|
Twerk from Home posted:If nVidia had positioned the 970 at $400+ and the 980 at $650+, maybe there would have been room for the R9-390 to come in and disrupt prices.
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2015 01:50
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 11:58 |
|
|
PC LOAD LETTER posted:If the rumor mill is correct R9 390/X will be aiming for performance lead and not bang for buck so expecting them to be cheap or disrupt prices much, except at the very high end, doesn't seem to pan out logically.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2015 01:55
|
|
|
Gah, I'm running 970s in SLI mode with AA turned *off* and I'm still getting miserable performance at 1440p (I can't get a stable 60 FPS - fluctuates anywhere from ~45 to ~90, depending on what I'm doing. Could my i5 4690 be bottlenecking the game? Has anyone got it to run beautifully in 970 sli?
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2015 06:22
|
|
|
beergod posted:Gah, I'm running 970s in SLI mode with AA turned *off* and I'm still getting miserable performance at 1440p (I can't get a stable 60 FPS - fluctuates anywhere from ~45 to ~90, depending on what I'm doing. Playing what? Counterstrike? Flight sim X? WoW?
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2015 06:23
|
|
|
beergod posted:Gah, I'm running 970s in SLI mode with AA turned *off* and I'm still getting miserable performance at 1440p (I can't get a stable 60 FPS - fluctuates anywhere from ~45 to ~90, depending on what I'm doing. What game?
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2015 06:23
|
|
|
Factory Factory posted:What game? Based on that miserable result, I'd guess Assassin's Creed: Unity 
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2015 11:49
|
|
|
After a bit of messing around I'm fairly content with the evga acx 2 970. If I'd known about the issues with the cooler and the cheap power delivery beforehand I would have bit down and bought the Gigabyte or one of the non-flagship MSI/ASUS cards, but the difference isn't worth the hassle of returning it. Thankfully my case completely muffles the coil whine and I don't have it as bad as some people do but the issue definitely exists. It's not a very demanding game but Valkyria Chronicles was the first game I could run with 4xDSR and not have the UI shrink to the point it was unplayable. Absolutely gorgeous, and I never caught it dropping a single frame even while recording. They've got a $10 mail in rebate going on for anyone making the mistake of ordering one in January, which I'm just barely not eligible for. As much as it's the worst 970 it's also currently going for $10 cheaper than its competition on Amazon, with the $10 MIR on top of that, which could be tempting if you're willing to gamble on the MIR and accept shittier temps.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2015 13:02
|
|
|
HalloKitty posted:Oh dear, the 960 looks like it may well come in with a pathetic 128-bit memory bus and 2GiB VRAM after all. Launching on January 22, and it will look like this.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2015 13:50
|
|
|
Rastor posted:Launching on January 22, and it will look like this. Well, that's weak. This leaves a giant gap between the 960 and 970. Seems like it's time for another loving alphabet soup with "Ti" and whatever. Oh, and overpriced 960s with 4GiB. This seems like a good time for AMD to hit back with something - they've usually been stronger in the mid-range - but I don't think there's anything new soon. HalloKitty fucked around with this message at 13:56 on Jan 6, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2015 13:53
|
|
|
HalloKitty posted:Well, that's weak. This leaves a giant gap between the 960 and 970. Seems like it's time for another loving alphabet soup with "Ti" and whatever. Oh, and overpriced 960s with 4GiB. AMD has been rebranding for the midrange, maybe the R9-290/X becomes the R9-380/X with long term MSRPs of $200 / $240. The 290s have been going that low if you can catch a sale and MIR, so it's not that crazy.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2015 16:24
|
|
|
.
Somebody fucked around with this message at 22:47 on Jan 6, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2015 22:36
|
|
|
Don't sell poo poo in random threads on SA. You may make a thread on SA-Mart and link to it here.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2015 22:47
|
|
|
HalloKitty posted:This seems like a good time for AMD to hit back with something - they've usually been stronger in the mid-range - but I don't think there's anything new soon. AMD already had their little 960 moment with that 2 GB R9 285 Tonga thing that left everyone scratching their heads. More time for good old 7970/280X to bask in
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2015 00:20
|
|
|
sauer kraut posted:AMD already had their little 960 moment with that 2 GB R9 285 Tonga thing that left everyone scratching their heads. That's actually a really good point. A card that didn't seem to fit in. I feel like the 960 is going to land in the exact same spot - the VRAM situation can't be ignored any longer. HalloKitty fucked around with this message at 00:38 on Jan 7, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2015 00:35
|
|
|
I could see Nvidia introducing a 2GB 960 at $230, and a 4GB model at $280. That way they could technically have a card with awesome performance close to the old 760 price point, but force you to shell out extra if you don't want the inevitable bottleneck.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2015 00:53
|
|
|
Wiggly Wayne DDS posted:Are we taking bets on how high the temp/power/noise will get this time?
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2015 01:05
|
|
|
Hace posted:I could see Nvidia introducing a 2GB 960 at $230, and a 4GB model at $280. That way they could technically have a card with awesome performance close to the old 760 price point, but force you to shell out extra if you don't want the inevitable bottleneck.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2015 01:09
|
|
|
http://www.pcgamer.com/new-geforce-gtx-965m-appears-in-msis-new-gaming-laptop/ GTX 965 in laptops good sign for 965 desktop cards?
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2015 02:14
|
|
|
beergod posted:Gah, I'm running 970s in SLI mode with AA turned *off* and I'm still getting miserable performance at 1440p (I can't get a stable 60 FPS - fluctuates anywhere from ~45 to ~90, depending on what I'm doing. Factory Factory posted:What game? Holy poo poo, sorry guys. The game is Far Cry 4. I changed the SLI profile to the Far Cry 3 profile and that helped dramatically, but the question still stands.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2015 04:18
|
|
|
beergod posted:The game is Far Cry 4. Well there's the problem  You can google around for miracle fixes like this, but basically Ubisoft happens. http://www.reddit.com/r/pcgaming/comments/2mt8fy/nvidia_users_who_stutter_in_far_cry_4_everyone/
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2015 04:56
|
|
|
I must be the luckiest dude alive because far cry 4 runs like a dream for me in 1440p, with a single 970. I've played the whole game top to bottom, online, everything there is to do. It can chunk down to 40 or 50 sometimes but its very smooth when it does so. Also its pretty as poo poo. edit: disclosure, its probably the first game I dont max out all settings all the time though I just remembered 1gnoirents fucked around with this message at 05:08 on Jan 7, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2015 05:05
|
|
|
In Far Cry 4 using the Nvidia selection will add a heap of things that you'll never notice (like higher quality fur on animals) unless you're really looking for it. Ultra is probably a better position to start tweaking from.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2015 05:13
|
|
|
EVGA has announced the Super SuperClocked (SSC) Edition, which presumably addresses issues people raised with their previous GTX 970 releases.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 17:42
|
|
|
seriously they should have saved face and just named it the regular rear end superclock one and offer to replace anybody's for free if they want. within some tiny rear end window, but really the "super super" ? lol I feel like I could like EVGA as a gpu company, but I feel like they need to cut their model line in half or more. They all virtually do exactly the same thing
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 17:44
|
|
|
1gnoirents posted:seriously they should have saved face and just named it the regular rear end superclock one and offer to replace anybody's for free if they want. within some tiny rear end window, but really the "super super" ? lol They've been doing this for a really long time though, I remember using the step-up to trade in a 320MB 8800GTS for a "super super clocked" 512MB 8800GT for free.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 17:47
|
|
|
Perhaps theyd do better to expand their vocab so they can say Mega Massive Superclocked. that'd open up the possibilities for tons of new cards with +/-30 mhz differences
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 17:50
|
|
|
Twerk from Home posted:They've been doing this for a really long time though, I remember using the step-up to trade in a 320MB 8800GTS for a "super super clocked" 512MB 8800GT for free. The 8800 GT was an absurd card. Hilariously overpowered for it's market segment. Those were the days...
