>he fell for the "mid-range card" meme

File: 1440941624798.jpg (93KB, 633x758px) Image search: [Google]

93KB, 633x758px

tfw gtx 960

>>56159182
They're mid range as in consoles. Cinematic 30 fps.

Also it's nice to see that the 480 an actual midrange card does nice.

>>56159182
Tfw just bought a brand new RX 470
Gonna get like 40 dps

Welp the eye can only see 30 fps anyways right guys :^)

>>56159182
That looks like a tough game. Lower FPS than Crysis 3/Witcher 3.

Gotta wait to see if that is because it is THAT good looking, or just poorly coded.

>>56159218
Yeah let's not turn down that X16 MSAA

>>56159182
I'll lower quality and play it at 60fps on my laptop, as usual.

>>56159182
These benchmarks are shit because they turn everything to the absolute maximum.

Now try turning tessellation to x8 and watch the RX 480 gain 30+ FPS without any noticeable graphics difference.

>>56159182
>turning on max setting and retarded amount of AA when you can't notice the difference if you tweak the settings a bit lower and get constant 60 fps instead
lyl

>>56159182
I bet it's because of reflections.

>>56159252
i always found it kind of weird how they always put everything to max and judge everything on that

do people actually play games on full max? i don't think i've ever done it

>>56159266
Some people do. It is why they have 1080x2 after all.

>>56159182
Did they leave out the 1060 or am I just blind?

>>56159266
No one does because barely anyone can run that. No one needs every kind of AA turned on. Just AA alone would nearly double this frame rate. They should at least add a bench without all the extra fluff.

>>56159371
>tfw 670

i play most of my games on med with all the fancy shit turned off. can never find benchmarks for med. framerate is far more important to me than graphical fidelity.

>>56159322
I bet it's performs like shit compared to 480 and that's why they excluded it!

>>56159371
this kind of reminds me of all that batman arkham knight stuff from last year.

just turn the goddamn graphic settings down, it ran mostly fine on my comp...

>>56159389
upgrade to the 1060 or 1070 if you ever do.
670 is a great card though

>>56159182
>DX 11

Now post the Direct X 12 benchmarks faggot.

>>56159553
yeah i was looking at 1070s. probs build another computer in a year. 4 yrs is a good long life. don't game too much any more so its pretty low on my list of priorities.

>>56159182
Source? I did a reverse image search and nothing.

>>56159572
DX12 is worse.. lots worse.

>>56159655

http://gamegpu.com/action-/-fps-/-tps/deus-ex-mankind-divided-test-gpu

>>56159731
it's worse because those faggots turn on every DX12 exclusive effect which negates the performance improvement DX12 should bring

>>56159182
>480 whoopin 970 ass
Glad I got rid of my 280x though. It'll be interesting to see what effect next month's DX12 patch has

>>56159216
R E T A R D

>>56159218
You'll get high 40s average. I got a 470 too

>>56159220
I've seen some footage. Looks like WatchDoge tier to my untrained eye

>>56159252
Supposedly there wasn't much tessellation in the previous Deus Ex game, so I doubt that there will be much here either, although supposedly there's an in game tessellation slider. Not every game is TW3

>>56159322
Does gamegpu even have one?

>>56159601
September homo

>>56159182
Good thing I'm playing at 1366x768

File: 900x900px-LL-405aa433_GAMEGPU_DE_MD_D12.png (150KB, 548x629px) Image search: [Google]

150KB, 548x629px

>>56159182
OP is a faggot. Here's DirectX 12.

>>56159182
Mid range is almost as good as 3 980's. That's just fine, you fucking fuck

50% DX12 boost coming

>>56159869
>it's even worse

Damn...

File: 0586 - bCSQQRA.jpg (7KB, 200x200px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 200x200px

>GTX 950
>card isn't even on the list

good thing i dont need to play triple goyim gaymes on ultra then!

>>56159928
Out of curiosity, why would you even buy then 950?

>max settings with tons of AA
I bet even the lowest cards on that list can play the game well on medium settings 1920x1080.
The midrange cards can probably all play it at 2560x1440 with high settings. Except for the 3.5GB crippled 970.

gtx 750ti 2GB. Hope i can get stable 30fps on lowest settings.

File: elrisitas.jpg (40KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 600x600px

>>56159869
>A Radeon 7990 beats out an RX 480

Fucking hell.

No Direct X 12 support until September 5th.

http://steamcommunity.com/games/337000/announcements/detail/930377969893113169

>>56159959
950 cause I realized that I don't really play a lot anymore.

File: Capture.png (5KB, 271x21px) Image search: [Google]

5KB, 271x21px

What did they mean by this?

>>56160004
I thought the same, but somehow gamegpu tested DX12 >>56159869

File: 1462499908080.gif (1MB, 540x540px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 540x540px

>>56159182
>Fury X beats 980Ti
I'm ok with this

File: Laughter-300x219.jpg (13KB, 300x219px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 300x219px

>>56160001

780ti in SLI gets beat by a single RX480!

call me when i need to upgrade from 690 for 1080p

>>56159182
>Only 16% gains from an extra $700+ worth of GPU

PC cucks will defend this.

>>56160004
>Nvidia gave us a boat load of cash to not include Directx12 support at release because that's when all the benchmarks are being made

Fucking kikes.

>>56160037
>a brand new AMD card beat out a 4 year old Nvidia card
AMD WON

>r9 270 is not on the list
>Still enjoy bf4, and other games every day.

>>56159182
The game has Denuvo so it is as if it didn't exist for me for now. No biggie.

>Also once the clean version comes out surely we will see an improvement in performance.

