Anyone getting the 1080ti? Looks to be almost double the fps

buy amd if you're poor :^)

Are you unhappy with the 980ti?

>>59332063
Already 1080 SLI see no reason

>>59332063
I downgraded to a 980Ti from a 1080.

Fuck ngreedia.

>>59332133
Why

>>59332063
>>59332063
>Sell your 980ti
>buy rx480
>poo on sidewalk
>???
>profit

>>59332144
Hackintosh/Dual Booting WinShit.

macOS doesn't have Pascal drivers :(

I put in 2x980Ti Hybrids in an mATX case and it's sexy. I can use both GPUs in macOS and WinShit. No problem.

Pascal is an amazing card tho. I had fun with it for a few months before I sold it.

File: 1466309487257.jpg (210KB, 1100x700px) Image search: [Google]

210KB, 1100x700px

I'll be picking one up to join my XB271HU 165hz 1440p monitor. I currently have a 970 so it'll be a pretty big upgrade. I've been holding off on titles like Witcher 3, and playing my backlog through.

i will make a wild guess...

this is the first time nvidia actually released a ti above the titanx...and by a good margin (and it doesnt have a lot of oc room)

i assume that vega is actually going to be good

>>59332063
Nope, got a second hand 1080, 490 € including EK waterblock, the 1080 ti is 829 € in yurop.

I want it for 1080p 144 hz of all things. It seems like it's the only card that can push recent titles to ~120 (I use ulmb) but I'm hesitant to buy it because I want adaptive sync and I refuse to pay the Gsync premium

You need to find the early talks on Virtual Reality that Abrash did where he predicted the impact it will have on the graphics cards industry.

Expect video cards to get even better & faster because there is a rising demand for them.

>>59332298

So you're telling me you're willing to buy a 1500 dollar computer plus a monitor that does 144hz, but an extra 100 dollars makes you stop?

wtf

>>59332418
It's only a premium because Nvidia refuses to support a VESA standard.

>>59332063
>Buying expensive shit to support a useless hobby

Look, all games nowadays are shit.
The only game if you're not a manchild is CS:GO, and you can run that on a toaster.

>>59332166
Retard.

File: 1479355833344.jpg (24KB, 840x405px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 840x405px

>you bought a 1080

>>59332616

if it's EVGA you can use their step-up program

>>59332166
Hello izo1

>>59332063
I've found that my needs in gaming are more lower then before. I went from a 5820k 980 SLI to a 6600k GTX 1070 and sold the 1070 to downgrade to a single 980. I feel like selling the whole thing and just making a g4560 Rx 470 build. Most of the games that I play don't stress the computer and I don't feel the need for 1440p/4k or higher refresh monitors. Even games like fallout 4 or the Witcher can still run at almost highest settings which I can tell the difference from the ultra settings that cut the frame rate in half.

>>59332640
It was Palit Golden Phoenix sample or whatever.
When will Nvidia start gimping it through drivers? GTX 2080?

>>59332127

> having to use SLI

Looks like you have every reason.

GTX 980 Ti users can just wait for Volta

If you have anything older like GTX 780 Ti, then you can consider the GTX 1080 Ti

>>59332643

Have you even tried 1400p or 4k?
Also there are 144Hz monitors and even 240Hz.
Even outside of all that, there's something to be said for the fluidity that a very high framerate provides in almost any game.

>>59332063
Maybe, I'm hoping AMD gets something decent out though. I recently went from a 290X to 1070 because the old card died and the local shop was having a sale on 1070s.
I haven't had a Nvidia card in quite some time but I was under the impression Nvidia had better software. The Nvidia control panel is the same as in the early 2000s with no added functionality also hardware decoding seems to be utterly broken in all browsers. There is also no difference in temperature, noise or power consumption with the cards so that has been a lie as well, slightly lower power consumption in idle maybe but barely noticeable.
So I'm hoping AMD comes out with something decent.

>>59332418
The problem with your post is the exaggerated numbers. G-Sync makes a 4k monitor $800 instead of $300, 1440p 144hz $700 instead of $350. And I only spent $1100 on the PC:
6600k- 200
z170 - 100
ddr4 - 100
1080ti(didnt buy yet) - 700

I want freesync but crossfire rx 480 feels stupid

>>59332701
I have but to be honest I wasn't blow away. My last PC had a 1440p monitor and a 120hz 1080p monitor. It looked nice but when I realized how much it cost and what a really got it felt kinda unsatisfying. At the end of the day if a play fallout 4 at 1080p or 4k I'm not remembering what the game looked like but what I did. Again this is just my gaming experience. I'm just more interested in my motorcycle and since I've gotten it games have seemed more hollow to me.

>>59332829
Also does that include the case, storage, and PSU. That would probably be another 250 at least.

>>59332063
Im selling my 1080s once they release a closed loop watercooled 1080ti.
Then after a week Ill fucking sli those like I always do

>>59332848

It just sounds like you're getting bored with gaming in general or not interested in its limits anymore. Which is fine and a pretty normal reaction to growing up. But if we were to go by your logic we'd still be gaming on 10 or 15 year hardware because you could already do pretty much the same thing then as now storytelling wise.
And if you're looking for a complete paradigm shift where you actually need even more horsepower than now, just look at what VR is shaping up to be. Even 4K screens per eye at 90Hz are considered pretty subpar for what its aim is. Which is something that's harder and harder to distinguish from reality.

Is there any game that really need this shit? I got a 1070 and it smashes everything.

Other than shooters you don't need 144hz

>>59332947
1440p 144hz you need a 1080. The 1070 is 1080p gpu

>>59332643
Why would you sell your high end shit only to buy new shittier hardware? You're not gonna walk away with a lot of money in the end and you got a downgraded PC.

File: l9lF8ca.jpg (254KB, 1400x805px) Image search: [Google]

254KB, 1400x805px

So, realistically will Vega make the 1070/1080(Ti) prices drop?

Because people were all hyped about Ryzen to BTFO Intel, and while they actually released nice CPUs, Intel didn't change their pricing one single bit.

>>59333033
I got enough money from it and in the end I get the same gaming experience and extra cash to throw on something that has more of my interest in it.

File: SteamHW.png (49KB, 942x466px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 942x466px

>being an early adopter, enthusiast, pioneer etc.

>>59332063
The 980Ti was overpriced to begin with.

Anyone who gets a 1080Ti is going to regret it when Vega and Volta come around.
It's just Nvidia's last chance to milk dumb consumers with overpriced outdated architecture.

It seems to actually hit 60 on average at 4k so i do need it

>>59333093
I use 4k@185ppi because I read code and PDFs 95% of the day and the extra clarity of 200% scaling on the same size as regular 1080p displays makes my eyes not tired after 2 hours of staring at a screen.
Why shouldn't I take advantage of that?

The few games I play run fine in 4K with a 1070 because I don't give a shit about Crysis and other AAA "photorealistic" shootershit

>>59333093
The 1920x1200 only being 1.11 disgusts me the most.

Fucking 1080p plebs.

>>59333093
>i should do what everyone else does

>>59333137
>Anyone who gets a 1080Ti is going to regret it when Vega and Volta come around

You don't know shit about what those architectures will be able to do.
HBM2 is poised to be great but nowhere in the near future

>>59332942
I don't think I was ever interested in the limits of gaming. I do think my interest in gaming has dwindled a bit though. I'm just at the point where I can play through tomb raider or metro last light and have a good run but if I were to start it up again at 120hz 4k I would be bores after 10 minutes because playing the same game. All these game that take advantage of these high settings don't really have a lot of replay ability. I'm just looking for a game that I can invest a lot of time into that can really sate my gaming needs. I'm more or less just waiting around for these larger RPGs like Mass effect or elder scrolls but I'm definitely losing my gaming bug. Hopefully I'll use that time to be more productive but I'll never stop gaming.

>>59333156

Blame the movie industry for pushing 16:9 aspect ratio over the objectively better 16:10

>>59333137
>Anyone who gets a 1080Ti is going to regret it when Vega and Volta come around.