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 18:09
|
|
|
PerrineClostermann posted:The 8800 GT was an absurd card. Hilariously overpowered for it's market segment. Those were the days... Were they really? Someone gave me an old Dell and it has a 8800GT in it factory. All I thought was "I remember those numbers" but I didn't know it was actually any good for the time.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 18:20
|
|
|
1gnoirents posted:Were they really? Someone gave me an old Dell and it has a 8800GT in it factory. All I thought was "I remember those numbers" but I didn't know it was actually any good for the time. It was a $200 card that was about the same performance as the $400-500 G80 8800GTS. I happily replaced a memory-crippled 320MB 8800GTS that I had paid $300 for with one, and got a performance boost. They later released a different GPU (G92 codename) as the 8800GTS because the old one was so noncompetitive, one of a couple times that I've seen different GPU architectures share the exact same marketing name. On top of it all they released it at a time when nVidia already had the competitive lead, and it was so good / cheap that the entire 9800 product line was based on rebranded 8800GT. Pretty much all of my friends who play PC games had an 8800GT at one point or another, and one guy is still on one 8 years later.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 18:26
|
|
|
The 8800gt was fantastic in its day, and then the 4xxx radeons came along and stomped it. I still regard the 4850 as one of the best bang for the buck cards. Of course I just installed a 970 and any card that laughs off Witcher 2 and Far Cry 4 on ultra is ok by me, especially for just over 300 dollars. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 20:42
|
|
|
SinineSiil posted:Sadly no. My laptop bios doesn't let me do that. Alternatively run it in a virtual machine where you get to set the parameters. Wiggly Wayne DDS posted:Are we taking bets on how high the temp/power/noise will get this time? Melting point of the solder/An additional PSU/Jet taking off from inside a tumbledryer Edit: I just realised the next line of GPUs from Nvidia has the chance to be called 1080 just as 1440 becomes the norm .
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 20:58
|
|
|
Boiled Water posted:Alternatively run it in a virtual machine where you get to set the parameters. 1440p is not anywhere close to the norm, it only represents 1% of monitors on the Steam Hardware Survey, anything above 1080p is still nearly non-existent for single monitors.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 22:40
|
|
|
What exactly is the point of the SSC it's still in the lovely ACX 2
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 22:41
|
|
|
Having some apparent issues with overclocking my MSI Radeon 5850s. MSI Afterburner will happily overclock GPU1, and will happily say "yep we can synchronize the two cards". However, the graphs show that GPU2 is not being overclocked, and is in fact at stock clocks. CPU-Z agrees with this, but GPU-Z doesn't, and Catalyst doesn't seem to give a gently caress anymore. Same results if I try doing the overclock with Catalyst Control Center -- GPU-Z says they're both 850/1175, CPU-Z says the first card is and the second is 765/1125 (stock clocks). What the gently caress is going on here? Are both cards actually being OC'd and two of three programs are just not getting the picture?
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 22:54
|
|
|
Beautiful Ninja posted:1440p is not anywhere close to the norm, it only represents 1% of monitors on the Steam Hardware Survey, anything above 1080p is still nearly non-existent for single monitors. I concede. You have defeated my humor with your superior logic.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 23:25
|
|
|
Beautiful Ninja posted:1440p is not anywhere close to the norm, it only represents 1% of monitors on the Steam Hardware Survey, anything above 1080p is still nearly non-existent for single monitors. Anybody posting about computers on the internet probably is in the top percentiles for IT spending. The reason why my friend is able to still coast on an 8800GT is because he's playing at 1024x768 in 2015.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 23:34
|
|
|
Twerk from Home posted:Anybody posting about computers on the internet probably is in the top percentiles for IT spending. The reason why my friend is able to still coast on an 8800GT is because he's playing at 1024x768 in 2015. I've read posts of people buying 1080p monitors. Saying that they were getting 60FPS with 8600 GT's at 1080p, but when asked to SS their game settings it would show like 1280x720 or something. Whenever someone says they can play a game I can't play at 60 FPS @ 1080p I ask them what GPU and what resolution and settings. They never seem to think that these matter.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2015 01:30
|
|
|
Beautiful Ninja posted:1440p is not anywhere close to the norm, it only represents 1% of monitors on the Steam Hardware Survey, anything above 1080p is still nearly non-existent for single monitors. I was gonna post this but yeah. You still need a foot long monstrosity with 3 fans to play nice 1080p, 1440p is not even on the radar until the masses will have digested the GTX 970 shock 2-3 generations down the road.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2015 02:20
|
|
|
sauer kraut posted:I was gonna post this but yeah. It very much depends on settings and what the hell game you're playing. A GTX 780 can play Metal Gear Solid V: Ground Zeroes at 4K on max settings, and that is an incredibly good looking game: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o-7bIW1g904 The key to all this is going to be DirectX 12, GSync/FreeSync, and developers not Ubisofting their game engines. If everyone gets their act together, the cards most people already have will be fine for 1440p and beyond. I'd almost bet that 4k PC monitors will come soon and completely eclipse 1440p install base, just because of the consumer-grade marketing cache behind it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2015 02:55
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 11:58 |
|
|
sauer kraut posted:I was gonna post this but yeah. Well, the 970 might not be cheap, but there are certainly a couple of them that are only 6" long and a single fan. 1440p is certainly cheaper than it ever has been an R9-290 or 970 does fine at 1440.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2015 03:52
|
|