Poogobbler :
3 MAJOR things that no one has bothered to mention here....
1- AMD Cards are well known for having MUCH better multi-GPU scaling then Nvidia. Sometime as much as a 25% advantage.
2- AMD Freesync support.. Freesync monitors are not only much cheaper than Gsync monitors, there is a much wider variety of options available both from US vendors and even more affordable Korean vendors. Nvidia tied their hands to Gsync and will most likely never allow Freesync/Adaptive Sync support which is a real shame. So if you are planning on a Freesync monitor in your near future, which I strongly suggest you do, scratch any and all Nvidia GPUs off your list.
3- DirectX 12 & Vulcan Performance - Go find a youtube video of someone testing Vulcan with an AMD card and tell me again who wins the performance per dollar race. Nvidia still has no solution for DX 12. AMD is way ahead of the game and all bench marks and DX12 performance shows AMD GPU's destroying Nvidia at every turn.
I happen to have a GTX 980 G1 that I really like. I also have an R9 390x which performs almost identical except the R9 390x will allow me not to have to upgrade when DX12 becomes the standard and I am using it with my new Freesync monitor which is a game changer and I don't plan on going back.
There is more to consider here then just simply percentages of performance with current games and programs.
There certainly more to consider but let's look at these factors... but a) lets include some data to see if they hold up and b) include the parts you left out.
1. It's too early to judge CF/ SLI as we don't have comparable cards to judge and scaling performance is oft limited as card performance climbs. So w/ no current gen cards to compare, will use previous generation cards ...
https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/NVIDIA/GeForce_GTX_970_SLI/20.html
Scaling = 100/60 or 167% ... as you can see in the chart the closest AMD card to the 970 was the 290x
https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/R9_290X_CrossFire/21.html
Scaling = 100/67 or 149%
As to what will happen this time around, we just don't know until we can compare two comparable cards.
And let's not forget that the AIB 970s overclocked 17% ... AIB 290x just 11 .... Current AMD cards ONLY 6% ... current nVidia 18%
That puts SLI performance at 167 x 1.17 (195.3) and CF at 149 x 1.11 (165.4) ... quite a difference.. Not exactly a 25% advantage to AMD but a 30% advantage to nVidia when all the capabilities of the cards are considered.
In order for CF and SLI to make sense 2 moderate tier cards must be faster and cheaper then the next tier card ...
we do not have this for the 1st time ever ! So lets look at current cards and we find out why nVidia didn't add SLI to the 1060
https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/RX_480_CrossFire/19.html
2 x 480 = 146% as fast as a single 480 x 1.06 (for OC w/ AIB cards) = 155%
1 x 1070 = 153% as fast as a single 480 x 1.18 (for OC w/ AIB cards+ = 181%
Lets look at the price
Asus 480 Strix = $259 x 2 = $518
Asus 1070 Strix = $479 x 1 = $479
Why would you spend $39 (8.1%) more and not pick the option that is 17% faster ? But now let's address the hidden costs
Twin 480s TDP (peak Gaming) = 360 watts
One 970 TDP(Peak Gaming) = 190 watts
Add the cost of a 170 watt bigger PSU
EVGA G2 550 = $65
EVGA G2 750 = $109 .... +$44
Add the cost of two extra case fans (75 watts per fan) + $30
Now its $479 versus $592 (+24%) purchase costs
[170 watts / (1000 watts per kw x 90% efficiency)] x 30 hours per week x 52.2 weeks per year x 3 years x $0.10 per kw hr = $89 ... for me at $0.24 rates, that's $214
For me, that's $479 versus $683 ... for slower performance
2. As if Freesync and G-Sync were comparable technologies.... G-Sync is a syncing technology combined with a hardware module that provides motion blur reduction (ULMB) ... Freeseync has no hardware module and therefore no MBR technology... you can get MBR technology on a Freesync monitor, when the monitor vendor decides to add it ... some do, but it comes at increased cost .. It's like comparing a 6600 and a 6600K ... not the same, it's apples and melons comparison
3. No argument that AMD has been faster out of the gate than nVidia w. DX12 ... but the 1st horse outta the gate doesn't always cross the finish line 1st. And as for "destroying Nvidia at every turn" ... sorry, but the numbers don't support that:
https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/MSI/GTX_1060_Gaming_X/19.html
Rise of the Tomb Raider DX12 1440p = 47.4 fps
https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/ASUS/RX_480_STRIX_OC/19.html
Rise of the Tomb Raider DX12 1440p = 44.6 fps
Although AMDs advantage in some games w/ DX12 , it's unable catch up to nVidia because of the OC advantage.
Lets also look what DX 12 does to CF
https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/RX_480_CrossFire/16.html
39.7 w/ 1 card => 41.8 w/ two
Things have changed
With the 280 versus 760, I recommended the 280
With the 380 versus 960, I recommended the 380
This time around.... the 480 just doesn't deliver.
I know the price argument is going to be the next counter so let's just put that to bed.... Yes, $199 is a nice price for the 4GB 480 for someone at 1080p.... try and buy one tho. The cheapest one on pcpartpicker is $70 more than that.
You might be able to snipe one of the reference cards on newegg for that price, I don't watch 24/7 to see how often they arrive in stock.... but I can't recommend the reference card. I can only recommend non-reference cards with the 8 pin connector
http://www.tomshardware.com/answers/id-3133544/480-blew.html
But the only non-refernce 480 on newegg is $279.... MSI's non-reference 1060s are running $249 - $279 ...
and you can actually buy them
If we see a non reference, 8 pin 4 GB card, selling for $199 ... then that will be a recommendation I can make for 1080p users on a tight budget. Until then, AMD has no horse in the race. CF'ing those 4 GB cards to play at 1440p though, you'll want a 6 GB or 8GB model
I have to agree with TPU....
Should there actually be GTX 1060 cards that retail for $249, any hopes of AMD will be dashed because the GTX 1060 will also beat it in performance-per-dollar, leaving AMD with no real wins with which to convince potential buyers.
And there are 1060s available now for $249
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram