Rumors say GTX 1080 Performance for $250

Imagine buying AMD when Nvidia is better at every department if you have the money. There is a reason why Nvidia has like 80% marketshare. AMd sucks ballsack.

Then what the fuck are you doing in this thread? Fuckin autismo.

...

Guess I'm waiting one more gen since I already have a 1080ti. no fucking way an I paying for a 20xx series

samefag

also Nvidia will put out better gear in half a year, cant beat Nvidia.

i dont need anything better than a 1070ti

When is 4k ultra 144hz 140 fps games possible? Ten years? I only have 1 2080ti and I can only get 60+ in most games.

>samefag
Yes you fucking faggot I was linking the other autismo to my post because he posted before I could submit mine.

Why is the entirety of Yea Forums so retarded?

user just jump ship, I've been team red for a while but it's not worth it anymore. Just wait for AMD to unjust themselves, if it ever happens

>why is entirety of Yea Forums is so retarded
looks like you are projecting. AMD has been behind tech for years now. Their last good card series were the 48xx

>user just jump ship
Thing is I'm the fag that's always posting about Hackintosh so I can't use Nvidia even if I wanted to. If Applel had support for it I would undoubtedly swallow the Jewish pill and save for a 2080 Ti

Yea Forums everyone

That's just Navi 10. They want to release Navi 20 later on and it should be more powerful than that.

Any info on date/price/performance equivalent?

if that's the performance the card offers its good enough for most PC users. Very few people actually need a better card, and the games that do demand them are usually shit.

Sadly not. Seems like the major focus is on Navi 10 and the mainstream market now. It remains to be seen if Navi 20 even releases this year at all to be honest.

Rumors about AMD gpus are always extremely exaggerated. Remember when the Vega was going to completely outclass the 1080?
Never going back to AMD and their shitty drivers and random hickups. They're not even cheaper in my country (Norway).

>shitty drivers
Oh, we're still using this meme?

>It remains to be seen if Navi 20 even releases this year at all to be honest
Alright, good to know. So now the question is, Get the RX 590 for $280 now and wait until Navi 20 to definitely get it or get the Radeon VII for $800 and maybe consider Navi 20 as a possibility?

Attached: 1920348755.jpg (400x592, 30K)

Navi is what the next gen consoles will get right? How underpowered will they be at release?

>meme
If anything, it's a meme that AMD ever fixed their driver support. Never had any trouble after I switched to nvidia. Performance and price also got better.
If you wnat to run scientific simulations on your gentoo, sure, get AMD - but not for video games.

Unironically the yuzu devs stopped supporting AMD's opengl drivers unless playing on linux.

Who cares about next gen consoles

So does this mean that consoles are only going to be 1080 tier in 2020?
Fuck, I miss when consoles had hardware comparable to high-end pcs at the time of release. They usually got destroyed when the next gpu generation was released but it was nice to know that they weren't mid-range when they came out.

you do know you can literally get a $250 vega56 right now and bios flash it to 1080 level.
sure it uses 300w but it can handle it. fine wine am i right amd sheeple?

1080 is still good because AMD stopped competing & Nvidia are selling ray tracing instead of performance gains

1080 is from 2016 so it should be shit these days but here we are

>So it's not going to be more powerful than Radeon VII?
No, most likely not. At least not the first release of Navi. AMD not that long ago released their high-end part first (Radeon VII) and Navi is more likely than not going to fill in the rest of the product stack, I'd expect it to be around Vega 56/64 level. Navi is a mainstream design for next-gen consoles, it's not going to be a 300W performance monster.

Later down the line we might see fatter versions of Navi though, but it's much too early to talk about that anyway.

Yeah but what about in 2020? Plus intel is going to release their shit the same year too.

>performance of a three year old graphics card
LMFAO the absolute state of console kiddies

Attached: 1276715498043.png (334x378, 175K)

That only ever did happen until the early ps2 era, the problem was that pc ports were shit back then so never had the opportunity to actually see the difference in power besides the odd port of Half Life 1 on the ps2 or Doom on anything other than pc.

it's not a meme. go and watch any tech video from the release of any amd gpu and then watch one from now. you'll see average performance gets better over time because launch drivers are always fucking garbage and slow and it takes amd like 2-3 years before they actually start extracting the full potential of the gpu. meanwhile nvidia cards are running at near max potential from day 1.

No, both gen 6 and 7 had hardware comparable to high-end pcs. The original xbox's gpu was high-end shit that wasn't even available to pc like a year later.

Attached: 003.jpg (1024x683, 86K)

You can get fairly close right now with 2080 Ti SLI in the games which work well with SLI. You can also get it with a single card for a lot of titles which are less demanding, like plenty of the "e-sports" games where FPS would matter most.

