and is open source.  TressFX, as far as I can recall, has never played favoritism for either brand (it uses DirectCompute); on the other hand, HairWorks (NVIDIA's competing API which is proprietary and closed source) caused a ruckus with Witcher 3's release because AMD cards had framerates fall >60% when enabled compared to GTX 980s 30%.
> ...


The reason why Hairworks sucks on AMD cards is simply the excessive use of tesselation for Nvidia knows that this is the weak spot of AMD. Even their own cards suffer a bit, when it's activated.

RotTR in DX12 is utter crap, that's why AMD cards perform badly there at the moment. The DX11 chart is way more balanced between the competitors.



> Devil's advocate, the 6000 series competitor, the 500 series, is still getting driver updates. Heck, even the 400 series, the 5000 series competitor, is still getting regular updates. By that metric, AMD's performance in terms of support is much worse than nvidia's.


It's not, AMD still supports HD 5000/6000 as legacy cards with new drivers. At least AMD doesn't promise things they don't hold up to (GTX 400/500 geting DX12 support). Kepler support is falling as we speak, Doom and some other new games have pretty bad performance on Kepler.


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (May 30, 2016)

Red_Machine said:


> I made sure to close every program before doing the flash, even disabled my antivirus first. There was nothing running that could have interfered with it as far as I know, I terminated a few extra processes in Task Manager too, just to be safe.


I personally thought Atiflash didn't work on windows 10 ,it didn't for me previously.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (May 30, 2016)

Kanan said:


> The reason why Hairworks sucks on AMD cards is simply the excessive use of tesselation for Nvidia knows that this is the weak spot of AMD. Even their own cards suffer a bit, when it's activated.
> 
> RotTR in DX12 is utter crap, that's why AMD cards perform badly there at the moment. The DX11 chart is way more balanced between the competitors.


I did massive edits to that post.  Done editing it now

 Crystal Engine has a history of being biased in favor of NVIDIA, DX12 or no.




Kanan said:


> It's not, AMD still supports HD 5000/6000 as legacy cards with new drivers. At least AMD doesn't promise things they don't hold up to (GTX 400/500 geting DX12 support). Kepler support is falling as we speak, Doom and some other new games have pretty bad performance on Kepler.


Fun fact: I installed Windows 10 on a system with an HD 4### card.  No problems.  Obviously it runs at DirectX 12 feature level 10_1 because it doesn't have the hardware to do better than that.


----------



## TheinsanegamerN (May 30, 2016)

Kanan said:


> The reason why Hairworks sucks on AMD cards is simply the excessive use of tesselation for Nvidia knows that this is the weak spot of AMD. Even their own cards suffer a bit, when it's activated.
> 
> RotTR in DX12 is utter crap, that's why AMD cards perform badly there at the moment. The DX11 chart is way more balanced between the competitors.
> 
> ...


um, wat? from AMD's own site "MD Radeon™ R5 235X, Radeon™ R5 235, Radeon™ R5 230, Radeon™ R5 220, Radeon™ HD 8470, Radeon™ HD 8350, Radeon™ HD 8000 (D/G variants), Radeon™ HD 7000 Series (HD 7600 and below), Radeon™ HD 6000 Series, and Radeon™ HD 5000 Series Graphics products have been moved to a legacy support model and no additional driver releases are planned. This change enables us to dedicate valuable engineering resources to developing new features and enhancements for graphics products based on the GCN Architecture."
http://support.amd.com/en-us/download/desktop/legacy?product=legacy3&os=Windows 10 - 64

http://techreport.com/news/29362/amd-ends-driver-support-for-non-gcn-radeon-cards

http://betanews.com/2015/11/24/amd-kills-gpu/

http://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-retires-non-gcn-gpu-lineup,30643.html


The only drivers available for download are the 15.7.1 driver (7/29/2015) and the 16.2.1 beta driver(3/1/2016), nothing newer.

Meanwhile, nvidia has the newest 368.22 driver available for anything 400 series on up. Performance on DOOM for kepler is poor, true, but other new games, like forza 6, can be maxxed out 60FPS if you have a 4GB kepler card. Kepler is simply not being optimized for, so you will occasionally have these kinds of problems. DOOM wont run at all on the 5000 and 6000 series (but it DOES run on the 500 series), and neither of them have DX12 either.

EDIT: youtube videos show the 770 running doom pretty well, considering it is a 4+ year old GPU. The poor performance at launch seems to have been fixed.


----------



## Ebo (May 30, 2016)

Never had any problems with ATI/AMD cards which I have had since R9700 PRO back in the day. I will be upgrading also, but I will wait forthe toptier and HBM2 to comes out. 
Benchmaks dosent interest me at all, I want realworld experience.


----------



## medi01 (May 30, 2016)

TheinsanegamerN said:


> 770 launched at $400


I'm sure a friend of mine got it within 2 month from release for 280.



TheinsanegamerN said:


> ...comes in on a much more expensive process


Oh, give me a break.


----------



## TheinsanegamerN (May 30, 2016)

medi01 said:


> I'm sure a friend of mine got it within 2 month from release for 280.
> 
> 
> Oh, give me a break.


And I'm sure your friend didnt. 770's were solidly $400 until the 290/290x dropped. and it was only down to $330, with most custom ones coming in at $340-$350. $280 would only be possible as a used card or a firesale just before maxwell dropped.

And I am not giving you a break. 28nm was dirt cheap by the time maxwell came out. 14nm is brand new, new processes are more expensive than old ones. That has been true for over 20 years. unless you mena to tell me that 14nm is somehow cheaper than 28nm from 2011?


----------



## Jack1n (May 30, 2016)

medi01 said:


> Oh, give me a break.


It's actually the die size that drives the production costs up, and yes, it's significant enough to cause the higher pricing that we are seeing.


----------



## HumanSmoke (May 30, 2016)

Jack1n said:


> It's actually the die size that drives the production costs up, and yes, it's significant enough to cause the higher pricing that we are seeing.


Process yield would also impact cost per die mm. Regardless of whether the contract is on a good die percentage basis, or a flat wafer cost, a lower yield adds to the cost. There is also a higher level of amortization of ROI to consider:


> But perhaps the biggest issue is cost. The average IC design cost for a 28nm device is about $30 million, according to Gartner. In comparison, the IC design cost for a mid-range 14nm SoC is about $80 million. “Add an extra 60% (to that cost) if embedded software development and mask costs are included,” Gartner’s Wang said. “A high-end SoC can be double this amount, and a low-end SoC with re-used IP can be half of the amount.”
> 
> On top of that, it takes 100 engineer-years to bring out a 28nm chip design. “Therefore, a team of 50 engineers will need two years to complete the chip design to tape-out. Then, add 9 to 12 months more for prototype manufacturing, testing and qualification before production starts. That is if the first silicon works,” he said. “For a 14nm mid-range SoC, it takes 200 man-years. A team of 50 engineers will need four years of chip design time, plus add nine to 12 months for production.”
> 
> ...


[Source]


medi01 said:


> Oh, give me a break.


You mean stop posting factual analysis that directly contradicts your unsubstantiated comments? Now why would anyone on a tech forum be OK with you posting half-baked uninformed nonsense without subjecting it to scrutiny?


----------



## Aquinus (May 30, 2016)

TheinsanegamerN said:


> Devil's advocate, the 6000 series competitor, the 500 series, is still getting driver updates. Heck, even the 400 series, the 5000 series competitor, is still getting regular updates. By that metric, AMD's performance in terms of support is much worse than nvidia's.
> 
> And AMD really had no choice but to continue optimization of GCN 1, since they were still selling them 4 years later, while nvidia had moved onto maxwell. And kepler didnt have to wait 3 years for full performance, it was performing that well days after a game came out.
> 
> ...


Now you've done it. If you're not already sitting, please sit down before reading this post. I'm not sure if it was the post @TheinsanegamerN wrote or the beer but, work with me here for a minute while I lay it all out for you.

Alright everyone, it's story time. Time to get nostalgic!

