Is 4k gaming a meme? Now that the 1080ti has dropped I was

>>388926202
>s 4k gaming a meme?
Yes.

>Is it worth it?
No.

>>388926202
prices have dropped?

GPU's are still expensive as fuck in my country

I have a GTX 1080 and a 55" LG 4K OLED tv. As you can guess, GTX 1080 can't run most modern games on 4K smoothly, so I have to resort to running games on resolutions like 2560x1440 and 3200x1800.

And guess what? The difference isn't nearly as huge as you would think. 4K looks a bit sharper when you actively compare it by switching back and forth, but it's not really something that you would notice in real use so easily. 4K isn't a meme and there are clear benefits when you go above 1080p, but I'd still say that 4K is too expensive for what it is now. But when GPUs can actually handle it without the need for a GPU that costs nearly a grand? Sure.

>>388926536
>GPU's are still expensive as fuck in my country
as a third worlder i'd liek to say its always expensive, not because people dont have money(well we dont) but because of taxes and some magical prices bullshittery

>>388926579
Also, I'd say that 1440p is the sweetspot now if we're talking about playing on a monitor. It looks much better than 1080p even if you increase the screen size up to 27 inches from the typical 23-24 inches, but it's still not too hard on GPUs anymore.

1440 p is where's it at

>>388926661
i live in netherlands but they used to be ok priced

now you pay like 800€ for a 1080ti

>>388926202
>>388926368
this

Go 144Hz/1440p instead..

>>388926536
Ya its going for about $700 usd now. It was over $1k for a wile. Im also expecting sales for black friday. (Us shopping holiday)

The lack of affordable monitors is what kills it for me.

120+ fps is better than higher resolution anyways.

>>388926202
>Ps4 pro and xXboxXxoneXx need not post.

it's cool I just have a vanilla PS4.

>Is 4k gaming a meme?

yes lol. unless the industry starts making 4k games you can brute force your setting all you want and enjoy you diminishing returns. I can render Unreal Tournament at 1080p, that doesn't make it an HD game.

>>388926736
its $900 usd here thats the most expensive ones the cheapest one goes for like $700
which is holy shit lower than yours

>>388926202
>4k
>meme
Maybe, but you know what's not? 60fps+ gaming, doubt you'll even be able to look back.

>>388926202
stick to 1440p 144hz on every game

>>388926579
This. 4K looks nice, but it's still all diminishing returns with a huge price tag after 1440p.

>>388926202
4k is pretty nice don't let poorfags here tell you otherwise.

>>388926202
I'd love to be able to buy a GPU .
I haven't checked in awhile are miners still shitting up the market?

Good 4k Monitors are around 600 USD.

So no

You can find good ones with 1 ms response with 1440p for less than 300-400 usd.

>>388926857
This

You need like twice the horsepower just to render at 4K vs 1080p, much more at 120+hz + 4K

High pixel density is nice but not necessary for PC

>>388926202
yes https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1FtiRVZOkIs

>>388926202
MEMES ARE NOT REAL

File: PCgaming in a nutshell.png (49KB, 847x497px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 847x497px

higher resolution gaming is just a money trap. there's always going to be that new game that demands more out of your GPU and at 4k you're to find yourself wanting to upgrade more often to get better performance, you'll never feel satisfied.
it is literally for people who have lots of money to throw away, there are more reasonable things to buy and spend your money on.

>>388926368
thisx1000
We've seen so many returns, and I was told to dodge up the 1080p screens contrast next to the 4k displays in order to make them look better.
This is DVD to blu-ray all over again. The increase is there, but its not VHS to DVD.
Waste of your money, and thats from someone who gets whatever model he wants for free.

File: 1481488985886.png (326KB, 498x462px) Image search: [Google]

326KB, 498x462px

>>388926536
No
The prices will be high well into next year. You will never get one on sale since everyone wants them.

They only time you will be able to actually buy a gpu at a reasonable price is when crypto has its annual dip or you pre-order a new model and get the price locked at list.

OP here. My only concern with 1440p 144hz is that i will be dated in the next 2 years. It seems with the Ps4 pro and xXboxXxoneXx the industry is really pushing for 4k soon. If i do go 1440p what gpu should i get?

Wait for Nvidia Volta GV102 GTX 2080 Ti

>>388927263
>If i do go 1440p what gpu should i get?
Well if you want to run modern graphics-intensive games anywhere close to 144Hz you still need a top tier GPU.

>>388927309
>waiting for Volta Ti
1080 Ti was out much later than 1080 was, if the trend continues he could very well have to wait for a year or so.

