3 ms·
A nice comparison chart for hundreds of cards, with the 1080 being on top (this is updated daily) http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/high_end_gpus.html http://ww
by ronnier 10y ago
A nice comparison chart for hundreds of cards, with the 1080 being on top (this is updated daily) http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/high_end_gpus.html http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/high_end_gpus.html
- jsheard 10y agoI wouldn't take PassMark too seriously. It's a dated synthetic benchmark that isn't controlled for other system components or driver versions, since the results are coming from many different users at different times. Here's an aggregate of 15 real world benchmarks on a consistent test rig: http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/NVIDIA/GeForce_GTX_1080/26.html http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/NVIDIA/GeForce_GTX_1080/2...
- _Codemonkeyism 10y agoI've got out of the game of upgrading PCs years ago, so have no clue. To me I'd think the average user with his drivers and different components might get a better impression what to expect if he buys the card from the first link, than your link? (which would more express what to could be expected at maximum?)
- onli 10y agoNot really. The Passmark is useful to get a broad comparison, but real benchmarks will be closer to what users see in practice. Some results show that clearly. E.g. the 780 Ti is in the passmark before the GTX 970, but in games with modern drivers the GTX 970 is better. But well, they are close in both. More severe is the GTX 960 – the passmark sees that card above a R9 380X. That's completely unrealistic, the GTX 960 is slower than a R9 380, without the X. Most user run games and not artificial benchmarks, thus the performance measured in games is closer to what they will get in practice.