<dissertation>
I hear you but, let me contrast your experience with mine and maybe we'll see uncover why despite having several ATi/AMD cards, we've come to different conclusions.

When I first started building my own tower, I started with a Radeon 9200. In fact, I still have it in the attic with my first CPU, motherboard, and chassis. It wasn't the fastest but, it was 10x better than Intel's integrated graphics which I was using prior to that machine, so I loved it. Heck it even overclocked without external power (Woo!) After that, I had a GeForce 6800 OC. It was better than the 9200 but, I was kind of expecting more out of it and mine didn't overclock very well. I ended up selling it to a friend at school. After that I had a x800 SE which had some pipelines cut but, overclocked really well which I was very happy with, I also sold that to a friend when I was done with it. After that I had a GeForce 7900 GT where the VRAM eventually failed and XFX replaced that with a GeForce 8600 GTS which was without a doubt the best card I've ever overclocked, I don't remember the exactly numbers very well but I think the core was at 950Mhz and shaders at 1950Mhz and performance was up something like 30% over stock. I got a Radeon HD 2600 XT to compare it to since I could get it pretty cheap and found them to be on par at stock but, the 8600 GTS wiped the floor after being overclocked. I think that 8600 GTS is burried in the attic and I still have the 2600 XT which is sitting behind me as a memento of the fact it had GDDR4 which very few GPUs used. After that I upgraded to a Radeon HD 4850 which was pretty nice. It didn't overclock well but, at the time I didn't really need to. I ended up giving that away in a machine to a friend. I replaced the 4850 with a Radeon HD 6870 on release day. I still have that GPU and it still runs great, it's sitting in a box with static-proof wrap. I paired that with a second 6870 3 years later which gave me (at the time,) 7970-like performance (when it was new) at half of the cost (since I already had the first 6870,) so long as I could deal with CFX and drivers (which I did to primary positive effect.) About 9 months ago, I decided it was time for an upgrade and chose the Radeon R9 390. The 6870s were suffering because they only had 1GB of VRAM but, they had plenty of compute power that was being untouched, so I opted for the 390 with 8GB over the 970 with 3.5GB+.5GB despite the 970s OC advantage thinking that the extra VRAM would give me more longevity should I need to buy a second one and run CFX again. While the 390 was en-route to my house, my newer 6870 failed catastrophically so clearly it was a good time to upgrade. Since then I've used the 390 primarily for work but when I game with it, I so far haven't been disappointed.

So that's my story, the only commonality is that we both owned the 2600 XT and I think we can both agree that it wasn't a very good card. It could have been great with that GDDR4 but, it ended up being pretty weak. For what it's worth though, the 2600 XT (at least mine,) didn't have external power where the 8600 GTS did so, it may not really be a fair comparison. I would argue that you shouldn't let you experience with the 2600 XT to form an opinion around AMD/ATi. I feel like between the 9000 series Radeons and the x*** Radeons that there was a shift where the higher end was better than the mainstream GPUs where nVidia had a clear advantage. I do think that the 8600 GTS was a clear indicator of that over the 2600 XT however, the 4850 was a nice card but, the 4870 ran kind of hot (I came across one of those in my travels, gave that away too,) but, the area between mainstream and high-end has always (to me, ) seems to be a strength for AMD for the last decade or so. It hasn't always been the best but, it's been comparable.

So, I will leave you with this. Not every GPU in either camp is great but, depending on the way you use a GPU, if you think it was monetarily worth it, and if something goes wrong, is up to you. Experiences vary greatly and I will tell a short story that's an example of that: Remember that XFX GeForce 8600 GTS that overclocked like hell? It also was using a proprietary MOLEX to PCI-E-like connector on the GPU which provided both +12v and +5v. Without knowing this at the time, I used a PCI-E power connector to power it since the key was the same and tried using it (for those of you who don't know, PCI-E power connectors only provide +12v.) The GPU was fine but, it ended up frying DDC on one of my monitors. I bet you not many other people will have that kind of story but, I'm sure it has influenced my upgrade decisions since. That isn't to say it's nVidia's fault but, it was a negative experience that has pushed me away from nVidia (to a lesser extent than...) and XFX to this day.

tl;dr: We may all own cards from both camps but, depending on experience, you could own the same cards and come to different conclusions. Either way, it's dumb to not acknowledge that both camps have worked hard to produce good GPUs but, that isn't always the case where sometimes there are GPUs that don't quite meet the satisfaction of consumers depending on what you bought, when you bought it, and if something went wrong.
</dissertation>

You can blame Sierra Nevada's Torpedo Extra IPA for this rant.


----------



## xkm1948 (May 31, 2016)

Aquinus said:


> I think @xkm1948 had a similar issue with his Fury X. I thought I recall the problem getting solved somehow but, I'm not exactly sure how. Maybe he can chime in.



The screen corruption problem is completely fixed with the new official UEFI bios pushed out by AMD. I suspect there were some efforts in the newer drivers as well.


----------



## OneMoar (May 31, 2016)

xkm1948 said:


> The screen corruption problem is completely fixed with the new official UEFI bios pushed out by AMD. I suspect there were some efforts in the newer drivers as well.


flickering/screen corruption is always a thing with AMD
its like shingles you can treat it and cover it all you want but its still in you ...


----------



## xkm1948 (May 31, 2016)

Just saying my old HD5870 still have new driver support up to 16.3.2 beta. AMD stopped supporting WHQL drivers to 5000 series cards, but beta driver is still good. I have my HTPC running my old HD5870 on Windows 10 64bit.


----------



## xkm1948 (May 31, 2016)

OneMoar said:


> flickering/screen corruption is always a thing with AMD
> its like shingles you can treat it and cover it all you want but its still in you ...



 Really?

Let me check my memory.

Radeon 9700 days no problem at all
Radeon 1650XT days no problem at all
HD3870~HD4870~HD5870 no problem at all
APU 6800K no problem

As a matter of fact the screen corruption only happened for FuryX due to aggressive power saving. But now it is all fixed.


----------



## OneMoar (May 31, 2016)

xkm1948 said:


> Really?
> 
> Let me check my memory.
> 
> ...


really because 
5750 - flickering
6870 - screen corruption
7870 flickering
7970 screen corruption/can't enable power play because loldriver crashes running quake 3


----------



## xkm1948 (May 31, 2016)

OneMoar said:


> really because
> 5750 - flickering
> 6870 - screen corruption
> 7870 flickering
> 7970 screen corruption/can't enable power play because loldriver crashes running quake 3



I missed all the bad generations.


----------



## OneMoar (May 31, 2016)

I have personally never owned a post 4xx amd card that hasn't had some sort of power-play related fuckup 
amds power management scheme is horrible and has been horrible for generations


----------



## okidna (May 31, 2016)

FordGT90Concept said:


> It's technically TressFX 3.0 which runs on DirectCompute and is open source.  TressFX, as far as I can recall, has never played favoritism for either brand; on the other hand, HairWorks (NVIDIA's competing API which is proprietary and closed source) caused a ruckus with Witcher 3's release because AMD cards had framerates fall >60% when enabled compared to GTX 980s 30% (see below, TressFX is far more friendly than HairWorks).
> 
> 
> Correct me if I'm wrong but I think you posted that RotTR graph to counter the Hitman graph.  The reason why AMD does well in Hitman and not so well in RotTR is because Hitman uses async compute which boosts AMD and hurts NVIDIA.
> ...



I do remember that enabling TressFX made my FPS tank back when I'm still using GTX 560 Ti, it took about 2 weeks until NVIDIA release a new driver to improve TressFX performance.
They even acknowledged the performance issues : http://techreport.com/news/24463/nvidia-acknowledges-tomb-raider-performance-issues

And about Hairworks in Witcher 3, if you look at this review : http://www.hardocp.com/article/2015/08/25/witcher_3_wild_hunt_gameplay_performance_review/6
it's not that bad actually for AMD cards (certainly not a >60% FPS drop). The worst drop in average FPS among those cards are GTX 960 (46.8%) for NVIDIA and R9 390 (44.5%) for AMD.

