Cockmaster posted:At first I was intrigued by the idea of a game console designed with VR support from the beginning, but then... 2560x1600 is not all that much larger than 2560x1440 so I would expect it to be a little lower but not much lower, for instance I use a 1920x1200 monitor which is the same ratio as 2560x1600 and I get ~5 FPS less than benchmarks done at 1920x1080 with similar hardware, so maybe you will see 75+ FPS instead of 80. As far as VR goes the 1080/70 should be blazing fast for that both because they are powerful enough in the first place but also because Nvidia added a number of features that greatly speed up VR on Pascal based chips.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2016 22:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 08:30 |
|
|
I'd be surprised if the u2412m didn't come with a displayport cable; the u2410 certainly did.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2016 22:20
|
|
|
I still have two U2412Ms that I used to use as my primary monitors before I bought my ultrawide. Just been too lazy to bother selling them. Don't remember if they came with a cable or not. It sucks that the 480 benchmarks are going to be coming out a bit late compared to the third party 1080/1070, even if the latter two are probably still going to end up being the better option. I'm still on the fence about if I want to go all in on the 1080 or not, since the 970 I have generally runs everything pretty well at maximum settings on 3440x1440, and the 1070 would just be the nice upgrade.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2016 23:07
|
|
|
Two warnings about DisplayPort: 1. DisplayPort can carry power, and if both the monitor and the GPU are trying to supply power strange things can happen. Look for a cable that does not have pin 20. 2. Some monitors (particularly Dells it seems) incorrectly implement the presence signal and stop sending it when they're turned off, resulting in Windows thinking the monitor was disconnected which causes your desktop icons, window arrangement, and/or multi-monitor configuration to get hosed up. The cable problem is obviously relatively easy to solve, but the misbehaving monitor one is out of your hands. It might be fixable with a firmware update, but that assumes the monitor even supports firmware updates or that the vendor gives a poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2016 00:06
|
|
|
Am I dumb for being tempted by MSI's watercooled version of the 1080? I'm on the border of going maximum insanity on this latest system rebuild. (I already got a corsair h100i on the CPU)
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2016 00:12
|
|
|
Deuce posted:Am I dumb for being tempted by MSI's watercooled version of the 1080? I'm on the border of going maximum insanity on this latest system rebuild. (I already got a corsair h100i on the CPU) No, hybrid cooling is cool and good (make sure it doesn't have a rep for rattly pumps). It's louder at idle but really quiet under load.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2016 00:28
|
|
xthetenth posted:No, hybrid cooling is cool and good (make sure it doesn't have a rep for rattly pumps). It's louder at idle but really quiet under load. The MSI one is being done in tandem my MSI and Corsair so I would think they are using one of Corsair's Hydro AIOs to cool it so it should be decent.
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2016 00:33
|
|
|
triple sulk posted:I still have two U2412Ms that I used to use as my primary monitors before I bought my ultrawide. Just been too lazy to bother selling them. Don't remember if they came with a cable or not. i've only been half-heartedly following the reviews/benchmarks, what makes you think the 1070 would be a better option than the 480? last i heard people were pretty upbeat about the $200 vs $380 price point, even considering that the 1070 should be some ways better.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2016 00:34
|
|
|
wicka posted:i've only been half-heartedly following the reviews/benchmarks, what makes you think the 1070 would be a better option than the 480? last i heard people were pretty upbeat about the $200 vs $380 price point, even considering that the 1070 should be some ways better. More so a $239 price point since an 8GB frame buffer is a good thing to have now, and the price premium comes with the fact that you're not buying a card (all value aside) made by a company that by all rights might only be making 'high-end' GPUs for consoles in two years' time. Also, nVidia usually holds back about 10-20% in 'hidden' performance gains in drivers for 'just in case' situations. I know the reason I buy nVidia, despite the added expense, is because you've practically got a new or unofficial driver coming out once or twice per week. AMD can't match that. They need to extend their 'let the community help' thing to their drivers again. BIG HEADLINE fucked around with this message at 00:45 on Jun 6, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2016 00:41
|
|
|
BIG HEADLINE posted:More so a $239 price point since an 8GB frame buffer is a good thing to have now, and the price premium comes with the fact that you're not buying a card (all value aside) made by a company that by all rights might only be making 'high-end' GPUs for consoles in two years' time. Also, nVidia usually holds back about 10-20% in 'hidden' performance gains in drivers for 'just in case' situations. oooooooooooh, $199 is just the 4gb model? did not know that, thanks
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2016 01:01