>>56159182
>>56159869
>GTX TITAN
>not even 30fps

f-futureproof, r-r-right g-guise?

>>56159266
The only games I ever fully max out are old games. Most modern games maxed out usually include options that drop framerates a significant amount for minimal visual improvement.

>>56159182
>>56159869
That's one unoptimized piece of shit game.
I bet it also looks like shit.

>>56159266
I play any game that I can get 50ish for minimums at max settings.

>>56160071
A new midrange AMD beat two flagship 2.75 year old Nvidia cards and was in turn beat by a single 3.25 year old halo AMD card.

AMD Cards really seem age well.
So they weren't that bad after all.

>>56160129
PC port was third party, and yeah the art might be decent but the graphics suck

My Titan black getting stomped by 480.
Kek.

>>56160001
you do know 7990 is a dual gpu card right?

>>56160017
I don't either, but I still got a 1070 so that when I do play I don't have to fiddle with settings too much.

>>56160631
so you gonna give it to you wife's son?

>>56160129
It's running the latest TressFX and other physics simulations for cloth. Not to mention the tesselation. Not surprising that framerates are this low with it turned on.

>>56160662
I don't play other people's saved games, anon.

980 ti and 1070 owners should be looking at the 1080 results because that's roughly how fast the cards perform after overclocking.

File: proz_11_amd.png (73KB, 523x440px) Image search: [Google]

73KB, 523x440px

"muh i5 2500k is never obsolete!" fags btfo

>>56160785
Delete this immediately. I am not joking.

>>56159182
> 290X on par with 980
Nice.

>>56159869
>1080 SLI below Fury X crossfire
top kek.

>>56160785
>720p
really makes you think...

>>56160871

That they specifically bottlenecked the CPU and the 2500 gets shit on by a FX-6300 because it has superior multi-threading?

>>56160785
>dat 8350

It begins

unironically playing vidya

Just lol

>>56159182
Does VHQ have a retarded amount of SSAA combined with MSAA or what's the deal here?

>>56160785
Overclock it to 4.5GHz and try again.

Name a single good game that's unplayable(not, not maxed, unplayable) on iGPUs.

>>56161138
>muh overclock

you can say the same about the others ones

>>56161078
It's probably a really shitty port. The E3 gameplay looked very close to Human Revolution.

>>56159182
>just bought 1060
>h-hey, lets check how it does on the benchmarks
>not even on the list

>>56161206
cuck

>>56161206
What a fucking cuckold if ive ever seen one.

Faggot.

>>56161206
You must be retarded. Even nvidiots admit that 1060 is a piece of shit. Just add a bit and get 1070 or if youre AMD fan go get yourself 470/480.

>>56159182
Who wants to bet there is like one or two settings by turning them down a few notches your framerate improves 2x.

>>56160026
>she

>>56161206
just take rx480's fps and add 10

>>56160644
good idea

File: deeznuts.jpg (8KB, 229x200px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 229x200px

>>56161264
>>56161247
>>56161228
>>56161301
>tfw paid $440
>tfw 1070 is $640
such is life at the land of jews

Also 480 costs the same as a 1060

[spoiler]1080 is $1040[/spoiler]

>>56160785
>Sandy Bridge slower than Bulldozer
>i3 unusable
>3Ghz Octacore top of the list
Reminder that Intel shills were still doing the old "i3 is fine for gaming" routine until a few months ago.
Reminder that all quadcores will be obsolete in a year or two.

File: no-matter-how-fast-i-run-i-cannot-run-away-from-the-pain-sonic-costume.jpg (52KB, 640x800px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 640x800px

>>56159869
>TFW you bought a 780ti
WHY DIDN'T I WAIT FOR 290X TO COME BACK IN STOCK REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

>>56161179
except part of the whole 2500k meme has to do with its overclock-ability

>>56161353
Don't listen to them, the GTX 1060 is fine. 440$ is a bit too much for it though, what version did you buy?

File: 1471215867150.jpg (32KB, 298x470px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 298x470px

>>56160001
>>56160001
>380x beats Titan

This game is all over the place.

>>56161681
Got my 6600k to 4.3 Mhz stable without touching the voltage.

>a month ago nvidia shills were happy with the rx480 getting rekt by the gtx 970 by 1-5 fps in their benchmarks of outdated shit
Boy, you just got RADEON'ED

>>56159197
tfw gtx 970, actually

>>56159182
And here I thought my 390 would be good for a while.

>>56161693
Gigabyte G1 gay-men, all others were not in stock, the cheapest (6gb) card runs for about $370.

None are in stock anywhere right now, bought yesterday.

>>56162098
>370 for a fucking 1060
dude, it's supposed to be a 250 dollar card

>>56162036
better than a 980
It's almost at 1070 level
>VHQ
I'm pretty sure it has some super high resolution textures that are just unnecessary for sub-4k resolutions turned on and 16x AA.

>>56161514
i almost fell for the 780ti last year which was at $300

>>56162113
It can't be America everywhere anon.

$50 shipping and %18 import tax drives prices pretty high.

I've thrown some prices for reference in my original post (the one with SpongeBob).

Also took a look at the new Titan x, $1500.

>>56162113
>>56162098
Finding a GTX 1060 for less than 280€ is almost impossible now, considering the low amount of stock products, at least here in Europe. I pre-ordered the EVGA GTX 1060 6GB GAMING (non OC) for 289€ (taxes and shipping fees included) some days ago, it was supposed to arrive this evening, but I didn't get any notifier. I strongly hope that they won't make me wait for it forever...alternatively I could get an Asus GTX 1060 Strix OC for 379€, but honestly I don't want to spend too much money for only a minor improvement.

