HardwarePC upgrade me-do

  

Press Ctrl+Enter to quickly submit your post
Quick Reply  
 
 
  
 From:  ANT_THOMAS   7 Feb 2015 19:30 
 To:  milko      21 of 41 
41390.21 In reply to 41390.20 
Them Nvidiots on their Micro$haft OS.
0/0
 Reply   Quote More 

 From:  Dave!!   8 Feb 2015 15:03 
 To:  milko      22 of 41 
41390.22 In reply to 41390.17 
I currently have a Radeon 7870 and haven't had any driver issues at all with it. Actually, I've been put off Nvidia somewhat since the bad-bumps scandal of the GeForce 8 range (and my own GeForce 8 which popped a few months after the warranty had expired). Not one of their better moments that, even though the issue is probably long-since fixed.

Seems at the moment as though Nvidia versus AMD for graphics is fairly even-stevens overall, but AMD have somewhat dropped off the boil when it comes to CPUs. My system is still chugging along with a 5 year old Core i5 750 in it. Still runs modern games smoothly with the details cranked up, so I've not felt the need to replace it.
---

 
0/0
 Reply   Quote More 

 From:  Kenny J (WINGNUTKJ)    11 Feb 2015 11:07 
 To:  milko      23 of 41 
41390.23 In reply to 41390.20 
Of course, by the time I read that, I'd already ordered the Radeon R9 that Serg suggested. It's currently sitting under my desk in a ridiculously huge box. I'm thinking about bunging it into my current PC to see whether it can cope, before I attempt the full motherboard-processor-memory-ectomy.
Kenny
0/0
 Reply   Quote More 

 From:  99% of gargoyles look like (MR_BASTARD)   11 Feb 2015 11:30 
 To:  milko      24 of 41 
41390.24 In reply to 41390.20 
TLDR, but the big take-home message seems to be more about the massive performance improvement of the low-level APIs (black vs. red bars), which applies just as much to the R9:

truffy.gifbastard by name
bastard by nature
0/0
 Reply   Quote More 

 From:  milko   11 Feb 2015 13:10 
 To:  99% of gargoyles look like (MR_BASTARD)      25 of 41 
41390.25 In reply to 41390.24 
Yes and no as far as I can tell. Early days, but it's a boost for all, but not 'just as much'.

If you take the top two cards as the current flagships then, DX11 gets a poor speed on Nvidia and positively glacial one on AMD. Then AMD have their 'Mantle' proprietary low level API which actually puts them on top if a game uses it... until DX12 when suddenly Nvidia is way out in front of it either way and AMD suffers a slight drop. And by no means a majority of games seem to support this Mantle thing anyway.

It's good news for owners of any reasonably recent card, I think. Fuck, this text editor.

Or as the article says:
Quote: 
As it stands, with the CPU bottleneck swapped out for a GPU bottleneck, Star Swarm starts to favor NVIDIA GPUs right now. Even accounting for performance differences, NVIDIA ends up coming out well ahead here, with the GTX 980 beating the R9 290X by over 50%, and the GTX 680 some 25% ahead of the R9 285, both values well ahead of their average lead in real-world games. With virtually every aspect of this test still being under development – OS, drivers, and Star Swarm – we would advise not reading into this too much right now, but it will be interesting to see if this trend holds with the final release of DirectX 12.
milko
0/0
 Reply   Quote More 

 From:  99% of gargoyles look like (MR_BASTARD)   11 Feb 2015 13:14 
 To:  milko      26 of 41 
41390.26 In reply to 41390.25 
I wasn't saying that the Nvidia wasn't a faster card, just that the benefits of low-level API (be it mantle of DX12) are more fundamental than the age-old GPU war.

truffy.gifbastard by name
bastard by nature
0/0
 Reply   Quote More 

 From:  Matt   11 Feb 2015 14:26 
 To:  99% of gargoyles look like (MR_BASTARD)      27 of 41 
41390.27 In reply to 41390.24 
Indeed it looks like AMD cards stand to gain rather substantially from DirectX 12, on average more so than the Geforce cards do.

doohicky
0/0
 Reply   Quote More 

 From:  Drew (X3N0PH0N)   11 Feb 2015 14:31 
 To:  Kenny J (WINGNUTKJ)       28 of 41 
41390.28 In reply to 41390.1 
I've just done an upgrade (to this is anyone cares) too so this is that one 6 month window every 5 years where I actually know about this stuff.

AMD cards tend to be better value for money (just in terms of FPS per £ like) and are the better choice if you're 100% certain that you'll never want to use Linux ever.

That particular card is the revised edition of the previous-generation's hardware. It's not the new architecture like the rest of the R9 family, it's essentially a reworked 7870. It's still going to be way faster than what you have now but If you can nudge it up to a 280 or 285 that'd be worth it since they are both the new architecture.

AMD CPUs are generally not a good choice for gaming. Most games, just due to the kind of stuff they do, don't make much use of multiple cores and Intel chips just have *much* better single core performance. DX12 will change that a *bit* but not enough to really matter. So if gaming is your primary concern you'd probably be better off with a slower-clocked Intel with half the cores, it'll actually perform better.

For stuff that *does* make use of multiple cores (compiling, encoding stuff) AMD chips are great because they just load them up with loads of cores/threads.

