|
Dang, really disappointed in the 4k performances for ultra setting and such. At 1080p it really doesn't make sense to even upgrade from my 2gb 770 gtx, though I might do so if nvidia or AMD end up offering something that can deliver at least 1.5x the performance for $150 or less. At 1080p the 1070 seems like a waste unless you want to drive a panel with higher than 60hz refresh rates (or 1440p). I think it matters that we aren't getting a card here that's cost-effective at 4k because eventually 4k will become the standard for monitors the same way 1080p is now (sorry 1440p). I'm guessing a card that can drive 4k monitors in gaming at reasonable performance levels will have to be within commodity level prices before monitor manufacturers start mass producing 4k monitors and selling them at lower prices. Dang, Pascal = total meh. Yes, I'm salty that I will not at this time be buying electronics I can reasonably justify to myself as being necessary upgrades. objects in mirror fucked around with this message at 06:58 on May 18, 2016 |
#
?
May 18, 2016 06:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 02:45 |
|
|
Josh Lyman posted:The most intensive game I'm likely to play for the next couple years is Civ 6; I feel like my 970 is probably fine for 1440p for a while. Civilization games are CPU bottlenecked anyway. Upgrading from a 970 won't do poo poo unless you get a new computer to go along with it.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2016 07:20
|
|
|
objects in mirror posted:Dang, really disappointed in the 4k performances for ultra setting and such. At 1080p it really doesn't make sense to even upgrade from my 2gb 770 gtx, though I might do so if nvidia or AMD end up offering something that can deliver at least 1.5x the performance for $150 or less.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2016 07:55
|
|
|
fozzy fosbourne posted:Some ultrawide benchmarks Yessss, exactly what I was waiting for. And that Witcher benchmark has a healthy enough margin that I could turn on Hairworks without noticing a hit to FPS. June can't come soon enough.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2016 08:02
|
|
|
xthetenth posted:What I was saying is specifically about the pattern of the 780 and 980, which release priced above what their performance indicates because the fastest single card commands a premium (See also: Titan). Pretty much uniquely to those cards, they get obsoleted within their own generation by the corresponding Ti model. The 980 Ti launched when the 980 was priced at 550. The 980's price fell to 500 on that launch, and it was basically discounted as being way overpriced (it was). Once you buy a gpu its value is either its used price or its ability to render frames. The 780 and 980 fared very poorly in both regards because the former didn't stay artificially high like its MSRP and the latter was never there in proportion to its price tag. I bought a 780 at release and it served me fine until I upgraded from 1080p to ultrawide. At no point did I feel the need for a 980 or a Ti or a Titan because no game needed it. I'm going to do the exact same thing with the 1080 because it works, so see you at the 1280 release. 
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2016 08:29
|
|
|
So do people still think its worth waiting for the 1080Ti if I currently have a 980Ti or should I just get a 1080 then see what pennies I can get for my 980Ti now? (I really have no idea what they would be going for now over here in the UK used anymore its probably almost worthless?)
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2016 13:59
|
|
|
The 1070 will be a waste at 1080p, until it isn't
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2016 14:11
|
|
|
Blackfyre posted:So do people still think its worth waiting for the 1080Ti if I currently have a 980Ti or should I just get a 1080 then see what pennies I can get for my 980Ti now? (I really have no idea what they would be going for now over here in the UK used anymore its probably almost worthless?) I think for most people the jump from a 980ti to a 1080 is probably not going to make sense for the money spent, but its all up to you. The nice thing is, no driver change will occur to suddenly make a 980ti work any differently than it did before, so it was a nice card 3 weeks ago and it'll be a nice card 3 weeks from now! In the US, used 980ti's are going for $400-$500 USD still, so they still have pretty good value if you absolutely need to have bleeding edge.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2016 14:13
|
|
|
Lockback posted:I think for most people the jump from a 980ti to a 1080 is probably not going to make sense for the money spent, but its all up to you. The nice thing is, no driver change will occur to suddenly make a 980ti work any differently than it did before, so it was a nice card 3 weeks ago and it'll be a nice card 3 weeks from now! I'll be honest my gut feeling is to hold off until the 1080Ti, but a 30% boost seems pretty significant? Over here its looking at about £330-350 for the 980Ti currently but from a quick google it seems like founders 1080s will be £620 but we're currently really unsure about what will be available and for how much I'm not sure how many we'll get closer to MSRP or what that might be in the UK. Just don't want to 'do the wrong thing' whilst I feel throwing money at the problem right away now is probably the wrong thing It is a pretty significant boost in performance?