The game looks like shit, so who cares?

Not playing it anyways.

>>56162207
Any RX480 with 8Gb ram will also atleast cost 299€.

At this point the GTX 1070 is only a bit more than 100€ more expensive.

The choice should be clear for anyone getting a new card.

The midrange cards suck. Only decent card to invest money into right now is the GTX1070.

>>56162216
AMD owners won't be playing it either because denuvo.

>>56162216
Then why are you here?

>>56162296
To hunt milfs

>>56162296
To tell you midrange cucks to invest 100 bucks more into a decent card that will also allow you to enjoy VR stuff, if you want to get into it.

Also getting a card with which you can still play games next year at 1080p all maxed out.

File: spychief.png (55KB, 218x219px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 218x219px

>my puny 660 isn't on the list

>>56162284
>GTX1070
That is 500Euros not 400.

>>56159182
>sli 1080 same as sli 980
what am i missing here?

>>56161721
the original titan was garbage so no surprise

File: .png (2KB, 512x512px) Image search: [Google]

2KB, 512x512px

>>56161353
>tfw just bought 1070 OC for 479eurodollars
>it's 640$ somewhere on this planet
shiggy diggy doo

>>56162329
>play games
literal children

yeah do me a favor and go back to /v/

>>56162284
Dude, it really depends on which games one means to play with its video card. Calling a card bad simply because it doesn't perform well on a new, super-difficult-to-drive game at ultra settings is somehow misleading. For most people a mid-range video card would be more than enough. Don't forget that most games look good even on med settings.

>>56162329
I think my 1070 will be fine for now.

>>56162414
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>">play games" meme
>argues about GPUs in a thread on /gee/
wew lad

>>56162414
>Saying games for children in a thread about game benchmarks.

>>56162414
so you never play any games, like football?

You must be healthy individual with good diet, exercise routine and blast at parties.

>>56162464
he's a blast at gloryhole parties maybe

>>56162477
he wouldn't fit into a stall, i'm afraid.

>>56159218
Who cares, wait for DX12 for that game

File: 1432809136854.png (496KB, 904x1406px) Image search: [Google]

496KB, 904x1406px

>>56159218
>dps
>derps per second
that's actually a really good unit to measure the performance of AMD cards

cant wait to play this at 800×600 buttety smooth 60fps on my 290x.

File: 1468448636096.jpg (211KB, 1280x1084px) Image search: [Google]

211KB, 1280x1084px

>>56162380
Not here


>>56162414


Shiggydiggy

>go to a thread about hardware that is meant for gaming and not professional work and tell people to go to/v/

arriba andale

my 290x that i bought day1 of its release is still fucking bitches in their assholes.

all i did was put on the accelero iv cooler and it runs like epic memes

>980 ti and 295x2 can't even hit 60 at fucking 1080p

WHAT THE FUCK

File: 1471442592205.png (905KB, 960x974px) Image search: [Google]

905KB, 960x974px

>$349 Fury X gets same fps as $650 1080
Holy fucking shit Nvidiots, whats your excuse now?

>Bbbut its not the way its meant to be played!! housefires!! poo in loo!!! Huang please help me!

>>56162910
>349 Fury X
Fucking where?

>>56162512

See >>56160785

>>56162941
XFX had them on sale for that much on Newegg awhile ago

>>56160785
>720p
lol

>>56159182

Please tell me this is a shoop.

This is the performance all these cards should be getting at 4K, not 1080p

Was this a farmed out port?

File: 1470251730787.jpg (105KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

105KB, 1280x720px

So its a port so shittily optimized that it doesnt take full advantage of Nvidia's power

who cares.
Like since when the fuck has Deus Ex been graphically intensive? Theres obviously some fuckery going on around here

>>56162941
379 Right now. Still not regretting my 1070 though.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814150742

>>56162998
Human Revolution was one of the only games I played to actually implement tesselation. I think it and Mankind Divided both have decent graphics.

>>56162910
>fury x considered a failure even among amd users
>finally faster in one game

>fury x owners around the world breaks into a seizure from the earth shattering orgasm

>>56160785
>Mfw Zen was shown by AMD to have Broadwell E performance
>AMD CPUs will become the CPU for gaymen
i5 fags fucking BTFO till the end of time

File: AMD-Polaris-16.jpg (180KB, 2000x1125px) Image search: [Google]

180KB, 2000x1125px

>>56163036
Have amd slides ever been right?

>>56159182
>x16 AA

File: 1469303226577.png (30KB, 602x500px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 602x500px

>>56163033
Nice damage control there, Huang.
Im sure the extra $100 you paid for Founders Edition will give you "The Way Its Meant To be Played" experience you need.

>>56159959
I bought it as an emergency replacement to an older system.
Also I'm poor.

File: 1449695636522.jpg (112KB, 1060x404px) Image search: [Google]

112KB, 1060x404px

>tfw gtx 970
i-it's just a shitty port, right guys?

>>56163075
>Significant Perf per watt improvement
Whats wrong about that slide?

>>56163170
Because it doesn't agree with the opinons of nvidia shills

>>56163170
>Whats wrong about that slide?
I chuckled so hard my windows shattered. Good one anon.

>>56163133
Fair enough. I've made shittier purchases when I needed parts and was broke. Currently doing damage control for a shitty PSU I had to get.

>>56163137
Wasn't the 970 actually a pretty decent card at its price point, even with the whole 3.5 thing though?

I'm also pretty sure that this port is horrendously shitty, even by the standards of shitty ports, if the recommended 16gb of RAM is any indication.

>>56163192
So you cant answer and are going to act smug instead?