There's no benefit in getting the 1866 RAM over 1600 RAM. There's a trade off between speed and latency and after a certain point faster speeds make no difference (benchmarks demonstrate this really clearly). Having said that there's like £2 difference between the 1600 and 1866 so it's not a huge deal. I assume you're getting 1x4gb (and thus not getting the benefits of dual channel) with a view to getting another 4gb stick later?






 
 
0/0
 Reply   Quote More 

 From:  milko   11 Feb 2015 15:57 
 To:  Drew (X3N0PH0N)      29 of 41 
41390.29 In reply to 41390.28 
I still just read way too many people complaining of weird game issues with AMD cards, like stuttering frame rates and the like. I was wondering if they still need rescuing with those Omega drivers I used to need to use waaay back, and now they call their own drivers Omega?! It's a crazy world is PC stuff.

I'm going to do that pc part picker thing because I keep forgetting what I've got. Need to re-learn to overclock my CPU as well since it's supposed to be good at it.
milko
0/0
 Reply   Quote More 

 From:  graphitone   11 Feb 2015 16:17 
 To:  Drew (X3N0PH0N)      30 of 41 
41390.30 In reply to 41390.28 
A 1TB disk? Bravo. But how on earth are you going to fill it?


images?q=tbn:8nj2HfmLhyV7yM:b
Drawings n' that
0/0
 Reply   Quote More 

 From:  Dave!!   11 Feb 2015 18:59 
 To:  milko      31 of 41 
41390.31 In reply to 41390.29 
Odd one. I have standard Catalyst drivers on my system and it's silky smooth in Mass Effect 3, Skyrim and any other game I've thrown at it. No stuttering at all and no stability issues either. My old 5770 was also fine with no strange stuttering - apart from its more limited horsepower of course.

Maybe this is an old Crossfire/SLI related issue perhaps?
---

 
0/0
 Reply   Quote More 

 From:  milko   11 Feb 2015 19:52 
 To:  Dave!!      32 of 41 
41390.32 In reply to 41390.31 
Don't think so, I've seen it loads in general recent PC game threads where people are having various problems. Are you playing anything newer? Maybe the drivers have been long since patched for those games.
milko
0/0
 Reply   Quote More 

 From:  Drew (X3N0PH0N)   11 Feb 2015 20:09 
 To:  milko      33 of 41 
41390.33 In reply to 41390.29 
ATI/AMD drivers have never been as good as Nvidia's, yeah. I don't think the problems are often show-stopping (on Windows at least) though. Nvidia's definitely *better* but they're also more expensive so if you want the most FPS on a tight budget then AMD's the way to go I think.
 
0/0
 Reply   Quote More 

 From:  Drew (X3N0PH0N)   11 Feb 2015 20:10 
 To:  graphitone      34 of 41 
41390.34 In reply to 41390.30 
Never going to happen (nod)



That's with ~100ish games installed in Steam.
 
0/0
 Reply   Quote More 

 From:  milko   11 Feb 2015 20:10 
 To:  Drew (X3N0PH0N)      35 of 41 
41390.35 In reply to 41390.33 
Fair enough indeed. *clink*
milko
0/0
 Reply   Quote More 

 From:  99% of gargoyles look like (MR_BASTARD)   11 Feb 2015 21:37 
 To:  Drew (X3N0PH0N)      36 of 41 
41390.36 In reply to 41390.33 
quote: X3N0PH0N
if you want the most FPS on a tight budget then AMD's the way to go I think.

PLUS! You can't be called Nvidiot.

I think that's what's called a watertight argument.

truffy.gifbastard by name
bastard by nature
0/0
 Reply   Quote More 

 From:  milko   11 Feb 2015 22:04 
 To:  99% of gargoyles look like (MR_BASTARD)      37 of 41 
41390.37 In reply to 41390.36 
I've been busting to remember what the ATI equivalent was, but it's not happening.
milko
0/0
 Reply   Quote More 

 From:  milko   11 Feb 2015 22:07 
 To:  milko      38 of 41 
41390.38 In reply to 41390.37 
Perhaps it was ATidiot but that's not nearly as good.
milko
0/0
 Reply   Quote More 

 From:  Serg (NUKKLEAR)   11 Feb 2015 23:13 
 To:  milko      39 of 41 
41390.39 In reply to 41390.38 
ATit?
[...Insert Brain Here...]
+1/1
 Reply   Quote More 

 From:  Dave!!   11 Feb 2015 23:30 
 To:  milko      40 of 41 
41390.40 In reply to 41390.32 
I'd be intrigued to see a few. The drivers argument has been around for nearly 15 years, yet for me I've had no real problems with playing any games with either an Nvidia card or an AMD/ATI card. Skyrim also ran fine when I installed it just after release day (so long before any driver issues could be patched).

The only experiences I've had so far is that I've never had an AMD/ATI card die on me due to shitty engineering, whereas I've lost a £260 GeForce 8800 due to that (which is kind-of annoying).

Still, my current card is now a couple of years old and maybe others are having problems with newer games. Just nothing I've personally come across so far it must be said.
---

 
0/0
 Reply   Quote More 

Reply to All  
 

1–20  21–40  41

Rate my interest:

Adjust text size : Smaller 10 Larger

Beehive Forum 1.5.2 |  FAQ |  Docs |  Support |  Donate! ©2002 - 2024 Project Beehive Forum

Forum Stats