Lower the settings a little bit. You can barely tell the difference.

Has AMD ever lived up to rumors? Amdrones waste years of their life waiting but the end product always falls short.

>translation I love when nvidia lock shit down, and bribes my game studio to make their card perform better while fucking everyone else. THAT WHY I PAY PREMIUM SO OTHERS CAN GET FUCK'D

ryzen was pretty good. everything else especially on the gpu side has been a letdown since like 2010

>it's not amd's fault, it's nvidia's fault that amd has shitty performance!
ok kid

I think we all know that AMD won't deliver in the GPU space.
I'll just wait for the RTX meme to die off or something to upgrade.
My R9 Fury is still fine for every single game outside of super demanding games running maxed out at native 4k at 60 FPS.

Attached: wwzRetailEgs_2019_04_16_22_48_17_971.jpg (3840x2160, 1.17M)

>4gb vram

retard could have bought an 980 ti for $200 and bought a housefire fury instead

Not him, but does amd run enbs and other mods from Skyrim, and emulators as well as nvidia?
It seems to me that people who make work-arounds for video games have nvidia in mind. Amd seems nonexistent.

I got my Fury for $260 back in 2016, when 980 Tis were still going for upwards of $380.

And that's new pricing, not used.
$260 for a NEW R9 Fury in 2016 is pretty damn good.

>2016

nigga i bought an evga 980 ti for $200 in 2016 because the 1070 came out that year i think and it made the 980 ti obsolete. 1070's were like $350 and the 980 ti market crashed because the 1070 was faster and cheaper with more ram

>used
Call me when 980 Tis were going for less than $350 new, because they weren't.

I'll buy an AMD GPU when they fix their power hunger. These fucking things pull more watts than NVIDIA cards and still get btfo

>16 core 32 threads 5ghz cpus for $300
>2080ti equivalent for $250
Based amd taking a big stinky dump all over intel and nvidia

I have a 980 Ti free from work. It can't run shit at 4k 60fps.

who the fuck cares? it worked just fine for 2 years till i upgraded it and still works fine now for a friend. being a used card doesn't suddenly mean it's shit. if you sell your fury onto someone else tomorrow does that mean it's suddenly going to be shit? the WHOLE benefit of pc gaming is the ability to find good deals on hardware because the market is so huge.

if a fury can run a game at 4k60 then a 980 ti can by default since it has more vram and is also a faster card and always has been. not even the higher level fury card, fury x, could match the 980 ti. a 980 ti overclocked can gain an extra 15% of performance too.

Reminder that the navi "leaks" are from the same guy that said that the entire Ryzen 3000 and Navi lineup would be announced at CES this year and that the AMD's 50th anniversary CPU was going to be a 16c/32t 5GHz CPU.

yea but how many patches and how many games are going to have issues with it on their release days though

you have to take that into account to the 250

>if a fury can run a game at 4k60 then a 980 ti can by default
Evidently that's true, which implies neither card is suitable for 4k gaymen. The 980 Ti may be reasonable if appropriately paired with a G-sync display (can't support FreeSync unfortunately). No remotely modern game is gonna give a consistent 60 FPS at 4k on this card. That other user must've had a very broad definition of
>super demanding games

.

It's not 2011 anymore m8, AMD's drivers are arguably more stable than Nvidia's nowadays.

Pretty cringe bro.
I'd rather just have a 1070 ti, AMD is high power draw unoptimized garbage.

Attached: unimpressed.png (645x773, 11K)

or he's just playing at low/medium which he probably is. i'd rather play at 1440p high than 4k low.

Navi is all about price to performance ratio and pixel pushing power.

I thought this was PC gaming not console gaming

why don't they have modular gpu. I want 10 fans and a red dot.

it's still going to be worse than nvidias offerings. think about it, amds best at 7nm only just caught up to nvidias best at 16nm. turing is utilizing tsmc's 12nm and from navi 10 leaked performance its just going to be around 2080+15% performance which is pretty terrible considering they have the one up on nvidia right now with manufacturing node (navi 7nm va turing 12nm). once nvidia actually releases their 7nm cards they'll completely decimate amd on the same process.

tomshardware.co.uk/nvidia-samsung-7nm-euv-2020-graphics-cards,review-34706.html

meant to say navi 20 (i.e. the highest end navi)

Most games outside of the latest AAA games aren't actually all that demanding, even at 4k on high-ish settings.

There was a research some time ago that showed AMD drivers are more stable than nvidia's.

pixel pushing at the expensive of compute