>>56163326
Are you serious?

>>56163426
Ill take that as a yes
But I know youre going to say
>le pcie slot meme
which already got fixed

Polaris is still everything AMD said it would be

>>56163491
If you're serious about >>56163170
Go look up Polaris pref/watt then take a look at >>56163075 again.

>>56160282
>RX480
>midrange
It's AMDs high-end card.

>>56163036
Good thing I have a spare i7 4770S I got for free.

>>56160785
>720p

Why no 480p while you're at it?

>>56159182
Still running my 660

>>56163716
Whenever I read mind numbingly posts like these it makes me want to leave /g/.

>>56159182
this makes me even sadder that my 290 died when it did.
best value card ever

>>56163642
>He doesnt know about Vega

>>56162284
1070 is still overpriced atm.
maybe in 1 year it will be good value. but i suppose if you absolutely need a card now from this generation, 1070 is the best choice

File: 1471634104473.jpg (39KB, 1034x94px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 1034x94px

>>56163075
kek

>>56159869
>No 1060
>No 470
>No 460
Why?

Hey /g/, should I pawn my GTX 970 off on my gf and get a 1070 or is it worth SLI my 970 for 1080p gaming?

>>56164395
Don't SLi the 970.
The VRAM problem is a thing, and on SLi it's even more of a problem.
Give GF your GF GTX 970 and get a GF GTX 1070.

>>56164422
Alright. I'm selling the 970 to her for $200 since she only plays Overwatch and I can get 1070 when prices drop below $400

Thanks lad

>>56159869
Still unacceptably bad performance. Even GoyWorks games run better on AMD cards than this and this is AMD sponsored game.

>>56164463
$200
>>56163258
I think you're demanding too much for that pre-gimped card.
I sold this whole rig for $200.
Don't be mean to your gf.

>>56164591
Hah! Not the guy you replied to, but I've been posting in this thread too. I'm the OP you're talking with in linked thread. Funny coincidence.

>>56164463
>for $200
Isn't that close to the going price of a new one?

>>56163252
Why shitty purchase?
Is there a better card for same money?

>>56164544
That benchmark is run with 4x or 8x MSAA.
Nvidia sponsored games don't even support any decent AA modes. Only blurtastic FXAA, TAA or other shitty post filters and they still run like shit.

>>56164687
Small world. :3c

>>56164721
Not really, but if gaming is a hobby of yours it's not really a great purchase. But if you can't afford better, then it can't be helped. This is coming from someone who used to own a 650. It definitely played my games and was within my budget, but it was a shitty purchase.

>>56164463
Cum on card and sell it to her for a premium.

>>56164779
Gaming is my hobby, but I would rather get back to writing and drawing.

Only video games that I want to play is witcher series, bannerlord and space engine. UT4, when I'll be really bored.

Vidya is like masturbation. You enjoy it, but when you end it feels like waste of time.

>>56164853
I agree. It's not my main hobby. Some games I feel like I gained something from, but most are just to pass the time. My main hobby is anime, but I really want to get into something more constructive. Too bad I'm shit at drawing, and I dislike writing.

>>56159182
> daily reminder that buying any high-end card in 2016 is a bait-and-switch scam from the glorious HBM2 future we were promised.

>>56159182
It's funny because I see all these kids that are new to PC hardware who think '1080p' cards are a thing. This is the reality, kids. There is no such thing as a card that will run x resolution60 when developers push visual fidelity at console resolutions.

>>56159869
dx12 patch already in? i thought it was for September release?

Also game ia using glacier 2 engine(hitman) so i expect amd to perform better?

>>56160033
This is probably to optimize the API so that performance like >>56159869 doesn't happen. Also the performance of the game will improve when the drivers optimized for this game come out for Radeon and GeForce hardware.

>>56159266
If I can't max a game I get mad and throw an autism rant in my head.
Gtx 1080 for 1080p ha ha

So is the GTX 1060 really bad?

>>56159869
>1080 sli only 8fps better than a single 1080.
Holy unoptimized game batman

>>56159182
I got 980ti and its sad to look how shit it is in full HD, what the hell

>>56167213
Enthusiast is a meme, anon. You only buy that if you absolutely need the power

>buy new build with new card
>happy about finally playing games on max settings at high res
>find out i cant play any game on 4k res
>now i cant even play games at 1080p

it just keeps getting worse and worse

>>56167518
>>56167213
And also, if you go use high settings (one step down from ultra), you'll usually more than double your FPS.

4K is also a meme at this point. It'll be viable in few years.

File: 1471396486391.png (182KB, 578x691px) Image search: [Google]

182KB, 578x691px

>290x still going strong
Will there EVER be a reason to upgrade? This is like the end of all GPUs.

>>56167659
>Will there EVER be a reason to upgrade?
You might not want a space heater. The 480 would be a nice sidegrade.

>>56164275
You can only use Nvidia Review guide approved benchmarks for the 1060
Nvidia will benchmark it for you :^)

>>56159182
>takes the best GPUs and needs multiples of them
>STILL drops below 60fps
that's a poorly optimized piece of shit, not reflective of how good GPUs are.
but if i must inform you, GPUs are in a terrible state. they cost far more than ever before, while not doing anything better.

they're just rebranded pieces of junk and these price brackets are at a price ratio to the performance from GPUs from the begining of the decade.
yet retarded manbabies will keep buying the rebrands allowing the market to stay stagnent without the use of any decent releases in the forseeable future... fuck i hate millenials.

