Will /g/ be buying the Gtx 1080 TI? I'm excited to

hahahhahahahahahahaahhahahahaahhahahaha
no

>>59167323
Why aren't you? Are you a poor wagecuck?

>>59167347
>2017, still giving money to jewvidia

>>59167301
If its worse than the titan xp then its still not good enough for 4k

>>59167386
Nice poorfag excuse!

>>59167301
Yeah...... NO

I rather wait.

I already have triple sli titan xps haha
Usually have to disable one to even get game's to ru ln though

>>59167301
That depends. Currently I've the GTX 1080 installed.
If performance boost is over 15% I might buy it and sell my 1080

>>59167301
will buy 2x 1080ti's and i will post it on /g

>>59167301
I will wait for waterblocks to be available and then I will buy it

>>59167435
Why will you wait anon?

I hope it comes out before May (bought 1080 recently) so I can get that sweet step up from EVGA

If less than 5% slower than Titan Pascal it is a first day buy for max 999.

>>59167553
>max 999
hahahahhahahhahahhahahahhahahahahahhahahahhaha
Do you not understand Nvidias business model?
>Here's a $400 GPU, it will cost you $1200

>>59167553
You really think it will be 1,000?

>>59167510
Because i want to see if vega is bad or good. If it's bad the i will go with nvidia. If it's good the i will see which is better.

>>59167301
I'll probably wait for the gtx1180 and pick up a 4K screen.
Depending on if the Zen benchmarks are legit, I might pick up a 1800x

>>59167586
Wishful thinking is 899.

just get a gtx 1070

>>59167639
About 40% to slow!

>>59167655
overclock it

>>59167639
The 1070 is not suitable for 4k.

>>59167684
Hard to get 40% though, 20% maybe, but then again the 1080ti may be able to go about the same in OC, refined production and aftermarket coolers!

Gonna be shit at 4K just like the Titan XP and GTX 1080. Performance is gonna be above GTX1080 and lower than Titan XP in some titles, and others it will be faster than the Titan XP.

Next gen GPUs should be able to do 4K 60fps at high settings. 1440p is what the 1070/1080/XP/1080Ti are good for. And this brings another point, the 1070 does 1440p 60fps easily that it makes the high end cards a pointless buy.

>>59167720
use 1080p

File: 1488294208594.png (497KB, 600x800px) Image search: [Google]

497KB, 600x800px

>not waiting for vega

>>59167738
You can get high settings on these cards with 60fps, just not very high/Ultra and every other useless hair improvement turned on.

>>59167738
What are you talking about? The Gtx 1080 TI will be able to Max out AAA titles at 4k 60Fps easily.

My 980ti still works fine at 3440x1440.
A titan xp still doesn't max games at ultra with 100hz.

If I have to make compromises anyways, I'd rather not spend 800+ to make the compromises smaller.

>>59167812
I've got a GTX1080, you gotta use medium settings to achieve 60fps with good frame times.
>>59167833
No, kiddo.

>>59168014
What games are you running? I get 60fps at 4k high. Fallout 4, Far cry 4, GTA V.

>>59167738
>high end cards a pointless buy

Does 144+Hz not exist for you?

>>59168085
I've tried those games, yeah they work on high-ish (they're also older games) settings but remember I am trying to target a locked 60fps experience, some people can tolerate occasional frame dips and/or shit frame times but I can't.

>>59168094
144Hz only matters for FPS games.

>>59167301
How long until we get third party cards?

Since the founders edition will be shit, as it was with the 1080.


Does anyone know how long it was when the 1080 got out?
Founders will probably be sold from mid-march.

>>59167301
just look at Titan X benchmarks

only be excited for the price

>>59168222
Really only on fast pace FPS games like, Overwatch, CS:GO, call of duty. I'd much rather have a higher resolution on a game like Arma 3.

I'm happy with my 1070

>>59168185
I agree with you, For me Skyrim SSE is an issue to run all out on 4k, seeing low 50s in certain places. Very bad optimization i guess, just look at Doom getting high 70s with high on 4k.

>>59168222
And racing games? Or fast paced action games? Why not have the best of both worlds?

>>59168336
Well any game will benefit from a higher refresh rate but some things to consider is your input device (panning becomes less noticeable with controllers as opposed to mice).

I think 144Hz (and above) is really only a requirement for competitive FPS games. And yes, I've got a 144Hz monitor. I even play some games like Dragon's Dogma at 100Hz just for the added smoothness.

>>59168471
Should I buy a 4k 60hz monitor? Or a 1440p 144hz Monitor? I will be buying the Gtx 1080ti, and the only shooters I play are Arma 3 and BF1 casually.