Anyone who gets a 2017 Ford Focus is going to regret it when the 2018 Ford Focus comes around.

Fuck that shit.

As long as the card does what I want, I'm good. If it stops being able to do that, I'll upgrade.

I don't buy my games around my graphics card, I buy my graphics card to suit my games.

So what if half a year later something better comes around that has less price. It'd be a surprise if that wasn't the case.

>>59333158

But that wasn't my point.

>>59333211
yeah it was you dumb faggot

>>59332829
>crossfire rx 480 feels stupid
it is stupid, don't do it. amd needs to get their shit together and put out a competitive video card, i don't know wtf they're waiting for

>>59333210
>Anyone who gets a 2017 Ford Focus is going to regret it when the 2018 Ford Focus comes around
Not really?
Especially if they get the Focus RS.

I got a 7970 and I don't regret it. It just got better with time. Still runs most games at 1920x1200 60fps+
1080Ti is going to get a driver update that immediately gimps it once Volta comes out to get the plebs to upgrade to Volta.
Like sheep, they'll keep doing it, instead of buying an AMD card that ages better.

>>59333243
>i don't know wtf they're waiting for
80% of their driver team and 100% of their GPU hardware team is working on Vega.

While Nvidia took the opportunity to price gouge while AMD wasn't competing on the high end, Nvidia delayed Volta for 2 years while AMD is focusing on getting a true next-gen architecture out.

It's only 2 more months wait. Quit being an impatient baby.

>>59333210
>Anyone who gets a 2017 Ford Focus is going to regret it when the 2018 Ford Focus comes around.

Anyone who gets a Ford Focus will regret it*

>>59333261
>wait for fiji!
>wait for zen!
>wait for vega!
Fuck you faggots, if everyone listen to AMDrones on /g/ nobody would actually buy anything.

I will replace my GPU in 2019 or 2020. I'm running GTX 1060.

File: new patch.png (1MB, 2484x3052px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2484x3052px

>>59333361
Fiji was good after driver updates.
r9 Fury has 55% the performance of the 1080Ti for 1/3rd the cost. Even if you got it for MSRP when it launched, it was still a good buy as it was 80-95% the perf of the 1070 that came out a year later for less than the low avialability 1070 was.

And Zen too, wtf? It not only matches the 6900k in nearly everything, in some cases it's almost as good as the $1700 6950X.
You're retarded.
Zen is only slightly worse in some games because of thread scheduling issue.
The 7700k is already nearly bottlenecking the GTX at 1080p. It's a shit CPU for future games. Anyone with a brain knows that.

Ti versions hold longer value since the die size is spun off the flagship (which is now exclusively quadro)

Are you fags still going to argue this much when 1180 is released to create an artificial buzz

Just get on a cycle and deal with it, if budget doesn't allow you to upgrade then downscale but don't blame the world for it

>>59332200
where are his hands?
how does he control his device or drink coffee?

>>59332063

I'll wait for Volta. Either the **60 or the **70, depending on how the architecture performs.
The 1080 Ti is looking really fine, but I'm not going to pay this kind of premium just for being at the top of the curve for ~1 year.

>>59333467
willpower

Nah, I'm budgeting to buy a 1180ti once it comes out, I have a 1070 and don't feel the need for anything better, I'd have to buy a 4k or 2k/144hz screen first.

I think it's respectable that Nvidia are selling the 1080Ti for "only" $700 when they own the high end market now. In the past, they would have changed $900+ for this card.

But it's still a card that's going to be end-of-life architecture in a few years.
Pascal is still basically Maxwell which was basically Fermi with some efficiency improvements like tiled Rasterisation.

Plus Prey looks fucking sick, and Prey is probably going to be bundled with Vega or at least run great on it.

I want it, it's finally enough performance and I can actually afford one for once but it's almost 4x as much money as the 1060 for like 2.5x the performance. I know they're not directly related but I know if I wait next generations 70 or 80 series will be comparable or faster.

I wish vega would come out. I have a 1060 and I hate it. I can't even play WoW at 120fps stable. I mean rx480 is worse at all the games I play, it's just the tier of card. The higher tiers don't offer enough value.
I'm considering selling the 1060 and just picking up a $500 1080.

>>59333611
>Pascal is still basically Maxwell which was basically Fermi with some efficiency improvements like tiled Rasterisation.
Could you elaborate more about this? Isn't GP100 with HBM2 completely different?

>>59333644
Huh? None of the consumer Nvidia cards have HBM2.

Maxwell architecture is updated Fermi. Pascal is updated Maxwell.
Maxwell did change quite a lot, but it's still majority the same.
It's like the changes from GCN 1.0 to 1.1, 1.2, Fiji.
Vega is a radical change. Volta is also supposedly a radical change that Nvidia has been working toward for 6 years.

>>59332063
>1080ti
I have a Titan X Pascal already.

i've got a 1080, i'll survive a few years.

>>59332063
Nah, I've got 1080 SLI, I'm waiting until the next generation from NVIDIA and AMD at least.

What will happen if after many technological advances after several years, there will be a budget graphics card with the power to run games at 4K60 easily, would people actually buy 8K screens with small displays(24" or 27") and get higher performance cards, would using a screen of that resolution make sense on such small displays?

>>59334284
Look at pixel density of smartphone screens, PC displays still have a long way to go.

>>59332685
SLI already top titanxp by 30-40% on most games I play. Besides price if I sell both I will end with less hardware.

>>59332923
Same through but due to marvelous Brazilian taxes I need to pay $1000 for each so it's a no

>>59333054
Hard to say, 1080s already gone a cut probably Nvidia has a lot of stock and is trying to ever saturate the market before release of Vega.
Vega probably will sit between 1080 and ti around 550-650$ thing is hbm2 is rely expensive and will not show much difference in real usage vs gddr5

>>59334491
>real usage vs gddr5

HBM2 is intended for 2160p I believe.
And GDDR5 isn't acceptalbe in 4k

>>59333137
Guess it's always the same. You either upgrade 80->80 and tis for tis. Upgrading twice for each generation you are swimming on money.

Besides Volta isn't a die shrink I wouldn't expect massive gains like we got with pascal

>>59334510
Like someone said it's not for now. Even to or Titan can't handle properly 4k now, barely hitting 4k is still not acceptable performance.

>>59334284
No. There'd still be 144hz 4K.

Maybe some people would be fine with 30fps at 8k then. idk. I think that sounds stupid. 4k is already a good density.

>>59334514
>Besides Volta isn't a die shrink I wouldn't expect massive gains like we got with pascal
Apparently you missed Maxwell.

>>59334514
>Volta isn't a die shrink I wouldn't expect massive gains like we got with pascal
Definitely not as much as Pascal, as it was the biggest leap since Fermi or even before that IIRC, but Kepler > Maxwell was a pretty decent bump as well. I'd kind of expect the Volta 2080/1180 or w/e they'll call it to be very slightly above 1080Ti level with lower power usage, like 5-10% faster maybe and probably a bit cheaper too, depending on how well AMD manages to actually compete this round.

>>59333156
>>59333183
>tfw 16:10
I really dont want to go 16:9, im just glad that dell still makes them

>>59334626
Yeah I've been on 1920x1200 for ages.

I don't want 16:9. It feels wrong. I might try an ultrawide that's at least as tall as my 24" 16:10.

>>59334633
2560x1440 and above 16:9 feels better than 1920x1200 16:10. It's about screen space in the end, nobody sane goes
>this monitor has more vertical AND horizontal space than my own it's totally shit

That depends on if the 1080Ti will actually drive 4K acceptably or not. I'm not spending money on a new GPU until I see definitive proof of it hitting 60FPS minimum w/ plenty of headroom on modern titles at 4K w/ max settings. Until then I'll just keep using my 980Ti and upscaling games from 2K.

I'm sick of giving all these jews loads of money for iterative improvements that can't even keep pace with display technology.