Quick recap and comparison (average FPS drop HairWorks  OFF vs ON in %) based on HardOCP article :

TitanX drop by 10.76 %
980Ti drop by 19.96 %
FuryX drop by 24 %

980 drop by 34.16 %
Fury drop by 27.47 % (less FPS drop compared to 980)
R9 390X drop by 37.52 %

970 drop by 41.69 %
R9 390 drop by 44.50 %

960 drop by 46.83 %
R9 380 drop by 44.04 % (less FPS drop compared to 960)

No big difference in FPS drop percentage except for TitanX vs FuryX (13.24%), but that's not a directly comparable card price wise ($1000 vs $650).
FuryX vs 980Ti is separated by a small margin (4.04%), Fury managed to be better than 980, 980 vs Fury + 970 vs 390 also separated by a small margin (less than 5%).


----------



## Vellinious (May 31, 2016)

Bought an 8GB 290X to play with for a few months while I waited for the new tech to come out this summer.  I've been pleasantly surprised by how well it overclocked and ran.  It's been a fun card to play with.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (May 31, 2016)

okidna said:


> I do remember that enabling TressFX made my FPS tank back when I'm still using GTX 560 Ti, it took about 2 weeks until NVIDIA release a new driver to improve TressFX performance.
> They even acknowledged the performance issues : http://techreport.com/news/24463/nvidia-acknowledges-tomb-raider-performance-issues
> 
> And about Hairworks in Witcher 3, if you look at this review : http://www.hardocp.com/article/2015/08/25/witcher_3_wild_hunt_gameplay_performance_review/6
> ...


If you look at the link, it doesn't even mention TressFX.  It just says that NVIDIA had late access too the game so they couldn't preempt the title with optimized drivers.

Doing more research, it appears that Tomb Raider on NVIDIA had a wide gamut of problems with or without TressFX enabled.


All of your numbers do paint a clear bias in favor of NVIDIA cards where TressFX doesn't have that bias; additionally, TressFX has a much lower cost compared to HairWorks.  Knowing both of those facts, why would anyone use HairWorks over TressFX?


----------



## Jack1n (May 31, 2016)

OneMoar said:


> really because
> 5750 - flickering
> 6870 - screen corruption
> 7870 flickering
> 7970 screen corruption/can't enable power play because loldriver crashes running quake 3


I have gone through two 7970's and two 7950's and never had those issues.


----------



## terroralpha (May 31, 2016)

Champ said:


> I regret paying almost 500 for my nano months ago



here is an analogy. i paid $60,000 (USD) for a 2016 Audi A6 several months ago. but the new 2017 A6 and Benz E class are WAY better than my car in terms of performance and features. do i cry about it? no. i needed a car then, so i got the car. you needed your GPU then, so you got your GPU.

companies have to make something every year to stay in business. it's a fact of life. deal with it. i knew that a better model for the same money would come out some months down the road. you should have known that faster GPUs were coming in the summer. pretty sure everyone knew. now stop crying and go enjoy your card


----------



## Agility (May 31, 2016)

I have major flickering issues on R290 Crossfire playing TW3 / Dragon Age Inquisition.  Heck it annoys the heck out of me when i stop and stare at the environment, only to see mountains flickering in and out 

Been a fan of AMD since 9800PRO till now, even requesting all my friends and neighbors to go AMD. But when Nvidia GTX1080 released their card...... it make me cringe, wanting to jump to the green camp


----------



## Champ (May 31, 2016)

Agility said:


> I have major flickering issues on R290 Crossfire playing TW3 / Dragon Age Inquisition.  Heck it annoys the heck out of me when i stop and stare at the environment, only to see mountains flickering in and out
> 
> Been a fan of AMD since 9800PRO till now, even requesting all my friends and neighbors to go AMD. But when Nvidia GTX1080 released their card...... it make me cringe, wanting to jump to the green camp



I did also. I thought it was my board at first.


----------



## Champ (May 31, 2016)

The nano isn't bad, can't deny that. My 4850 however was terrible. Never had 1440p with Nvidia, but my lightning editiong 780 was a single card beast.


----------



## the54thvoid (May 31, 2016)

FordGT90Concept said:


> It's technically TressFX 3.0 which runs on DirectCompute and is open source.  TressFX, as far as I can recall, has never played favoritism for either brand; on the other hand, HairWorks (NVIDIA's competing API which is proprietary and closed source) caused a ruckus with Witcher 3's release because AMD cards had framerates fall >60% when enabled compared to GTX 980s 30% (see below, TressFX is far more friendly than HairWorks).
> 
> 
> Correct me if I'm wrong but I think you posted that RotTR graph to counter the Hitman graph.  The reason why AMD does well in Hitman and not so well in RotTR is because Hitman uses async compute which boosts AMD and hurts NVIDIA.
> ...



You seem to misunderstand me. My post specifically implied cherry picking. Such as I did with a DX12 title that hammers AMD.

For the record, AMD implemented high levels of async in Hitman for a reason. I posted the link in another thread. Same way Nvidia implemented high unnecessary levels of tesselation.

Tesselation improves textures to a reasonable extent when texture design isn't the most detailed. It's a good feature but can be abused to hinder hardware that doesn't cater as well as Nvidia does .
Same is true of async. Flooding a title with unnecessarily high batch calls isnt required for most games. But AMD will do it if they can to claw back Nvidia.
So the future remains the same. However, given how well Hawaii deals with async (sometimes outperforming Fury non X) it looks as though enough has been done on that front.
Next AMD architecture can hopefully bring all round performance increase not just limited to butchering levels of async or 4k res. As many people tout, AMD gets a lot of middle market purchase so 4k isn't part of that equation.


----------



## Ferrum Master (May 31, 2016)

There is actually the flickering bug on certain engines and z fighting. Skyrim is the best example. Altough I played it on 7970 much, I didn't notice it too. Also catalyst notes often flickering fixes with certain games. I had times with certain drivers ending up with red screens, freezes etc... usually it is lack of voltage, after doing hardmod and raising feedback the card became stable. So we cannot judge from one sample that all others are defective too.

So the truth lies in between. There is flickering, but on certain hardware combos, maybe defective or not. I have used various Ati cards too and had problems with both camps.

About tressFX and why to use hairworks etc...

A. Because nvidia pays to use their api.
B. Because it is faster to implement as nvidia usually helps itself.

And again. There is no wonder that same code causes more huge FPS drop due to architecture pipeline lenghts despite the overall peak compute power is the same. It's just compiling and higher level code. Who makes the sdk - rules the result.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (May 31, 2016)

the54thvoid said:


> Tesselation improves textures to a reasonable extent when texture design isn't the most detailed.


Tesselation dynamically adds and subtracts polygons so when you get close to an object, it renders in greater detail than the model is explicitly designed for:
http://www.nvidia.com/object/tessellation.html
https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/ff476340(v=vs.85).aspx
It's much more than "textures."

Back to HairWorks and Witcher 3: HairWorks is not optimized at all to run on GCN.  HairWorks is also closed source so AMD can't craft a fix of their own.  AMD cards can do tessellation as well as NVIDIA cards as demonstrated by the Dirt games.  Because AMD couldn't directly optimize HairWorks, AMD did the only thing they could do to improve performance and that's turning down the amount of tessellation in the driver.

That said, it seems like Wticher 3 is about the only title to use HairWorks.  It appears to be a dead end API as it should be.

Edit: NVIDIA apparently saw the writing on the wall and open-sourced HairWorks: http://wccftech.com/nvidia-gameworks-hairworks-github-release/


Async shaders are all about GPGPU at the same time as satisfying the graphics pipeline (read: not a separate card).  Ashes of the Singularity, for example, runs physics calculations on the GPU on top of graphics.  In terms of game development, especially on consoles, that's huge.  It allows games to do things they couldn't do previously.  Not only that, the things they do are meaningful to the game where PhysX, for example, has devolved into eye candy because it runs like crap on Intel/AMD (because NVIDIA has no intention to optimize it nor giving the source to them so they could optimize it at a reasonable price).  Async shading does work on NVIDIA cards but it incurs a FPS penalty where, on AMD cards, it boosts FPS likely because of freeing up the CPU.


