|
Wiggly Wayne DDS posted:Vulkan is compatible with older versions of windows, and I've yet to hear a feature of DX12 it doesn't support. Explicit multi-GPU didn't make the cut for Vulkan 1.0 but it's slated for 1.1. Some other minor things were left out too (ie. conservative rasterization) but they'll probably get bolted on with vendor extensions.
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 15:36
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 14:51 |
|
|
SlayVus posted:Best box opening, ever. 980ti and titanx had the same box design from nvidia.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 15:56
|
|
|
https://hardforum.com/threads/nvidia-geforce-gtx-1080-rumor-mill-just-blew-up.1893909/page-21#post-1042295591 lol
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 16:08
|
|
|
Im not a big box dude but that one looks pretty cool ill admit
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 16:13
|
|
|
Real benchies tomorrow?
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 16:40
|
|
|
fozzy fosbourne posted:https://hardforum.com/threads/nvidia-geforce-gtx-1080-rumor-mill-just-blew-up.1893909/page-21#post-1042295591 Can you quote whatever the gently caress it is that is so interesting in that thread? I've scanned over it like 3 times and I can't find anything of substance in there.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 16:45
|
|
|
Stanley Pain posted:Can you quote whatever the gently caress it is that is so interesting in that thread? I've scanned over it like 3 times and I can't find anything of substance in there. quote:I am going to leave this comment, before the embargo lifts tomorrow. Mostly amused by the pre-embarg-lift trolling
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 16:47
|
|
|
Oh, that's it?  Hey guys, I'm under NDA still but if I were to use one word to describe Polaris performance it would be   I'm sure 1440p and under the 1080 will be pretty freakin' stellar. I'm not holding my breath for 4k though. Next year can't come soon enough.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 16:57
|
|
|
Does anyone know if we get 1070 stuff tomorrow too? edit: quote:Hey guys, I'm under NDA still but if I were to use one word to describe Polaris performance it would be Is that good or bad? 
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 19:16
|
|
|
Stanley Pain posted:Oh, that's it? From what I've seen, Polaris performance is more 
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 20:19
|
|
|
he probably meant "wow this is a piece of crap !!" you know just to stay fresh and throw everybody for a loop
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 20:24
|
|
|
THE DOG HOUSE posted:he probably meant "wow this is a piece of crap !!" you know just to stay fresh and throw everybody for a loop It did great on their World of Warcraft benchmark
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 20:46
|
|
|
Hubis posted:It did great on their World of Warcraft benchmark Hopefully Polaris will be able to push the 24 fps too
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 21:11
|
|
|
Stanley Pain posted:Oh, that's it? I have a feeling the 1080ti and equivalent for amd's 14nm whatever they may call it will be very nice for 4k, which is the pricepoint that was expected for solid 4k gaming this year. Since there hasn't been anything at all to really do 4k thus far it will be pretty revolutionary imo
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 22:32
|
|
|
Do you think people are going have 1080 reviews up at 12:01AM or do you think Nvidia put in a specific time/timezone release for the NDA? Edit: Apparently on Reddit, one trusted korean benchmark site says NDA ends on 6AM PST/9AM EST. SlayVus fucked around with this message at 02:45 on May 17, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 02:38
|
|
|
THE DOG HOUSE posted:I have a feeling the 1080ti and equivalent for amd's 14nm whatever they may call it will be very nice for 4k, which is the pricepoint that was expected for solid 4k gaming this year. Since there hasn't been anything at all to really do 4k thus far it will be pretty revolutionary imo
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 03:22
|
|
|
Josh Lyman posted:To benefit from 4k, wouldn't your game need 4k textures? Like I run Diablo 3 at 1440p and it doesn't take advantage of that at all. I dont know honestly. I mean to an extent that must be true, but I've never played a game at 1440p that wasn't very clearly improved over 1080p either. But 4k is quite a big jump from 1440p too so perhaps there is some resolution event horizon here.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 03:26
|
|
|
Josh Lyman posted:To benefit from 4k, wouldn't your game need 4k textures? Like I run Diablo 3 at 1440p and it doesn't take advantage of that at all. I assume some games might just show you more stuff, while using the same resolution textures. Like, you could see more of the map in a Civilizations game, or something, but I'm not sure how many games actually do that.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 03:47
|
|
|
Josh Lyman posted:To benefit from 4k, wouldn't your game need 4k textures? Like I run Diablo 3 at 1440p and it doesn't take advantage of that at all. Biggest problem with Diablo 3 is that it's basically a static view. I wish Blizzard would stop their stance on how their games should be played and just let people play them how they want. Not like letting them cheat and stuff, but allowing things like 21:9 standard or other things like that. It'd be nice if with a higher resolution you would get a higher vertical play space, but the game is scaled to look the same on all resolutions. Like they think 21:9 is to advantageous to other players because it allows them to see more of the play area, though they haven't patched it out. Edit: Blizzard kind of considers 21:9 an exploit. http://us.battle.net/d3/en/forum/topic/7764666948#18 quote:The game servers and client UI were just not designed for this resolution and it's likely considered an exploit, giving an advantage to users with it over those without. ATI's Eyefinity feature is not supported for the same reason. SlayVus fucked around with this message at 03:56 on May 17, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 03:52