File: 1483972002547.jpg (29KB, 399x385px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 399x385px

>he paid 700 U.S. dollars for performance on screens that don't even exist yet

>>59334596
Yeah we can expect performance gains. Maxwell did really well, working on refinements they actually did a really very good engineering job, but more than CPUs, on GPUs any die shrink linearly translates into massive gains due to fitting more shader units. GPUs are a lot scalable and any die shrink is bound to have massive gains on it own.

>>59332971
Reading this post makes me realize the retardedness of company naming conventions. Normies would be so confused

>>59334661
The height of my 24" 16:10 is good.

In all likelihood I'd go for something with the same height, but higher pixel density.
That means scaling up fonts and such, so I'm left with roughly the same vertical space.

I have considered a 2560x1440 or 4k that's like 27-28", or something. I'm not just a sperg. There's still issues in a lot of OS with scaling, though.

>>59334735
1080Ti is only getting 30-40fps at 4k in many games. There's some exceptions where it does get 60fps minimum.

AMD is claiming +100% minimum frame rates compared to comparable hardware with Vega. If that's true, it should get 60fps minimum in almost every game, if not every game.

>>59335187
>The height of my 24" 16:10 is good.
Sure, but it's kind of the minimum for actual work as far as I'm concerned. 27" 1440p monitors are better in every way than 24" 1200p, so are UHD 27" but you probably want at least 125% scaling on one of those. At least I can't work comfortably on mine at 100% scale.

>>59335187
>AMD is claiming +100% minimum frame rates compared to comparable hardware with Vega
Must be why their DOOM 4K demo dropped to like 35FPS. Do not believe the marketing bullshit, that is a 100% unattainable claim and it will absolutely never happen.

>>59334735
>That depends on if the 1080Ti will actually drive 4K acceptably or not.
It will not, it's essentially as fast as a Titan XP, slightly above that. We know how that performs, we've known for months and it will not get you >=60FPS minimum in all games and will be far away from doing that with "plenty of headroom"

>>59333361
>he is not a savvy shopper
you buy what you need right now child.
ignore the future proof meme

the vast majority of people will only need a 470/1070 but if they chooses to go higher they risk getting BTFO by HBM2

>>59333093
>tfw single least common resolution on there

>>59335258
>Must be why their DOOM 4K demo dropped to like 35FPS
Source? Everyone else said 60fps minimum on that and that was BEFORE drivers were implemented for HBC.

Should I get a 1070 for 1440p?

>>59332829
My 144hz 1440p monitor was $500, and no, I didn't buy it used or refurbished.

>tfw by the time Vega comes out, it will be closer to the launch of Volta than to the launch of Polaris

>>59335682
I got a 1070 and have a 1440p 144hz monitor. If 60fps is your goal, go right ahead. The most demanding game I have is BF1, and that runs at around 80-100 fps. The 1070 runs slightly older games at 1440p 144fps no problem, and modern games at above 60fps. If you are on a budget, I'm sure a 1060 can run games at 1440p 60fps with some settings turned down just fine.

>buying the Founders Edition

Why?

>>59333210
Interesting how things have changed.

Back in the time of Pentiums and clockwars, a four year old computer (and frequently a three year old one) was good for absolutely nothing, you'd go to the computer shop to buy new games and find yourself below minimum spec.

2500k onwards, everyone has been trained to get five or six years and still not actually need the latest kit then.

Perhaps we should be thinking twice on whether its a good thing for AMD to provide competition. Yes, technological progress but no if it means you blink and you feel you've got to replace everything again.

>>59335950
>buying cards with non premium materials

Why?

File: Ancient Mayan Ruins.jpg (42KB, 460x332px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 460x332px

>>59333361
>Fuck you faggots, if everyone listen to AMDrones on /g/ nobody would actually buy anything.
That's not bad advice. Remember all those people that bought a Q6600/2500K or GTX460/HD4870?

I also have a 980ti, which nets me a solid 1440p 60fps performance in any game. I bought mine for $350

1080ti seems to be solid 4k 60fps performance but I doubt it'll hold out for newer games coming in 2018/19

I'll wait for a card that's close to 50% faster than a 1080ti and then when that performance level I cna get for about $400, so I bet I'll be waiting 2 years at least

>>59334386
Just so you know, by 2020 LG's next-gen factories will have completed construction and be into production which means we'll finally have the possibility of desktop OLED. Sony & Phillips are already contracting out their flagship models for 2017 to LG's panels.

>>59336078
>I can have an OLED 28" 4k HDR monitor probably with a refresh rate higher than 60hz in as little as 4 years
happy desu baka

>>59336078
They will likely be 120hz. That's what most of their OLED tvs are.

There are apparently a number of HDR10 monitors announced this year. but I don't think many of them will be over 90% of DCI-P3 if any. And many of them won't have good contrast except the OLED.

>>59333093
Now filter out laptops and third-worlders.

>>59333093
>a bunch of people playing CSGO and DOTA on their cheap laptops

I don't see the problem with that senpai

File: 1461010665397.png (96KB, 214x221px) Image search: [Google]

96KB, 214x221px

>>59336037
>Q6600/2500K or GTX460/HD4870?
ah the holy trinity of computer hardware at the golden times.

>>59333093
Things are changing fast. At the rx480 reveal, AMD said that 95% of people gamed at 1080p or below. If we're already down to 93% after a few months, and a shit ton of people on this list are laptop users, then desktops are transition to above 1080p at a decent rate.

>>59335812
Buys a 144hz monitor but plays most games at 60fps...

>>59336224
Source?
Right there isn't any.

>>59336286
My monitor lasts longer than I keep a GPU. I went with 1440p 144hz so I can play my backlog of games at 144fps, and new games at 60fps. And in the future, I'll have a better graphics card with the same monitor so I'll be able to play new games at 144fps.

>>59336304
Just watch the rx480 reveal.

File: lgoled2017handson-5l.jpg (134KB, 1200x1221px) Image search: [Google]

134KB, 1200x1221px

>>59336136
Motion performance is the bottleneck in OLED right now, and ironically enough getting HDR-compliance which focuses on color-performance will require LG to boost peak brightness that should make schemes like BFI possible that will allow it to behave more like an impulse drive than sample-and-hold. Phillips is doing something similar this year and coupled with HFR should avoid flicker.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3yrW2V8h_1A

http://www.avsforum.com/2017-lg-oled-tv-improvements/
>Automatic brightness limiting (ABL) has been improved as well, with a 25% increase in peak brightness. Of course, brightness still drops as average picture level (APL) increases—this is unavoidable with most display technologies—but the profile is certainly better than it was last year. In particular, the brightness of dark images (APL less than 3%) has increased by 25%, while bright images (APL of 50-70%) are now about 37% brighter than the 2016 models. The brightness of images with an APL of 10-40%—what LG claims is the APL of most images—is about the same as last year.

>Do the 2017 models offer BFI (black-frame insertion)? No, because that would reduce the overall luminance, and OLED needs all the luminance it can generate in HDR mode.

>Can the 2017 models display 1080p at 120 fps (frames per second)? Theoretically, yes, but this might not be implemented in the 2017 models.

Next year's panels are supposedly the "tick" to this year's "tock" in LG's development cadence that mimics Intel in year's past.

>>59332063
>one generation gap
>same tier
Nigger

>>59336208
Man after my 8800 GT shit out on me a month after the warranty ended, and the 9600GTX I got was a fucking lemon but too cheap to bother RMAing, I bought a 5770.
That card still runs great today.

Fuck me for ever buying Nvidia after my Radeon 9600 was so good to me. The 6800 and 8800 hype was so real, though.

>>59336364
This makes it sound like the OLEDs aren't going to have perfect blackness for {0,0,0} pixels...?

And I'm definitely not getting 1080p. That's fucking garbage tier resolution. 1440p or 1600 at least.