4k is only for SLI setup but it's worth btw any game that does not support SLI is console trash anyways and not worth playing 2bh.

>>388927075
>Twice the power
Four times the power actually

File: speccc.png (77KB, 746x357px) Image search: [Google]

77KB, 746x357px

>>388927417

>>388927062
>Tn monitor
Gross.

File: 1504009193572.jpg (58KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 500x500px

>>388927263
>My only concern with 1440p 144hz is that i will be dated in the next 2 years
Are human eyes and viewing distances going to change in the next 2 years or the next 200?
Have you ever heard of diminishing returns?

>>388926202
the monitor is gonna cost me more than my graphics card

When will 1440p144hz come down in price? Shit's too much.

File: 13346076.jpg (42KB, 302x448px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 302x448px

>>388926202
>>388926368

>4k gpu before volta

It's like your normies were always destined to be retarded.


>Is a resolution a meme

Reminds me of all the haters shitting on 1080p because muh 360 looks HD enuff at 720p

>>388927650
4k monitors are half the price of 1440p144Hz.

>>388927680
>Reminds me of all the haters shitting on 1080p because muh 360 looks HD enuff at 720p
cost vs value

>>388927472

Can you show me a IPS monitor with 1 ms of response that doesn't cost 1200 usd? thanks.

File: OP on his path to self improvement.jpg (36KB, 599x590px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 599x590px

>>388927754

So you hate on something because it's outside of your budget? Huh... This actually seems like the true definition of consolebabbie.

>>388927829
>So you hate on something because it's outside of your budget? Huh... This actually seems like the true definition of consolebabbie.
yes, thats why people hate the 1% where were you for all your life?

File: 1357233902252.jpg (636KB, 2262x2050px) Image search: [Google]

636KB, 2262x2050px

>>388927680
>wait fags

buy what you need right now
shit changes all time, future proof is a myth to trick good goys, even $150 gpus will run anything for 3-5 years, cpus even longer, cpu bottle neck is also a goyim trap

>>388927491
>Are human eyes and viewing distances going to change in the next 2 years or the next 200?
Well since the industry is no were near close to surpasing the human eye I think Ill be fine.

>>388927661
Yep. I was considering building a 1440p system but then I realized I can buy a 1080p system for the price of the 1440p monitor alone.

If you have the money for high end gpus 1440p is what we have now if you want max settings and non-console frame rates, but that's for new releases older games usually run great at 4k.

>>388926202

You don't need a 1080ti to play at 4k unless you want to play at max settings

It's not a meme, it's really nice. I much prefer crisp clarity over a bunch of effects and shit.
GTX1080 is enough for a lot of games to run at 4K, but some modern ones you need to go down to 1440 which is still quite nice.

In general, 4K is great for tasks outside of games too.
But also:
>1440p 144hz > 4K 60hz
>4K 60fps > 1440p 60hz

File: 32.png (71KB, 648x431px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 648x431px

>>388927680
>Reminds me of all the haters shitting on 1080p because muh 360 looks HD enuff at 720p
They don't use 4k as often as 2k in the cinema fucktard
Sure, you sit a bit closer but the PPI is already high enough at much lower than this stupid meme res
>>388928039
true, also nothing to do with resolution fidelity increases

>the I need a UHD monitor for UHD gaming meme

Downsampling is basically forcing super sampling AA through your gpu and no one ever says you need a 4K screen to use AA

>>388927789
Color accuracy is far more valuable than less than a frame of latency that is only relevant if you play specific games at a very high skill level. Few do.

File: 4k.jpg (82KB, 989x787px) Image search: [Google]

82KB, 989x787px

>>388926202
I do enjoy 4k but that's because I like the extra work space and the super crisp text for work. 4k games do look amazing but honestly if it's not something you know you already want I would say go 1440p/144hz as it's just all around better for games.

>>388928350
He doesn't even know where they calculate that 1ms from, its safe to ignore people that fall for that

good goy buy my 4k, its the bigger number after all

>>388928350
And not only color accuracy, also the viewing angles.

>inb4 haha why would viewing angles matter on a monitor because I watch it directly from front
TN panels have such horrid viewing angles that you get some serious color/tone shift on vertical axis no matter how straightly you stare at the screen. Case in point: http://www.lagom.nl/lcd-test/viewing_angle.php

I'm still using my GTX 560Ti and 900p and I'm haply with it, it runs everything I could ever want for it to run. Why on earth would I shell thousands of dollars to jews just to get more pointless eye candy?

anything above 1080p 60fps is a meme and not worth your money

>>388928350
>Color accuracy
color is a meme
its the our brain perceives color on how it wants to perceive color meme

File: Orgasm.png (211KB, 394x296px) Image search: [Google]

211KB, 394x296px

>>388927889

>tfw it feels good that's not me

I actually didn't get to own my first console for ages. I saw my uncle playing his nes and & snes and I was hooked. But I didn't get to own an n64 till like 2002, my last console was a PS2 and I was so poor I could never afford a 360 or ps3 so I had to completely skipped that gen.


