[CODE]CPU
Intel Core i5 4670k @3.40GHz (still have found no reason to OC)
Cooler Master GeminII S524 cooler
RAM
8GB DDR3 @799mhz 11-11-11-28 (ripjaws)
Motherboard
ASRock Z87 Extreme4
Graphics
2047mb GeForce GTX 770 (Gigabyte)
(p sure this card is like, all im going to need for 1080p for a long time)
((might grab another next year for SLI, i think i heard a rumor about nvidia allowing vram to stack))
Storage
465GB WD Black
(gonna grab an SSD soon, running out of space)
Optical Drives
>shiggydiggy
Audio
Realtek High Definition Audio
Power Supply
XFX P1-750X-XXB9
[/CODE]
[QUOTE=Kemerd;49224806]Your 980ti shows up with 2047MB of VRAM. So did that other dudes. Why is that? Doesn't it have 6GB?[/QUOTE]
I think it's a Windows thing.
It's all there and accessible so I don't really care.
Sorry no speccy because I'm at work
i7 5820K Hexa Core @ 4.4GHz (Custom WC)
4x4GB DDR4 3300MHz Corsair Dominator
Samsung Ultra M2 PCI SSD 256GB , SM951 (2100MB/sec read, compared to 500~ of a decent SSD)
MSI X99 SLI mobo
Corsair AX1000 PSU
and the weakest link of the entire system
GTX970
[editline]2nd December 2015[/editline]
Screen is a ASUS 278Q
-27inch
-1440P
-144Hz
-nVidia G-Sync
-1ms panel response
[t]http://i.imgur.com/HPtmmey.png[/t]
I replaced my 570 with a 980 two months ago, and god damn the performance is insane now. I'd like to OC my unlocked CPU, but I literally have no experience with OC'ing and I'm afraid that I'll break something.
[QUOTE=Saphirx;49226994][t]http://i.imgur.com/HPtmmey.png[/t]
I replaced my 570 with a 980 two months ago, and god damn the performance is insane now. I'd like to OC my unlocked CPU, but I literally have no experience with OC'ing and I'm afraid that I'll break something.[/QUOTE]
Yeah I replaced my GTS 450 with a GTX 950. Crazy better performance.
Laptop:
[img]http://vgy.me/PVTJeM.png[/img]
Desktop:
[img]http://i.imgur.com/O0dChqc.png[/img]
I use the latter for games.
I don't know much about the chips and the cards but I have a brand new 4gb system
[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/LHPKtKp.png[/IMG]
Time to play Quake
Brand new PC, just built two days ago.
[img]http://i.imgur.com/gPk5CXl.png[/img]
[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/xPKCLLd.png[/IMG]
I've got 1600MHz compatible memory, but the XMP profile causes bluescreens. After some searching on google, it seems like the motherboard's very picky when it comes to which manufacturer and model of RAM the XMP profile will work properly with, and that it can be fixed by overclocking the memory manually, but I honestly can't be bothered to do all that crap just to move from 1333MHz - 1600MHz
Also the Windows 10 november update finally added colors to the window borders
Still rocking well after a few years, probably going to do a brand new build, or at least new mainboard and CPU soon as I get massively discounted PC parts working at a computer shop.
[t]http://i.imgur.com/KstmuJp.png[/t]
[QUOTE=Rixxz2;49234308][IMG]http://i.imgur.com/xPKCLLd.png[/IMG]
I've got 1600MHz compatible memory, but the XMP profile causes bluescreens. After some searching on google, it seems like the motherboard's very picky when it comes to which manufacturer and model of RAM the XMP profile will work properly with, and that it can be fixed by overclocking the memory manually, but I honestly can't be bothered to do all that crap just to move from 1333MHz - 1600MHz
Also the Windows 10 november update finally added colors to the window borders[/QUOTE]
1600 doesn't require any XMP...
[QUOTE=Levelog;49234346]1600 doesn't require any XMP...[/QUOTE]
It does, default is 666x2
[QUOTE=Rixxz2;49235522]It does, default is 666x2[/QUOTE]
Not according to motherboard specs, that's all I'm saying.
Running strong since 2012. Temps slightly higher from some games.
[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/wDlQRtc.png[/IMG]
Seeing some pretty lovely systems too, the best being chipsnapper2's.
[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/RAn82eb.png[/IMG]
[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/yAge6ly.png[/IMG]
Used to have a GTX 780 Ti but I had to RMA that one and EVGA gave me a GTX 980 in return. :v:
[QUOTE=SPESSMEHREN;49232008]Brand new PC, just built two days ago.
[img]http://i.imgur.com/gPk5CXl.png[/img][/QUOTE]
Return that R9 390 while you still can and buy a 970 like I did. (Even tho ended up buying refurbished 980 [url]http://www.evga.com/products/bstock.asp[/url])
[QUOTE=Kemerd;49264104]Return that R9 390 while you still can and buy a 970 like I did. (Even tho ended up buying refurbished 980 [url]http://www.evga.com/products/bstock.asp[/url])[/QUOTE]
Why would he want to return his current GPU so he could get a worse one? I know the 390 is just slightly more powerful (I guess it does depend on the game), but 8GB > 3.5 GB of VRAM is rather a big difference.