But yeah, I figured I'd be waiting at least a year. It's sad how little monitors have improved (often regressed) the past few years.
I'm on a HP ZR24w that I got forever ago.

>>59336364
Philips have added black frame insertion on their latest OLED panel provided by LG. No idea how it affects the lifetime of the panel but apparently it looks amazing. LG sucks ball on motion. I know because I have a OLED55B6V and the motion STINKS!

I'd pay $700 but...
This thing is 887$ over here.
Even calculating VAT should place it at around 840 but no. It's 887. No buy.

I really am considering it. I have the money all saved up, but I am getting this feeling that Vega will be a 1080 (performance) at 1070 pricing. And if that is the case, I'd be able to get a CPU upgrade. I might just cave in and get the 1080ti though. Tired of waiting around.

>>59332298
This. I'd rather have 1080p @ 144 fps than 4k or whatever. I have a stock 980 and more games are coming out that I can't max out comfortably.

>>59335950
I have terrible luck with aftermarket cards. They always die on me within a year. Plain cards just keep on trucking.

>>59338742
Because you're buying Nvidia aftermarket cards.

I've never had an AMD card die except for ones that were DOA.
My 9600 lasted forever and so did my 5770.

File: 1452105822305.jpg (92KB, 500x376px) Image search: [Google]

92KB, 500x376px

Absolutely fucking clueless retard here. Looking at the reviews of it people are saying that it tends to get quite hot while working. How big of a deal is? Would it cause problems and should I wait for the better cooling versions to come out instead?

>>59332200
currently have a 970 on a 1080p 60hz. don't plan on upgrading gpu at all til maybe next year or I buy a used one for cheap and SLI later this year.

Is 1440p 144hz+ worth getting? or just 1440p 60hz

This thing is going to be like 1100$ in Canada

>>59339035
>should I wait for the better cooling versions to come out instead?

never buy vanilla single fans

>>59340539
Why not? 100-144hz 1440p freesync is not very expensive.

You can still run it at 60 on your 970 and then when you buy AMD instead of being cucked needing a new GPU every year with Nvidia, you'll be able to use the Freesync on it.

File: FB_IMG_1428537678037.jpg (127KB, 1280x960px) Image search: [Google]

127KB, 1280x960px

>>59332063
Not getting a new GPU until a single card can handle 4K 100+ fps without turning down settings.

>>59340670
I wouldn't be surprised if the Vega card coming out in ~2 months does Prey at 4K 100fps. But not every game.

Your wants are reasonable, though.
Personally I'd be happy with 4K 60fps MINIMUM, or 3440x1440 90fps MINIMUM. It probably won't be until Navi that we get a card that does that.. maybe only in combination with an APU or two cards or something, too. As far as I follow, Navi should get almost seamless scaling in a way that CF doesn't without games needing to actually support it.

Yep. Gonna upgrade from my 1080.

>>59335455
It was some screen recording of AMD's demo, it dropped to like 35FPS during one of the demon executions or w/e it's called in-game.

File: 1483945338579.jpg (58KB, 525x503px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 525x503px

What would I need to achieve enough fps to get use of my 144hz monitor? I don't really care for anything above 1080p. Would the ti be an overkill? I'm definitely considering it.

>>59333093
Steam survey is shit.
It detects my uhd monitor as 1440p, probably because 125% scaling in win10 but it's still shit

File: Capture.jpg (259KB, 2880x1619px) Image search: [Google]

259KB, 2880x1619px

>>59335455
>>59340848
I found it, it's actually in a video on AMD's own YT channel and the guy specifically mentions it's running "flagship Vega" so definitely not the small one.

https://youtu.be/Ku5OMWYVKSs
At about 25s in.

>>59332063
I can't believe they're actually paying you for this zero-effort garbage. If you're going to shill at least have a little pride in your work for god's sake.

File: 1483639063516.jpg (993KB, 3840x2160px) Image search: [Google]

993KB, 3840x2160px

>>59340848
To be fair, we could probably find a fps dip with a Titanxp as well.

>>59340973
Had a gtx1080 running 1080p 144hz
Wasn't overkill
Even some games were not able to hit the full 144fps without turning down settings

>>59341046
Sure, but minimum FPS is minimum FPS. It's not extremely relevant to the actual experience, something like 99th percentile FPS would be much more interesting to see, but the claim was made over minimum FPS.

AMD making a claim that Vega would improve min FPS by 100% is retarded in and of itself since a game could choke for a fraction of a second for reasons completely unrelated to the GPU or the actual rendering process (for instance due to slow disk I/O). Such a claim is nothing but essentially dishonest marketing about something they cannot guarantee and will never deliver due to conditions completely out of their control.

>>59341118
>essentially dishonest marketing
That's what AMD does.
All hype

>>59332063
Other then the fact I cant afford it, nah Im not getting the ti, I think I would have to be a millionare to even consider it, but then I would have other things Id want to do then max out muh fps

I, like most people, are still on 1080p.

I would love to pick up a 1440p Monitor but even then I would probibly just pick up another 470 and dual 470s seems to be able to play anythig I would want to at 1440p

>>59341033

This

>>59332412
hell yeah

also i hope there will be some innovation in non-VR display technology as well. we already got simultaneous multi-projection but i would like to see more image persistence stuff like strobing, higher refresh rates, and maybe completely new stuff like displays that do cubic interpolation over time instead of holding a fixed value for the full refresh period

>>59332063
Getting 2 and 1800x next month. How about you guys?

>>59342327
>1800x
for gaming you'll be better off with a 7700k @ 5 GHz

>>59342332
Not just gaming, but thanks.

File: 1474539308689.jpg (71KB, 750x714px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 750x714px

>>59332063
Managed to get my hands on one. Couldn't wait for Vega.
>im sorry amd

>>59332063
No, I'm good with a 970, I just play at 720 or 1080

Pre ordered two, they're coming in next week. Rampage V Edition 10 mobo, 6850k CPU, 32gb 3000mhz ram. Come at me newfriends

>>59343636
>32 GB RAM

>>59332063
Anyone find a hybrid cooler for the 1080 ti?

>>59343636
I pre-ordered five, for my bit coin mining machine that has 128gb of ram and two 8 core zeons.

fuck u

>>59343890
the regular 1080 hybrid fits it with some modding.

>>59343907
>with some modding.
can someone who is not a retard reply to my post?

>>59343924
That's literally the only fucking answer you cunt waffle shit fuck.

http://www.overclockers.com/forums/showthread.php/776114-Build-Log-JrClocker-s-Titan-X-P-AIO-Hybrid-Cooler-Mod

http://forums.evga.com/Petion-for-EVGA-TITAN-X-HYBRID-m2518532.aspx

>OP post date Friday, July 22, 2016 4:30 PM
>9 months

You fucking done?

>>59343872
Problem, poorfriend?

File: ay75ec9j.jpg (58KB, 468x611px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 468x611px

>no analog output
ill never switch from my 980ti

>>59343962
>That's literally the only fucking answer you cunt waffle shit fuck.
Stop replying you retard.

>>59344000
>I don't want the answer, im just shit posting

>>59343999
Enjoy your 120p potato quality, I'll enjoy my 8k display port

>>59343872
i'll go with 32 this year. i'm only on 6 right now but it's tough, i can barely run an IDE and google chrome without thrashing my hdd

>>59344132
>pretending to be me

Hahahaha alright bro. I'd never use Google Chrome. Tracking is bad.

But yeah, I get you. 6gb ram is shit. I have a 600 something Nvidia card and 8gb ram, can't even play civ 6 cuz no direct x 12 support

>previously bought a 980ti
>can't buy a 1080ti

You could have bought a card for half the price twice as often and got better performance more often.

fucking sold out, why don't they make enough to supply demand?
https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/geforce/products/10series/geforce-gtx-1080-ti/

>>59345135
yields aren't that good at TSMC, you can't buy tesla to this day even if you ready to pay for it

File: s.png (41KB, 662x527px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 662x527px

>>59336058
I'm on the same boat. Mine can do 1517/2000 stable and bases at 1443/1500. Add the fact that these days I only play League of Legends and browse 4chan most of the time. Also perfectly happy with 1440/60. I guess I'll get a R7 1700 to replace this POS cpu.

