I bought a 1080 last week

>novideo charging high end prices for mid range cards

shocking

>>59176383
You should probably learn to read before buying expensive hardware.

>>59176383
I bought a 970 about a month before 1070/1080 were officially announced.

Why would you buy a non-ti card this late in the generation?

>>59176383
i bought a 4670k last week.

>>59176514
My 780 had just died so I needed a card.

I'm just going to return this 1080 and then use my onboard graphics until the ti comes out

I bought an rx480 for £255 and forgot to use the 20% rebate losing around £60 savings

>>59176383
>tfw was considering trying to grab a cheap refurbished 1080 but instead went with a 1070

Dodged a bullet there.

Imagine if you had bought a 7700k

You'd be looking for a rope now

>>59176383
Return it if you can

>buying anything before the next thing comes out

always wait anon, never commit

File: amd-is-dead.png (2MB, 2560x1312px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2560x1312px

>>59176825
Uhhh

File: intel.png (495KB, 1070x601px) Image search: [Google]

495KB, 1070x601px

>>59176842
>posting the same fake benchmark over and over
Is this all you shills got?

just return it you idiot

>>59176383
gaymers are fucking retards. glad so many got fucked.

>>59176383
Once you buy the 1080 ti, something newer will come out and you will regret it. 7870 2gb owner here.

>>59176848
>fake

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DHeY6QIh0ws

>>59176383
I bet tons of people told you not to in /pcbg/ or whatever but you ignored them, didn't you?

Everyone told you that $600 was not worth it for just +75% more performance over a $170 GPU. But you didn't listen.

Yeah, go fuck yourself.

>>59176874
7970 owner here.

It's the purchase I've least regretted since I first got a TBird and 9600pro. Can still play 95% of games at 60fps+ at 1920x1200 with settings maxed.

File: jer01nov14BAZ.jpg (145KB, 1500x1054px) Image search: [Google]

145KB, 1500x1054px

>>59176877
That video proved nothing
Lol here's some numbers on a screen guise xd it's real cuz I put it on a graph
What do you get out of shilling for this shitty company?
They rereleased haslel 3 times and just kept playing the consumers for fools and took advantage of amd fucking up

File: 1483676207655.jpg (146KB, 432x529px) Image search: [Google]

146KB, 432x529px

>tfw you bought a 7700k and a 1080

File: ryzen-doa.png (177KB, 1089x677px) Image search: [Google]

177KB, 1089x677px

>>59176910
It's literally a video of a guy who broke the NDA

Just wait until the rest of the reviews come out in a couple days, they will all show the same thing

AMD has no answer to the 7700k, in fact their entire R7 Ryzen lineup is very bad for gaming

>>59176825
why?

>>59176929
Why the fuck does his 7700k get less avg fps than stock?

File: 1487995491808.gif (678KB, 480x320px) Image search: [Google]

678KB, 480x320px

>>59176929
>5.15 ghz
lel intel on suicide watch

>>59176951
*overclocked 7700k

>>59176913
Same here.

Don't really care though. I'll use this for 4-6 years like I did with my old shit. I wish some games worth playing would come out though.

>>59176929
>1700x
>3.4ghz
Again do you have any valid points
Games only use 1 core right goy
Remember to upgrade to the 8700k next year for 2% ipc gains only $50 more
It's not 2008. A lot of common games actually take advantage of many threads
Also multi tasking streaming etc
Price/perf

>>59176976
The problem is most games do not take advantage of the threads, and most applications do not either

Ryzen is a bad buy for the same reason that Broadwell-e is a bad buy for most people. It's a workstation CPU, not for gaming or general use.

>>59176991
Some site did a comparison of more recent games vs the 7700k tho and the 6900k outperformed in more than not
And it'll only increase with time
Also the application thing is just untrue.

>>59176991
>The problem is most games do not take advantage of the threads, and most applications do not either

Does "most" not mean "the majority"?

Because the majority of games and applications released the past few years are mutlithreaded unless you count some dogshit someone made for their first program and not something that's actually sold for money.

>>59177003
7700k is $340 dollars and beats the $1050 6900k in many games

Just think about that

Ryzen is doing the same shit, although the prices are better, it's still a much worse CPU for gaming than a 7700k

>>59177023
Of course they use the threads, but for it to really shine it needs to be optimized for multithreading.

For example GTA V is definitely multithreaded, but look at the results >>59176842

>>59177030
Did you miss the part where I said the 6900k won in more comparisons that it lost vs the 7700k and it will only get better in time as more games are developed to support this as well as the lower level apis
You're telling me
That on release
If the 6900k and 7700k were the same price
That people would still rather buy the 7700k
Do you honestly believe that?
Just throw amd out to the side for a minute and say it's Intel vs Intel and they stupidly just released them both for the same price
Also just gonna repeat it, better multithreaded supported games are just going to continue to release as time goes on as the trend is already showing

>>59177042
a 65 watt chip at 3.4 ghz has the same average as a 130 watt overclocked jewby lake?

File: imgres.jpg (6KB, 202x183px) Image search: [Google]

6KB, 202x183px

tell me why i shouldnt buy a 1080 tommorow

>>59177141
It will soon be price cut to $500 when the 1080ti releases.
On that note I just bought a 1070 a couple of weeks ago, I don't really have regrets. That was only part of my tax money.

>hasn't even been 30 days
>not just returning it

why are some people so dumb.