Built it in late 2011. Recently replaced my dead 460 with a 4gb 380, then I added another HDD and upgraded to Windows 10 today.
[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/lNpGK3C.png[/IMG]
[QUOTE='TheDark[PL];49264141']Why would he want to return his current GPU so he could get a worse one? I know the 390 is just slightly more powerful (I guess it does depend on the game), but 8GB > 3.5 GB of VRAM is rather a big difference.[/QUOTE]
R9 390 is a "better" card to say the least, but if you look at benchmarks between an R9 390 and 970, they're evenly matched with the R9 390 in the slight lead (GTX 980 destroys R9 390 for the record.). This takes a huge turn for the worse with a large percentage of games with gameworks and things along the lines of that. R9 390 is a good card, but VRAM means little nothing when games barely take up any of it-- it's not going to be a bottleneck for anyone playing 1080p or even 1440p. The R9 390 is a GREAT card for crossfiring at 4k (especially with the 970 and 390 having the best price-for-performance on the enthusiast grade class), which is one of the main reasons AMD included 8GB on it. This isn't even including overclocking, which Maxwell is much better at. (Not to mention power and thermals, which also is one of the reasons they overclock much better, but thermals and whatnot are not really a dealbreaking factor anyways.)
VRAM =/= Better Performance
Here, watch this to better understand:
[video=youtube;Utv144XeHag]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Utv144XeHag[/video]
And just because gimpworks is horrible (you can justify turning it off but performance still takes a hindrance not to mention nVidia generally always has better drivers):
[video=youtube;15wOp7_dD8E]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=15wOp7_dD8E[/video]
[video=youtube;vSDQzlKDYq4]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vSDQzlKDYq4[/video]
[IMG]http://s30.postimg.org/rv7womns1/Specs.png[/IMG]
I know the mobo is shite, I'm getting a new one along with a skylake i5 and DDR4 RAM for Christmas
[QUOTE=Kemerd;49264958]VRAM =/= Better Performance[/QUOTE]
no where in his post did he say that.
[QUOTE=Kemerd;49264958]R9 390 is a "better" card to say the least, but if you look at benchmarks between an R9 390 and 970, they're evenly matched with the R9 390 in the slight lead (GTX 980 destroys R9 390 for the record.). This takes a huge turn for the worse with a large percentage of games with gameworks and things along the lines of that. R9 390 is a good card, but VRAM means little nothing when games barely take up any of it-- it's not going to be a bottleneck for anyone playing 1080p or even 1440p. The R9 390 is a GREAT card for crossfiring at 4k (especially with the 970 and 390 having the best price-for-performance on the enthusiast grade class), which is one of the main reasons AMD included 8GB on it. This isn't even including overclocking, which Maxwell is much better at. (Not to mention power and thermals, which also is one of the reasons they overclock much better, but thermals and whatnot are not really a dealbreaking factor anyways.)[/QUOTE]
both cards cost almost exactly the same and the 390 beats the 970 in almost every situation. it's slightly more powerful, has much more vram (great for high res -- 4k and VR), and is more power hungry on average (especially since double the ram, at full load both cards will almost reach similar power draws. temperatures are only a few degrees difference between the two cards on full load as well.) you probably shouldn't be comparing the 390 with the 980 since they're not even on the same playing field. overclocking is also a luck of the draw; there will be some 390s that will out-clock some overclocked 970s.
after reading your post, you appear to be suggesting that the 970 is the better pick because a few games use nvidia gameworks? that doesn't seem to be very reasonable, since you're probably going to be disabling that on an amd card anyway.
the question still stands; why would he want to trade his card with an inferior card?
[QUOTE=ief014;49268523]
the question still stands; why would he want to trade his card with an inferior card?[/QUOTE]
Personally, those Fallout 4 benchmarks were enough for me to go with a 970 instead of my 390 (keeping in mind that I'm gaming at 1080p, where VRAM is not an issue, if you're gaming at anything above that I'd probably stick to the R9 390). If you look at some 1080p benchmarks, at best the R9 390 outperforms the 970 by a couple frames. This may look good down on paper-- but those extra couple of frames were not a good enough reason for me to sacrifice an extremely huge performance chunk when playing nVidia games, even with gameworks disabled. (There being many situations where you cannot disable them, as they are core features in the game.) It also comes down to that personal preference. Would you rather have good drivers and support for those games (which is a lot of them, these days), with the ability to get the nicest graphics possible without a hitch to performance, or would you rather have a great card that in some scenarios gives you a couple extra frames, but playing a lot of games gives you huge hit to performance, even when you tone down some of the nVidia features (keeping in mind a lot are actually integrated into the game without an option). Honestly, more and more games have been using gimpworks, even going as far as to taint Fallout 4, and I only see this getting worse and worse.
