I also said near double which according to this link they are.
The only thing about a GTX 1070 that is near double a Radeon RX 480 is the price tag. If you take the geometric mean of the average frame rates (using only DX12 numbers for Hitman, not DX11, so that the game doesn't get double-counted), the GTX 1070 is on average 54% faster than the RX 480. That's nowhere near double. And if you expect the DX12 games to be more representative of the future, the margin could be much smaller yet.
That's not to say that the GTX 1070 is bad. $400 cards usually aren't twice as fast as contemporary $200 cards. It's about the same margin by which a Radeon R9 390X beats a Radeon R9 380, for example. The choice of which card to get is really a question of budget. All I'm saying is that you should have a clear view of relative performance, not a ballpark approximation that is way off.
For comparison, the RX 480 is about 4x as fast as your current 7770, while the GTX 1070 is about 6x as fast. Either of those are quite an upgrade, and if you've survived with a 7770 until now, you'd probably be happy with an RX 480. But if your finances are in good shape, I wouldn't criticize spending more than you really need to on a product you'll use a lot.
Well, that and you can only buy a card that is in stock. Which neither are last time I checked.
What's the estimate price of the first vega cards going to be? I'm thinking I just might upgrade only my GPU sometime soon...no later than October. If the vega is going to be over 400, I might just get a 1070 now.
AMD's latest public guidance on Vega is this slide:
I'd read that as saying Vega about half a year after Polaris, so around the start of 2017. But the slide is intentionally vague, and all it really says is that Vega is better than Polaris and has HBM2. And the slide is also several months old already.
There is a rumor that Vega will launch in October of this year, but I don't know if it's true. Realistically, AMD will launch as soon as they reasonably can, and it's really just a question of how soon they can get enough dies with good enough yields from Global Foundries and enough HBM2 from Samsung or Hynix. By now, they probably have a pretty good idea; if they haven't already placed a production order, an October launch could only be a paper launch. But they're not announcing that publicly.
As for price, a lot depends on how good it is and how competing Nvidia cards are priced. If it's twice as fast as a GTX 1080, then AMD will charge more for it than if it's no faster than a GTX 1070.
DX12 performance is one of the reasons I want a vega card. I don't know if they'll make multiple versions but I don't really wanna spend more than 400. I know I said my budget is 600 but that's a little high for just a GPU. TBH the only game I have on PC right now that I have to drop settings to low for is doom 4. I have to play all low settings and at 720p with 50% renderscale to get constant good fps. That's like 1996 resolution lol. But I want to get battlefield 1 in October too which probably won't run too well with my current card either. Saving money on upgrades is always good. Means I can buy more games, but I also want a card with some staying power.
My best guess is that there will be a Vega card for $400 or less, but likely a cut down version or not the top chip if there is more than one. With the RX 480 at $240 for an 8 GB version as the top end Polaris card, it would be strange if AMD's next card up were $500.
I just bought a GTX 1070, I run everything at full setting using a 4k monitor(32"), 3840x 2160, I have zero issues. The games I tested it on was doom, totalwar warhammer (DX12), Tera, and Xcom2. my processor is pretty beastly its a 5820k (6core), 2133 ram x16. The funny thing is that i wasnt goign to get this i was going to get the 1080 but I got lucky as hell and got this at best buy when I am pretty sure the guy should not have soild it to me being online it said its a 6 month waiting period to get one. Its worth the money and I might pick up a 2nd in a year if there is a game that comes out sooner then later that will test this card.
I might pick up a 2nd in a year if there is a game that comes out sooner then later that will test this card.
Bad idea. If you need a faster card in a year, the solution will be to replace it by a single, faster card, whether Vega or a higher end Pascal. Once you've got a card in your hands, the clock is ticking on SLI support, and once Volta arrives, likely in 2018, you can expect no more performance optimizations for Pascal.
I doubt that it's really a 6 month waiting list. It would be really shocking if four months from now, Nvidia can't deliver plenty of GTX 1070s to meet whatever demand they expect to be there. As in, "TSMC 16 nm fabs destroyed by earthquake" shocking, not just some minor blip.
Also, they might prefer in-store sales to online sales. If they can get you in-store to buy one item, you might by others while you're there. Micro Center's entire business model is based on this. With sales online, people are a lot more willing to buy one thing off one site and another from another site.
I might pick up a 2nd in a year if there is a game that comes out sooner then later that will test this card.