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2016 14:16
|
|
Blackfyre posted:So do people still think its worth waiting for the 1080Ti if I currently have a 980Ti or should I just get a 1080 then see what pennies I can get for my 980Ti now? (I really have no idea what they would be going for now over here in the UK used anymore its probably almost worthless?) If you want to do VR or use three monitors in games: Yes. Otherwise: No.
|
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2016 14:16
|
|
|
So am I dumb for wanting to throw down for a 144hz 1440 monitor along with a 1070? I currently use a 120hz 1080p one. Should I just wait till 4k is more main stream?
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2016 14:17
|
|
|
AVeryLargeRadish posted:If you want to do VR or use three monitors in games: Yes. Otherwise: No. Welp I'm not too fussed about VR currently (interested but nothing has sold me yet) and only drive the one for now. Do like my ultra settings but still. Guess I'm waiting for now, get more for my money with the 1080Ti at least and will still get something for my older 980Ti.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2016 14:22
|
|
|
dpbjinc posted:Civilization games are CPU bottlenecked anyway. Upgrading from a 970 won't do poo poo unless you get a new computer to go along with it. I don't know that this is completely accurate. It might only get GPU heavy at higher resolutions (2560x1440 for me), but Civ V was actually what finally pushed me into a GPU upgrade about 2 years ago. The funny thing is I was noticing texture pop in and low framerates in Civ V, where my 2009-era 5870 had just torn though Wolfenstein: The New Order looking and running great. A GPU upgrade alone fixed all my Civ V performance woes.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2016 14:23
|
|
|
I thought even the 1070 would be good enough for current VR with the 90fps floor. The few 1080 benchmarks out for it seem more than promising so why would waiting on the 1080ti be required? Was confused by this: AVeryLargeRadish posted:If you want to do VR or use three monitors in games: Yes. Otherwise: No. Verizian fucked around with this message at 15:03 on May 18, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 18, 2016 14:25
|
|
|
Verizian posted:I thought even the 1070 would be good enough for current VR with the 90fps floor. The few 1080 benchmarks out for it seem more than promising so why would waiting on the 1080ti be required? Don't think anyone said that the 1070 wouldn't be good enough for VR?
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2016 14:27
|
|
Verizian posted:I thought even the 1070 would be good enough for current VR with the 90fps floor. The few 1080 benchmarks out for it seem more than promising so why would waiting on the 1080ti be required? I'm not sure what you are asking or who you are asking it to.
|
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2016 14:28
|
|
|
Holyshoot posted:So am I dumb for wanting to throw down for a 144hz 1440 monitor along with a 1070? I currently use a 120hz 1080p one. Should I just wait till 4k is more main stream? The waiting game is entirely up to you. You can wait forever and a half because the next big tech is right around the corner...