I've had AMD cards all of my life, and having a nVidia card-- the difference I get when messing with drivers or performance when playing a lot of my favorite games is just astounding. I don't NEED to worry if gameworks is enabled, which on my AMD card(s) was a constant paranoia for me, finding out whether or not the game gimped AMD cards or not.
The R9 390 is a much better card for higher resolutions (and crossfire/SLI at that)-- and in most games (at 1080p) it either is equal or slightly outperforming of the 970, however, in a lot of games, the fact of the matter is that the R9 390 takes a huge hit to performance rendering the same things as a 970 (even if the game was used to make use of technologies embedded onto the card).
[QUOTE=Kemerd;49269631]Personally, those Fallout 4 benchmarks were enough for me to go with a 970 instead of my 390 (keeping in mind that I'm gaming at 1080p, where VRAM is not an issue, if you're gaming at anything above that I'd probably stick to the R9 390). If you look at some 1080p benchmarks, at best the R9 390 outperforms the 970 by a couple frames. This may look good down on paper-- but those extra couple of frames were not a good enough reason for me to sacrifice an extremely huge performance chunk when playing nVidia games, even with gameworks disabled. (There being many situations where you cannot disable them, as they are core features in the game.) It also comes down to that personal preference. Would you rather have good drivers and support for those games (which is a lot of them, these days), with the ability to get the nicest graphics possible without a hitch to performance, or would you rather have a great card that in some scenarios gives you a couple extra frames, but playing a lot of games gives you huge hit to performance, even when you tone down some of the nVidia features (keeping in mind a lot are actually integrated into the game without an option). Honestly, more and more games have been using gimpworks, even going as far as to taint Fallout 4, and I only see this getting worse and worse.
I've had AMD cards all of my life, and having a nVidia card-- the difference I get when messing with drivers or performance when playing a lot of my favorite games is just astounding. I don't NEED to worry if gameworks is enabled, which on my AMD card(s) was a constant paranoia for me, finding out whether or not the game gimped AMD cards or not.
The R9 390 is a much better card for higher resolutions (and crossfire/SLI at that)-- and in most games (at 1080p) it either is equal or slightly outperforming of the 970, however, in a lot of games, the fact of the matter is that the R9 390 takes a huge hit to performance rendering the same things as a 970 (even if the game was used to make use of technologies embedded onto the card).[/QUOTE]
you've sacrificed an 8gb card for a 4gb for maybe a couple frames at best, on a game that will run like garbage on any piece of hardware you throw at it. most of these games will automatically disable gameworks' proprietary code, because some of those features are only available on nvidia cards.
not really sure what you mean by "good drivers", though. both amd and nvidia have decent drivers these days anyway and really hasn't been a valid argument for at least half a decade. and even when comparing benchmarks on those games that "support nvidia hardware" (aka gameworks) on amd, they seem to only suffer a loss of a [URL="http://www.overclock3d.net/gfx/articles/2015/12/01090654954l.jpg"]couple[/URL] [URL="http://img.hexus.net/v2/graphics_cards/amd/E35894B/4K11/Crysis.png"]frames[/URL] [URL="https://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/tmwt5gupskz0rbfzigi2.png"]at[/URL] [URL="http://gamegpu.ru/images/remote/http--www.gamegpu.ru-images-stories-Test_GPU-Action-Tom_Clancys_Rainbow_Six_Siege_Beta-test-RainbowSix_3840.jpg"]worst[/URL].
however, there are a small number of offenders that do support your claim, such as ass creed syndicate, which will suffer about a 10-15 fps loss [URL="http://media.gamersnexus.net/images/media/2015/game-bench/ac-syndicate-bench-1080-ultra-high.png"]with gameworks on equivalent amd hardware[/URL], but these games let you disable gameworks on amd hardware, [URL="http://www.kitguru.net/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/AC-Syndicate-1440p.png"]and the situation changes.[/URL] same thing applies to [url="http://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/s--tGo_DwlC--/c_scale,fl_progressive,q_80,w_800/1519147160977099300.png"]fallout 4[/url].
really, gameworks isn't as big as a supervillian you think it is. it might hurt a couple frames but that's about it, and for those games with physx - causing the cpu to perform these taxing calculations - can be disabled. you shouldn't be buying a card just because of these tiny proprietary features, let the better card win.
lmao I ran Speccy to post in this thread and apparently Speccy results in an instant BSOD for me
So here's the classic dxdiag
[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/aGWCcaA.png[/IMG]
OCed to 4.4 GHz when boosting, with a Hyper 212 EVO to cool it and it's so quiet!
[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/PxVzffn.png[/IMG]
[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/JdHpc7x.png[/IMG]
(Samsung 850 EVO and a CaviarBlack 1TB)
Main desktop:
128GB HDD
2.4GHz Dual Core
4GB RAM
HD5450 512MB
how do i even code on this thing
someone save me
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