I got a pc in late high school and realized that PCs were like the god of video games, the fact that I could make my own games with it, modify games to what I wanted and just experience all these games & software that I didn't even know existed wow'd me.

I never went back to consoles. I didn't hate shit I didn't own, I was marveled by it since the first time I saw that nes in action.

>>388928534
I have an IPS monitor and I'd rather have a TN because IPS glow is a bitch. HOWEVER 1440p 144Hz TNs have pixel inversion, which is just as annoying, if not more. At least IPS glow isn't noticeable on 90% of scenes.

Anyone know when the next affordable graphic card is coming out so I can POSSIBLY try and get it at retail price?
Rocking a r9 280x and have been wanting to upgrade for awhile.

>>388928746
Uh huh.

>>388928717
(You) happy now?

File: dats it mane.png (172KB, 984x786px) Image search: [Google]

172KB, 984x786px

>>388928326

>They don't use 4k as often as 2k in the cinema fucktard Sure, you sit a bit closer but the PPI is already high enough at much lower than this stupid meme res

I got a 27" 2560x1440p monitor and my girls' got a 30" 4k. My dell looks very good but it's clear 4k is much more of a beast than 1440p is. Without a doubt I will make the jump to 4k when dell pumps out an OLED HDR 120hz 4k monitor in my price range. Till then my 144hz ULMB 1440p dell will do.


Your cinema memes are irrelevant, I've played actual vidya on her monitor and they look gorgeous. If I cared about movies I'd be posting on /tv/.

>>388929181
your monitor has pixel inversion

also why are you only running it at 59Hz?

>>388929181

you forgot to change your monitor refresh rate anon

File: 1503938762544.jpg (96KB, 852x852px) Image search: [Google]

96KB, 852x852px

>>388927894

Im not a wait fag more of an expectations fag. >>388929181 That is my rig, but it is very evident neither maxwell nor pascal can deal with 4k. Volta was the planned arch for that and we will see it very soon.

File: 16k.jpg (2MB, 3840x2160px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3840x2160px

Gaming at 4k is a meme.
16k is where it's at.

>>388926202

Wouldnt call it a meme but i would say give it like 5 years or so. And dont go full retard thinking about future proofing or some shit.

File: 120hz.jpg (255KB, 1536x1284px) Image search: [Google]

255KB, 1536x1284px

>>388929412
>>388929463

No I didn't, it's running at 120hz right now for the ULMB as the image shows. Speccy inaccuracies:

>CPU is at 4.6Ghz
>Monitor is capable 144hz but running at 120hz
>1070 is 8GB of vram
>1070 is running at 2150mhz

>>388928631

Man. Thats suffering as fuck. I had a 560ti and that card is complete garbage. I mean if you only play minecraft or dorf fortress type shit its fine but gaming just feels better when its silky smooth 60 fps.

>>388929764
Is it running at 120Hz in Windows? IIRC Windows can override refresh rate.

>>388927470
>no 1440p 144hz monitor for fast games
KEK

>>388926202
No card can run 4k reliably yet. Get a 1080ti for 1440p 144hz gaming instead.

File: porn and women.jpg (169KB, 1000x750px) Image search: [Google]

169KB, 1000x750px

>>388930208


Yes, it is. Easiest way to tell is by adjusting refresh rate in or out of vidya. If you enable a non ULMB compatable refresh rate like 144hz the brightness changes dramatically.

>>388929470
that game is boring as fuck.

Not yet anon. Wait till the next generation of cards drop and grab the ti of that. The 1080ti still struggles to provide Ultra 4k60fps in some titles but only just barely.

>>388926202
4k looks great, but 1440p is where it´s at right now. You won´t be able to run most games on4k/60FPS, even with a 1080ti.

I'm still playing at 1080p 60hz on a 1080 Ti. Downsample when you can, play at comfortable 60 fps when you can't.

>>388930580
You're boring as fuck.

>>388926579
What viewing distance do you have? It's that 55" is too small for 4K use at typical living room distances, with 65" the difference would be more pronounced.