----------



## medi01 (May 31, 2016)

xkm1948 said:


> I missed all the bad generations.


There was nothing wrong with neither 7xxx nor with great 5xxx.
380 was pretty good too. (with Sapphire coolers, non-freaking audible ^^)



Jack1n said:


> It's actually the die size that drives the production costs up, and yes, it's significant enough to cause the higher pricing that we are seeing.



This is so damn wrong on so many accounts that I'm not sure if you are serious or just trolling. Here is a list, pick any point:


It's a high end chip, there is no competition, yet it costs even more than previous gen chip, which again had no competition and was priced "generously".
It's roughly 300mm2 vs 980Ti's 600mm die size
AMD employs 7000 engineers, budgets of 20-30 million are laughable even to them in this context
699$ suddenly translated into 789€ in Germany, which is 880$, I guess Germans are getting chips built from even better, "bio" silicon waffers, lol
nVidia commands nearly 80% of the market, selling 4 times what AMD does, how does that apply to the earnings from each sale to cover R&D expenses pretty please?
Frankly, it would be funny if it wasn't so sad.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (May 31, 2016)

Here's a video showing a tech demo of what would become HairWorks and TressFX 2.0:








It starts with HairWorks and ends with TressFX.

It looks like TressFX has a lot of antialiasing going on making the hair look blurry where the HairWorks looks sharp and clear.  But the framerates!  HairWorks visably lags where TressFX is pegged at 60 fps and doesn't really deviate from it.  Granted, this is two years old.

I think I would use HairWorks for pre-rendered videos and TressFX for real-time rendering.

Edit: I think Deus Ex: Mankind Divided will be the first game to use TressFX 3.0...it may look on par with HairWorks without the massive performance penalty.

There's some movement of hair in the trailer but the hair is generally short with no wind.  The hair looks really good (doesn't have the blurriness of TressFX 2.0):


----------



## Aquinus (May 31, 2016)

OneMoar said:


> 6870 - screen corruption


I used the 6870 for 6 years and never encountered screen corruption. Just saying.


----------



## basco (May 31, 2016)

never regretted going either red or green.
the 5870,7970,290 i owned are great cards


----------



## Melvis (Jun 4, 2016)

I never regret going red and for the most part of my 10yrs with AMD cards it was great! The only reason I changed was I had nothing but dramas from my 2x 280x's that the last 10 driver updates from 15.7 just broke alot of the games I played and I just had enough and moved back to the green team.


----------



## Frick (Jun 4, 2016)

Aquinus said:


> Experiences vary greatly and I will tell a short story that's an example of that: Remember that XFX GeForce 8600 GTS that overclocked like hell? It also was using a proprietary MOLEX to PCI-E-like connector on the GPU which provided both +12v and +5v. Without knowing this at the time, I used a PCI-E power connector to power it since the key was the same and tried using it (for those of you who don't know, PCI-E power connectors only provide +12v.) The GPU was fine but, it ended up frying DDC on one of my monitors.



 That is pretty epic.

Edit: About corruption/flickering: I had that with my HD7850, a slight flicker in games,  mostly recognizable in dark areas, but it turns out there was something with me using a DVI-VGA adapter. I had the same problem on the GTX760, but much worse.


----------



## Ebo (Jun 4, 2016)

never had any problems with any of my red cards, ever since ATI 8500 back in the day.


----------



## Flow (Jun 4, 2016)

No problems here either.
The selling price is my reason for choosing amd cards. In general a person will have a max amount of money they are willing to spend.
So it's looking at what you can get for that amount. Amd haven't failed in that department yet.
So sure, for more money you can get faster cards, and they will usually be nvidia cards.
But I'm not willing to spend €800 for the latest and fastest card. Which will be surpassed in the next year or so anyways.

In my region prices are pretty much fixed on their respective performance, so more performance will cost more money. Hence, you'll get what you've payed for.


----------



## cdawall (Jun 4, 2016)

Only card I have ever regretted was the gtx295. The dual pcb ones were a complete fiasco. I am currently still using my 7950's is a second rig and they still hold their own and after flashing to an r9 280 bios they pick up for dx12.


----------



## thesmokingman (Jun 4, 2016)

Champ said:


> I regret paying almost 500 for my nano months ago




You probably don't regret it as much as someone who spent $1000 on a gpu.


----------



## GreiverBlade (Jun 4, 2016)

i know i will not regret going red if i have to, upon Polaris and Vega release ... nvidia did nothing worth of my 980, as i value more price to performances ratio.... and they pretty much did, this time ... as they usually do: f**k it up.

my 980 is an exception as it was the best price to perf ratio i ever had ... since i got it in a giveaway  my previous 290 was still up to the task (specially at 150$... ok 280$ once under a waterblock ) 

i never regret going red or green... if i do go one side or another, it's mainly because i got a "killer deal" 


short version: waiting for the 480 benchies ... and probably Vega before going any color ...


----------



## Champ (Jun 29, 2016)

I still stand by my point. 480 belly flopped. When their new high-end drops NV will have surpassed twice


----------



## yogurt_21 (Jun 29, 2016)

I got my R9 290 3-4 months before the 970 came out. Not only was it cheaper, but had less power draw, was quieter, and at the time was a bit faster. While all that was tempting I still don't regret it. The card has held up and still holds up. The 3-4 months of gaming I got with the 290 compared with the 480 sli solution was infinitely more enjoyable than waiting. Plus the card will still play every new title at 1080p which is what my monitor is. 

now the nano isn't my thing at all so I would have gone 980 ti prior to the 1080 launch, shoot likely still after due to the shortage.


----------



## redeye (Jun 29, 2016)

Good memories, but

Yes, i was always disappointed... (Compared to Intel i though i wasmy last AMD card was a 6950. before that it was a 6850, then 4890, 3850... All the way back to an ATI aiw x800 .... The 6950 no longer works... (Missed up changing the heatsink)

And the last processor i had from them is the fx8350 (collectors metal tin package FTW )

(funny thing, all of my AMD motherboards (for the fx8350 processor have crapped out.) before that the  11000, 9850,9600, 3700,3200...


The disappointing thing about the fx8350, at 4.4G it was not the same as a 4790k at the same speed. (Not sure why but i was always getting 10Fps less on the amd fx8350/sli gtx980...

yet, AMD is  Surviving via  the console business.  Which mean they will be around for a long time (also they have the only x86 license, beside INTEL)


----------



## natr0n (Jun 29, 2016)




----------



## GreiverBlade (Jun 29, 2016)

Champ said:


> I still stand by my point. 480 belly flopped. When their new high-end drops NV will have surpassed twice


nope ... since the direct concurrent of the RX480 is not here already : the 1060  (surpassed twice ....  i wonder if they even did that once ... on one side or another  )

the RX480 was not meant to be pitted against the 1070 or 1080 ... (at last not at a price 3 time lower, even more judging by the prices of the 1070 and 1080 where i live ... i can get 2 RX480 8gb for *ONE *1070 and nearly 4 RX480 for one 1080)

imho
old line was Fury 390X 390 380X  VS 980 Ti 980 970 960
new line is    Vega 490(hypothetical atm i know, let's say Fury since the Fury line still hold good enough to be in the 490 spot )  480  VS 1080 1070 1060 (until the 1080Ti come out  )

so it's not a belly flop, it's 100% doing what it was designed for ... being a "cheap" high midrange card (oohhh just like the 1060 ... sans le "cheap" since it's Nvidia )

even if the RX480 is lower than my 980 .... AIB custom model might change that ... who know ... (8pin 2x6pin better cooling ... mostly solving the issues )


