sutyiWell... if you take a gander at the specs of the 1050Ti 4GB, you'll see it will be in the same ballpark as 960 4GB model.

There are three things where I can see the 1050Ti edge out the 960 4GB.

• 1440p gaming due to better DCC in the memorycontroller + higher pixel fillrate
  • Probably kinda dubious as the raw horsepower isn't really there, so going per se from 30 to 33fps at that resolution is pointless imo.
• Power consumption / Heat generated making it a better choice for ITX and HTPC builds
• Overclock headroom, if they don't limit it severely in the BIOS and what not.

If the 1060 is anything to go by, arguing OC is kinda pointless as the memory bus lets out first, pretty well much negating any OC.

Not sure if thats a cool thing to have, or descriptive of the aenemic memory bus this generation on Pascal.

Holy Hell people... you are toxic.

First of all complete lack of understanding and appreciation for money. 20-30 dollars in the US is not what the world pays. Sometimes, things simply COST MORE in other places. Those 20-30 dollars will amount to a 50 euro difference in my country!

Not everything fits in your small, tiny, little monolingual worldview. Also not everyone makes as much as you... some make a lot more and others a lot less. Show some human empathy...

Reading some of these comments I wonder whether AMD or Nvidia killed a loved one or something, it literally makes no sense. Or at best whether you really are just as good as their engineers (almost certainly not).

Finally... this "ugh 1080 Ultra or it is worthless" mentality is stupid. The PCMR joke got to your head and made you lack in thinking abilities. Ultra or Very High settings are bolted on top of games in 95% of cases. They offer just slightly better visuals for a very big hit to performance. It is future proofing of the actual game, you know, for those of us that are gamers and play old games as well?

Learn how games are made, learn what settings do and see what consoles actually run games on, settings-wise. Then play a few old games, stop being monolingual, read a book and grow some empathy and sense.

PC Gamers have gone to pot...

IceScreamerStating facts, their products should speak for themselves. If your product is good enough then it will sell, without any comparisons or slides (especially slides that you make in wake of competing products coming out). RX 470 is a good card, but AMD seems to think well, a bit differently. And that's what my complaint was about.

The fact is, a 470 handily beats a 1050 Ti, and for $30 more it should be an easy choice for most. Unfortunately, in the world of PC gaming, brand loyalty and mindshare play a headscratchingly-large role in what people choose to buy. It's basically tribalism to some degree. Hence slides like this from AMD. So, desperate: yes! Foolish: no! It's not foolish, it's necessary as a way to battle the skew of the mindshare in this market. It won't help much, but AMD needs to claw back as much of the mindshare of the market as they can.

Nevertheless, the 1050 series will undoubtedly outsell the 460/470 at a ratio that makes ZERO sense, only explained by this borderline-dogmatic support and faith in one brand over the other. It will take a lot for AMD to really get it back in the dGPU space, like a string of absolute clobberings, where people are basically forced into going with AMD over nVidia due to the huge performance gap. Probably not happening anytime soon with the large disparity in R&D between the two.

So, they're going to have to live with a relatively small piece of the market share. Which they should be able to do. It's still a huge market that's only expected to grow.

And luckily for them, this "mindshare" concept is much less important on the CPU side (businesses don't care about what brand is powering their machines nearly as much as what it can do and at what price point)... hence the excitement for Zen.

CharcharoHoly Hell people... you are toxic.

First of all complete lack of understanding and appreciation for money. 20-30 dollars in the US is not what the world pays. Sometimes, things simply COST MORE in other places. Those 20-30 dollars will amount to a 50 euro difference in my country!

Not everything fits in your small, tiny, little monolingual worldview. Also not everyone makes as much as you... some make a lot more and others a lot less. Show some human empathy...

Reading some of these comments I wonder whether AMD or Nvidia killed a loved one or something, it literally makes no sense. Or at best whether you really are just as good as their engineers (almost certainly not).

Finally... this "ugh 1080 Ultra or it is worthless" mentality is stupid. The PCMR joke got to your head and made you lack in thinking abilities. Ultra or Very High settings are bolted on top of games in 95% of cases. They offer just slightly better visuals for a very big hit to performance. It is future proofing of the actual game, you know, for those of us that are gamers and play old games as well?

Learn how games are made, learn what settings do and see what consoles actually run games on, settings-wise. Then play a few old games, stop being monolingual, read a book and grow some empathy and sense.

PC Gamers have gone to pot...

Agree completely with all of your points.

CharcharoHoly Hell people... you are toxic.

First of all complete lack of understanding and appreciation for money. 20-30 dollars in the US is not what the world pays. Sometimes, things simply COST MORE in other places. Those 20-30 dollars will amount to a 50 euro difference in my country!

