Core i7 5960X (Haswell-E) @ 4.4 GHz on all eight cores
16 GB (4x 4096 MB) 2,133 MHz DDR4

Our settings are as follows with very high quality, 16xAF, 2xMSAA and FXAA enabled.


SOS

If you cannot get the average FPS listed by guru3d then please check your CPU usage, GTA V is quite a CPU demanding games, i5 can hit 100% CPU usage in high density area.

Definitely cheaper

Go ahead brah

Fk it

I am sold

Salary cum 2 papa faster argh

this my first time ever leaping big since 5850 radeon 3 years ago hahahaha

60fps booster is quite orgasmic like waterfall spraying up

This post has been edited by skylinelover: Jun 30 2016, 10:45 AM

5960X, now that explains everything.

Not necessary need to be 5960X to get those listed average FPS one, I am getting similar frame rate (5 FPS+/-) on my setup too (i7 6700K + GTX1070).

I'm getting 55-70 with a 1231v3. Win7

This post has been edited by TenSou: Jun 30 2016, 11:03 AM

Did you tick the "Ignore Suggested Limit" checkbox? Probably that. I crank everything up on mine as well, so that checkbox is the first thing I tick. I even dragged the draw distance bar to the furthest I can without tanking my FPS too much.

On second thought, cancel that. There's tons of other variables in the game that isnt mentioned what settings they put it on. I tried on 4K and I get between 55-70fps depending on settings/levels are set. Unless they mention settings specifics, can't be sure.

This post has been edited by stringfellow: Jun 30 2016, 11:31 AM

I suspect your Xeon 1231 V3 is bottlenecking the game. Here's a quick Firestrike comparison I pulled up.



As you can see, even though this Xeon 1231-V3 Graphics score is higher than i7-5960X (maybe that guys overclocked his GTX 1070 GPU better), but the i7-5960X massive CPU advantage (Physics score) has the final impact on end result. i7-6700K lose out just a bit to the i7-5960X because its Physics score is closer to i7-5960X

This post has been edited by adilz: Jun 30 2016, 11:59 AM

IIRC the "Ignore Suggested Limit" just allows the game to use up to go over the vram but I'll try it anyway when I get home.

It really would be nice to see what settings they have turned on because I cranked everything up myself to test and it was nowhere close to the 152 fps they got at 1080p. Maybe my cpu is bottlenecking the game but I didn't expect a 50% difference in FPS lol.

I'll have to test it again using GFExperience's optimization settings when I have the time. Been busy playing games on my coughconsolescough lately more than on my pc.

I think if Nvidia get things right the 1060 may kill the RX480

RX 480 outperforms the GTX 970 on average but... far behind the GTX 1070 (expected it to be closer). At this rate, I think GTX 1060 might be faster than the RX 480.

Still, for those on an ancient/ageing card wanting to play the latest games at highest settings 1080p, this is an amazing buy.

Bang for the buck indeed. As in the bang you'll hear when your motherboard goes up in smoke. Hopefully just the motherboard, coz it'll no longer be a "budget system" when you have to replace everything.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/4qfwd..._specification/

I can only say this, pity those who panic sold their 970 or 980 for fear/anticipation of this RX480

RX 480 is supposed to compared to GTX 1060, not GTX 970 (tech from almost 2 years ago)...

In Malaysia, best bang for the buck should be GTX 1070. GTX 1070 at RM 1999 is 1.53x more expensive compared to RX480, but also 1.53x faster at stock. It can even be overclocked to 2000MHz to 2100MHz (28% increase), making it almost 2x faster compared to RX480.

That's because people here wants "all the bangs, but dont want to spend the bucks".

They'll get a different kind of "bang" with the RX480 because of that.

Need to investigate further... it indeed true then...

Frankly, I am very puzzled by people selling GTX970 / GTX980 for RX480.

Why sell away a decent card to replace with a slightly cheaper and arguably slightly less powerful card?

Because of all the, "will be better than Pascal and cheaper too!" pre-release hype lor. And now, the RX480 got a "watt-gate" scandal brewing. Old mobo users, beware!

Too much marketing hype. It should have been better than Pascal (given the fact that Pascal is a 2 year old technology)

As of now, RX480 is comparable or slightly less powerful / slightly cheaper depending on situation kinda of new GPU compared to GTX970 / GTX 980.

Motherboard failure or missing 0.5GB VRAM?

Which is better choice...