Quote Originally Posted by Rollo View Post
OK

So in the top three slots, NVIDIA has no competition at all. While I'm sure somewhere a fanboy smoked enough to ignore the FCAT reviews, games that just don't scale at all, and $1000 price for two chips you can buy for under $400 a piece, I've never seen a forum post with 7990 owners talking about their cards. (where the forums were full of 690 threads)
yeah I saw tons of posts from 690 owners on various forums, mostly ing that they couldnt get them to scale worth a damn or at all on various games, funny enough, 7990 owners where rare but those that did post enlarge where not having those problems.
When the best you can say is "Yay, our flagship GPU is in a dead heat for 3rd place in the GPU market!", and you haven't launched a part for over 18 months, things aren't "too close to call" on who the "leader" is".
yeah because most of the sales are in the high end segment of the market.......*rolles eyes*

you should check where most of nvidia's numbers come from, or most sales of videocards in general come from....i think you will find its in the low to mid range segment, at least that was my experiance for all the years i worked retail and computer repair/upgrade/build/exct jobs......overall very few people bought high end or even mid high end cards, those that did tended to either be one of 2 types, loyal to a brand(like 3dfx.....all the poor fools who where so upset when 3dfx commited seppuku.....) and the kind who just want whatever is fastest for their buck.

really anymore, gpus arent the big problem with game perf, its the fact games are enlarge just really poor console ports rather then being optimized for modern hardware.

You could say they're in a close performance race with intel too- if you don't look at the chips intel made since 2011.
yes we get it, AMD sucks and dosnt make anything worth anybody owning, we can see you have a titan and 990x, and we are happy for you, if that makes you happy, great more power to you.

I happen to own one of these systems thats worthless in your eyes, and funny enough, my 8350@4.6 and dual 7870's have yet to let me down with any modern game, and infact in crysis 3 my system was noticeably smoother then my friends 920@4.1 with his dual 660ti's, his benches better in most older titles though(mine is faster in bf3 though, another game that uses an engine that likes more cores)

I understand your dislike of products you dont use and dont want to use, I understand your need to belittle AMD and anybody who uses their products in your quest to justify the price you paid for your titan, its ok, you dont need to keep waving your epeen around to show us all how big and shiny it is.....we get it.....

on a side note: alot of the tasks I do, run quite noticeibly faster on even my other system, an 8120@4.5, then they do on my friends 920 system, stuff like encoding large batches of audio files with dbpoweramp(dosnt like virtual cores/hyperthreading at all).

I still build systems, and have built a good number of sandy and ivy based intel rigs, with both nvidia and amd videocards, and though they are fun to play with, I just dont see the value in buying one for myself when I have 2 current gen amd rigs that I will just be able to toss new cpu's into when they drop without replacing my board as well....with intel, I already have a few people I built ivybridge rigs for complaining that they have read they would need a new board to get a new chip....when i warned them about that before they built.....(funny enought none of the 2011 users i built for are complaining or looking to upgrade....probably because they are happy with the oc i set them up with....)
....


as to this story, as i said on another site, this is just stupid, i mean they should have used AMD 8300 cpu's, with 7850 or 7870 videocards.....back it with fast ssd's and you can emulate the xbone experience using similar hardware even if you ran it at far higher clocks.....

also note: no need to quad channel the ram really, just toss 32gb in, set fancy cache up so it can cache the files being used to ram and away you go.(fancycache is great!!!)

sure a server platform could have been even better, but, would have also cost alot more, and sometimes you can run into issues with videocards and such in them(i have been doing this a long time, cant tell you how many high end workstations i have made with server/workstation grade hardware where i ran into issues you wouldnt see in a server because the server would at most use the video built into the board, or more common the console or serial management ports rather then even having a kb/mouse/monitor hooked up. (once spent a month back and forth with a server board vendor getting a bios bug fixed that kept videocards put into the boards slot from outputting video....that was"fun", to their credit they did get it fixed and also unlocked some features that where missing we needed at no extra charge)

either way, i really cant wait for these new consoles to launch, I think it will be good for everybody be it intel/nvidia or amd/amd, dx11 will get used(finely), multi threading will get used(because dev's have no other choice now!!!) that means perhaps companies like arenanet will fix their games to use more then 3 cores efficiently, thus making their games run alot better.

cant tell you how many games I expect to see get serious patching and updates as they are being ported to consoles this time around!!!