>>388928810
Yeah, IPS glow is annoying too, but I still prefer it because it's only visible with pure blacks (or very close to it at least), TN color shift applies more to all parts of the brightness scale. But yeah, it's annoying that picking a screen in current day is still a "choose your poison" kind of situation, there's always something annoying in all panel types. OLED would be the best one with both black levels and viewing angles, but it's just not an option yet for PC screens.

how come modern video cards dont have a checkerboard option like ps4 pro and xbox one x do? seems like the obvious thing to do so they can sell more monitors and graphics cards, but they dont.

>>388931581
>it's only visible with pure blacks
It's visible with any darker colors for me (AOC AG271Q). I actually returned the monitor when I saw it in Quake and tried a TN (whatever's Dell 1440p 144Hz 27 inch model is called), but it had pixel inversion, so I switched back because pixel inversion was way more annoying and at least with IPS the colors really do look nicer. I would absolutely keep the TN if not for pixel inversion, though.

I'll keep my eye on Samsung and their QLED developments, they've announced some gamer QLED display recently, but it's something stupidly expensive and impractical, with 31:9 ultraultrawide (ultrawidewide?) panel, I'll wait for 3-5 years till they have something more practical and less expensive.

Oh yeah an I tried a VA monitor, Acer Predator, but it had a ton of black crush and was only a 1080p and 1080p is just not looking good enough at 27 inches after you've spent some time on a 1440p.

>>388929470
>379MB

>>388931997
Because that's a software solution done a per-game basis. I think some Ubisoft games on PC have that as an option.

>>388932079
>15360 x 8460
>.bmp

>>388926202
32" for 4K sounds more reasonable to have better native scaling with current and older games/applications. I have a 27" 4K IPS display so I have to be sitting fairly close around 0.5m at that display size and can run into some issues with scaling (UI too small, text too small, etc...) for programs with not means of scaling adjustment or hidpi icons and what have you.

For productivity I find it quite nice since you can fit more on the screen and smaller text will still look sharp.
For gaming I do notice a difference from 1920x1080 but you are hitting the point of diminishing returns hard as far as price performance is concerned for your typical 24~27" display 1440 currently seems more suitable since the difference between 4K and 1440 at that size isn't that large.
You stand to gain more from fluid motion at 144Hz anyway even if you don't play twitch shooters.

Wish I got a 1440 144Hz 27" and waited on 4k 144 32" OLED instead. Thing is I have no idea if there is a decent IPS panel capable of displaying at such a high refresh rate.
I watch a fair amount of 720p 24fps Chinese cartoons and since 144Hz is a multiple of 24 panning scenes in particular would look less stuttery, 1440 is a multiple of 720 effectively double so native scaling wouldn't look out of place except 1080 is not a direct multiple so it wouldn't scale as nicely.
With 4K you can scale both 1080 and 720 easily natively since both multiply to 2160. 1440 wouldn't scale as easily but who fucking cares about that stepping stone resolution outside of games which can render at other resolutions anyway.

>>388929470
>3840
>4K
>15360
>16K
stahp it, it doesn't even round to 16K

File: W O W.jpg (49KB, 1683x235px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 1683x235px

>>388932567
>15360
>16K
Yes, display ratios and colloquialisms are a bitch. 15360 is effectively 16k, deal with it.

>>388932567
This junk upsets me too. Do true 4k monitors actually exist?

>>388933121
I'm not sure about true 4k displays but 5k displays do exist.

>>388929181
>>388928358
whats with these fucking bottlenecked builds
>1070 with 6700
>1080ti with i5

1440p is fine for pubg the premiere pc game

>>388933061
I'll be laughing in my grave in the year 2087AD
>256K display
>has colloquialism went too far?

>>388933463
6600k/7600k won't bottleneck a 1080ti at 4k/60hz. If you're running 1080p/1440p though it will.

>>388930261
>playing mp shit

>>388933871
>won't bottleneck 4k but will bottleneck 1080p
4k 60Hz is literally more demanding than 1080p 144Hz

>>388934074
It's more demanding on your GPU. At 4k/60hz you are completely GPU bottlenecked even with a 1080ti. 1080p/144hz requires more CPU because you aren't GPU bottlenecked at that resolution.

See:
https://youtu.be/sWD64r_mi_k?t=1m51s

>>388926202
Its a meme, personally I'm fine with 1080p 120hz for another 5 years or so. Been using this since 2011, and my 2500k 980 can still max everything.