>>56167745

But it's okay when AMD does it

>Every review is the AMD partnered AotS and Hitman

>>56167787
>fuck i hate millenials.
Liked and Shared :^)

Anyways, the reason is that transistors size means that we don't have to focus on performance, but rather temps and wattage
This is because everyone is waiting for the 10nm fabs, which are very soon.

I don't really know about rebrands, but it's not why the market is stagnant at all.

File: 1455496263060.gif (3MB, 167x190px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 167x190px

>that crossfire and SLI scaling

Jesus how horrifying, and I was considering buying a second R9 Fury...

>>56167633
>And also, if you go use high settings (one step down from ultra), you'll usually more than double your FPS.


Sometimes I feel like because of the apparent anonymity people (like you) are just fine spouting the most inane piece of disinformation they can come up with.

>>56168017
R E T A R D
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=02uxM3vyClY

>dx12 delayed because GPU vendor politics

>>56167897

Few companies will use 10nm. GPUs will jump to 7nm.

>>56166968

There is no directx 12 for this game until the 5th. What you are seeing is a shitty DX12 wrapper around Direct X 11.

Well that shit game with shit optimizing.


ps. i have 290X

File: 1444354334923.gif (150KB, 300x225px) Image search: [Google]

150KB, 300x225px

>>56169460
AAA games are shit at optimization to begin with like FO4 and it's stupid RAM requirements, or the memory leaks with GTA V. How many releases in 2015-2016 alone have been terribly optimized on day one or required day one patching?

>>56162512
>directx

>>>/v/

>>56159869
DX12 isn't even available yet
>http://www.gamespot.com/articles/deus-ex-mankind-divided-on-pc-wont-support-dx12-at/1100-6442829/

With how AMD biased Hitman was, and now this, its pretty obvious Square and AMD have something going on, because the 1080 is undoubtedly way superior to any AMDshit

The whole "GPUopen" shit might just be Gameworks but "its open source so its good!"

>>56159731
>running low-medium setting on GTA-V
>DX10 looks WAY better with the exact same options

cant explain that, dx11 was causing objects and tree foilage to disappear at closer distances and it looked like shit anyway

>>56170588
inb4 VRAM limit, not even close

>>56169501
>How many AAA releases in 2015-2016 have required day one patching
Can't think of one that hasn't

>>56159220
Hey falcon, you won't remember me, but I argued with you on the argument that
>480/1060 or higher is stupid for 1080p because they are wasted on that resolution
My argument was
>they might only be wasted on that resolution on old games, new games push new things and then the "overpowerful" card can't even hit 60 fps at 1080p anymore
I stand corrected

>>56159182
that game looks like a poorly programmed resource hog

>>56159182
>DX11
>In a game built ground up for DX12

What shit benchmarks.

>>56159731
For nVidia maybe...

>>56160075
>bf4
>4 years old, cpu oriented, and dice optimization magic
What else can you run?

Not huge into gaming, but let me get this straight.

You shell out $600-800 for a brand new top of the line GTX 1080 to get only 66fps at 1080p in a modern game? I thought high end graphics cards were all about that 100+ fps in games. What gives?

>>56170890
If it was built for DX12, why hasn't it been released in dx12?

>>56171224
It has.

>>56171293

http://www.gamespot.com/articles/deus-ex-mankind-divided-on-pc-wont-support-dx12-at/1100-6442829/

File: 1456618203232.jpg (46KB, 429x334px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 429x334px

>>56163642
>It's AMDs high-end card.
do you have brain damage?

>a fucking 1080 can't keep 60 fps in this game at 1080p
How fucking badly optimized is the game? A fucking 1060 can max The Witcher 3 at this resolution.

File: serious sam 3 gpu settings.jpg (120KB, 1600x900px) Image search: [Google]

120KB, 1600x900px

>>56159266
>>56159425
Does any other game have graphical settings as ludicrously detailed as Serious Sam 3?

Fucking well optimized too.

>>56159182
>weighting absolute minimums over average
In what world is one frame less more impactful than two frames more?

Should I get a 1070 or a 1080?
Or should I wait for the high end AMD cards?

>>56171814
No it can't.

File: wonderful.jpg (499KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

499KB, 1920x1080px

>>56171838
The Talos Principle goes even further.

Same developer (Croteam) and maybe the deepest game I have played the past 5 years.

1920x1080 (1080p)
The Witcher 3, Ultra, Post AA, No HairWorks

GTX 1060 - 68.4
GTX 1070 - 94.2

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3W7WX6pjL-M#t=1m38s

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2016-nvidia-geforce-gtx-1060-review

>>56171878
Do NOT wait.
Buy the best your money can afford. If it happans to be a high-end GPU you're golden - sell your GPU in a year from now and use the money to buy the next flagship GPU.

If you manage to get good prices you shouldn't lose money (or 10% max if you didn't get good deals/didn't your card at a good price)

>>56159182
There will most likely be a day 1 patch which fixes these issues. Devs like leaving things to the last minute.

>>56171921
Meant to quote >>56171890

>>56159869
Yet they claim amd are the good guys.
Yet they claim amd never try the old gimperoo.

Here's your proof.

>>56168221
Depends on how long it takes to get from 10nm to 7nm. Signs point to it taking a long while.

>>56170187
Open Source means it's nothing like Gameworks.

>>56171183
Pretty much all benchmarks are run at max settings if at all feasible(except for occasionally turning off features like Hairworks that blatantly favor either Nvidia or AMD) when in reality you can get almost twice the FPS by turning some graphical settings down a notch and losing virtually no visual fidelity.

>>56171861
Consistency is at least as important as raw FPS itself. Getting 60fps average doesn't make for a good experience if there are constant dips to below 30.