>>59168611
IMHO, BF1 is not about twitch aiming like other shooters atm, I haven't played Arma much to give an opinion on it.

You can get away with either option. I prefer 1440p but I feel like it's not a standardized resolution, whereas 4K will eventually be the new standard in the future.

If you've got cash to burn 4K 144Hz is expected later this year but I'm skeptical at the release date and quality control of the panels that are upcoming.

tl;dr: You decide.

>>59167753

I was going to but they still haven't released prices or release dates. I'm done waiting

>>59167301
no, i've got a gtx 1080 and its more then i need.

Why does everyone think the TI will be $1000? If anything it'll sit right at 700-800

>>59168829
It's gotta be in the middle of 1080 and Titan XP.

>>59168729
Too bad a standard 4K 144hz monitor will probably cost around $600 and one with JewSync will require selling your boipucci to buy

>>59169120
>Too bad a standard 4K 144hz monitor will probably cost around $600
Kek, the price is gonna be much more than 600.

No because I am waiting for 4K Freesync 2 144Hz monitors to become available.

>>59169120
Most IPS 4k monitors that are a decent size are around that price now. When 4k 144hz Monitors first come out they will probably be around $800+ depending on the size.

>>59169141
A non-sync 4K goes for around $300-400 now so I doubt a 144 Hz non-sync could go above $700

>>59168185
using G-sync (or freesync) with a compatible monitor ?

File: -------.jpg (61KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

61KB, 640x480px

BUY A 2500K

>>59169216
I've got a G-SYNC monitor, don't really like G-SYNC much. It's good on the very few games where FPS swings widely like Borderlands Pre Sequel or Forza Horizon 3.

File: 1440045393594.jpg (32KB, 356x319px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 356x319px

>eight hundred and ninety nine you ess dollars

>>59167386
>2017 the only gpu company not in isreal is nvidia
>the only company that is literally not jewish is nvidia

kek

>>59167301
i'm looking forward to the 1060 ti desu

>>59167301
I'm just not playing video games any more until AMD releases something more powerful than the Titan XP. Also saving my money for 4k 144hz monitors.

>>59169120
Try $1200.

https://www.pcgamesn.com/nvidia/nvidia-gsync-hdr

>>59169547
Well there's nothing worth playing this year anywasy

File: 1486342337991.jpg (861KB, 1816x1710px) Image search: [Google]

861KB, 1816x1710px

>>59167347
>the average nvidia user

>>59167301
yes

Probably from Palit/Gainward because they are the most quiet Brands with the highest OC (and the cheapest). Yeah I know that the Zotac has even higher OC, but with the 1080 it consumed with a huge margin the most power.

But I wait for the custom Brand reviews, because if every GPU would cost the same, had the same oc, and are equally quiet, I would probably buy MSI.

File: poo in the jews.jpg (103KB, 720x720px) Image search: [Google]

103KB, 720x720px

>>59167386

>>59167301

I'm planning on building a new PC this summer, planning on having the 1080 Ti there if it's practically just a Titan XP but 300-400 bucks cheaper.

>>59168268

ARMA 3 doesn't need a great graphics card. You could probably max it out on a 1060 6 GB or a 1070 in all ways.

Save the money and get a better CPU and/or better SSD for a better ARMA 3 experience.

>>59172221
BF1 will require a high end graphics card if you want to play at 4k 60fps

>>59172355
BF1 would, not ARMA 3 which is what the poster was talking about.

ARMA 3 is an oddball in the way that the CPU and Hard drive have more influence in its performance than the Graphics Card like in most other titles.

>>59167301
I've got 1080 SLI, I'm not interested in upgrading unless I can get at least a solid 50% performance boost. I doubt even 1080 Ti SLI would be that fast and with no competition on the market the price is going to be ridiculous too, at least until AMD actually gets Vega out. So I probably won't upgrade until Volta and Navi (?) are out unless I really need to.

>>59167301

Yes. I have been using dual ATI cards (5990, 6990) for the past 7 years but I want to switch back to nvidia. A month ago, I just built a i7 7700K, 32GB ram, 960 pro m2 ssd and it's basically unusable because I'm still on a shitty 6990 waiting for the 1080 Ti. Don't disappoint me nvidia. I want to come home

>>59172482
Back to being a novidya gamerbabby with that obsolete CPU.
>he fell for the 16GiB meme x2

For What LUL
enjoy your $2k paperweight

>>59169609
>tsideinanutshell.jpg

depends... Ifs its not a single card solution for 4k@60fps on ultra. then no. i have the 980 Ti and want to upgrade, but it better be worth it.

>>59174316

I'm planning on getting a 1080Ti, but doing 1440p at very high smooth frame rates and ultra settings.