For 4k you're looking at dropping a grand on the newest gpu every time. Personally in games on monitors the difference isn't that big

>>388933871
It still will in certain games and cause bad minimums i.e. Bf1, civ 6, crysis 3

4c/4t is outdated now, pairing it with anything higher than a 1060/580 is a waste

>>388927680
It's not that 1080p is enough compared to 4k. Given the choice of 144hz vs 4k, personally it's easily 144hz.
4k is nice though. That pixel density is delicious.

>>388926202
Games make the most of 4K from all my use cases (general use, programming, video playback, games). They look absolutely amazing and the high DPI works wonders, this is hands-down the biggest upgrade I've seen in terms of eliminating aliasing while preserving a perfectly sharp image since I started playing PC games like 20 years ago. If you care about image quality, 4K is hands-down the way to go, but graphics cards aren't currently all that capable of handling 4K 60+ FPS, at this point I'd suggest you wait for Volta if it's not urgent.

You don't need a 1080ti for 4k.
After spending $2000 on your 4k gayming machine and another $1000 on the monitor you will spend a couple days benchmarking the latest games and jerking off to the graphics. After a week you are back to playing indie games, your favorite games from 10 years ago and something like CS:GO.

File: 1502972524928.png (252KB, 442x444px) Image search: [Google]

252KB, 442x444px

>>388933463

I bought my 1070 because I didn't want to give nvidia $700 for a non HBM2 card. Im not buying a TI for the same reason and because volta will be here mid next year. In the mean time the x70 series offers great performance when overclocked for not the worse price.


If nvidia would have had HMB2 for the 1080 I woulda shelled out the money but even before release I knew pascal was a filler tier architecture and not worth my full investment. On the other hand skylake was as good as it was gonna get for at least the next 3 years worth of CPU archs. Buying a skylake i7 was a no brainer.

>>388935073
I'd say that 4c/4t migh be fine in the current moment because there really aren't that many games that benefit from higher amount of cores now, but I would never buy a CPU like that anymore because the situation could change very fast.

After all, while GPU is usually the bottleneck in most games, at least it is easy to upgrade. But changing CPU? It's a total pain in the ass considering that you usually have to change mobo too, possibly even RAM, so it makes sense to buy one that is as futureproof as possible.

Who knows, perhaps that 100 dollars between i5 and i7 could mean 2-3 years of practical lifetime to it before you feel the need to upgrade.

>>388935594
>wanting HBM2 memery
>a 4 core CPU is "ss good as it's gonna get" for the next 3 years

>>388926978
1440p/144 is harder to hit than 2160p/60.

File: 1503495257865.gif (627KB, 251x199px) Image search: [Google]

627KB, 251x199px

>>388935429

Even if that were the case you can now play your favorite games and CSGO in 4k res with your new monitor and pc.

>>388935753
You don't need to hit stable 144 FPS, if your monitor has some kind of adaptive refresh rate you won't even see any tearing if you go lower, and going lower than 144 is not as bad as going under 60.

I just got a 4k tv. The clarity alone is sweet. But wide spread functionality is probably still a few years off.

>>388927661
TN's are dirt cheap, you only pay out the ass if you want a 144Hz IPS with Gsync.

>>388935762
You could to that with a new monitor and your old PC.
Those games run on a toaster, even at 4k.

>>388935994
There are only a couple of 1440p 144Hz TNs and they're all based on the same AUO panel which has an issue with pixel inversion.

All IPS 1440p 144Hz panels are AUO too, and they have their issues as well. Also, in my experience those gaming TNs aren't THAT cheap. Definitely cheaper than IPS though.

File: When autism and D.jpg (18KB, 236x337px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 236x337px

>>388935748

>Too autistic to understand the performance value of HMB2 & why Nvidia would have it in all their true top of the line GPUs
>Too retarded to understand that 4c 8t yields the absolute best performance you can get in current gen gaming because it allows the highest possible clockspeeds & single threaded performance is still king


If you don't know the slightest bit about what you're talking about why embarrass yourself by having a technical discussion?

My monitor has an SRGB setting, should I use that for games or leave it off?

>>388936125

True but it depends on your old PC's performance. At the end of the day it is about your personal wants and needs. Most people don't need a $50k+ car but that hasn't stopped Porsche & friends.

>>388936125
CS:GO really doesn't run well on a toaster, especially new maps. Nuke used to kill my old laptop with framerates dropping to silky smooth 15-20 FPS outside. Had over 60 FPS on d2, mirage and old inferno though. And cache. That's on 800x600 lowest settings.

I know the game looks like shit, but that doesn't necessary mean it runs well.

>>388935594
>skylake
>as as good as it was gonna get
AMD is already selling 6-cores for $200 and Intel's next linup is mostly 6-cores with only the low end chips being 4-cores.