|
|
|
Stormangel posted:Someone else mentioned it, but in case it wasn't seen, the U2412M has a display port on it. Get you 2 display port cables and use the 2 display ports if the 1070 you get has 2, or 1 display port and 1 DVI if not. To late, already bought the cable.  But good to know.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2016 01:16
|
|
|
wicka posted:oooooooooooh, $199 is just the 4gb model? did not know that, thanks The 8GB is expected to be $250 I think. I'd have to see real reviews and benchmarks before I'll say if that's a good deal or not. People are guessing that it'll come in somewhere between a 970 and a 980 in terms of performance, but the 1070 is basically going to be a 980 Ti for $380 and has the 8GB of VRAM. But you can get a used 970 with 4GB for $200 right now, so apart from the power utilization I don't think it's really a compelling offering at $200. An 8 GB model for $250 is a more compelling offering if you don't need 980 Ti levels of performance. The 1070 / 980 Ti are about 33% faster than the 980, and 1.33 x $250 is $332 versus the 1070's price of $380. So it's slower but better value for the money. Of course, the 1070 also buys you access to GSync and CUDA and those other NVIDIA-exclusive features.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2016 01:24
|
|
|
I swear to god I saw a $239 MSRP thrown around for the 8 GB model, but these prices are largely guidelines once the AIB partners step in and do their value-add thang.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2016 01:32
|
|
|
For the expected performance level of the 480 I think 4GB is fine.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2016 01:34
|
|
|
If I put my cynic hat on, the 4 GB model will be forgotten within 3 months by AMD, and AIBs will focus on the 8 GB model. The 4 GB 480's existence is there purely to allow AMD to drive the narrative of "starting at $199", but I think they'll really be pushing the latter.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2016 01:40
|
|
|
Totally a possibility I just don't see it as a huge value add since it seems to be best suited for 1080p. Everyone would have to start using Shadow of Mordor as their guide to Vram usage for 8GB to make sense.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2016 02:14
|
|
|
i'm just not at all optimistic that we're going to see any of these cards widely available at their MSRP any time soon
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2016 02:16
|
|
|
wicka posted:i'm just not at all optimistic that we're going to see any of these cards widely available at their MSRP any time soon Every 3rd party had a 1080 up for the given MSRP (or really close to) on launch day, so I don't see any reason to believe otherwise right now.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2016 02:24
|
|
|
Nemesis Of Moles posted:Every 3rd party had a 1080 up for the given MSRP (or really close to) on launch day, so I don't see any reason to believe otherwise right now. i could be wrong and dumb but i haven't seen any in stock
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2016 02:29
|
|
|
wicka posted:i could be wrong and dumb but i haven't seen any in stock All the initial shipments are going out around 6/10 apparently. I'd expect to see stock gradually increase after that, particularly as the other new GPUs start to come on the market as well.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2016 02:33
|
|
|
Nemesis Of Moles posted:Every 3rd party had a 1080 up for the given MSRP (or really close to) on launch day, so I don't see any reason to believe otherwise right now.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2016 03:25
|
|
|
Founders editions are specifically $100~ above mrsp. Everyone has a cheapo reference model at mrsp and some have custom coolers for a bit more.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2016 03:45
|
|
|
BIG HEADLINE posted:I know the reason I buy nVidia, despite the added expense, is because you've practically got a new or unofficial driver coming out once or twice per week. AMD can't match that. They need to extend their 'let the community help' thing to their drivers again. I've had multiple NV cards break poo poo and that not get fixed for over a month because those drivers are often small tweaks released frequently, and AMD was the one with release drivers for the game in the past year where performance mattered most to me (total warhammer). Paul MaudDib posted:An 8 GB model for $250 is a more compelling offering if you don't need 980 Ti levels of performance. The 1070 / 980 Ti are about 33% faster than the 980, and 1.33 x $250 is $332 versus the 1070's price of $380. So it's slower but better value for the money. Of course, the 1070 also buys you access to GSync and CUDA and those other NVIDIA-exclusive features. I'd figure if someone was going to fork over the money for GSync over Freesync they'd likely be willing to spend a bit over $300 on a video card.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2016 05:03
|
|
|
xthetenth posted:I've had multiple NV cards break poo poo and that not get fixed for over a month because those drivers are often small tweaks released frequently, and AMD was the one with release drivers for the game in the past year where performance mattered most to me (total warhammer). Not saying nVidia's not infallible - hell, I'm still using the 352.94 iCafes.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2016 05:30
|
|
|
