Discussion in 'Frontpage news' started by Hilbert Hagedoorn, Feb 8, 2015.
I give up. Dafuk happened to these forums??
I wish I knew. I stopped visiting for a few years and come back to all this....
reported for obvious trolling.
I would have agree if you wrote r9-290x, in tests I have seen gtx 970 averages 1% better at 1440p than r9-290x.
But that is because gtx 970 gets huge benefit in nVidia sponsored games like Bioshock Infinity.
The 290 is not faster than the 970. At all.
I think Hilbert nailed it on the thumb by saying "Percentage wise the Nvidia's reputation, we are sure, has a higher value damage wise."
Many end users are stuck with there hardware whether they like it or not. Luckily the 970 is still one hell of a card. But later down the road, I am sure people will still harvest resentment & think twice about Nvidia for future purchases.
i still love my 970 and im not returning the card anyway.
i really cba about all of this.
but nvidia should've told the truth or apologise
Do what I did.
Return the 780ti and get 2 290 cards.
Today you can do this score for £400 price tag
I would like to see a £400 970 card get that score.
Come on do the math you know it makes perfect sense.
So many lols.
You don't buy 970s for 4k gaming. In fact you don't buy anything atm for 4k gaming. You wait for the next generation GPUs.
So you're basically saying that 99% of the reviews out there are paid by Nvidia, and this includes Guru3D? Hah.
Also I have no idea what drugs you're on, but the 290 can't compete with the 970.
I can easy game 3200x1800 with 100+ fps
Im sure I can do 4k at around 60 to 70 fps.
So I disagree.
No thanks, I`ll keep my 2 780ti until a worthy card is released.
970 SLI graphics score: 23206
290 CFX graphics score: 21950
970 SLI beats the 290 CFX by 1256 points. Thanks for confirming what I said.
That's what people thought after it came out that NVidia lied about TDP data for G84m and G86m.....yet, look at how many people are insanely loyal to NVidia. Nothing seems to actually hurt NVidia's reputation long term. The fanboys will see to that.
lol. you cannot compare 3d mark scores with 2 different speed 2700k, like eclap said you need to look at the graphics score.
Idk, i would rather take that 0.5GB Vram extra than those extra 1200 score.
there in the same ball park.
If you look at there clock frequency settings.
Be honest with yourself pls.
It's not accurate to compare two cards in a multi GPU situation since you never know what performance you will get as you are at the mercy of the game devs and driver teams.
3D Mark isn't a game so no one cares about the scores.
I would have returned my card if there was alternative I liked, but there isn't at the moment.
I've also had zero performance issues, so what would be the point.
All I'm seeing above is that the 970 is faster. I thought you said the 290 was faster?
true, it's a bit silly to claim that the 290 is the faster card and then to prove it link 3dmark scores where the 970 beats the 290. right?
All depends what your doing and what game engine your using.
For me using mantle api with bf4 the 2x290 cards walk over the 970.
Im using 3850 meg more often that not, and the 780 ti with its 3 gig and this 970 with its 3.5 gig its not enough and I would be memory swapping.
Pound for pound price vs performance 2x290 cards for 400 pounds is at the top and with mantle benefit ontop of that its even higher.
Find me a card 400 pounds that can match them 3d mark scores with 4 gig of ram that's needed pls.
Oh and them benchmark results.
1400 MHz on there cores ....
Buy me a card or 2 cards for 400 pounds that can do 17,000 firestrike.
Oh hold on you can 2x290 cards. top of the food chain