Bad idea. If you need a faster card in a year, the solution will be to replace it by a single, faster card, whether Vega or a higher end Pascal. Once you've got a card in your hands, the clock is ticking on SLI support, and once Volta arrives, likely in 2018, you can expect no more performance optimizations for Pascal.
I doubt that it's really a 6 month waiting list. It would be really shocking if four months from now, Nvidia can't deliver plenty of GTX 1070s to meet whatever demand they expect to be there. As in, "TSMC 16 nm fabs destroyed by earthquake" shocking, not just some minor blip.
Also, they might prefer in-store sales to online sales. If they can get you in-store to buy one item, you might by others while you're there. Micro Center's entire business model is based on this. With sales online, people are a lot more willing to buy one thing off one site and another from another site.
Might be true, just repeating what the guy told me at the store when i bought it. I asked if he has any more in the back, he said no and no store around him has one and there is a 6 month waiting period.
This card is a beast regardless, because I am a elite member at best buy i think i have a 30 day return so if i can find a 1080 gtx before then I will just get that.
Well the 480 is probably the safer bet since it's pretty doubtful the 1070 would live through until the end of the real next gen consoles (not scorpio and neo). The 480 would most likely play everything at high+ at least at 45+ frames until the next gen consoles arrive which is where game specs usually start to rise.
Unless you need that $400 card performance, it is better to buy 2x $200 cards...
So, if you go off MSRP and you compare 8gb to 8gb, you're talking $240 vs $380 for a 480 vs a 1070. According to anandtech, across their entire suite of games, the 1070 is approx. 50% faster. So. Once supply issues are worked out the 1070 is roughly equivalent price/perf to a 480. Secondarily as quiz said, it's absolutely a matter of budget, you're still talking about spending $380 vs $240 (or $200 if you cut down to 4gb).
However, I fully expect AMD to have a lot more 480's available before the 1070's are readily available.
"The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently."
Well the 480 is probably the safer bet since it's pretty doubtful the 1070 would live through until the end of the real next gen consoles (not scorpio and neo). The 480 would most likely play everything at high+ at least at 45+ frames until the next gen consoles arrive which is where game specs usually start to rise.
Unless you need that $400 card performance, it is better to buy 2x $200 cards...
I couldn't disagree more. Twice in my life I have done SLI and both times it was a mistake. This is the problem with looking at just the numbers. It's like comparing a Porsche 911 to a Corvette. Yes, the corvette is faster and costs a hellofa lot less. But it doesn't tell you the whole picture. There are quality of life issues with SLI that make it more trouble than its worth.
IMO the only application for SLI that makes any sense is for people who are really into benchmarking. For actual gamers, its just not worth the trouble/hassle.
"The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently."
At this point I would get the 480 with a new CPU, Ram, and Mobo. There are a few knowns here. First the performance difference between a 480 and a 1070 will close over time. Traditionally AMD driver updates improve performance more than nVidia driver updates. Also AMD supports DX12 better which most future games will support. Your current CPU, Ram, and mobo will bottle-neck either card so it needs to be upgraded. We have reached a new process node and technology. Neither nVidia or AMD will support it well at first meaning its better to get the mid-range part now, then get another mid-range part down the line instead of getting a low-high end card now. I wouldn't wait for Vega or nVidia's high end card unless you are doing something extremely taxing like 4k. High end cards like those simply aren't worth the money as today's mid-range will max out games of the next few years at more normal resolutions.
My new plan was to get a GPU, and see just how much the CPU was limiting it, then if it was too bad I'd buy the CPU and other parts sometime later. I think you're right though. By the time the 480 stops giving good performance there will probably be another ~$200 card. IDK though, the new memory the newer cards are gonna use is said to be expensive so I'm not sure just how low of a price they can get away with.
If I'm gonna get a midrange card I might as well see how the 1060 performs. Not sure it will be able to match the 480 DX12 performance.
so I just saw a post on reddit r/amd that the sapphire(the brand I usually buy) aftermarket 480 model is going to be $332... The 1070 is looking a bit more attractive with this news.
I could maybe believe it if it's a binned and heavily factory overclocked (the mythical 1500Mhz 480), since those tend to carry a pretty large premium. That would be enough of a premium to make it pretty pointless though.
So since I do have to buy a copy of windows 10( Somehow I'm using windows 10 while only owning the full version of windows 98 + upgrade versions of xp,windows 8 and 10) and want to upgrade motherboard, cpu, and memory, I think I might have to go with the r9 380 since sapphire has said there's not gonna be a 4GB aftermarket 480 card and I don't want to be stuck with jet engine noise levels from a reference card.
