Nice!!!  I love it!!! Competition is good and nvidia has had this coming.

Go AMD!  They are on the ball...Competition is good for US!!!
 
 

I can see Nvidia responding with a refreshed GTX 970

bobmitch
Go AMD!  They are on the ball...Competition is good for US!!!
 
 

No, this is just "buy our card, because its cheaper, and we didn't make a stupid mistake". Competition would be "buy our 380x which is more powerful than the 980". AMD is simply low balling the prices on their older cards to attract customers, instead of trying to compete and make a better card. This is just my opinion though.

lol amd should not even taik at all there only doin this 2 try and sell more cards what amd needs 2 werry about is makeing a cpu that can keep up with intel and not werry about there apu and maybe make a radeom card that dose not use alot of power or heat but yet this is why i stay with nvidia and intel amd can taik all the smack thay want when thay should look them self befor taiking cuz thay are still so far behide on so much but i did start a step up fro my 970  switching it out for 980 

you know what, this is insane, no one threw this much of a fit back in 03, when Radeon and FX where cheating on 3dmark

Gold Leader
To be very honest I am not surprised as the GTX 970 scandal goes...  Since this is not the first time NVIDIA has been dishonest to their customers, with AMD you at least know what you are buying
For my main system I have a Sapphire R9 290X 4GB and I have been using it the past 14 months now and I never had a single issue with it, drivers & support simply rocks
 
AMD like NVIDIA had their ups and downs all true, this is just one of NVIDIA's major downs, mainly being dishonest and lieing about the specs of their products which they have sold in large numbers to their customers... that really marked a scar of unreliability's on their company reputation, something any company would want to avoid.
 
Obviously NVIDIA had this coming

The past 14 months have been awesome for the R9 2##x drivers, their driver release has been rock solid and on point. I guess they got sick of being that company.

Vlada011
This would be much less drama but NVIDIA force significance of 4GB over 2-3GB in last period and some new games suddenly show up after few years with more video memory usage than people expected. Long time 1-2GB vas enough.

While I could say we've had the same resolutions for almost a decade, it is the games that push, not solely the resolutions.  Ten years ago, both ATI and nVidia Vram was around 256-512MB mark, and now we're an order of magnitude from that.  
 
 
Did games from 2004 or 2005 not need more than 512MB of Vram despite details cranked up?  The truth is we don't know, there was no software back then where people measured Vram usage and reported it.  Running an older game nowadays on a modern system may skew results simply because our hardware wasn't there back then, eliminating many bottlenecks that couldn't be dealt with.  There is no telling whether our modern utility software is stable in older systems, and the impact it would have on an older slower CPU (taking precious computation away from the game being tested).
 
Ironically enough, while that software exists even now, not all graphics card reviewers cover Vram usage and judge the performance of a higher Vram model solely by frame rates against a lower Vram model, as if exceeding Vram means lower rates, as if that is all people really care about.  True in a way, but reviewers have bias, they don't all test the proper scenarios where higher Vram has a point; so more skewed results.
 
1440p and 4K (2160p) resolution is getting more affordable, and with it, the gamers' dream of running it smooth means those getting more than one GTX970 could have benefited with that last 512MB cluster (since SLI doesn't add up Vram).
 
If AMD is able to cash in on those upset over GTX970, at least we know those people were not loyal to brands; if nVidia reacts to AMD, then at least we know those not loyal are a bigger fraction that nVidia can't afford to lose.

candle_86
you know what, this is insane, no one threw this much of a fit back in 03, when Radeon and FX where cheating on 3dmark

I remember when Nvidia had the upper hand on Vantage due to physx for a long time.

Gold Leader
Well said bud, yet i have to admit the time I have been using ATi Radeons & AMD Radeons was since March 15, 2002 to this very day and I actually never had a really bad driver experience, so I dunno where these people are getting such bogus talk from... It seems that this group of people have a hard time installing a driver of a production VGA card lol 
 
But hey glad to see you're still around Seth89

 
the bad ATI drivers where well known back in the day, and while they may be better, i still cringe from the random problems dealing with a Radeon 7500

candle_86

Gold Leader
Well said bud, yet i have to admit the time I have been using ATi Radeons & AMD Radeons was since March 15, 2002 to this very day and I actually never had a really bad driver experience, so I dunno where these people are getting such bogus talk from... It seems that this group of people have a hard time installing a driver of a production VGA card lol 
 
But hey glad to see you're still around Seth89

 
the bad ATI drivers where well known back in the day, and while they may be better, i still cringe from the random problems dealing with a Radeon 7500

Back in the day of maybe the 1990's... I remember hearing about 3rd party drivers working better than the ones provided by ATI. But that was quite a while ago. I never had any issues with my X1650PRO, X1950GT or X1950PRO's... they were solid cards back in 2005. Back when AMD was the best processor to buy.

RainStryke

seta8967

RainStryke

candle_86
you know what, this is insane, no one threw this much of a fit back in 03, when Radeon and FX where cheating on 3dmark

I remember when Nvidia had the upper hand on Vantage due to physx for a long time.

But thats a feature for all nvidia cards. Not a lie/cheat for demo cards falsifying scores.

No, when you had phsyx on, it assisted the CPU score and highly inflated the score. It was also falsifying scores, cause the CPU tests were for the CPU, not for the GPU and CPU.

 My point is that it was still a feature of nvidia. If you bought Nvidia card and expected a score of 7500, you got that score. Even if the gpu was helping with physx it was still the expected and delivered product. AMD would say "look our demo makes 8000" you buy it go home and you only get 7000. You bought a product under false advertisement of getting a score and it did not achieve that. Much like the 970 and the ram issue.

Good to see AMD playing the price game, now if they can only get the 980 down in price, and the Titan II's when they come out that will be when we start winning as consumers again... Because as it stands now ugh, being a hardware consumer prices are a bit out of touch and have been for some time.

idea to recovery, GTX970, at least we aren't as loud as an FX5800, oh sorry R9 290x that was low

Vlada011
Titan Black is peace of Art compare to AMD Radeon.
From every side you look NVIDIA have that chip two years and AMD still no stronger card of full unlocked GK110.
If you compare chip, performance, driver, stock cooler, huge amount of video memory...
AMD never had something like that in their offer.

Keep drinking the koolaid and buying $1000 video cards. Nvidia love you long time for it.