|
|
|
VulgarandStupid posted:I assume some games might just show you more stuff, while using the same resolution textures. Like, you could see more of the map in a Civilizations game, or something, but I'm not sure how many games actually do that. Yeah this is the general idea. When I use my 21:9 monitor on games that support it properly I get to 'see' more of the game than someone on a 16:9 monitor. Likewise a 4k monitor can just see more of the game because it's 1:1 pixels match up to more visuals being in your face. This is why they take more power to run at native 'cause you gotta render all that extra poo poo out. Games can do all sorts of poo poo to mess that up though, so it's only for native res games. Something like Diablo III should (but doesn't it turns out) render more of the map and your avatar should be smaller as a result. If the avatar is normally 500 pixels tall it's going to be a lot smaller on a 4k screen than a 1080 one.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 03:54
|
|
|
SlayVus posted:Biggest problem with Diablo 3 is that it's basically a static view. I wish Blizzard would stop their stance on how their games should be played and just let people play them how they want. You know, because the only people who play D3 are interested in the competitive hardcore aspect of it, and it would be totally impossible to program in a "noncompetitive freeform" mode that would let you use arbitrary aspect ratios.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 04:05
|
|
|
DrDork posted:But my eSports fairness! Yea, they should just allow it for anything but the actual ranked stuff.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 04:12
|
|
|
DrDork posted:But my eSports fairness! Seasons are technically ranked even though it wouldn't specifically give you any advantage though. In other news, currently watching videos relating to GTX 1080 because middle of the night with nothing to do. Paul's Hardware - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SGVhKIB-4_E&t=473s quote:The performance numbers from Nvidia are pretty impressive... and to be taken with a grain of salt. I guess everything can't be fairy tales and lollipops when it comes to getting bleeding edge technology with truthful information from companies.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 09:55
|
|
SlayVus posted:Seasons are technically ranked even though it wouldn't specifically give you any advantage though. In other news, currently watching videos relating to GTX 1080 because middle of the night with nothing to do. Well, if rumors are correct in four hours we will be seeing the first reviews going up, so something to look forward to.
|
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 09:59
|
|
|
Full Pascal slide deck: http://videocardz.com/59999/nvidia-geforce-gtx-1080-full-presentation Previous leak was incomplete.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 11:55
|
|
|
DrDork posted:But my eSports fairness! This is the reason I stopped playing warcraft 3, and a slew of other RTS games. I have a huge honking monitor now, and the default zoom level feels absolutely claustrophobic and makes me physically uncomfortable, having to move the camera all the time. And they don't let you zoom out further because OMG MY ESPORTS BALANCE.  Thank god for supcom/PA.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 12:33
|
|
|
Starcraft would definitely suffer a lot in multiplayer from being able to zoom out but it's unfortunate that they don't let you do it in single player at least. Especially since the campaign in SC2 has never been about training you for the multiplayer anyway what with all the gimmicks, unique units and the fact that they already let you play the game in slow motion if you want. Can you even control camera distance in the custom map editor? Surely they at least let you do it there? I remember back in the day I played a lot of old games that were designed to be rendered at 640x480 or 800x600 but let you pick 1024x768 and you got to see way more of the level and it felt really cool. Jazz Jackrabbit 2 comes to mind. Are there even games that do that anymore? HMS Boromir fucked around with this message at 12:43 on May 17, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 12:39
|
|
|
HMS Boromir posted:I remember back in the day I played a lot of old games that were designed to be rendered at 640x480 or 800x600 but let you pick 1024x768 and you got to see way more of the level and it felt really cool. Jazz Jackrabbit 2 comes to mind. Are there even games that do that anymore? Not since 3D happened. I love playing hacked StarCraft 1 at 2560x1600, lets me see like a quarter of a map. Now you just have to hack the camera distance or fov, which is honestly often much easier, just run cheat engine and change a variable. But there's no games that ship with this enabled by default for some reason. HMS Boromir posted:Starcraft would definitely suffer a lot in multiplayer from being able to zoom out but it's unfortunate that they don't let you do it in single player at least. See, this is one argument I saw a lot when trying to play HON with my friends. Them - "Keep an eye on your minimap AT ALL TIMES  , so you don't get ganked/hooked/whatnot, make sure you remember which colours the enemies are so you know which hero is which".Me - "Okay, sure, but why can't I zoom out a bit more instead?" Them - "BALANCEEEEEEE" If the argument is "you need to keep an eye on your minimap at all times and keep a perfect battlefield awareness anyway", then the argument of "balanced camera distance" is really "you need to struggle with the interface instead of the game, because that's how these games work, shitface"