BIG HEADLINE posted:Not saying nVidia's not infallible - hell, I'm still using the 352.94 iCafes. I was real surprised they missed TW:W, it's more an aberration than anything, I just get pissy with how many releases it takes them to fix some issues.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2016 05:34
|
|
|
xthetenth posted:I'd figure if someone was going to fork over the money for GSync over Freesync they'd likely be willing to spend a bit over $300 on a video card. But I thought I was in the cool-kids club with my 780 Ti 
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2016 05:49
|
|
|
Does anybody have a use for this fancy SLI bridge? If so, you can have it for free. Just throw me a couple bux for shipping. It lights up and looks cool. Unfortunately the red sticker makes it more pink. At any rate, I only have one graphics card now, no need for this thing anymore. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2016 06:25
|
|
|
Generous of you - those go for ~$30 on their own.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2016 06:36
|
|
|
So whilst I know the Strix 1080 seems to be the best one out there is the EVGA FTW one going to be any good/probably good for further overclocking? Asking as I was able to get it for £579 which is less than the Strix.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2016 10:44
|
|
Blackfyre posted:So whilst I know the Strix 1080 seems to be the best one out there is the EVGA FTW one going to be any good/probably good for further overclocking? That is not really answerable at this point, not enough data. Hell, there isn't even one review of the EVGA FTW 1080 out right now.
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2016 10:55
|
|
|
Video round-up of 1080s: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pKFkFIjF_G0 It's pretty poorly done, since they don't employ any text; only thing that stuck out was the one model that uses fan slots to activate based on GPU temp instead of CPU.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2016 12:02
|
|
|
Blackfyre posted:So whilst I know the Strix 1080 seems to be the best one out there is the EVGA FTW one going to be any good/probably good for further overclocking? Wasn't the ASUS 1080 the one this time with two heatpipes that don't even touch the core? EDIT: the picture going around showing this seems to be what happened with some 980Tis. No one's shown a picture of the underside of the 10x0s ASUS cards' HSF yet. BIG HEADLINE fucked around with this message at 12:14 on Jun 6, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2016 12:09
|
|
BIG HEADLINE posted:Wasn't the ASUS 1080 the one this time with two heatpipes that don't even touch the core? We do have pictures of the Strix cooler's underside:  The upper one is the Inno3D iChill 3X and the lower one is the Strix, it looks fine, not all the heat pipes make contact but that is because there are too many to make contact with the area the chip covers.
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2016 12:26
|
|
|
AVeryLargeRadish posted:We do have pictures of the Strix cooler's underside: My understanding is that the reason for the extra ones is 'they spread heat off the pipes that are in contact, so they do actually have a reason to exist as opposed to being a marketing lie'. Is that right?
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2016 12:55
|
|
|
That was my assumption too.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2016 13:25
|
|
|
Tanreall posted:Totally a possibility I just don't see it as a huge value add since it seems to be best suited for 1080p. Everyone would have to start using Shadow of Mordor as their guide to Vram usage for 8GB to make sense.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2016 13:37
|
|
|
Depend on the thickness of the backplate they seem stuck on and the adjustment between the heatpipe and the backplate. I havn't done thermal simulation in a while but it seem awfully in efficient, especially if those heat pipes are just solid pipes and not full of ammonia or something similar.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2016 13:54
|
|
|
Krogort posted:Depend on the thickness of the backplate they seem stuck on and the adjustment between the heatpipe and the backplate. Heatpipe means heatpipe not lol solid metal tube, I'd be very surprised if one of the manufacturers was doing that especially considering how badly EVGA got slammed for leaving one empty and what those pipes are doing.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2016 14:14
|
|
|
Gray Matter posted:Can you expound on this? Shadow of Mordor is pretty much the most intensive game I play and I've been waffling about either building a new Skylake system or just putting a RX 480 in my current one (FX8350, HD7850 2Gb, 1080p). Shador of Mordor doesn't seem to be very CPU sensitive: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/shadow-of-mordor-performance,3996-4.html The RX480 is expected to be around a 980 so in any case you're going to more than double your framerate at ultra (if you weren't using ultra already): http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/shadow-of-mordor-performance,3996-3.html
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2016 14:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 08:30 |
|
Krogort posted:Depend on the thickness of the backplate they seem stuck on and the adjustment between the heatpipe and the backplate. Those are probably water filled ones, usually the ones used in computer equipment are copper/water instead of aluminum/ammonia.
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2016 14:49
|
|