If you bought a 4-core this year, you fucked up.

File: ppl liek u.jpg (16KB, 325x252px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 325x252px

>>388936496

>>>388936178


>Too retarded to understand that 4c 8t yields the absolute best performance you can get in current gen gaming because it allows the highest possible clockspeeds & single threaded performance is still king


If you don't know what you are talking about then stop. Seriously, stop.

File: sadpeeps.png (183KB, 504x428px) Image search: [Google]

183KB, 504x428px

I have i7-3770 3,4 ghz CPU

is it any good?

>>388926202
1440p at 120hz >>>>>>>>>> 4k "gaming"

>>388937923
You haven't lived until you've played a game on a 40" 2160p PC monitor.

>>388937989
>40' inch 4k tv
I'd rather on a smaller 27' widescreen monitor tbqh.

>>388935887
yeah having your framerate fluctuate wildly from 70-144fps will mean your input latency fluctuates wildly. Better than fluctuating and then having tearing on top of it, but it's still not ideal.

>>388937024
still better than what's in the PS4 Pro and Xbox One X, and should be able to play most new games fine still.

>>388938108
No, not a TV. A monitor. We're not talking about low-end TV shit hardware here.

A large format 16:9 PC monitor is going to be wider, taller, and higher resolution than a shitty 27" 21:9 screen.
You need to expand your horizons.

>>388935594
>I bought my 1070 because I didn't want to give nvidia $700 for a non HBM2 card
HBM is a meme, the 1080Ti has more memory bandwidth than the HBM equipped RX Vega 64. GDDR6 will be out next year and will likely see more support than HBM due to its lower price.

>>388937989
Why the fuck would you upgrade resolution that much if you're not going to increase your DPI? I'm not spending $500 or whatever to play games at fucking 110dpi, the whole point of 4k gaming is to eliminate aliasing.

>>388934074
Like >>388934517 said, the CPU will be your bottleneck when targeting 144Hz. I have a 6700K and most games don't even go beyond 50% CPU usage for me as I only play at 60Hz.

>>388926368
>>388926579
>>388926740
>>388926883
etc

4K is not for console shit that is designed for viewing from a distance of 6+ feet. Where you can appreciate the increased detail, it counts for a fuckton.

Granted, I'm not only looking at it from a gamer's perspective, but as a programmer 4K is twice as much visible code I can shove on a screen as a 1080p screen.

It's a "meme" in my opinion. Maybe in a few years when it comes to standard, but pretty pointless now desu.

>>388938284

But does the 1080ti have more memory bandwidth than the Nvidia flagship with hbm2? No it doesn't. It's cute to compare completely different architectures made by completely different companies but just because it's cute doesn't mean it's right.

>>388935650
I7 does extend the lifetime alot, my 2500k feels dated. Not because of the ipc or clocks but because of the lack of hyperthreading

Debating whether to stick a 2600k in and sell my 2500k, would only cost £60 compared to dropping £400 for a ryzen build

>>388936652
You sound like the people who recommended dual cores until a couple years ago.

>>388938352
> the whole point of 4k gaming is to eliminate aliasing.
That's one reason to go to 2160p if you're going to use traditional tiny computer monitors.

Alternately, 2160p allows for reasonably sized single displays at typical (if slightly above average) PPIs instead of needing to build complicated arrays of smaller screens to have a usable amount of screen realestate.
40" 4320p displays will be the best of both worlds.

>>388938580
>But does the 1080ti have more memory bandwidth than the Nvidia flagship with hbm2?
No, because the 1080Ti is $699 while the the Quadro GP100 is $6000. Seeing as it's not even double the memory bandwidth, HBM is not that impressive.

GDDR6 doubles the performance of GDDR5 so Volta will almost certainly use it. GDDR6 on a 384-bit memory bus same as (Titan Xp) will have 768GB/s of memory bandwidth. HBM's price and limited capacity will make GDDR6 more desirable.

>>388938580
>Fury X
>overpriced at launch
>couldn't beat a 980Ti
>aged like milk due to only 4GB

>Vega 64
>overpriced
>can barely compete with 1080
>horribly bottlenecked, barely outperforms an overclocked Vega 56 in games despite being much more expensive

HBMeme is a failure for gaming, AMD should have kept it on the Pro cards like Nvidia.

File: mad_max-vega-amd-vs-mesa.png (25KB, 600x329px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 600x329px

>>388939275
>Fury
>aged like milk

You need to take into account the massive problems of the official AMD driver.
The unofficial Mesa drivers are much better and the Fury is routinely well above both the 980 and the 1070.