>>59345206
this. they're towing the line of what you can do with the technology right now. it's also why their top-end cards come at a premium price, it's not just marketing like /g/ tards think

>The 1080Ti uses the same GP102 chip as the Titan X. Nvidia increased the yield of the GP102 by building in more processing cores (called CUDA cores by Nvidia) than it actually uses. That allows it to selectively disable a block of defective cores while still maintaining spec performance. Out of 3,840 cores on the GP102 die, only 3,584 are enabled.

>For the new Ti, Nvidia goes a step further and disables one of 12 memory controllers and some other circuitry, whereas the Titan X needs to use all of them. This further improves yield and lowers cost of the Ti. It's the single disabled memory controller that results in the odd 11 GB of memory for the card vs. 12 GB for Titan X.

>To compensate for the decrease in memory controller count, Nvidia ups the clock rate on the memory interface and takes advantage of some slightly faster memory from Micron (NASDAQ:MU).

>So the lower price doesn't necessarily mean lower margins for Nvidia on the Ti. In addition to the higher yield, normal learning curve at Nvidia's foundry, TSMC (NYSE:TSM), reduces cost per wafer. The net effect is that Nvidia has probably been able to hold the line on gross margin.

>>59345206
>yields aren't that good at TSMC, you can't buy tesla to this day even if you ready to pay for it
I have no idea what you just said

>>59345280
they can't make more

>>59345295
>they can't make more
why?

File: 1486160203608.gif (2MB, 400x250px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 400x250px

>>59332166
>Retarded subhuman /g/ dweeb shits on a company that doesn't pander to his obscure preferences that cover less than 0.1% of the market

WEW.

>>59332666
Well they still haven't started gimping Maxwell so you might wait a while.

waiting on vega before i decide

amd seems to be getting back on track with ryzen, so if vega can actually compete then itll come down to prices

>>59345323
>gimping
nice meme. it's not that nvidia gimps their gpus, it's just that amd has shitty drivers which takes years for them to improve, so a few years down the line older amd cards look better by comparison, and newer games use tech which has better hardware support by newer gpus so newer gpus can sometimes look disproportionally good by comparison, but you can usually lower the graphics quality to accommodate older gpus as well, but at some point your gpu is just too outdated to run the latest games

File: 1489132883123.jpg (104KB, 1000x1430px) Image search: [Google]

104KB, 1000x1430px

>tfw you read that reddit thread yesterday about what "processing" meant and you ordered one from scan too then the Nvidia card shipped this morning too

File: ulmb lightboost.png (573KB, 616x853px) Image search: [Google]

573KB, 616x853px

i'll keep using my 980ti for a few years.

1. i don't have the money to upgrade every year
2. i usually don't play triple A releases
3. if i ever have to play at low framerates, i just turn on gsync
4. at 1440p, i get between 85 and 120+ fps (i use ulmb so i have capped it at 120) and i can't tell the difference past 100fps anyway

i'll upgrade once 4k@120hz, preferably with ulmb and gsync at the same time, is possible.

if you currently have a 980ti, i would not upgrade to a 1080ti unless you have a lot of spare money. wait for the 1280ti or something.

980Ti is $345. Should I pull the trigger?

>>59345870

No wait until the upgraded 1080s come out and people start panic selling their 980tis.

>>59345823
Fuck yeah ULMB

>>59345823

Nothing wrong with the 980 Ti, actually anyone thinking to buy a GFX should only buy Ti because the die size and chip is based on the flagship

Anyone with 980Ti thinking of buying the upcoming 1180 should think twice because it's somewhat of a downgrade which won't be immediately apparent so get the 1180Ti

>>59345252

NVIDIA next gen is going to be sourced from Samsung foundries (goodbye TSMC)

Also the main issue imo with 1080TI is the 88 ROPs instead of 96

>>59345964
Oh shit not Samsung again. Fucking korean jews will surge the prices like they did with SSDs and DDR4 RAM

>>59332599
>Russkie Strike: Wallhack Offensive
>Epic Skins!!! XD
>Esports Cancer
>Retards that know nothing about tactics
Yeah no.

>>59333181
I'm pretty much in the same situation. Another issue is that the titles that get enough money pumped into them for great production tend to be absolutely bland and forgettable in terms of game play or story.

File: 1477882030227.gif (708KB, 408x303px) Image search: [Google]

708KB, 408x303px

>Bought a Titan X Pascal a month ago

I own a 1080, thinking of upgrading to a 1080 Ti, but first those little fucks need to stock them.

Which brand do you guys recommend for the GTX1070?

File: Oukitel-K10000-feat (1).jpg (164KB, 1000x667px) Image search: [Google]

164KB, 1000x667px

>>59346126

Black Bull™

>>59346084
it's still a nice card, but since 1080 ti is a bit better, see if you can sell it for the price of a 1080 ti or more, or if it's not worth the hassle for you just keep the titan xp

oh and lol at fucking retarded amd shills who said 1080 ti would cost $800-900, it's $699, i was right again

if i like big numbers and future proofing yet only play meme games like league, should i buy?

>currently have a 980ti classified

>>59346422
you'll be fine, maybe wait for volta, you can at least wait for amd vega if you're doing ok with your current card

>>59346441
vega likely has nothing on the 1080ti as unfortunate as that sounds

File: 1470775568600.jpg (586KB, 3096x1874px) Image search: [Google]

586KB, 3096x1874px

>>59346422

I'd say get the 1080 Ti, it's very nice.

980 Ti upgrade to 1080 Ti or equivalent a year from now.

Make the switch from x80 cycle and you'll get a card that lasts 2-3 years. It's always going to depend on your game res so min. 1440p, look into upgrading to 4K

>>59346469

This. Vega is too much of a gamble.

So I was looking at prices for 980ti's, turns out they're more expensive than their better performing counterpart the 1080 for a new one, and the used ones run the same price. What is this joke?

>>59346527

980 Ti used to sell around $650 on launch and they're based on the Titan X platform which is completely different from 1080. This makes the card last longer, as you see the 1080 Ti is compared to 980 by Nvidia themselves because the 980 Ti still holds. 980 Ti is still a great buy for 1080p. Alot of ppl had 980 Ti SLIs which is fairly powerful (better x80 SLI) but single powerful GPU is always the better solution.

Some people have this strategy of buying 980 Ti, then buying a second 980 Ti when 1080 or Titan XP is released.

For example someone buying a 1080 Ti will buy another second hand when the next Titan drops.

Besides that, the Maxwell 22nm architecture is quite good because Pascal had some slight issues along the way and it's the first gen 14nm arch which is being perfected.

File: 1310429820535.jpg (13KB, 300x300px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 300x300px

>>59333210
This, fucking waitfags

how much more is the 1080ti going to effect the prices of the rest of the 10xx series?

im about to buy a 1070 but i would hate to see the price drop the next 2 weeks or so

what do you niggers think

>>59346084
It's not like you could have seen it coming from a mile away, they did the exact same thing the last 2 generations of cards

>>59346615
Nvidia made a price cut on the 1080, not the 1070.

It will obviously affect prices on 2nd hand 1070's though

nvidia ti cards were never above titan series

suddenly nvidia releases a card that is 12% above a titan

its already overclocked near its limit

no oc headroom what so ever

gee i wonder why they released it in such a way

>>59346675

Pascal runs way too hot and overclocked if you ask me, the headroom was inexistent since launch

File: Untitled.png (1MB, 1088x746px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1088x746px

>>59345315

faster than the 1080Ti

>>59346084

You'll feel better when they release the 2070 equivalent and it's pretty much just as fast for half the price.

>>59345823
While the 970 was really dogshit, but the 980Ti wasn't bad at all unless you got a limit that doesn't have half the VRAM working.