----------



## ChristineAndRusty (Jun 30, 2016)

Elder state? Fair enough. OK, some folks can afford huge 8 gig whatever's and boards from places that may or may not have existed in 1990, and don't forget the wireless mouse. (couldn't figure the thing out when it hit the market with a wire and ball), but from where I sit I like "RED". After a certain "Elder state" set in and I had time for hobbies, I bought one, Dell Latitude Cpi Pentium II , Windows 95. Had a lot more internet than the ones I had used in the hospital, send orders to the pharmacy, admit records to the floors from the ER. Then SETI came along. It has been and still is a learning experience-but I don't know enough, probably never will know enough. Eventually, as I am, I wanted to know how things worked. Finally I found out what all the fuss was about video cards. I had a card that was just huge, had a laugh when I read the type-I can't remember it was so long ago, but the PC ran better and faster, then AGP and those lovely VIA and Pegatron boards. I still have a couple of them laying around, AGP's. 
So we decided to build a pair, the twins, and we spent a little money. The wife built her first one just about the same as I did, the not so free parts, and eventually had what we wanted, GPU and all. Now days a $10.00 USD used card is pretty spendy, but what others think is no good, Oland 2 gig, Cape Verde 1 gig, etc. I find just fine for doin what I'm doin. They'll be in a card's box from the upgrade, they still work, I never found one that didn't work. And yes, frame rates mean something to me as do shaders and unified cores.  AMD. "Built on AMD Architecture". Have seen it in so many print outs, it means something to someone-especially when Bentell uses it, I always see it in there some where. AMD is fine enough. I pulled a part of the info from this everyday klunker, (it's a Hardly Possible, Pavillion dv9000) so bear with me as it is in text form, you know that works:

  NUMBER_OF_PROCESSORS  2
  OS  Windows_NT
  Path  C:\Program Files\Common Files\Microsoft Shared\Windows Live;C:\Program Files (x86)\Common Files\Microsoft Shared\Windows Live;C:\ProgramData\Oracle\Java\javapath;C:\Windows\system32;C:\Windows;C:\Windows\System32\Wbem;C:\Windows\System32\WindowsPowerShell\v1.0\;C:\Program Files (x86)\QuickTime Alternative\QTSystem;C:\Program Files (x86)\QuickTime Alternative\QTSystem\;C:\Program Files (x86)\Windows Live\Shared
  PATHEXT  .COM;.EXE;.BAT;.CMD;.VBS;.VBE;.JS;.JSE;.WSF;.WSH;.MSC
  PROCESSOR_ARCHITECTURE  x86
  PROCESSOR_ARCHITEW6432  AMD64 <---**HERE**
  PROCESSOR_IDENTIFIER  Intel64 Family 6 Model 15 Stepping 10, GenuineIntel, ,,
  PROCESSOR_LEVEL  6
  PROCESSOR_REVISION  0f0a


RED, have a pile of green things that usually are handed down from friends when they go buy the "Next new release from nVidia": 9500GT,9800GT, an N740 2gig, all run, all always crave attention, always want the next PhysX, CUDA tools, or that one even wanted full control over board/ RAM/chip set/ CPU, and a driver for finding new drivers to try to get another driver..my first wife was like that, always craving attention... Just clock from the bios, install the driver and CCC if you want and sit back and it does what it's supposed to: Oland 2 gig, it set even at 1200 mem and 1200 core, benched it some where and that's what they said too. But then this is just a hobby and it's supposed to be fun, and fun usually don't cost $400.00 and get water cooled either, hmmmm.... well, maybe somewhere it does, and probably not even PC related if ya know what I mean. Sorry so long winded, don't never have much to say except once in a while I do.............................


----------



## ZoneDymo (Jun 30, 2016)

Well lets see, Nvidia PCX5200 was... well it worked sooo yeah fine I guess.
Nvidia 7900GTO worked for a while, but drivers where a bitch.
Nvidia 8800GTS G92 worked great for a while but then got heat issues and drivers again were ass.

AMD HD6950, worked and still works great and no problems with the drivers ever soooo no, so far team RED has been really good to me.

Not that that influences my next card choice though but team RED is at least as valid a choice (and in my personal experience perhaps the better choice so far).


----------



## CAPSLOCKSTUCK (Jun 30, 2016)

I have no regrets or favourites


----------



## R-T-B (Jun 30, 2016)

I did have one AMD regret.

A build featuring a Phenom I (can't quite remember what, but I think it was a quad core?) and a HD 2900 XT Crossfire setup.  My god that build was hot, noisy, and could barely run bioshock I maxed where the GTX 280 could do it with practically one card.

I've liked all my other AMD cards.  But the early merger GPU cards were dark, bad days.  I hear the CPUs after that never quite got back to their former glory, as well.


----------



## P4-630 (Jun 30, 2016)

CAPSLOCKSTUCK said:


> I have no regrets or favourites
> 
> View attachment 75874



But..But... Your green apple is in the spotlight....


----------



## R-T-B (Jun 30, 2016)

P4-630 said:


> But..But... Your green apple is in the spotlight....



Duly noted.  CAPS is an apple racist.


----------



## laszlo (Jun 30, 2016)

correct thread title shall be " Anybody regret buying an over-priced hyped product?" 

as i see who can afford shall not ask these kind of questions...no matter if bought red or green


----------



## D007 (Jun 30, 2016)

You shouldn't go red Johnny.. My grandmother went red once... Once...


----------



## CAPSLOCKSTUCK (Jun 30, 2016)

R-T-B said:


> Duly noted.  CAPS is an apple racist.










I currently have Sapphire HD7970 in one PC and EVGA GTX 680 in another............they are both great for what i play.


----------



## R-T-B (Jun 30, 2016)

CAPSLOCKSTUCK said:


> View attachment 75883
> 
> 
> I currently have Sapphire HD7970 in one PC and EVGA GTX 680 in another............they are both great for what i play.



Not sure if people still remember, but I used an R9 290X until early last year and was very happy.


----------



## AsRock (Jun 30, 2016)

R-T-B said:


> I did have one AMD regret.
> 
> A build featuring a Phenom I (can't quite remember what, but I think it was a quad core?) and a HD 2900 XT Crossfire setup.  My god that build was hot, noisy, and could barely run bioshock I maxed where the GTX 280 could do it with practically one card.
> 
> I've liked all my other AMD cards.  But the early merger GPU cards were dark, bad days.  I hear the CPUs after that never quite got back to their former glory, as well.



Yeah the 2900XT hated AA too lol, if there was any it be that one.


----------



## Recon-UK (Jun 30, 2016)

I had a bad time with my old 4870, it was a Gainward Golden Sample (high end) no end of driver issues and there was so much stuttering.
7770 was great no issues ever, only it died...








AsRock said:


> Yeah the 2900XT hated AA too lol, if there was any it be that one.



My 670 get's a little annoyed when i apply a lot of AA, the GPU can process it but it seems like the memory bandwidth or something can't? huge frame drops when a lot of stuff is going on with AA applied, though not in every game.


----------



## AsRock (Jun 30, 2016)

The 2900XT just did not like AA period.  Although it did replace a 7900 which had a terrible design and i was just not willing to trust a nVidia card at that for a while.


----------



## Champ (Jul 1, 2016)

Oddly enough my favor setup was crossfire 290s. It did a decent job at 4k for the price.


----------



## dieselcat18 (Jul 1, 2016)

R-T-B said:


> Not sure if people still remember, but I used an R9 290X until early last year and was very happy.



I just moved on from my ASUS R9 290X OC several months ago. Ran that card for approx 2 1/2 years and was extremely pleased with it in every way.


----------



## D007 (Jul 1, 2016)

Champ said:


> Oddly enough my favor setup was crossfire 290s. It did a decent job at 4k for the price.


My SLI 980's didn't even run 4k well..
You mean 3k?
27 fps in metro last light, is not what I consider decent anyway..


----------



## R-T-B (Jul 1, 2016)

Champ said:


> Oddly enough my favor setup was crossfire 290s. It did a decent job at 4k for the price.



