• 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
ASUS STRIX GTX 950 DirectCU II OC Performance results with 29 games
#1
CLICK HERE TO SEE THIS POST ON THE MAIN SITE
strixpix-1We received an ASUS STRIX GTX 950 DirectCU II OC Edition a week ago under NDA and are still writing this review.  It will be published in its entirety within the next few hours.  This is an important launch for Nvidia as it aims the new $159 GTX 950 directly at AMD's $149 R9 370.  The GTX 950 also brings new sharing and broadcasting features and latency optimizations for MOBA gaming to the GeForce Experience.

In the meantime, here is what we call our "Big Picture" which will compare the $169 - just released and slightly overclocked - ASUS STRIX GTX 950 DirectCU II OC with the GTX 650 Ti, the GTX 750 Ti, and with the PowerColor R9 270X PCS+.  The factory-overclocked PowerColor 270X is faster than the GTX 950's current competition, the R9 370, which is priced beginning at $149.

The Big Picture


Here is the summary chart for 29 games and 1 synthetic test.  Specific settings are listed on the Performance chart and they are identically high, very high, or ultra across all platforms.  The benches are run at 1920x1080 and 2560x1440. All results, except for Futuremark, show average framerates, and higher is always better.  We see some very impressive results with the ASUS STRIX GTX 950 DirectCU II OC for its suggested price of $169.main-chart

This evaluation will be completed today.  We shall also unbox the new ASUS STRIX GTX 950 DirectCU II OC and discuss Maxwell architecture and the features that this new card brings to GeForce gaming today.

Happy Gaming!
  Reply
#2
Nice! That looks like a great card for the price. I wonder if they will make a Ti version.
  Reply
#3
Probably. Especially if AMD releases a 370X.


This GTX 950 is the best performing of Nvidia's GTX x50s that I have seen - ever!. There have been GTX x50 Tis that approach GTX x60 performance, but not usually the GTX x50s, which is really entry-level GeForce gaming.
  Reply
#4
I think nVidia is starting to feel the heat from Intel's iGPUs. Broadwell probably gave them a scare. Then there is also the fact that AMD is working on Zen and who knows if they try to put a beastly iGPU on the thing.

It's great for us as gamers, though. I'm pretty sure that we will see this card hit a $100 street price as well, the GTX 750 regularly sells for that much.
  Reply
#5
(08-20-2015, 02:12 PM)SickBeast Wrote: I think nVidia is starting to feel the heat from Intel's iGPUs.  Broadwell probably gave them a scare.  Then there is also the fact that AMD is working on Zen and who knows if they try to put a beastly iGPU on the thing.

It's great for us as gamers, though.  I'm pretty sure that we will see this card hit a $100 street price as well, the GTX 750 regularly sells for that much.

Not at all.  Nvidia's GTX 750 is faster than Broadwell's best CPU graphics, and there are two inexpensive entry-level GTXes faster that are WAY faster (750 Ti/950).

Nvidia will always be able to stay ahead of Intel's CPU graphics.  It's logical that a dedicated GPU on a PCIe card will always be faster than integrated graphics on a CPU die because of space and power requirements.  The argument is that someday, Intel's graphics will be "good enough" for 1080P, and that dGPUs will become unnecessary.

Well, it already is good enough, for MOST users today.  Only gamers need dedicated video cards and they will always need something faster - games are not standing still with DX12 - and 4K is here, where Intel doesn't make it at all for gaming.  VR and AR is coming, and you need a GTX 770 as a MINIMUM - when do you think Intel gets that kind of graphics on a CPU die?  2020?  maybe.  So that means that the market has already shifted away from Sub-$100 video cards and shifted to midrange and high end cards instead.  That is why Nvidia is selling way less units but making far more profit, and why AMD is in the toilet.

The people who proclaim the death of dGPU are nuts in my opinion.  The dGPU will live or die with PC gaming for the foreseeable future. PC gaming is growing and they need dGPUs.  Expensive ones.  In the meantime, Nvidia is wise to use their record profits and massive margins to branch out into other fields like they are doing as a hedge against the future.
  Reply
#6
Couldn't discreet GPUs die because of HDR memory though? What if they put HDR onto the motherboard for the CPU and GPU to share? They could just put a GPU "socket" on the motherboard.
  Reply
#7
Look at the size of the GPU in transistors.  Now compare to Broadwell biggest CPU.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transistor_count

The GTX Titan X uses a 8.1 Billion transistor die and sits on a small motherboard.  Intel's biggest CPU is just over half that

Nvidia's NVLink aims to connect the GPU more directly with the CPU and will be used in workstations and supercomputers.

If you make the GPU "drop in", then you make the motherboard far more complex
:idea:
  Reply
#8
Wow that's insane! I had no idea that an 8 core Haswell-E CPU only has 2.6 billion transistors! So the Titan X has almost 4 times as much!

You're probably right. However HBM is going to create some interesting possibilities for integrated graphics if they decide to use it.
  Reply
#9
HBM (2) is going to create some interesting possibilities for dGPU!  Pascal is just the beginning.  Volta and Einstein promise some insane performance increases (absolutely necessary for 4K VR and AR).  CPU graphics will at that point be perfect for 1080P gaming with the current crop of console games - when the next generation launches.

It's a natural progression and dGPU is tied to PC gaming. Nvidia will shift their market to above $200 for entry-level PC gaming while CPU graphics can handle everything else. It's good for Nvidia and good for Intel. Good for the gamer and the consumer who has decent choices.
  Reply
#10
Well I hope you're right and we see massive gains with the newer cards. DX12 will help as well. Hopefully it will align perfectly with my 4k upgrade. :)
  Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)