>>59346084
>not knowing that the Titans are just a way to sell enterprise chips that would otherwise be thrown in the garbage to "enthusiast" suckers.
lmao! you deserved this

>>59347387
>the 970 was really dogshit
>MUH 3.5 GB VRAM MEME

Did everyone simply let /g/ meme them into some kind of selective amnesia? Because VRAM controversy nonwithstanding, the 970 was pretty damn impressive when it came out in 2014.
I already relegated the 970 to my secondary desktop, but I never managed to hit the VRAM wall once with it at 1080p and it performed remarkably well all the way until the second half of 2016 when I switched to 1070 and 1440p.

>>59346422
>future proofing
1080Ti isn't for future proofing. It's just the usual "I like having to buy a new GPU every year so I buy Nvidia" card.

It's the last card of an EoL series of architectures.

It's good for 1440p on current games, but that's about it. It can't even run all the current gen games at 4k 60fps. Not even close.

And next generation games are going to be optimized on Vega and Volta architecture. Similar to GCN, architecture refreshes that follow will be smaller updates by comparison to the big changes that Vega and Volta will be.

>>59347733
970 was not impressive.

It's half the performance of the R9 fury.

>>59347829

More like 2/3 the performance, with outliers where it performed better than the Fury.
It was also half the price here in central EU and ate half the power.

File: ttNwXON.jpg (145KB, 1200x600px) Image search: [Google]

145KB, 1200x600px

Which non-ti 1080 has no/the least coil whine?

Pls

>>59345315
NVIDIA makes Linux drivers

>>59347733
Of course they have. When it first came out only the uber top tier were comparable. GTX 980, 780 Ti, R9 290 and 290x. All cards that were the kings of their day. The GTX 970 was a monster.

>>59347829
R9 Fury was released 9 months later. At the time its main competition from AMD was the R9 290 and 290x.

>>59347888
It's really not 2/3rd.

The 970 is 30% the performance of the 1080Ti and that's at 1080p. The R9 Fury is about 55%.
In 1440p the 970 falls behind more.

>>59348176
Wasn't the 290 and 290X going up against the 780?
7970 went up against the 580 and 680 iirc.

It was the 390X refresh that was disappointing (though they still hold up great in newer games today compared to the 970 and 980). Just an overclock and more VRAM.

>>59332063
No. the Ti series is a literal jew scam.
Might as well wait for the 1180 at this point.

>>59348289
The R9 300 series wasn't released until 9 months later, just like the Fury line.


At the time of the GTX 980 and GTX 970, the R9 200 series was what they had to fight back with. They dropped prices and encouraged stuff like the Sapphire 290x 8GB card.

File: Nvidia-AMD.png (289KB, 2236x527px) Image search: [Google]

289KB, 2236x527px

>>59348357
But when the 290X was released, it was released up against the 780 and nvidia skipped 800.

980 came out a year after the 290X.

>>59332640
Step up seems to only be valid for a month or two after your original purchase

>>59348387
I started out by directly responding to >>59347733
who noted that when it released the GTX 970 was pretty impressive. And it's true. At the time only the GTX 980, 780 Ti, Titan, and R9 290 and 290x were comparable. Everything else previously released by both companies got goomba stomped by it. All I'm talking is its viability upon release.

>>59348094
Throw away your shitty fucking power supply and then none of them will have it you dumb fuck.

>Cheapest AIB GTX 1080 costs $685 in my country
>AIB GTX 1080Ti will probably be minimum $800 here
JUST

>>59348094

I've got the MSI one and just had the fan at 100% then and it's less loud than my Silverstone 180mm case fan.

>>59348523
So it's actually a PSU issue?

I've got a decent (or at least expensive) one (RM750i).

My current card (7970) has no coil whine either. So the Amazon reviews are just people with bad PSUs?

>>59348650

Nigga stfu. It's like 887 euros over here. That's nearly 1k $

>>59348742
That is correct. I've owned a dozen fucking different graphics cards that people complain about having coil whine and it's their shitty psu 90% of the time.

>>59348452
My 7970 that came out almost 5 years earlier isn't far behind the 970 in some games. Especially when you consider how undertuned the 7970 reference card and how many non-reference 7970 had more than 20% more performance than the reference 7970 and could overclock for another 15% over it.

Sure I paid more for it FIVE YEARS AGO, but for a $480 card to still be 75% as good as $330 card 5 years later is pretty fucking crazy. That perfectly illustrates how long it took for Nvidia to catch up after GCN, and what a short time they've actually been on top.

That's why I believe the Vega hype. There's some things Nvidia added for performance and efficiency with Maxell that are only now coming with Vega on top of many other new arch differences.

>>59346422
>yet only play meme games like league, should i buy?


don't buy it please, maybe another person who could actually use that card will get it instead of you

>>59350040

>don't buy it please, maybe another person who could actually use that card will get it instead of you

after excessive taxation and currency devaluation, now on top of being a luxury GPUs need to be a charity?

No wonder cloud gaming has potential.

>>59332063

no

im getting a cheap 2nd hand 1070

good enough for overwatch 144hz, some dotes and league

>>59345823
Don't know about ULMB, but 4K 144Hz HDR GSync screens with local dimming are coming this year.

>>59350186

Already since a few months: PG27AQ

>>59350321
Nope, that's 60Hz not 144Hz. It's the PG27UQ that's going to be 144Hz but that one isn't out just yet, should be coming later this year.

File: 1269479567122.jpg (61KB, 536x375px) Image search: [Google]

61KB, 536x375px

Anyone see any benchmarks on 1080 sli vs a 1080ti? Would the sli be better for higher resolutions.

>>59348650

It's called sales tax

>>59350485
idk but generally you want a single high end card. trust me, i had gtx 260 core 216 SLI, and i think the general recommendation online is still to go with a single high end card. + if you get a 1080 ti you'll have some money left over vs 1080 SLI to use for an upgrade a few years down the road

>>59348154
>>59348357

970 and 390x were meh. 290 and 980Ti were the proper choices though after the miner demand for the 290 drove the price up really high, 780/Ti were better picks.

I still have a GT 620. No plans to upgrade.

>>59345823
How do I get pic related on x34?

>>59332063
my 980ti died last week, hoping to get a 1080ti when the RMA completes

>>59351770
You need the camera to pan at the same speed. They use a simple motorized device but you could manually pan.

>>59351789
How did you kill it? Nvidia locks their cards down enough to stop most users from killing them.

>>59351839
i was playing tides of numenera and it just died, there was a distinct pop and the smell of burning electronics and it just wouldn't boot

never overclocked it or anything, was an msi piece of junk tho

>>59351839
No software I can just install and run for godmode motion blur killer?

>>59332063
>not waiting for vega and instead buying this shit

>>59351898
If your monitor supports ULMB but is old like mine (I have the original VG248QE) you will need to install ToastyX Strobelight to get the motion blur reduction. Newer ULMB monitors I think support it as a hardware option.

>>59351892
That sucks big time. Was it a reference of aftermarket cooler?

>>59351925
aftermarket, it was this one

https://www.msi.com/Graphics-card/GTX-980-Ti-GAMING-6G.html#hero-overview

only a little over a year old too

>>59351952
Damn the MSI Gaming? That's one of the better ones too. Hope they give you the 1080Ti for RMA!

>>59332063
not really tbqh senpai i already have a titan x (pascal)

>>59352069
Good to know people with a Titan X Pascal are not going to buy a slightly modified version of the same card!

>>59332641
huh

the titans make sense if your budget allows, if you bought titan xp at launch you've had it for 7 months before the 1080 ti would come out

>>59351922
>implying vega won't be yet another disappointment from AMD

>>59352959
Except for throttling because Jewvidia only allows partners to sell reference cooled Titans. To get their full potential, you gotta custom watercool which is a huge hassle and even more money.

It can still make sense but I like to think of Titan as no-compromise gaming. Not P6000 rejects with crappy cooling.