Nothing odd about that.  The 290 and the 2900XT (which I was upset with) are entirely different cards.


----------



## Recon-UK (Jul 1, 2016)

Best GPU i ever owned is the GTX 480.... besides it's heat issues and making summer a living hell... for real...
Fermi was a monster, throw AA at it all day long, just kept churning out the numbers.


----------



## Caring1 (Jul 1, 2016)

Recon-UK said:


> Best GPU i ever owned is the GTX 480.... besides it's heat issues and making summer a living hell... for real...
> Fermi was a monster, throw AA at it all day long, just kept churning out the numbers.


I like purple


----------



## Recon-UK (Jul 1, 2016)

This is awesome and i agree.


----------



## Champ (Jul 1, 2016)

My game at the time was dragon age Inquisition and the mantle drivers worked wonders.


----------



## P4-630 (Jul 1, 2016)

I was very satisfied with my Gigabyte HD3870 and HD4870 after that, back in the days, amazing overclockers!


----------



## Recon-UK (Jul 1, 2016)

P4-630 said:


> I was very satisfied with my Gigabyte HD3870 and HD4870 after that, back in the days, amazing overclockers!



Glad you had a good 4870, mine would only manage 40mhz on the core and nothing on the memory and it was a Golden Sample... i mean really expensive, dual bios and everything


----------



## P4-630 (Jul 1, 2016)

Recon-UK said:


> Glad you had a good 4870, mine would only manage 40mhz on the core and nothing on the memory and it was a Golden Sample... i mean really expensive, dual bios and everything



Bummer man!
I took off the Zalman coolers they had and installed this one with a 120mm and one 80mm fan on the other side (Thermalright)


----------



## ChristineAndRusty (Jul 2, 2016)

XFX Radeon HD 5570 DirectX 11 HD-557X-ZNFR 1GB 128-Bit DDR3 PCI Express 2.1 x16 Video Card






 Just a hand me down but it really is smooth. Traded a 750GTX that was little "touched" if you know what I mean. Fan had a mind of it's own, friend blamed the Phenom II UCC Gigabyte board and offered this to help me out. Board is fine, GTX is a paperweight now.  So, we're still friends, and I'm pleased with the choice I had to make.


----------



## dieselcat18 (Jul 2, 2016)

Just recently went to a Nvidia card. Last ones I owned were a GTX7900 & GTX8800 (not much luck with the 8800)

Since then it's been all RED till now.

An ATi Radeon 9800 Pro 256MB 







An ASUS HD4870 512MB (beautiful looking card) (shortly thereafter went to a HIS HD4890 1GB for the increased onboard memory)







Then went with a Sapphire 6970 2GB (another nice running card at the time)




Bought this about 2 1/2 years ago....ASUS R9 290X 4GB OC....Still love this card







Switched to Nvidia due to the price drops of 980ti's since the release of the 1080 cards.


----------



## P4-630 (Jul 2, 2016)

dieselcat18 said:


> Just recently went to a Nvidia card. Last ones I owned were a GTX7900 & GTX8800 (not much luck with the 8800)
> 
> Since then it's been all RED till now.
> 
> ...



You should post these photos in https://www.techpowerup.com/forums/threads/tpus-nostalgic-hardware-club.108251/page-179#post-3482447


----------



## Cvrk (Jul 2, 2016)

Champ said:


> So it wasn't until I saw Jayz 2 Cent recent aftermarket 1080 vid, that I realized I made a huge mistake. I need to stop trying to go against the grain and support the underdog. Nvidia is dominating for a reason and I saw it. I regret paying almost 500 for my nano months ago and I'm definitely regretting getting a freesync monitor now. We gotta be realistic. AMD will probably never catch Intel/Nvidia. Processor or graphics wise.


i have a freesync monitor. will get the asus rx 480 in one month when it will come out. wanted to get the r9 380x but the rx is a much better deal.
so why you regret the freesync ?


----------



## Champ (Jul 2, 2016)

Now freesync is one thing I don't regret. It works well. It's just that currently AMD best offering doesn't allow it was work all the time. Cut off rate for my monitor is 40 fps. My nano OCed struggles to keep that at certain scenes in the Witcher 3. I play that the most now. With older games, it's wonderful with the resolution booster thing. Can't think of the name.


----------



## pbm86 (Jul 2, 2016)

My first ATI card XPert 2000 (not sure PRO or not) had pretty terrible performance at the time I got it. Later all my Radeon cards were pretty good. I used a 9550 for a long time and it lost its usefulness in the end and it died after 8-9 years use. Now I have working HD 5670, HD 7870 and a R7 360. Still pretty good cards.


----------



## remixedcat (Jul 3, 2016)

AMD would have to wine-n-dine the hell outta me to get me to get another one of thier products again. There was a thread on thier forums about the latest card killing PCI-E slots!!! wtf is that shit? That's scary and I only have one slot on my mobo so fat chance of them getting a chance in this system.


----------



## Cvrk (Jul 3, 2016)

pbm86 said:


> My first ATI card XPert 2000 (not sure PRO or not) had pretty terrible performance at the time I got it. Later all my Radeon cards were pretty good. I used a 9550 for a long time and it lost its usefulness in the end and it died after 8-9 years use. Now I have working HD 5670, HD 7870 and a R7 360. Still pretty good cards.


i almost got the monitor, you have. it was so much cheaper. a friend of mine told me about it. and then i went for the newer version with freesync.
i am so looking for testing this freesync. i hear so many good things about it. here on TPU not many people talk about it. one more month till the asus rx comes out.
with your specs i think you could safely upgrade the card . that i5 that you have is still super good


----------



## Jetster (Jul 3, 2016)

I pulled my GTX760 out of my HTPC and sold it. Put a R7 250X in it just for kicks. The resolution changes when it comes out of sleep. Windows the browser and screws up Kodi HDMI and AVR. Going back to Nvidia as it did not do this. Will try a GTX750 ti


----------



## Recon-UK (Jul 3, 2016)

Ahem...


----------



## Saturn11111 (Jul 4, 2016)

AMD has its own advantages like PS4 and XBOX APUs


----------



## Recon-UK (Jul 4, 2016)

I had one of these on an Athlon II quad!!











Great for 720P at the time


----------



## R-T-B (Jul 5, 2016)

remixedcat said:


> AMD would have to wine-n-dine the hell outta me to get me to get another one of thier products again. There was a thread on thier forums about the latest card killing PCI-E slots!!! wtf is that shit? That's scary and I only have one slot on my mobo so fat chance of them getting a chance in this system.



The irony to me is that the only card to ever kill one (actually 3) of my PCIe slots was a EVGA GTX 980 (defective, granted)


----------



## wolar (Jul 5, 2016)

Jetster said:


> I pulled my GTX760 out of my HTPC and sold it. Put a R7 250X in it just for kicks. The resolution changes when it comes out of sleep. Windows the browser and screws up Kodi HDMI and AVR. Going back to Nvidia as it did not do this. Will try a GTX750 ti


It maybe the cable , i had a DP on my 970 and it had the same changing resolution problems.


----------



## Jetster (Jul 7, 2016)

Jetster said:


> I pulled my GTX760 out of my HTPC and sold it. Put a R7 250X in it just for kicks. The resolution changes when it comes out of sleep. Windows the browser and screws up Kodi HDMI and AVR. Going back to Nvidia as it did not do this. Will try a GTX750 ti




Just following up on this.
The issue was my HTPC I shut the TV and Receiver off leaving the PC running 24/7. When I would start the TV back up my resolution had changed, browser windowed and Kodi at 600X800 ..
Switched back to Nvidia now GTX 750 ti. Now works perfect. Maintains resolution out of sleep state also.