Even with the 380 I'm about $80 over budget at 683. Not sure if I should wait for 470 or not.
Well, 470 should be a great card too and its worth the wait, whole last gen just isnt worth buying unless you find it really really cheap (and honestly i havent seen such deals yet to say "yeah thats good buy")
Yeah I bought the 7770 back in 2013 even though there was a newer generation out but it was only $120. I'm surprised it can still play recent games, but only at medium or low.
Upgrading sucks... I want to upgrade but don't want to spend money lol.
Comments
That's not to say that the GTX 1070 is bad. $400 cards usually aren't twice as fast as contemporary $200 cards. It's about the same margin by which a Radeon R9 390X beats a Radeon R9 380, for example. The choice of which card to get is really a question of budget. All I'm saying is that you should have a clear view of relative performance, not a ballpark approximation that is way off.
For comparison, the RX 480 is about 4x as fast as your current 7770, while the GTX 1070 is about 6x as fast. Either of those are quite an upgrade, and if you've survived with a 7770 until now, you'd probably be happy with an RX 480. But if your finances are in good shape, I wouldn't criticize spending more than you really need to on a product you'll use a lot.
Well, that and you can only buy a card that is in stock. Which neither are last time I checked.
http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2016/03/amd-gpu-vega-navi-revealed/
I'd read that as saying Vega about half a year after Polaris, so around the start of 2017. But the slide is intentionally vague, and all it really says is that Vega is better than Polaris and has HBM2. And the slide is also several months old already.
There is a rumor that Vega will launch in October of this year, but I don't know if it's true. Realistically, AMD will launch as soon as they reasonably can, and it's really just a question of how soon they can get enough dies with good enough yields from Global Foundries and enough HBM2 from Samsung or Hynix. By now, they probably have a pretty good idea; if they haven't already placed a production order, an October launch could only be a paper launch. But they're not announcing that publicly.
As for price, a lot depends on how good it is and how competing Nvidia cards are priced. If it's twice as fast as a GTX 1080, then AMD will charge more for it than if it's no faster than a GTX 1070.
I doubt that it's really a 6 month waiting list. It would be really shocking if four months from now, Nvidia can't deliver plenty of GTX 1070s to meet whatever demand they expect to be there. As in, "TSMC 16 nm fabs destroyed by earthquake" shocking, not just some minor blip.
Also, they might prefer in-store sales to online sales. If they can get you in-store to buy one item, you might by others while you're there. Micro Center's entire business model is based on this. With sales online, people are a lot more willing to buy one thing off one site and another from another site.
This card is a beast regardless, because I am a elite member at best buy i think i have a 30 day return so if i can find a 1080 gtx before then I will just get that.
So, if you go off MSRP and you compare 8gb to 8gb, you're talking $240 vs $380 for a 480 vs a 1070. According to anandtech, across their entire suite of games, the 1070 is approx. 50% faster. So. Once supply issues are worked out the 1070 is roughly equivalent price/perf to a 480. Secondarily as quiz said, it's absolutely a matter of budget, you're still talking about spending $380 vs $240 (or $200 if you cut down to 4gb).
However, I fully expect AMD to have a lot more 480's available before the 1070's are readily available.
"The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently."
- Friedrich Nietzsche
I couldn't disagree more. Twice in my life I have done SLI and both times it was a mistake. This is the problem with looking at just the numbers. It's like comparing a Porsche 911 to a Corvette. Yes, the corvette is faster and costs a hellofa lot less. But it doesn't tell you the whole picture. There are quality of life issues with SLI that make it more trouble than its worth.
IMO the only application for SLI that makes any sense is for people who are really into benchmarking. For actual gamers, its just not worth the trouble/hassle.
"The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently."
- Friedrich Nietzsche
I wouldn't wait for Vega or nVidia's high end card unless you are doing something extremely taxing like 4k. High end cards like those simply aren't worth the money as today's mid-range will max out games of the next few years at more normal resolutions.
If I'm gonna get a midrange card I might as well see how the 1060 performs. Not sure it will be able to match the 480 DX12 performance.
I was going off the converted cost of the british pound... Although I guess prices could differ for the US.
EDIT: 20% of 250 pounds is 2x25=50 pounds, which means no tax price is 200 pounds.
200 pounds to $ = $265.
Though my hunch says $275 is gonna be the price.
Even with the 380 I'm about $80 over budget at 683. Not sure if I should wait for 470 or not.
Upgrading sucks... I want to upgrade but don't want to spend money lol.