It's their choice. I'd rather upgrade on PC than blow $400 on a DRM box. And you don't need to upgrade every year. My ATI 4670 lasted me 3 years.
Other reports and nVidia's own word on the subject disagree. Difference of 80-100W under full load.
If you're only an enthusiast or don't pay for your electricity, maybe it doesn't matter. But if you're a big enough customer that your nVidia representative is going to listen to your requirements, and pass them up the chain, it's a huge difference.
Last edited:
Blurt much?
Justifying manufacture actions and calling it progress by purchasing new graphic card for 500-700$ every 10-12 months to gain 1-10fps. I wish there was so many AAA exclusive games coming out on PC as there is hardware parts. It would be true master race.. until then we can all dream.
If you have the money why not? If it means that you get more performance with lower TDP. Besides you can still sell your year old cards and fetch a good price on them.Blurt much?
Justifying manufacture actions and calling it progress by purchasing new graphic card for 500-700$ every 10-12 months to gain 1-10fps. I wish there was so many AAA exclusive games coming out on PC as there is hardware parts. It would be true master race.. until then we can all dream.
EDIT: And btw, I don't buy GPUs every year. Just making a point.
Last edited:
Even that is not necessary, unless there are some important gains. Normally, if your card is still enough - why upgrade? If not, that's another matter.
It doesn't mean that manufacturers shouldn't update hardware frequently. There is no point for them to stagnate it. They'll have enough customers who really need every bit of performance and are ready to pay for upgrades. And gaming is not such case.
Last edited:
It's not "necessary" at all, I'd give a new GPU 4-7 years until I change it, squeeze every last drop and when I'm done I'll use it for an HTPC just saying if you HAVE to get a new one 2 year cycles(respective of architectural changes) is the only one that seems to make SOME sense.
just saying if you HAVE to get a new one 2 year cycles(respective of architectural changes) is the only one that seems to make SOME sense.
But if you're a billionaire oil sheik why not
I'd get a new Lambo every year. ^^
Because you can use that money for something more productive? Having a lot of money doesn't equal to wasting them.
You wouldn't stay a billionaire for very long thenBut if you're a billionaire oil sheik why not
I'd get a new Lambo every year. ^^
Pff.. The amount of revenue I'd make each year selling my oil to the Americans I could easily buy a new Lambo each year. And much moreYou wouldn't stay a billionaire for very long then
I have one too. I'm not going to buy a new card until 16nm one comes out and 680 won't be enough to run some games. So far it's perfectly enough for me.
If you want to...
Here's a 680 v 980 benchmark. Both x80 for a 'fair' comparison, the x70 variant is just slightly lesser than the x80s anyway
http://anandtech.com/bench/product/1348?vs=1351
Every year but not a new architecture every year, just a refresh of the same cards. So "new technology" cards every 2 years in layman terms.
It's good to see that noise level is actually lower in 980. In 780 it was higher.
It's not "necessary" at all, I'd give a new GPU 4-7 years until I change it, squeeze every last drop and when I'm done I'll use it for an HTPC
I have to agree. If I get the best GPU this year, then upgrading next year is totally unjustitfiable in my country especially considering the european pricing bullshit. I can barely get the new stuff I posted earlier. If my 6950 hadn't fried I still would have used it till TW3 because it could have run DA:I quite well on medium-high.
Hell, I still have my i5 2500k at stock and it is still a beastly CPU and when I'll really need to, I'll OC it.
High-end cards tend to be grey-market here, which means not much of a warranty. So the upgrade is either "when it stops working" or "when it isn't good enough any more".