----------



## yezok (Nov 1, 2016)

Nope, I do not regret going red team. I recently opted for an XFX rx-480 black edition other than a problem with wattman  refusing to cycle up the fans, now I think I gots that solved it performs pretty damn good. I average 85 FPS in dues Ex mankind divided with everything cranked, I had considered The 1060 cost was about the same and I could not find a crow bar big enough to pry the coin from my wallet for a 1070 or 1080. I know they perform better but for what i need it's too much overkill. Besides never was much of a fan since they offed 3DFX many moons ago after they took them over. I was running 2 asus en8600 gt's that were given too me but the tearing I sometimes experienced was terrible but they were good for other games and crunched seti work units fairly decent.


----------



## alucasa (Nov 1, 2016)

Holy Nerco.


----------



## R-T-B (Nov 1, 2016)

alucasa said:


> Holy Nerco.



He's only dabbling in the dark arts, this is a minor necro compared to some of the tomb-defilers around here.


----------



## Fluffmeister (Nov 1, 2016)

Necros are funny though, only reason is 16nm! Polaris will destroy the GTX 1080!

Comedy GOLD!

https://www.techpowerup.com/forums/threads/anybody-regret-going-red.222878/page-2#post-3465039


----------



## P4-630 (Nov 1, 2016)

Fluffmeister said:


> Necros are funny though, only reason is 16nm! Polaris will destroy the GTX 1080!
> 
> Comedy GOLD!
> 
> https://www.techpowerup.com/forums/threads/anybody-regret-going-red.222878/page-2#post-3465039


----------



## Frag_Maniac (Nov 1, 2016)

Champ said:


> So it wasn't until I saw Jayz 2 Cent recent aftermarket 1080 vid, that I realized I made a huge mistake. I need to stop trying to go against the grain and support the underdog. Nvidia is dominating for a reason and I saw it. I regret paying almost 500 for my nano months ago and I'm definitely regretting getting a freesync monitor now. We gotta be realistic. AMD will probably never catch Intel/Nvidia. Processor or graphics wise.





Kursah said:


> No but for what you got for the money at the time the R9 Nano was a good deal I'm sure...


I caught hell from diehard Nano users in a Nano fanboy thread when I implied they were in denial even well after they purchased it and lower priced cards were beating it. Mind you this was not just that newer, lower priced cards were beating it, it was that they were still advocating people buying them. When they launched I predicted they would at best garner a cult following of small form factor builders, if nothing else for the cute and small appeal. I look back, and I don't think I was wrong about that.


----------



## Hnykill22 (Nov 1, 2016)

After having AMD 8350 for some while and AMD 7950, i gave up seeing so many having Core i7  and superior GPU's. so i got my self a X99 system. I7 5820K @4.4, and a GTX 1070. and im not looking back. and suddenly games started playing games at 1080p at Ultra.  100+ fps. im not going back until team RED starts doing the same.


----------



## xkm1948 (Nov 1, 2016)

It's been a year and more since I got my FuryX, totally love it. Nope, I have no regret going red. I feel lucky I didn't buy 970 or 980Ti when I was building my rig, since both of these older maxwell cards are losing performance fast in new games.


----------



## the54thvoid (Nov 1, 2016)

xkm1948 said:


> It's been a year and more since I got my FuryX, totally love it. Nope, I have no regret going red. I feel lucky I didn't buy 970 or 980Ti when I was building my rig, since both of these older maxwell cards are losing performance fast in new games.



Umm, no.  My 980ti is doing just fine.  Ran Deus Ex at a handsome pace (in DX11 of course, I'm W7 still) and running BF1 at a smoothness I didn't get in BF4.  I can see the 970 struggling with the memory framebuffer but 6Gb is quite enough on the 980ti and the speeds it can run with it's core count make it very effective.  It just looks bad compared to the new 1080 which is about 20% faster.


----------



## alucasa (Nov 1, 2016)

I don't care either way. I am not someone who chooses a side.

Having said that, I tend to prefer Nvidia due to needing to work with CUDA. After moving to Xeon E5-2683v3, however, I can choose Red if I want and am thinking of RX470.


----------



## Fluffmeister (Nov 1, 2016)

The Nano was overpriced turkey in the end, there are niches then there are niches, then there was the market the Nano was targeted at.


----------



## LightningJR (Nov 2, 2016)

I didn't regret having a Phenom II X3 that I unlocked and overclocked, I was very happy with it. When I got my 2500k though I noticed a quickness, in general computing, that wasn't present with the AMD and the fact that it overclocked to nearly 5Ghz made me giggle like a school girl.

I hope to go from my 2500K to Zen next year. I hope it turns out to be great.

I would say that I also don't regret having an APU in my laptop but I am disappointing in it's performance, mainly the CPU. It was a cheap laptop with an A8 so I can't complain too hard. We need Zen APUs in laptops asap because Intel/discrete GPU laptops don't live in the budget space.


----------



## cdawall (Nov 2, 2016)

youfail1e said:


> You been told. Power up admin, not a good shot blocker. You're just impeding on the freedom of speech.



There is no freedom of speech on a privately owned internet forum you clown. This forum isn't even based out of the US.


----------



## eidairaman1 (Nov 2, 2016)

cdawall said:


> There is no freedom of speech on a privately owned internet forum you clown. This forum isn't even based out of the US.



Yup anything goes as long as it is not blatently insulting members haha


----------



## Aquinus (Nov 2, 2016)

cdawall said:


> There is no freedom of speech on a privately owned internet forum you clown. This forum isn't even based out of the US.


I bet I know who he's voting for but, I probably shouldn't say more or, I'll be earning myself a vacation. 

I feel like I need to say something on topic now. I don't regret my 390 purchase any less than I do my 6870s. If it gets me until next summer without an upgrade, I think I can say it has earned its value.


----------



## rtwjunkie (Nov 2, 2016)

Aquinus said:


> I feel like I need to say something on topic now. I don't regret my 390 purchase any less than I do my 6870s.



I don't regret the 380x on one of my systems. It's an excellent all-round mid-tier GPU that works great at 1080p.


----------



## Aquinus (Nov 2, 2016)

youfail1e said:


> Shut the fuck up


I hope you don't kiss your mother with that mouth.


rtwjunkie said:


> I don't regret the 380x on one of my systems. It's an excellent all-round mid-tier GPU that works great at 1080p.


Since the beginning I've started with low tier and have worked by way up. The 6870 was my first mid-tier GPU that I wanted to buy "hot off the press." I ordered it on release day and I still have it and works great. It gave me an amazing 6 years of use, 3 years alone and 3 more in crossfire. You can't really ask more from a GPU than that if you ask me.


----------



## TRUELOVE95 (Nov 2, 2016)

EntropyZ said:


> I feel similarly when I bought the R9 380 for 230 euros (new) from my local hardware retailer, when I got it it had fan issues for a month before AMD fixed it in the drivers, and even then the thing would downclock like crazy all the time and made some poorly optimized games macro-stutter. I thought the raw power of Red team was going to win over the GTX 960 which was cheaper and ran all games smooth at my monitors resolution.
> 
> I was always running an nVidia card since the Geforce 2 MX, from there it goes to 7200GS and then finally I got a good mid-range card for the first time in my whole life, it was the GTX 460 768MB in 2011 (for 100 pounds) which pretty was solid for 3 years before I sold it off and went looking for my next big jump in performance. (Most people probably think the GTX 460 is a damn dinosaur now, but hey it plays some recent ports from Square Enix at 1080p60FPS! Namely FFXIII)
> 
> ...




That is a very very accurate post.
http://gpu.userbenchmark.com/
if you sort by speed, you can tell your card is very much top notch for the price. nothing compares unless you spend about twice as much.

I bought three R9 380 for roughly 100euro brand new. Sold two for 300euro, kept the third card. Might sell the card, because I don't believe now is a good time to buy cards. But at this point in time, the card is ultimately bargain dollars at 100euro new.

The only caveat is with new cards like 1050ti, the card is on my second list, because I always favor nvidia cards over their drivers, and although I rock some ati cards, that is due to bargain prices.


----------



## TheGuruStud (Nov 2, 2016)

Aquinus said:


> I hope you don't kiss your mother with that mouth.



Only his sister and if the 1st cousins want to join in.