>>56170818
Cuck

THEN WHAT SHOULD I BUY!? This is so confusing! My max budget is in the range as the 480 and 1060, but I have no idea what to buy.
Usually when I upgrade its just whatever is the most bang for the buck at that particular moment, but this is just confusing as shit, rushed designs, shit drivers, sponsored benchmarks, biased optimizations.

I just want to upgrade my 7850 1gb dammit.

>>56172200
That's fantastic but all we get from this image is the bare minimum fps and the average.
You can't just go out and say "Well see it dips constantly and that's bad mkay" there's no information to support it

>>56172264
If you want the most bang for the buck. just get a 4gb 480 unless you can get a 1060 for less.

>>56172285
Where I live the prices are equal between the 480 8gb and the 1060 6gb.
But the cheapest 1060 3gb is cheaper than the cheapest 480 4gb.

>>56160785
>>56159869
>mfw still with Q9550.
>mfw won't care about dx12 because i got cucked by SSE4.2 and POPCNT instructions.
>mfw no face

>>56159266
Yes and often higher by forcing super sampling etc. It's what you buy the highest end cards for.

>>56171957
wtf are you smoking because I want some

>>56172376
If they are the same price then weigh up what games you play. Do you want to play current games and older games that are not DX12/Vulkan specific? If so get the 1060. Do you plan on playing new games only? You might be better off with the 480 (not proven just a bunch of airheads theorizing). Also the 480 uses a little more juice than the 1060 so electricity costs are a small factor. Mini ITX builds might suit a 1060 better too in this regard.

>>56172376
1060 3gb is not the same as 1060 6gb.
It performs slightly worse because it has less CUDA cores, Stream Processors and ROPs.

>>56172765
The wattage difference is hardly a factor, might be a few more dollaros a year if even really noticeable compared to all the other appliances you use.

>>56159182
>1070 averages less than 60fps

Fuck.

Wait, 1080 SLI gets 77avg?

Does the game really look that good

>>56172788
Game must be shit. (Technically. It's probably good as a game.)

Look at it this way. Movie studios use rendering farms for the big blockbuster movie effects. Even at 1080p. You can keep pushing 1080p visually and it will continue pushing GPU hardware further and further the more visually 'rich' you make it. This is also having to be generated realtime where movie effects are pre-rendered.

>mfw i'm at that point in my life where i'm fine to turn settings down to medium to get 60 fps instead of obsessing over having every effect to max
>smoothness framerate is far more important

feels good man

File: untitled-19.png (50KB, 686x812px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 686x812px

>>56171890
Come the fuck on dude.

It "basically" can since most benchmarks for W3 are novigrad based and everyone gets like +20fps outside of it.

The idea that you can play every game for years to come at 1080p is a fallacy.

I'll be interested to see if new drivers make a meaningful impact on drivers or the upcoming DX12 patch. The performance figures seem poor here.

>>56172871
>The performance figures seem poor here.
In the same way that 9/11 was an unfortunate incident and WW2 was a minor fucking skirmish.

This game appears to run like shit. Less than 80fps on SLI'd 1080s at 1080p?

Literally what the fuck.

>>56171838
Croteam and their engine are exemplary of optimization. They set the bar very high for other devs. Probably that good old slav magic at work.

>>56172897
Yeah. That's a setup you get to play at 4K. This is crazy.

>>56168197
Sometimes I honestly feel this shit is some kind of conspiracy going on between game devs and GPU manufacturers.
That the former keeps making games more unoptimized so that the masterrace will keep buying the latest vidyacards when they come out, just so they can play at the higher resolutions.
After all, does this game look much better than previous flagship titles like Crysis 3 or GTA V?
Often enough these days, you see games that look alright but not like they should demand as much from your GPU as they do.

>>56172965
This game gets the same fps on 2 1080s that a maxed Witcher 3 gets at 4k. It's fucking crazy.

>>56161780
>MHz
Is is it 1991?

File: 1471439023505.jpg (181KB, 657x527px) Image search: [Google]

181KB, 657x527px

>>56159182
I TOLD YOU FAGGOTS CONSOLES WOULD BE BACK IN BUSINESS WITH THE PS4K/SCORPIO AND THAT THEY'D NOT ONLY BREACH THE GAP BUT COST LESS THAN A GOOD GAYMING PC FOR THE SAME PERFORMANCE (IF NOT BETTER)

I TOLD YOU AND YOU LAUGHED AT ME AND BOUGHT POOLARIS AND GTX 1060

EAT SHIT NOW FAGGOTS

>>56172992
>consoles better performance than a good gaming PC
When has this ever been true? Not since the era of hardware-accelerated 3D graphics began. And the laws of physics and economics mean it never will be true.

>>56172862
It doesn't matter where you are, if you have GoyWorks turned on a 1060 can't even come close to 1080/60. If you turn it off, the game is no longer maxed out, so who cares?

>>56159182
tfw gtx 650 top kek

>>56173017
Nobody turns on HW in Witcher 3 because it looks terrible.

Besides, what reputable benchmarking site would include gimpworks in benchmarks?

>>56173017
the 1080 can't max it either with hairworks on

face it moron you bought a shit card

1080p won't be maxed until nvidia releases its HBM VRAM high end GPU

File: 1464619868160.png (185KB, 401x469px) Image search: [Google]

185KB, 401x469px

>tfw I always stay at least two or three years behind the video game trends
>tfw I always get games after they've had all their DLC packs and performance patches for half the price or more
>tfw playing games on mid-range cards that run the game better than absolute top of the line could have when they came out
>tfw seeing you modern day kids complaining about day one patches, DLC and the insane hardware prices needed to get new games running at 1080p/60 on mid/high spec
>tfw I didn't fall for the cutting edge meme

>>56173017
>>56173042
There's nearly zero performance hit with gamework on Nvidia cards because it isn't shit with tess. The performance hit comes from stupid shit like x16 aa and x16 af.