File: FEDORA.jpg (651KB, 3031x2279px) Image search: [Google]

651KB, 3031x2279px

>>59332063
WAIT

FOR

VEGA

>>59332063
>4K monitors still too expensive

>most games dont use 4k textures

>not much 4k content

>HDMI 2.1 still not out (makes gsync/freesync irrelevant).

>Games generally sucking right now

>programs often not scaling well over 1080p

So nope, no upgrades for me.

4K right now only seems worth while for workspace, and even then, can get another monitor instead.

I'll consider upgrading my GPU when 4K HDR high refresh rate monitors become common

im kind of torn..

On one hand I have a 1080 coming in the mail..

But yet the 1080ti will be at least ~$330 more money..plus the founders edition generally sucks.


It might be a few weeks before retailers get some decent stock, and few weeks before we see aftermarket coolers for it as well (with inflated price tags too)

>>59332166
You could have emulated 980ti instead of switching it for real.

>>59345323
They haven't gimped it because Pascal is pretty much 14nm Maxwell with some improvements.

File: 2012%2F12%2F04%2F6b%2F9stunningex.bof.jpg (197KB, 1200x627px) Image search: [Google]

197KB, 1200x627px

>>59354090
>4K right now only seems worth while for workspace
you're missing the point of 4K if you think its to just give you 4x the workspace of 1080p.

The point of high PPI is to make pixels 'vanish' in a sense, that you can no longer clearly see the defined edges of pixels.

>>59354229
what if i want both?

>>59354415
You need to scale the icons you dumbass

>>59354615
yeah but then i get less workspace. 1080p is cramped as fuck

Anyone own the nvidia's regular old 1080 founders pascal? The pascals have always seemed like they overheat.

>>59354676
>founders

there's your problem kiddo.

>>59354676
I do have it. Without overclocking, when it under 99% load the temperature is about 72 degrees celsius. Usually when I play it falls between 60 to 70 degrees. I don't need to overclock it yet so... That's on 2560x1080 screen.

>>59354719
It doesn't heat that much if you have proper ventilation and custom fan profile.

>>59354710
Would the FTW be the best choice? I don't intend to overclock it, but I was considering the founders since I can just pick it up at a best buy with their good warranties over amazon's hassling.

Also, it seems amazon isn't offering a free game with the 1080s any more.

When will the price for the custom 1070 drop?

>>59354785
If you don't intend to OC, buying a reference cooler isn't as bad since the 1080 is a lot smaller and easier to cool than things like the 390/980Ti/1080Ti

But I'd still get an aftermarket card. Personally I want cards that run quietest at load. Something like the Gigabyte Gaming X (dunno the full name) or Zotac Amp Extreme are quiet at load. Watercooled ones too ofc but then you have pump noise.

But if the deal is good, 1080 Founder's isn't a bad buy.

>>59334735
>>59335299
https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2017/03/nvidia-gtx-1080-ti-review/


what the fuck are you guys talking about it averages 60fps in most games?

>>59354869
that (or those) guys said 60fps MINIMUMS not AVERAGES

I have a 1080 GTX for my 4k monitor

Should I sell it and get a Ti, or keep it and buy another 1080 off ebay for SLI?

Both will cost me about the same. SLI seems more straightforward but I don't want to suffer microstutter and nvidia driver hell

>>59354890
SLI is never worth it

>>59354890
>microstutter

If you have ADD like me, you'll notice it every time it happens. Its not worth it.

>>59354869
Only dumb fucks like you care about average FPS instead of minimums.

>>59332063
Anyone else noticing some kind of latency with nvidia gpu(pascal in my case)

I didnt have this with my 290x, it feels weird.

Do I have to turn something off?

please help

>>59354913
>>59354908
I guess the card is off to ebay then, will probably sell it at a £200 loss

>>59348926
Oced my 7950 to 1300MHz

I WAS SO PROUD

it's still running in my bros PC, probably one of the best cards I've ever bought

>>59355080
Yeah my 7970 gets to 1325mhz super stable.
It's funny that they had them at only 925 stock. I think even the worst silicon gets to 1200 easy.

They did use a lot of power and put out a lot of heat, though. So I actually ended up underclocking mine to 910mhz since that was the sweet spot for lowering the voltage. well below stock voltage.
Since it was such an overpowered card, it still ran most games at 1920x1200 60fps for years underclocked like that.

I'm still using it, but it's getting about time to upgrade. I could just overclock it back up but I'm in a hot climate. That's literally the only reason for me to get rid of that 6 year old card right now.

waiting for dat gigabyte aorus to drop bc i need all 6 of the ports. use 4 monitors and want to get VR at some point

gaming at 5760x1080 is pretty good on a 980ti but im pretty sure a 1080ti will push me into the terrirotry of getting at least 60 fps for the next couple years since everything is a shit tier console port anyways

>>59356921
Geforce cards support 4 monitors max

File: 1271298934487.jpg (12KB, 380x304px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 380x304px

What is the point of buying a 1080ti now over a much cheaper 1080?

Neither one will do 4k and a 1080 will handle everything perfectly fine at 1080p or 1440p. Wouldn't the smart move be to just wait until a true 4k card?

>>59355042

scaling

>>59357344
Higher framerates, more eye-candy. Same situation with all higher performing graphic cards. There will be settings in many gaymes even at 1080p that a 1080Ti can handle at a given fps requirement that the 1080 can't.

only thing I've ever bought from Nvidia was the shield x1 because it was 200 bucks, beat the ipads performance, and came with nougat

>>59357433
it's all about render distance. The amount of stuff rendered goes up exponentially every time you want it to be farther, so even if your graphics look great, you need tons and tons of fast memory to hold the extra stuff; as long as you want to be able to see little animals running through the woods while high up on a mountian

>>59357491
Way more than just render distance which is often more CPU constrained though yeah a faster GPU will help there too. I was thinking fancier reflections, shadow, AA, and particle effects. For myself, I know for a fact that the 1080 is not sufficient to keep 120fps minimums for PhysX effects in Killing Floor 2 where the 1080Ti should be able to. I can't even get 60fps minimum for ARK so the 1080Ti could help there too.

>>59332166
Holy shit, you're a fucking retard. Why the hell do you care about Hackintosh?

Would it be a decent idea to upgrade from a 770 to 2 way sli 1080ti if i plan on keeping it for 4 to 5 years and only play older games like skyrim and new vegas at 4k?

>>59357937
do not SLI

>>59358040
How come? Is SLI support at an all time low or something?

>>59356945
your point? how is that relevant to what i said?

>>59332923
But why? The gains are marginal

>>59358164
>35%
>marginal

ok

>>59358180
I mean the closed loop instead of a typical air cooler. Like the msi gaming or acx 3.0 model

Is there a difference between

buying a hybrid cooler for my founders edition

vs.

buying a 1080 ti with a hybrid cooler already attached?

>>59358240
just fucking wait you autistic faggot

>>59358099
Yes. And microstuttering still exists. Upgrading would be so much easier if SLI Just Werked.

>>59358220
Not that guy but the watercooled ones are a lot quieter at load when OCed. But I'd totally go for a quad slot GPU since I don't like pump noise.

>>59358240
>buying a reference card to turn it into a non reference card at an added cost without the benefit of increased performance you'd get if you'd just bought a non reference model that already comes with more fans

how are people so low int?

>>59358262
what am i waiting for?

>>59358279
for non reference models with multiple fans to be released? you know.. the thing you want to mod the reference card to be?

>>59358274
>without the benefit of increased performance you'd get if you'd just bought a non reference model that already comes with more fans
Is hybrid cooler not better than triple fan?

>>59358291
who cares if its 5 or 10c better? you do know temperatures don't kill components right?

man the "temperature concern" meme really just won't die will it?

over voltaging for extended period of time SHORTENS life span

heat of 5-10c more for your non memecooled card isn't going to mean a fucking thing besides giving you some weird unnescesarry autism driven peace of mind

do you have a 1000w power supply and 64gb of ram as well?