----------



## Recon-UK (Nov 2, 2016)

Wow well this was a pretty normal thread for the most part.

I'm grabbing a GTX 1070, i have plans to move on to 1440P so it makes sense for me plus i have a job that can cover the costs.
But i would never turn down a well priced Radeon that could deliver similar performance at a lesser cost, Nvidia have the lead in efficiency for now they also have a few extra features like Shadowplay and PhysX which.. once you get used to them are nice, however i can live without them.


----------



## eidairaman1 (Nov 2, 2016)

youfail1e said:


> Shut the fuck up



Reported


----------



## Caring1 (Nov 2, 2016)

gboy4u said:


> bta, biggest L


What does that even mean?
Who opened the gates early at preschool!


----------



## 64K (Nov 2, 2016)

Caring1 said:


> What does that even mean?
> Who opened the gates early at preschool!



I think this is the same guy that's already been banned twice yesterday from two accounts for posting crap.


----------



## rtwjunkie (Nov 2, 2016)

64K said:


> I think this is the same guy that's already been banned twice yesterday from two accounts for posting crap.



No idea what this asshat is on about but I've reported both "personas"


----------



## 64K (Nov 2, 2016)

And here is his 4th account in two days. Good lord!


----------



## Caring1 (Nov 2, 2016)

havokg said:


> There is no need to tell me nothin.


That means we need to tell you something! Your grammar and attitude need work.


----------



## cdawall (Nov 2, 2016)

Jesus since no one has taken notice and yes I know this isn't some of your sections.

@W1zzard @btarunr @sneekypeet @Fourstaff @Paulieg @Mussels @HammerON

It's like a dumber ashen Jr.


----------



## rtwjunkie (Nov 2, 2016)

cdawall said:


> Jesus since no one has taken notice and yes I know this isn't some of your sections.
> 
> @W1zzard @btarunr @sneekypeet @Fourstaff @Paulieg @Mussels @HammerON



I've already reported all 5 personas as the same IP.


----------



## Caring1 (Nov 2, 2016)

rtwjunkie said:


> I've already reported all 5 personas as the same IP.


I've also reported this troll, as I'm sure others have.


----------



## cdawall (Nov 2, 2016)

rtwjunkie said:


> I've already reported all 5 personas as the same IP.



I'm just trying to catch one of the poor guys that's actually awake. What's sad is I think I missed the mod that actually took care of it  sorry @RCoon I see you down there boss hossing it. 

Give it a bit w1z loves them Mac address and blanket bans.


----------



## RCoon (Nov 2, 2016)

Gotta love it when a 13 year old thinks he's some kind of script kiddie, makes a couple of accounts by filling the sign up form _manually _and somehow thinks he can inject worms with BB code or some crap. Not my section, but I imagine a mod will be down to close the thread shortly since it was some sort of necro anyway.


----------



## eidairaman1 (Nov 2, 2016)

RCoon said:


> Gotta love it when a 13 year old thinks he's some kind of script kiddie, makes a couple of accounts by filling the sign up form _manually _and somehow thinks he can inject worms with BB code or some crap. Not my section, but I imagine a mod will be down to close the thread shortly since it was some sort of necro anyway.




Lol Takin the trash out RCoon


----------



## alucasa (Nov 2, 2016)

Holy Necro.



Just close it already. Any threads involving Red vs. Green or Red vs. Blue never end well. It's stupid.


----------



## NDown (Nov 2, 2016)

Going Red is one of the best decision i made

Sold my 970 for around $320 and picks up a 2nd hand cheapo R9 290 for $190 for the sake of giving FreeSync a shot

The performance difference isnt that far in 2016,  or should i say both are pretty on par (i sold it in early 2016, around mid-January before the 10 series were released) 

Not going to go green again unless G-Sync can match Freesync in terms of price/value 

the cheapest G-sync monitor which is the Benq XL2420G starts at around $560 here, while i snatched my AOC G2460PF for around $240


----------



## Athlon2K15 (Nov 2, 2016)

I regret going red every time i give AMD a shot at changing my mind.


----------



## cdawall (Nov 2, 2016)

AthlonX2 said:


> I regret going red every time i give AMD a shot at changing my mind.



I haven't ever regretted going red. Back when xfire had crazy issues SLi was just as bad, I am loving my RX480 right now, but this is back onto single card land so who knows how that will do if I get a second.

I will say my Ti4200 and GTX470 are still my favorite cards of all times.


----------



## neatfeatguy (Nov 2, 2016)

I had AMD CPUs for a long while and I liked what they had up through the Phenom II chips (even if they were a bit behind Intel's offerings at the time). I had high hopes for Bulldozer - we all know what happened there. I held out in hopes that Piledriver would fix what Bulldozer failed with - we all know what happened there. I then waited it out for a while to see if Steamroller could be a winner - but that never came to light.

Once AMD put a kibosh to their desktop x86 CPUs and pulled Steamroller and scrapped Excavator, I picked up my i5-4670k. The i5 was an amazing improvement over my Phenom II x4 940 (that I had been using for 5 years, most of which it was running at 3.7 or 3.6). I put new life into my GTX 570s I ran in SLI. I kept the 570s for almost another 2 years because going form the PII to the i5, any game I ran saw almost double the performance or more.

I'm hoping Zen can put AMD back on good, solid ground for their desktop CPUs. I like AMD, but I can't at the moment support their products. Hopefully things will turn around for them once Polaris gets out and Zen comes out.


----------



## Flow (Nov 2, 2016)

Hm, being used to ati and now amd it's kinda hard for me to go nvidia.
Even though the gaming numbers should encourage me.
But never regretted going for amd videocards.
And after all, they usually give you good performance for a reasonable price.

The latest nvidia cards though, could very well be a sign on the wall. Amd needs to catch up quickly.


----------



## TRUELOVE95 (Nov 2, 2016)

Why do you reply to an angry person? He is angry, replying to his "trolling" will not help situations.
Maybe he has issues at home.

Anyway do you think I should sell a r9 380 for a 1050 ti? yes, benchmarks show slight edge but I am all for power efficient cards and Nvidia is always always very stable with programs apps and drivers. Not to mention they just work better as well due to their physx in card tech and etc etc features.


----------



## TRUELOVE95 (Nov 2, 2016)

Flow said:


> Hm, being used to ati and now amd it's kinda hard for me to go nvidia.
> Even though the gaming numbers should encourage me.
> But never regretted going for amd videocards.
> And after all, they usually give you good performance for a reasonable price.
> ...


I prefer nvidia cards as well, but AMD is always very very well performing for the price.


----------



## IceScreamer (Nov 2, 2016)

I tend to buy AMD, mostly because I never had problems with them. Same deal with Intel, though they are out of my price range. On the other hand I only had issues with Nvidia in the past (had 2 of them) so I try to stay away.


----------



## jaggerwild (Nov 4, 2016)

Buying AMD=keeps all costs low. Buying Nividia=you get old tech over priced heaters at over $650(they making gaming similar to the American Dream)a thing of the past!


----------



## Frag_Maniac (Nov 4, 2016)

jaggerwild said:


> Buying AMD=keeps all costs low. Buying Nividia=you get old tech over priced heaters at over $650(they making gaming similar to the American Dream)a thing of the past!



Not to perpetuate a red vs green war, but AMD kept their Nano prices high even when the $250 GTX 1060 6 GB was beating it, and the Nano was over priced to begin with. There's being loyal, then there's being gullible. Point being they've both had their over priced products, driver issues, cooler issues, over hype, etc, etc.

That's why you have to choose by product, not by brand. I'm pretty much color blind when I make my decision.


----------



## cdawall (Nov 4, 2016)

Only thing I am regretting right this second is how long it's taking glofo to produce Polaris chips with acceptable wattage in larger yields.


----------



## AlienIsGOD (Nov 4, 2016)

i dont regret trading up from a gtx 680 to an rx 480  i couldn't be more happier with my purchase, that being said my 680 was a great card as well (the 2gb vram was the downer)


----------