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2016 14:35
|
|
|
Blackfyre posted:Don't think anyone said that the 1070 wouldn't be good enough for VR? If the GTX 970 is the official "good enough for VR" target then why on earth wouldn't the 1070 be good enough? The 970 will continue to be the discrete GPU with the highest install base in the world for a while yet, so it'd be dumb if VR developers don't at least get their games hitting 90fps on it at lower settings. Edit: not to mention anyone investing in developing for VR is going to want to port to PlayStation VR as the install base is going to be huge. I have a feeling the 970 and better will be perfectly fine for a while.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2016 14:49
|
|
|
FaustianQ posted:Rumored 2560SPs, as the 2048 "mobile part" appears to be nothing more than a mistaken Tonga (which also apparently has a 1.35Ghz clockspeed, less than 150W TDP and 5.5TFLOPs, so the tiniest grain of salt there because JFC AMD, why wasn't this the 380X?! That'd crush the 960). So at bare minimum, absolute bare minimum, it's matching a R9 390. This means it gains no architectural improvements and clockspeed doesn't change, basically claiming that Hawaii was merely shrunk and somehow gained nothing from the shift to 14nm. 980ti +/- 5% is 1070 performance which might be a tad optimistic for a 1/3 smaller chip but here's hoping for another RV770.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2016 14:53
|
|
|
Am I correct in assuming a 1080 will just be a massive improvement from a GTX 770? I don't see why it wouldn't be, but I can't find hard numbers. I'm gaming at 1080p until this monitor kicks the bucket and driving an Oculus Rift, FWIW.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2016 14:55
|
|
|
Deviant posted:Am I correct in assuming a 1080 will just be a massive improvement from a GTX 770? I don't see why it wouldn't be, but I can't find hard numbers. I'm gaming at 1080p until this monitor kicks the bucket and driving an Oculus Rift, FWIW. Well, yeah. ~twice the frames
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2016 14:56
|
|
Zero VGS posted:If the GTX 970 is the official "good enough for VR" target then why on earth wouldn't the 1070 be good enough? The 970 will continue to be the discrete GPU with the highest install base in the world for a while yet, so it'd be dumb if VR developers don't at least get their games hitting 90fps on it at lower settings. But no one said the 1070 wouldn't be good enough? 
|
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2016 15:00
|
|
|
AVeryLargeRadish posted:But no one said the 1070 wouldn't be good enough? You said that if people did VR they should wait for the 1080Ti rather than getting a 1080, no? AVeryLargeRadish posted:If you want to do VR or use three monitors in games: Yes. Otherwise: No.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2016 15:02
|
|
|
Rigged Death Trap posted:Well, yeah. It's closer to triple the frames http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/NVIDIA/GeForce_GTX_1080/26.html
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2016 15:03
|
|
|
AVeryLargeRadish posted:But no one said the 1070 wouldn't be good enough? Lol yeah I'm just saying in case anyone did/does say. AMD sure is taking their sweet time with a response. I was really hoping there would be something on the shelves by next month from either of them that wasn't super limited availability but it's not looking good.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2016 15:05
|
|
|
Huh. So AMD's bundling Total Warhammer with some of their stuff (390s and FX cpus). What the hell AMD is it that thinks bundling a major release that should be a best case for their products because of DX 12 support is a good idea? I'm not familiar with this AMD. Isn't AMD going to be doing an announcement sometime real soon? I'm pretty sure they have something scheduled before the 27th.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2016 15:07
|
|
Subjunctive posted:You said that if people did VR they should wait for the 1080Ti rather than getting a 1080, no? No? What I said is that you should get a 1080/1070 if you are doing VR or using a multi-monitor setup in games because of the improvements the 10-series cards make to those. If you are not doing those things and you have a 980Ti(like the person I was responding to) then you should not upgrade to a 1080 because of the marginal performance difference between it and the 980Ti and should instead wait for the 1080Ti for a large performance boost outside of VR/Multi-mointor scenarios.