The situation with Vega is even more compelling and this is with a driver that isn't even really fully there yet.

>>388939275
Vega only performs badly because the drivers are shit. Once the drivers enable primitive shaders it will get a big boost.

The problem with HBM2 is that it's too expensive. From a technical standpoint it's gold for AMD because it uses a fraction of the power of GDDR5X. Means more power can go to the GPU core.

>>388939630
You misunderstood me, I was specifically talking about only 4GB killing the Fury X at higher resolutions in more modern games, even though Fury X actually scales well with higher resolutions due to AMD's horrid Windows drivers. AMD pushed the high VRAM meme with the 8GB 390, Nvidia looked stupid withe the 3.5GB controversy so they put 8GB on the 1070 and 1080. Now VRAM requirements are skyrocketing, 1GB is no longer playable and 2 is barely. 4GB can no longer even max out games at 1080p.

Also no one cares about Linux gaming anyway.

>>388939935
People literally said the same thing about Fury X and it still can't beat the 980Ti/1070 in anything but a few Vulkan benchmarks.

>>388940136
Fury X didn't have major features of its architecture disabled at launch.

>>388939975
that's not true you can get away with 4gb in 1080p
i only go past 4Gb with my 1080 when i go at a bigger res then 1440
for exemple f1 2017 maxed out in 4K only take 5.2gb

File: unigine_valley-amd-windows_official-vs-linux_mesa-apples_to_apples.png (30KB, 600x396px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 600x396px

>>388939975
>Also no one cares about Linux gaming anyway.

AMD users at least should start caring. Even in benchmarks AMD's official driver has heavily optimized for the still barely optimized Mesa drivers are performing 10%+ higher.

>>388931581
>What viewing distance do you have?
Just a bit over 5 feet, eg. ~160 cm. I would actually have bought 65" if all content I watched was 4K stuff, but I can only imagine how shitty SD and 720p content would look with that screen size at that distance. They are already rough enough.

I think my 980 might be dying.
I really hope she lasts me untill Volta, I don't want to cash out on a 1080/ti yet, I got taxes and plastic butts to buy first.

>>388927054
A month ago i had to buy a 1060 for $310, but i haven't checked since

File: AG35-BF1[1].jpg (241KB, 1200x800px) Image search: [Google]

241KB, 1200x800px

FORGET 4k

Get a 3440x1440p ultrawide monitor

Much better, mine is 100hz too, 4k can only go up to 60hz

1080 Ti isn't going to do 4K/60fps in all games unless you are willing to turn down some settings, which PC gamers can't seem to do

Wait for Volta in 2018, 1180 Ti will be faster than Sli 980 Ti's

File: Its over, kill the lights.gif (447KB, 245x179px) Image search: [Google]

447KB, 245x179px

>>388938891

Clearly because the quadro isn't a consumer card therefore it doesn't have consumer pricing. Does AMD charge charge an arm and leg for their hbm consumer cards? Clearly not. Nvidia is saving money to make an even higher margin of off their cards. I don't care about Nvidia's margins I care about performance.

Do you remember when for the longest time Nvidia sold their big chip as the x80 card for $500 and their mid size chip as the x60 cards for $200? Do you think I went ooh pappa nvidia fuck me harder when they started charging the full size price for the medium chip when kepler released? I went no I'm not buying that. And that is exactly why I didn't buy a 1080, if I was an ignorant /v/irgin I prolly would have bought the card cause marketing says it's the coolest kid in town.

You are also comparing GDDR6 a next gen tech made by the same company to a current gen tech hbm 2. Well see how el cheapo GDDR6 does vs HBM3 etc. when the time comes.


>>388939275

>It's cute to compare completely different architectures made by completely different companies but just because it's cute doesn't mean it's right.

>>388926202
>He hasn't fallen for the ultrawide meme yet

>>388936178
That's really cute and all but games like BF1 already load all the cores of an i7 up to 95-99% and with even Intel jumping on the MOAR COREZ bandwagon it won't get any better.
>the highest possible clockspeeds & single threaded performance is still king
Why aren't you using a Pentium overclocked up to 6 GHz then?

File: pMG1KSS[1].jpg (3MB, 5312x2988px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 5312x2988px

>>388941508
This

ultrawides are also great because you can watch films without black bars

>>388938580
Volta gaming flagship will use GDDR6. Unless you want to buy the outrageously priced Titan equivalent, if you're waiting for Volta you're waiting for GDDR6. If you want HBM2 so much, buy Vega, lol.