Not everything fits in your small, tiny, little monolingual worldview. Also not everyone makes as much as you... some make a lot more and others a lot less. Show some human empathy...

Reading some of these comments I wonder whether AMD or Nvidia killed a loved one or something, it literally makes no sense. Or at best whether you really are just as good as their engineers (almost certainly not).

Finally... this "ugh 1080 Ultra or it is worthless" mentality is stupid. The PCMR joke got to your head and made you lack in thinking abilities. Ultra or Very High settings are bolted on top of games in 95% of cases. They offer just slightly better visuals for a very big hit to performance. It is future proofing of the actual game, you know, for those of us that are gamers and play old games as well?

Learn how games are made, learn what settings do and see what consoles actually run games on, settings-wise. Then play a few old games, stop being monolingual, read a book and grow some empathy and sense.

PC Gamers have gone to pot...

The games have gone to pot (been shit for almost 10 yrs now) and the marketing dollars are working as well as ever.

TheGuruStudThe games have gone to pot (been shit for almost 10 yrs now) and the marketing dollars are working as well as ever.

It is scary, AMD have a console monopoly and they simply don't have a great history of working with game devs.

Even their third party Gaming Evoled Raptr app has been canned, Jesus make an effort for once!

AMD are the king of PR slides and nothing else.

chadem311Nevertheless, the 1050 series will undoubtedly outsell the 460/470 at a ratio that makes ZERO sense, only explained by this borderline-dogmatic support and faith in one brand over the other.

I don't know about other people, but Nvidia usually makes better financial sense when I go to buy a card. Sale prices tend to have deeper discounts resulting in higher FPS/$. Especially if you OC. AMD's margins are tight while Nividia can discount theirs more and still make a profit. And when you add in $10+/yr in electric savings (for my use) then it's a no-brainer. Nvidia cards tend to have better initial reliability also.

TheGuruStudThe games have gone to pot (been shit for almost 10 yrs now) and the marketing dollars are working as well as ever.

This! The games only got pretty visuals and that's it. Except a few selected games, all the recent titles are 10x times worst in gameplay, story and repeatability than the ones 10-15 years ago. But yeah, they got good graphics nowadays.

rtwjunkieWhy does there need to be Nvidia people and AMD people? And why is one side always supposedly stupid?

He has a point on the buying geforce for the sake of geforce even if it's 30 bucks more. We even see this played out on the used market.

IceScreamerStating facts, their products should speak for themselves. If your product is good enough then it will sell, without any comparisons or slides (especially slides that you make in wake of competing products coming out). RX 470 is a good card, but AMD seems to think well, a bit differently. And that's what my complaint was about.

AMD has to overcome the ingrained loyalty and they can't do that by not marketing to their strengths. Personally it sounds stupid to me if they didn't make any graphs or slides, etc. What company would do that? I don't understand how the rules are always different for AMD? They can't seem to do anything that doesn't piss someone off. Maybe they should just die off and all consumers will be better off right?

IceScreamerStating facts, their products should speak for themselves. If your product is good enough then it will sell, without any comparisons or slides (especially slides that you make in wake of competing products coming out). RX 470 is a good card, but AMD seems to think well, a bit differently. And that's what my complaint was about.

LOL. Yes, who needs comparisons or slides. All customers know all data telepathically... those cards are for the mass market, not for nerds who know the difference between CUDA cores and Stream Processors etc.

Ever heard of... advertising? It seems to work for some products.

rruffI don't know about other people, but Nvidia usually makes better financial sense when I go to buy a card.

Really? How many have you bought? I can't remember a single card that had a better price/performance ratio than the similar AMD offer. It makes sens for Nvidia, yes, but not really for the customer. Except when you need the fastest available card NOW... and in this case, financial sense has gone out of the window anyway.

rruffI don't know about other people, but Nvidia usually makes better financial sense when I go to buy a card. Sale prices tend to have deeper discounts resulting in higher FPS/$. Especially if you OC. AMD's margins are tight while Nividia can discount theirs more and still make a profit. And when you add in $10+/yr in electric savings (for my use) then it's a no-brainer. Nvidia cards tend to have better initial reliability also.

Had a 9800 Pro, x1950 Pro, now a 290, all work fine

Where is the news report on the 1070 issue?

JadawinReally?

The GTX 950 I bought for $100 last Nov, and the GTX 750 for $50 after rebate the Nov before that. Both beat any AMD sale prices.

JadawinLOL. Yes, who needs comparisons or slides. All customers know all data telepathically... those cards are for the mass market, not for nerds who know the difference between CUDA cores and Stream Processors etc.