File: get[1].jpg (58KB, 640x640px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 640x640px

1080Ti is confirmed.

Might as well wait for 2018

4K DP1.4 HDR Monitors with more nits & GPU's with HBM2

>>59167301
clever people will wait for the 1080 ti to drop and then lurk ebay for a few days to pick up and 1070/1080 on the cheap because of retarded casuals who will sell their old card for the new card.

managed to save a whopping £200 on a basically brand new gtx 980 FTW back when the 980 ti launched. got it for around £300 which was only like £50 more than a 970 and £180 less than a 390x.

>>59167720
1070 works fine for me for most games in 4k.

File: uncle-leo.jpg (7KB, 196x191px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 196x191px

>>59167347
>make 6 figures
>nvidias pricing still disgusts me

You know youve fucked up when

File: 1080Ti = True Successor of 780Ti.png (54KB, 757x382px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 757x382px

>>59174515

It is a successor of 780Ti (which is a full titan card with 3GB instead of 6GB).

1080Ti = Titan P

The owners of Titan P BTFO AS FUCK

File: geforce-1080ti-features[1].jpg (143KB, 1200x678px) Image search: [Google]

143KB, 1200x678px

>>59174632

File: hitman-game-performance[1].jpg (138KB, 1514x836px) Image search: [Google]

138KB, 1514x836px

>>59174666

File: nvidia-geforce-gtx1080ti-specs[1].jpg (281KB, 1600x806px) Image search: [Google]

281KB, 1600x806px

>>59174672

1080Ti is FULL GP102.

Can anyone actually justify dropping the ridiculous amount of cash nVidia will inevitably be asking for it for a marginal increase in performance that still won't be able to power max settings at 4k and a reasonable framerate at the same time? Wait for the next generation at least for fucks sake.

>>59174681

holy shit

>>59167301
No because I'm not a gamer manchild

>>59174693

http://www.ustream.tv/NVIDIA

amd cuckolds btfo

>m-muh vega
lmao

twitch / nvidia

gogogo

live

>>59174689

a lot of games can do max settings in 4k with 60fps

damn stream is late

1080 Ti incoming lads

full 102

AMD is done + bankrupt

>>59167301
I will buy whatever has the best performance

>>59167301

>4K
>doesn't own a 4K monitor

>benchmarks
>doesn't play games

PRICE CUTS FOR 1080 / 1070 / 1060 CONFIRMED

>paying more than 100$ for a GPU
there is literally no point except for computer gayms which are for manchildren
>inb4 poorfag
I'm rich because I invest my money instead of spending it on video gamer cards

>>59174817

cool story bro

SAME CUDA CORES AS TITAN PASCAL
35% FASTER THAN 1080
NVIDIA DID IT AGAIN

Ill either buy that or a 1070 not sure yet

>>59174632
explain how titan xp owners are btfo. titan xp owners have had their cards for 9 months. if pricing is $999 then that is a $200 premium to have the best performance for that time.

>>59174815
>PRICE CUTS FOR 1080 / 1070 / 1060 CONFIRMED
but when though

>>59174529

>>59174529

>>59174529

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9AVZ_x64hg4

>>59167301
no. i'm poor from a poor country where it will cost at least twice as much as their msrp

>>59174681

full gp102 is 3,840

File: gSTaBEB[1].jpg (972KB, 4032x3024px) Image search: [Google]

972KB, 4032x3024px

https://imgur.com/gallery/CDFSG

>>59174764
I didn't buy a 100hz monitor to get stomped on because hardware/software program interfacing is dumping card performance hard and can't actually render games at a reasonable framerate. As such I will not be buying another card from any manufacturer until it's evident they've gotten their shit together.

If the 1080ti is a cut down Titian X with worse performance and cost $850+ while vega is a 1080 with +20-30% improvement they will both meet in the middle

While AMD claimed they want to bring 4k gaming to the masses (code word for a midrange budget card) and is in then 350-450$ rang but with HBM2 and HBCC there is literally zero reason to buy a 1080ti

Then taken into account AMD cards get better over time from actual driver improves performance and not planed obsolescence like nvidia, even if the 1080ti beats vega now a year from now nvidia will want you to buy a Volta card and it will b all downhill from there and you'll hear "remember when the 1080ti bear vega lol"

>>59175015
>Then taken into account AMD cards get better over time from actual driver improves performance

that meme

>>59175015

1080 is $499 now

IT'S OVER, AMD IS FINISHED & BANKRUPT!!

>>59175072
AMD has always been inferior, they make cards for poorfag casuals.

>>59175015
>If the 1080ti is a cut down Titian X


Same cuda cores, less bandwidth, higher clocks.