>>59358287
I want an AIO cooler on it. I assume thats better than triple fan.

>>59358316
>do you have a 1000w power supply and 64gb of ram as well?
I do actually.

Is AIO cooler not better than triple fan?

I want OC.

>>59358336
lol

>single gpu
>1000w psu
>wants watercooled gpu

WEW LADS. How much you wana bet he's got RGBs as well?

COULD YOU POSSIBLY HIT THE RAZR GAYMER GEAR TRIFECTA LOTTERY?!

>>59358373
>WEW LADS. How much you wana bet he's got RGBs as well?
I don't actually. everything I have is LED FREE.

now answer the question nigger.

>>59358268
Oh, so am i better off staying with one card?

>>59358482
Yes.

>>59358482
sli is garbage. do not fall for this meme

other memes to watch out for

-water cooling your gpu
-buying reference cards
-4k "GAMING"
-1200p "gaming"
-1440p "gaming"
-raiding ssds

memes that were once memes but now have become a potential reality due to shitty fucking skimping on design and materials

-watercooling your cpu (kaby lake only applies)


but you bought a 1000w psu so chances are you're just going to continue making awful fucking purchases like clockwork

>>59358556
>-water cooling your gpu
nice try OClet.

>>59358679
why do you need to water cool a gpu?

my 980ti doesn't even start spinning its fans until its past 60c

it passively cools itself and maintains 60c at idle

i run it with a custom fan profile but it's intended to run how i just described

doesn't matter if it gets up to 80 or 90c when gaming.. it isn't going to break

what are people doing that their gpu is going to overheat to the point of failure that requires it to be watercooled?

fucking nothing. it's a meme

>>59358806
OC without a noisy fan or throttling. At full load your air cooler with custom profile is doing one of those. But nice try OClet

>>59358856
>OC without a noisy fan or throttling.


the fan noise i'll give you

never been one to be bothered by the noise of a computer though. must be my natural tendency not to be a little bitch crying about fan noise kek

OC'ing video cards is a meme too. i've oc'd every fucking gpu i've ever had and never noticed actual world results in games

the only time i know its working is when i run some meme test and get a higher score

wooo weee mom i got a higher score

never seen it do anything other than artifact gameplay or cause weird tearing

5 generations of gpus.

>>59358913
haha yeah you'll never notice a 1500MHz clock over the stock 1202MHz. Only artifacts or tearing. Everyone who notices the better performance is lying to themselves. Just get a reference cooler faggots, the noise and lower clocks don't matter!

kys

>>59358556
>tfw got 1000W PSU for $120 during Black Friday

>>59359473
cool you could have saved $50 and gotten a gold rated single rail 550w

learn how to build a computer faggot

>>59347733
It was "impressive" because it could be overclocked to match stock 980 performance while being wildly cheaper. Beyond that, it's not a very exceptional card.

>>59358556
How is 4k gaming a meme? Honest question, im a bit out of the loop.

>>59359484
I bought it because I have two CPUs (Xeon E5v3's) and a couple of GPUs (750Ti and Quadro 2000).

>>59359499
think about it...

its not going to be well optimized because it isn't the market share

everything is a shit tier console port and even if you're playing at 4k it isn't 4k anything. its upscaled garbage

it's not like all these games are coming with 4k textures for everything in the game so you're just seeing shit tier 2k textures upsampled and going "ooo man it looks o gud :^)"

>>59359499
It's a meme because all the real gaymers are playing CSGO at 480p or Hearthstone on their 720p laptops.

>>59359526
Super specific question, what about in the event of replacing every texture in say Skyrim or New Vegas with 4k textures? Would in this very specific circumstance sli be viable?

>>59359653
enjoy your microstuttering

>>59354869
You should really have a look at some of those 99th percentile numbers. If that's not over 60 or below but very close then you're going to experience stuttering instead of smooth gameplay.

>>59359526
Texture resolution has literally nothing to do with the resolution the game is rendered at, absolutely nothing at all, no connection whatsoever. You could play a game from 2000 at 4K if it allowed you to configure the resolution to that (and some do, actually).

How clear a texture looks depends greatly on how far you are from it. You can very well get improved detail from a 2K texture when the game is rendering at UHD resolution in situations where detail would be lost on low res screens because they simply do not have enough pixels to display it.

>>59359653
SLI at 4K is somewhat tricky, some games don't scale well if you don't have sufficient PCIe bandwidth. SLI is only ever worth it if the current fastest single GPU card isn't fast enough - it's worth it because you don't actually have another option in that case. Never upgrade to SLI and never get it because you don't need it NOW but you think you'll need it 5 years in the future.

As for your specific games, search around to see if they scale well with SLI or not.

>>59359878
>Texture resolution has literally nothing to do with the resolution the game is rendered at

no shit

what im saying is that when you're playing your shitter console port that has 2k res textures and you switch the res to 4k it doesn't magically download and import and render 4k textures

it displays 2k textures. period.

>>59359895
>it displays 2k textures. period.
Yes, and? That doesn't mean the image quality doesn't benefit greatly from the resolution.

>>59359878
>>59359997
Thanks anon, it seems i have some research to do.

>>59359997
the "image" in "image quality" is made up of fucking textures

do you not understand this? everything in games is textures

upsampling doesn't make anything look better except to console-tier mongoloids who need a way to dissipate their buyers remorse

quit pretending like anything outside of a fully 4k modded game is 4k

>>59357937
Just get 1. As a former 770 owner, the driver optimisations that a newer card will get over a Kepler card will already make a massive difference. One 1080ti will already more than triple your performance.

>>59358316
New Nvidia cards since Maxwell have heavily locked down their OC support to relying mostly on their GPUBoost tech. Temperatures are far more important than voltage for getting a better OC on Pascal since they have really crippled overvolting and are highly temperature sensitive (throttling).

I think they do this just to ensure someone doesnt buy a lesser GPU and overclock it to the next tier up like they saw happen with the 970.

>>59360230
How many hours have you spent playing games at 4K?

>>59360491
a handful

im not saying things dont look better. things being super sampled or upscaled does look better but quit lying to yourself that it's 4k

if anyone can provide a source of a game that has all 4k textures i'd fucking love to see it

i know they dont exist because games are all shit tier console ports and im pretty sure you can't fit 100gb on a blu ray

pretty sure the only reason to get a 4k monitor or gpus to support is if you're modding every texture in the game for a real 4k experience

that or watching movies in 4k

>>59360516
How often do you think a 2048x2048 texture is displayed at full resolution on a 1920x1080 screen?

>>59360536
100% of the time when close enough to said object to fully render? right?

>>59360551
Yes. But to get even close to full resolution you'd need to be close enough for A SINGLE TEXTURE to cover your entire 1920 pixel width.

How often do you have a single texture covering your entire screen?

>>59360582
>But to get even close to full resolution you'd need to be close enough for A SINGLE TEXTURE to cover your entire 1920 pixel width


that isn't true at all...... as long as the texture is fully rendered at whatever distance, you're seeing it at a max resolution

has nothing to do with how much of your screen its covering... lol this nigga trippin

>>59360598
>as long as the texture is fully rendered at whatever distance, you're seeing it at a max resolution
False, downscaling implicitly loses detail in the image. You cannot represent the same amount of detail in a 500x500 image as in a 2048x2048 image, there literally aren't enough pixels there.

If a 2048x2048 texture is displayed in a 500x500 area on your FHD screen the texture resolution and detail is completely useless, you could've gotten the same quality and detail out of a 512x512 texture. But if you suddenly quadruple your number of pixels to UHD, your texture suddenly gets 1000x1000 pixels in the same scene. Your monitor can now display much more detail. Do you understand?

Your texture resolution is fucking useless if your monitor doesn't have the pixels to show it. Saying you need 4096x4096 textures in order to benefit from UHD is fucking retarded because you don't cover the entire screen in a single texture, at least not in the vast majority of scenes.