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 12:55
|
|
|
HMS Boromir posted:I remember back in the day I played a lot of old games that were designed to be rendered at 640x480 or 800x600 but let you pick 1024x768 and you got to see way more of the level and it felt really cool. This owns with Worms Armageddon, it was designed for 1024x768 at most but the map size they chose just happens to fit perfectly on a 1920x1080 screen with no panning 
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 12:59
|
|
|
Truga posted:"you need to struggle with the interface instead of the game, because that's how these games work, shitface" It sucks but at the end of the day it's true. Starcraft is an exercise in spinning plates and even Starcraft 2's improvements like better pathfinding and being able to select more things at once removed so many of the plates you need to spin that they decided to shoehorn in extra mechanics just to get the plate count back up (though I think they've since given up on them). You might not like spinning the plates and it's pretty fair to call bullshit on a game that falls apart if you zoom out, but it totally would.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 13:06
|
|
|
Quote is not edit, but now if you zoom out you get to see more of my posts.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 13:08
|
|
|
  AnandTech Guru3D benchmarks and FCAT tests TechPowerUp HardOCP HotHardware OverclockersClub repiv fucked around with this message at 14:08 on May 17, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 13:58
|
|
|
The truth about 3-way and 4-way SLIU - JayzTwoCents - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2wBDt9tN5-c http://anandtech.com/show/10326/the-nvidia-geforce-gtx-1080-preview/2 Hardware Canucks HexusNet HardOCP KitGuru TweakTown   LinusTechTips https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2-61Zn4Sb8Q Paul's Hardware https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kYdzZzSzF2I SlayVus fucked around with this message at 14:10 on May 17, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 14:02
|
|
|
Does anywhere have anything on the 1070 or is it all 1080 stuff today?
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 14:12
|
|
|
So initial results are good, but now to play the waiting game for proper AIB coolers and OC tools. Really curious about this combination for the 1070 as well.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 14:14
|
|
|
all this is making it really hard for me to wait for the custom partner cards
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 14:16
|
|
|
Nemesis Of Moles posted:Does anywhere have anything on the 1070 or is it all 1080 stuff today? Just 1080, 1070 doesn't even release for another like two weeks after the 1080. Rukus posted:So initial results are good, but now to play the waiting game for proper AIB coolers and OC tools. Really curious about this combination for the 1070 as well.   JayzTwoCents said that he will be releasing SLI and Tri-SLI results later today on his channel. SlayVus fucked around with this message at 14:21 on May 17, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 14:17
|
|
|
TPU and computerbase.de seem to have OC results, but computerbase seems to be getting a pretty weak OC while TPU got 2114 MHz. TPU's got really impressive numbers and a very new suite of games, which makes it look like it will be doing better vs Maxwell as time goes on. Good performance from the blower, but it is a top end cooler on a mid range TDP and they're charging a bucket for it. Kind of was hoping for a bigger increase, but we didn't previously have a stripped down half generation on the previous node to beat. Curious about the DX 12 results, I'm thinking they get some but not all of AMD's increase. Also interested in whether Polaris will do better there than previous cards.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 14:25
|
|
|
DX12 stuff https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-cLYn937ZFE&t=341s looks like with OC I dont see how anybody could have realistically asked for better, Pascal is looking solid
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 14:28
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 14:51 |
|
|
xthetenth posted:TPU and computerbase.de seem to have OC results, but computerbase seems to be getting a pretty weak OC while TPU got 2114 MHz. TPU's got really impressive numbers and a very new suite of games, which makes it look like it will be doing better vs Maxwell as time goes on. Good performance from the blower, but it is a top end cooler on a mid range TDP and they're charging a bucket for it. You have to take into account that AMD's DX11 path were poo poo, so going to DX12 was just better. DX12 on Nvidia however isn't showing good performance and sometimes has negative performance effects because they haven't optimized it as well as their DX11 paths. It still may be a problem with the GPU or the drivers. It'll take maturity of the device to figure out whether Nvidia is screwing everyone again or not on DX12. THE DOG HOUSE posted:looks like with OC I dont see how anybody could have realistically asked for better, Pascal is looking solid SlayVus fucked around with this message at 14:33 on May 17, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 14:30
|
|