>>56173042
>the 1080 can't max it either with hairworks on
You fucking wot?

My 1070 stays above 60fps at Ultra 1080p with hairworks at x8.

>>56173083
max EVERYTHING at 1080p, including hairworks

then enjoy your 45 fps

>>56172992
i saw some threads yesterday it's a maximum quality with full 4xaa tested.

>>56173094
Uh, I do.

Witcher 3 really isn't super demanding.

It's 1080p, not 4k.

>>56173102
mind uploading a video of Novigrad to back your claim then?

if you shoot it with the shadowplay the performance loss shouldn't be more than 5fps max

>>56173094
Only place you'll drop to mid 50s at those settings is riding a horse through Novigrad.

I've never seen under 50 with maxed hairworks on my 1070/6700k. And even then it's basically just a frame time spike, and doesn't stay that low for more than a second.

>>56173045
I do that too, but don't talk shit about the people who sacrifice their money at the frontier.

Without them, we'd have nothing, don't be so smug, you silly fuck. It's against the spirit of /wise consumer/.

If we were all /wiser consumer/, then we'd be the primary target of jewing, so encourage the brave souls who sacrifice so we can remain untargeted.

>>56159182
>Rx 480 here
What a fucking joke, not that the other cards are doing much better but fuck man

>>56173120
Hang on m8. Tried steam screenshot first but the fucking thing doesn't show FPS in screenshots.

Never used shadowplay, so give me a second.

>>56173102
>Witcher 3 really isn't super demanding.
What game is more demanding?

Hard mode: no immature low-overhead API implementations

>>56173184
Rottr because it uses 4k textures on ultra. And because of that it's very vram hungry needing at least 10gb to not bottleneck at 1080p.

The quality difference is noticeable too.

File: 1455900665575.png (315KB, 780x720px) Image search: [Google]

315KB, 780x720px

>>56172992
>frogshit

>>56173205
People still care about neo Tomb Raider?

>>56159977
Me too... I quite like this card, hope it will last a while longer.

>>56169501
>>56170731
Day 1 patches are planned in the release schedule. Anything that doesn't work after the day 1 patch is an oversight, poor design, a bug, crappy coding, lack of testing and everything else.

>>56173227
It's better than Witcher 3. Holy shit what a chore to play that was.

>>56173281
I dunno about W3, but I like to be in control of my character for more than 10 seconds at a time.

Tombraider is a poster child for games that are nothing but QTE's. Kind of sad how shitty games have gotten.

>>56173297
idk what you're taking about but cool I guess

>>56173120
Anon, I'm uploading it to youtube.

>>56173281
>>56173297
Never been mored unsatisfied with gameplay other than TW3, combat felt like a suggestion more than anything

>>56173345
As Western RPGs go, it's decent.

Plus, everything else is pretty fucking quality.

Except the textures, which are shit. But that's the price of around 2gb VRAM use at 4k.

>>56173325
You weren't standing around enough trees/bushes/ducks during the combat plane jump scene! Stop cherry picking!

>>56173325
Goddamn, I haven't done this since like 2007. Why does it take so long to process.
>>56173361
Made sure to run around Novigrad, including about a minute just doing direction changes while running around in Hierarchic Square.

File: GoyWorks.png (49KB, 1299x1148px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 1299x1148px

>>56173071
>There's nearly zero performance hit with gamework on Nvidia cards

Nice meme, friendo!

>>56173373
Anon, how long will you wait, I accidentally uploaded this bullshit in 360p.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5_eXJfNYqJE&feature=youtu.be

And you can't see the fps counter clearly enough. I can do a 1080p one but it will take longer.

>>56173406
Apparently, nevermind.

I'm just an idiot.

An idiot that pulls 60fps+ with hairworks maxed in Novigrad on a 1070

>>56173321
Tomb Raider. They take control away from the player every few steps.

>>56173406
Where's the FPS counter

>>56173440
Lower right. VERY small. Pretty hard to see, but it's readable. Don't know why only the steam overlay fps showed up but shadowplay didn't.

>>56173426
?

File: 900x900px-LL-15d9b54b_fallout-4-god-rays-quality-performance.png (67KB, 869x526px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 869x526px

>let me just cut your fps in half

>>56173406
Your 1070 has a decent overclock. That doesn't count m7.

>tfw using Oentium G4400 internal graphics
>maxed out Arkham city
>50 fps

lmao

>>56173406
It went to 46fps for a second.

>>56173493
That was a frame spike from fast travel. It's irrelevant.

Come on anon. I went through all this trouble. Can you at least give me a (you)?

>>56173493
I'm calling the police.

>>56173345
not as unsatisfying as tomb raider. I thought the 2nd was better but its something that you could just watch a play through on youtube with all the cutscenes after 5min of gameplay and stupid QTEs.

So is that performance with nvidia gimpworks on or just regular gameplay performance?

>>56173560
>gimpworks
isn't this an amd gaming evolve

>>56173406
>>56173525
Well, I'm gonna delete the video now.

Let the record show that you can easily get a consistent 60-65 FPS in Witcher 3's most demanding area, with maxed hairworks, on a 1070 and an i5 2500k.

>>56173617
>my 1070 is coming monday
>have a 2500k 4.6ghz
im excited

>>56173664
Overclock that thing. It's pretty easy to get it to 2000mhz and the difference is noticable.


