The GTX 980 a viable upgrade to the 7950

Vicxas

So the news of the 980 is released and the card is looking amazing.

My question is, would it be a viable upgrade to the 7950? Its been a long time since I was excited about a GFX card.

Saadyst

From what I've seen so far, it should be - but does depend on what you play and what rez.

980 is very pricey tho, personally I'd go to the 970. I'm on a 7950 myself.

Serephucus

970 does look like a very promising card. You're basically getting a 780 at minimum (driver maturity) for around €330 or so.

Gumbi

Serephucus wrote: »

970 does look like a very promising card. You're basically getting a 780 at minimum (driver maturity) for around €330 or so.

It's a good upgrade. 290 Tri xs were going for about 330 to 340 and I would take them at 1440p definitely but at 1080p nVidia will probably be better.

Shiminay

I'm really glad I didn't get a 770 (been hovering over the trigger for the last couple of months) as the 970 looks like a great card. The 770's still no slouch for a mid tier, so if there are any serious price drops on it to clear stock outta somewhere, I might still consider it.

BloodBath

Was about to order a R9 290 myself and now looking at the 970. When do amd have new cards out?

Serephucus

No real news, so far as I know, but I don't keep as much track of AMD stuff.

BloodBath

Sound, who makes the best coolers normally for Nvidia? Reasonably priced.

I haven't had an Nvidia card in years. First time they have competed in price/performance in a long time.

ZeroThreat

hang on, I haven't really kept up to date during the past few months, but wasn't the 800 series supposed to supersede the 7xx cards?

ShadowHearth

You way better off with 970. Its just amazing bang for your money right now with a huge potential for SLI.

ZeroThreat

ShadowHearth wrote: »

You way better off with 970. Its just amazing bang for your money right now with a huge potential for SLI.

Is a 980 similar to the 780Ti ?

Serephucus

The reference cooler (if my 780 was anything to go by) is actually really good.

I actually haven't had experience with non-reference cards for a very long time now (since the 480 days) as I've been running water. I've heard great things about MSI's Lightning cards though. A lot of people swear by the Classified cards for OCing as well. ASUS's Strix cards are also semi-passive now (think PSU), though I don't know if this applies to other manufacturers as well (probably will over time with a BIOS update).

Gbear

I also have a little trojan worker of a 7950.

I've seen the comparisons of the 970 with the R9 290 and the 290X and it seems to trump both, but the ones I saw seemed to be comparing reference coolers and, as far as I know, the AMD cards had particularly troublesome heat and power issues (so maybe the coolers from the likes of MSI and Sapphire close the gap a bit?).
It seems that the 980 will absolutely demolish everything though but you'd want to be able to justify using all that power - 7680x1440 or 4k or something.

I was tempted to pull the trigger on the 290 a few days ago but the 970 has certainly made me have another think about it.

I'd say it's a good idea to wait a little while and see what the full range of non-reference Nvidia cards are going to perform like and what moves, if any, AMD make in response.

BloodBath

I hate the way they compare non reference cards to reference especially when the 290 reference coolers were terrible and throttled.

I'll be waiting as well for the full details but it's looking like a 970 + Qnix 1440p monitor.

Do the cards support displayport 1.3?

Gumbi

BloodBath wrote: »

I hate the way they compare non reference cards to reference especially when the 290 reference coolers were terrible and throttled.

I'll be waiting as well for the full details but it's looking like a 970 + Qnix 1440p monitor.

Do the cards support displayport 1.3?

nVidia reference coolers are solid. AMD's are a joke. Part of the problem AND cards are a lot less efficient per watt thus their similarly performing cards often draw more power than their nVidia counterparts and consequently produce more heat.

BloodBath

Gumbi wrote: »

nVidia reference coolers are solid. AMD's are a joke. Part of the problem AND cards are a lot less efficient per watt thus their similarly performing cards often draw more power than their nVidia counterparts and consequently produce more heat.

I know that but knowing that why would you compare them. A decent 290 usually performs around the level of a reference 290x anyway.

I have no clue why AMD didn't use their their triple fan design for the 290's.

Gumbi

BloodBath wrote: »

I know that but knowing that why would you compare them. A decent 290 usually performs around the level of a reference 290x anyway.

I have no clue why AMD didn't use their their triple fan design for the 290's.

No idea either. Cost maybe but the launch prices of the cards were super competitive the only downside being the piss poor cooling - IIRC by the time the after market cards were released the prices sky rocketed due to bitcoin.

I try to compare cost for cost is all. I would never buy a reference 290(x) but I think a Tri x 290 for 330 euro ~ is a great card. I would also not buy a 290x because the price differential is not worth 5% (or less!) performance increase per clock speed.

BloodBath

For sure. The 970 seems to be the way to go for now at least. I'm sure AMD will counter soon.