|
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2016 15:07
|
|
|
repiv posted:It's closer to triple the frames  That is quite a graph.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2016 15:08
|
|
|
xthetenth posted:Isn't AMD going to be doing an announcement sometime real soon? I'm pretty sure they have something scheduled before the 27th. You're probably thinking of the partner call happening today, but AMD say it's nothing interesting: https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/4jcf29/psa_the_call_on_518_at_9am_ct_about_polaris_is/
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2016 15:12
|
|
|
repiv posted:You're probably thinking of the partner call happening today, but AMD say it's nothing interesting: https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/4jcf29/psa_the_call_on_518_at_9am_ct_about_polaris_is/ I could've sworn there was going to be something in Macau before Computex. Either that or I should lay off the sleep deprivation.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2016 15:17
|
|
|
xthetenth posted:I could've sworn there was going to be something in Macau before Computex. Either that or I should lay off the sleep deprivation. Oh yeah I forgot about that  It's still a rumour though, if it's happening the invites must be NDAed: http://wccftech.com/amd-polaris-10-polaris-11-launch-event/
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2016 15:19
|
|
|
repiv posted:Oh yeah I forgot about that There's so much rumor stuff it's a real pain remembering what's real and what's wccf and similar sites trying to enumerate every single possibility so they are guaranteed to be right.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2016 15:24
|
|
|
Arzachel posted:980ti +/- 5% is 1070 performance which might be a tad optimistic for a 1/3 smaller chip but here's hoping for another RV770. Got to remember that the 1070 is 1920 CUDA core effective, so comparing on the full die size doesn't hold up IMHO. That, and a 232mm² 14nmFF LPP is roughly equal to a 250-260mm² 16nmFF+ die, so no I don't think it's really that unreasonable for a good comparison to the 1070. [The] God[s] love AMD Comedy Option: instead of a 4870, we get a 5770 vs 460 situation where Polaris 11 is only like 15% behind the 1070.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2016 15:45
|
|
|
Deviant posted:
...and my current GPU isn't even on it. Yeah, maybe I've waited long enough...
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2016 15:52
|
|
|
FaustianQ posted:Got to remember that the 1070 is 1920 CUDA core effective, so comparing on the full die size doesn't hold up IMHO. That, and a 232mm² 14nmFF LPP is roughly equal to a 250-260mm² 16nmFF+ die, so no I don't think it's really that unreasonable for a good comparison to the 1070. I want to see a GTX 1070 Core 2160. Durinia posted:...and my current GPU isn't even on it. A big upgrade must be awfully cheap now.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2016 15:53
|
|
|
Holyshoot posted:So am I dumb for wanting to throw down for a 144hz 1440 monitor along with a 1070? I currently use a 120hz 1080p one. Should I just wait till 4k is more main stream? I'd wait and see what is announced at computex. A 120+ hz 34"+ *sync backlight strobed 4K display attached to a nice dynamic monitor arm seems both plausible and extremely epic. It will be big enough that you can set it to a custom resolution if you need the fps or 21:9 and just scoot it forward a couple inches. I think I would go for 40"
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2016 15:54
|
|
|
objects in mirror posted:Dang, really disappointed in the 4k performances for ultra setting and such. At 1080p it really doesn't make sense to even upgrade from my 2gb 770 gtx, though I might do so if nvidia or AMD end up offering something that can deliver at least 1.5x the performance for $150 or less. This is where I was at as well. Glad I'm not the only one a bit disappointed in the 4K benchmarks. Still, it's a massive boost over my current GTX 770, and I'm more interested in VR than going full 4K at the moment. I'm thinking of just spoiling myself with a 1080 now, and looking at doing an upgrade to 4K in another 3 years once the GPUs trivialize it, HBM is standard, and the rest of my PC is in need of an upgrade.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2016 16:03
|
|
|
Siets posted:This is where I was at as well. Glad I'm not the only one a bit disappointed in the 4K benchmarks. I was deadset on buying a 4k display too, but I think I'd much rather get a 1440p display with all the bells and whistles - G-sync and 144hz, and then upgrade to 4k in a couple years when I can get something for under $500.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2016 16:06
|
|
|
I'd at least wait for AIB versions of the 1080 with a better cooler and better power delivery, based on reviews the Founder Edition significantly hampers the 1080's potential, such that they aren't impressively better than OC 980ti's.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2016 16:12
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 02:45 |
|
|
The obvious choice is to not go for 4k and instead go for ultrawide! Easier to drive and more of the game for you 
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2016 16:15
|
|