Also, hairworks is fucking dumb and I never play with it on.

>>56173677
Yea i don't care about gimpworks whatsoever. I just got a 1440p screen (ips,144hz) and the 970 wasnt cutting it.

>>56173617
Is that all the settings maxed out?

>>56173689
Witcher 3 on my PC goes from averaging about 75-85 in cities to nearly 100 in the wilderness.

In the mountains, you might actually hit 144.

>>56173695
Yes. The video showed all the settings.

>>56173042
I have an i7-4790k and a 1080gpu
Can confirm I play the witcher 3 will everything pushed to the max including hairworks and get over 60 fps.
I do however turn hair off as its not worth the fps difference you get with it being on and off.

File: memes2.png (1MB, 856x482px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 856x482px

>>56173689
You need fast ram for that 2500k to work well homie.

>>56173727
Wtf ram actually matters?

File: ram.png (648KB, 895x648px) Image search: [Google]

648KB, 895x648px

>>56173790
>he actually believes ram is a meme

File: 1337529234234.jpg (22KB, 296x266px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 296x266px

Last time I overclocked my i5-2500k
my mobo got short circuit, it was stable in occt but died next day

I have a 500W beQuiet system power 7 psu
p8p67 pro rev 3.1 mobo and r9 280x,

what happen

>>56168197
>The framerates LITERALLY doubles without any solid improvement in image quality.

I never understand this retarded obsession with maxing out every performance tanking effect. What is the exactly point of maxing games that don't even properly reward using for maxing it out. Wanting 4k at least make sense because you do things like turn off Antialias because you are running it at such a higher resolution.

File: 1470491676486.jpg (295KB, 812x1024px) Image search: [Google]

295KB, 812x1024px

>>56159182
>DX11

File: IMG_20160818_024427.jpg (1MB, 2448x2448px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2448x2448px

>>56173842
>Wanting 4k at least make sense because you do things like turn off Antialias because you are running it at such a higher resolution.
No, you still need AA at 4k if you do things like use a 40" TV as a monitor.

>>56172863
You can, just not on highest settings. A 7850 will play this game; that card was released 4.5 years ago. Considering the PS4 is a custom 7850, who knows how long it'll work.

>>56173279
There's Day 1 patches that fix a few minor bugs, and then there are 4GB Day 1 patches. The latter is unacceptable because it shows that the game was released unfinished.

>>56173842
Seems like many engines are stuck in the past, e.g., Bethesda's RPG engines.

File: reaction.png (659KB, 802x802px) Image search: [Google]

659KB, 802x802px

>>56173951
>hoarder
>long hair
>toenail clippers at the desk
I'm gonna barf

>>56174000
Not him, but get out.

>>56174024
Take a shower, gnutist

>>56173828
You had a shit motherboard.

>>56173951
hwat's that case and what are those weird stripe thingeys on ti?

File: Workstation.jpg (1MB, 2448x2448px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2448x2448px

>>56174204
SuperMicro SC743.

>stripe thingeys?
the vertical ones? 8x 480GB Seagate 600 Pro enterprise SSDs

>>56174204
>>56174411
The mobile rack the SSDs are in. I replaced the drive sleds with ones from a different SuperMicro chassis so they'd match the look of the HDD sleds.
https://www.supermicro.com/products/accessories/mobilerack/CSE-M28SACB.cfm

>>56174411
>>56174437
fugg, that's bretty cool

What do you use it for though?

File: Screen Shot 2016-08-20 at 7.13.09 AM.png (735KB, 3360x2100px) Image search: [Google]

735KB, 3360x2100px

>>56174450
home lab and vidya

>>56174411

I remember you - you're the one with your system just shy of meltdown because its under constant load 24/7 right?

>>56174622
It isnt under constant load 24/7 and the only thing which melts down are the GPUs and RAID card, because even with a 80mm 6000RPM fan feeding them air, it isnt enough. The GPUs aren't as bad since some anon told me I could remove part of the backplate on the left most GTX980 to feed more air to the right one.

>>56174665
What do you use it for that's so demanding?

>>56174685
see >>56174468

>>56160047
Just do it. I upgrade from 680 to 1080.

When 4K is viable anti-aliasing will offer little benefit. It's gonna require large textures though and lots of vram.

>>56173951
>>56174411
Oh god, it wasn't a troll picture. And I thought my shit was messy.

CPU bottleneck?

The 980 SLI and 1080 SLI is performing the same.

Deus Ex Mankind Divided Benchmark on SLI GTX 1080: ULTRA 1920х1080 MSAA 8X

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l_hfz7Ess8s&

>MSAA 8X

That is just retarded.

File: 1920_dx12.jpg (151KB, 1207x515px) Image search: [Google]

151KB, 1207x515px

Looks like you can turn a lot of shit off or down.

File: laughingsluts.png (1MB, 960x792px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 960x792px

>>56174665
>the only thing which melts down are the GPUs and RAID card
>RAID card melts down
wait, are you the guy who fell for the $1000 raid card meme?

>>56176256
>he thinks a 1883ix-24, 8GB RAM upgrade and a BBU only costs $1k
laughingwhores.tif

>>56176360
>card melts under load
>uuuuh I actually paid more for it than you thought! REKT!
i am perplexed

>>56176394
did you look at where it is in the chassis?

>>56176413
No. So what you're saying is
>I can't make a build with proper air flow
ok m8, you win
those were really smart spending decisions

File: Screen Shot 2016-08-20 at 10.08.55 AM.png (763KB, 3360x2100px) Image search: [Google]

763KB, 3360x2100px

>>56176457
>I wish I had a computer which cost as much as anon's RAID card