Ever heard of... advertising? It seems to work for some products.

Wow advertising, how didn't I think of that?

But seriously, that wasn't the issue I was referring to, it's their sudden need to point out that their more expensive card is better that the cheaper alternative (mind blown right).

And don't get me wrong, this isn't anything against AMD, if Nvidia did this my response would be the same.

I'm just putting this out this way... AMD probably didn't see this 14nm chip being in the market this early. I think they had a good handle on what and how soon such GP107 could fill the channel and that was from their minds... more mid Nov.

Now back July when AMD had enough Polaris parts of the 470 spec they looked at the market, with GTX 1050's out a ways, while given 470's close performance to the 480, the GTX 10603Gb inbound, all while the market hot for any Polaris they price them at $180. At the time I thought a little high, but sure "ride the wave" while you can.

Now things have changed and AMD is not longer in a price position and inventory is filling in so they "made hay" while they and partners could but the landscape is changing, so they're changing with it. Better then obstinately digging in their heal in (cough, 960 2Gb... cough!) . If they can come down and attack the 1050Ti, while offer a better $/perf against the 1060 3Gb, and still make a decent margins... Good for them, good for consumers.

CammIf the 1060 is anything to go by, arguing OC is kinda pointless as the memory bus lets out first, pretty well much negating any OC.

Not sure if thats a cool thing to have, or descriptive of the aenemic memory bus this generation on Pascal.

That's ridiculous, the 1060 shows plenty of improvement from an overclock. If it didn't, then why would the reference cards be below the factory overclocked ones?

www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Gigabyte/GTX_1060_Xtreme_Gaming/29.html

www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Gigabyte/GTX_1060_Xtreme_Gaming/26.html

I don't want/need either. Got a pair of Galax GTX 960 4GB EXOC for $179.99 (new) a few weeks ago on clearance. Got 'em in SLI (which all my games support with anywhere from 60-80% scaling). About like a GTX 1060 or RX 480. Good enough deal and definitely better than an RX 470 for the same price. Basically, shop around and keep and eye out. Don't necessarily go for the obvious.

OMG, I don't care! Just offer a decent LP card...

danbert2000That's ridiculous, the 1060 shows plenty of improvement from an overclock. If it didn't, then why would the reference cards be below the factory overclocked ones?

Look at the results, a 7% overclock on the GPU is eclipsed by the 18% clock on memory, giving a 12% boost to frames (which is far above the increase of the core). Most of that fps boost is coming from the memory clock OC, hence pointing out the anemic memory bus as the biggest bottleneck.

Just saw the dx12 BF1 benchies for 480 vs 1060.... LOL. Nvidia is screwed if we get some games that aren't half-assed.

www.techspot.com/review/1267-battlefield-1-benchmarks/page2.html

The GTX 1060 does fine, and DX12 again offers random issues that are easily cured by simple using a well supported DX11 (by Nvidia as least).

Fluffmeisterwww.techspot.com/review/1267-battlefield-1-benchmarks/page2.html

The GTX 1060 does fine, and DX12 again offers random issues that are easily cured by simple using a well supported DX11 (by Nvidia as least).

Not from what I saw... That's an embarrassing spanking www.tweaktown.com/tweakipedia/115/rx-480-dominates-gtx-1060-dx12-battlefield/
and it's noted that these aren't the new drivers

1080ti and Vega is sure going to be interesting.

TheGuruStudNot from what I saw... That's an embarrassing spanking www.tweaktown.com/tweakipedia/115/rx-480-dominates-gtx-1060-dx12-battlefield/
and it's noted that these aren't the new drivers

1080ti and Vega is sure going to be interesting.

Techspot already mentioned they couldn't recreate TweakTowns ownage.

But who knows, maybe most RX 480 owners also have a Intel Core i7 5960X.

But yeah, Vega sure is late, release it already.

CammLook at the results, a 7% overclock on the GPU is eclipsed by the 18% clock on memory, giving a 12% boost to frames (which is far above the increase of the core). Most of that fps boost is coming from the memory clock OC, hence pointing out the anemic memory bus as the biggest bottleneck.

Why don't you just admit that the statement you made earlier ("If the 1060 is anything to go by, arguing OC is kinda pointless as the memory bus lets out first, pretty well much negating any OC.") is plain wrong. The 1060s OC very well and the memory doesn't hold it back, because it OCs very well too!

Meanwhile the best RX 480 TPU tested only OCd 5% on the core, but the 13% memory OC pushed it up to a 8.6% performance increase. Same thing (performance increase is more than the core increase). Does the RX 480 have a weak memory bus also? www.techpowerup.com/reviews/MSI/RX_480_Gaming_X/26.html