I have a gtx 970. What grafics card should i get for 1440p. Also is there a good 1440p 144hz ultra wide motor?

File: 7a0b85885205a02ba65bf9e41140e2cf9969e1d3c3768856c7cab9871eeff3d9.jpg (33KB, 510x393px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 510x393px

>>388926202
>Now that the 1080ti has dropped
Not even the 1080ti can manage to get 60fps in 4k with most new releases. Only a handful of them.

The world (literally) isn't ready for 4k yet.

File: 1484929979386.jpg (55KB, 342x316px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 342x316px

>>388941645

>Why aren't you using a Pentium overclocked up to 6 GHz then?

Ask yourself this question retard. Why would I say a 4c 8t is superior to bigger cpu due to clockspeed potential instead of some single or dual core CPU at higher speeds. Really, think real hard anon.

>>388941680
Can't download remuxes anymore though. Only properly encoded rips.

>>388941159
I was looking at it and reports of it having issues with flickering and big ghosting problems turned me off.

>>388941846
>Not even the 1080ti can manage to get 60fps in 4k with most new releases. Only a handful of them.
Completely maxed out you mean. It's not like you need AA with 4k.

>>388941919
The AOC? Yeah they released a patch a few months ago that literally fixed it completely, I haven't had nay flickering or ghosting whatsoever

>>388941854
>some single or dual core CPU at higher speeds
And yet, again, modern games are quite capable of pushing all four cores of your precious i7 to the limit. And everything points to at least 6c becoming the standard next year. Skylake is good, but it won't be the be-all end-all chip in the next 2-3 years as you are suggesting.

>>388941993
Fuggg. I didn't really believe a patch would change anything because HP panel using literally the same panel had the same issue and HP ended up just recalling all of them. Oh well, I'll consider getting an ultrawide when QLED displays become affordable.

File: 1504237146794.jpg (48KB, 500x384px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 500x384px

>>388941769

The only thing I can say to that is we'll see in the actual year volta will release. There's plenty of info on Nvidia wanting and using HBM as their flagship memory but availability and pricing cucking them. Tech gets cheaper and more available as time goes on.

That and you seem ignorant yet again, if the titan uses HBM then so will the TI that you kids seem comfortable with price wise. The rest of this discussion is irrelevant HBM 2 is superior hence why the most powerful Nvidia GPUs use it exclusively but Nvidia wants their shekles from the consumer market so they cuck those cards with cheap GDDR.

>>388941841
>1440p GPU's
Fury X/GTX 980Ti/GTX 1070/RX Vega 56
GTX 1080/RX Vega 64
GTX 1080Ti

1070's are overpriced where I live due to mining. Used Fury X's and 980Ti's are usually expensive as well. Vega is low stock so it's luck right now to get one at a decent price. 1080 and 1080ti are close to MSRP, those are probably your best bet if you have the cash.

>>388942195
I'm happy with the monitor, i'm talking about the aoc agon ag352ucg


It's very good, it has g-sync too

>>388942384
Yeah, that's the one I'm talking about too. It just has the same panel as HP Omen... 35-something. I was choosing between it and a 27 inch 1440p IPS monitor. Which is fine too, I guess.

>>388942106
I have an AMD Ryzen 5 6 core and even at 4GHz I get bottlenecked off of one or two cores with CPU spikes. You're not really being helpful since going 6 cores would either bottleneck him in other ways with Ryzen, or encourage him to get Coffee Lake which will be overpriced, or go for Broadwell-E which is also overpriced and has expensive mobos. Skylake-X is so shit it's not really an option. Basically if you want a cheap 6 core that doesn't bottleneck you the only option is to wait™ for Zen 2 and hope the rumors that it can hit 5GHz are true.

File: 1501336519330.gif (3MB, 250x250px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 250x250px

>>388942106

>And yet, again, modern games are quite capable of pushing all four cores of your precious i7 to the limit

This is dishonest. Just because you have a some i7 running at high load on BF1 doesn't mean all i7s got defeated by BF1(The pinnacle of gaming apparently). I remember when BF3 came out it put stress on sandy bridge does that mean that BF3 is the maximum we could get out of sandy? Considering how well that 6 year old processor does to this day it seems you are drawing some narrow minded conclusions.


Let me put it to you simply, software is software it is what tells the hardware "what" to do. Just because at an extreme: life of a black tiger has the ps4 chugging doesn't mean it's the best way to make use of the PS4's power and a more important conclusion to draw, if the PS4 with it's baby netbook CPU at ~1.8Ghz from 2012 can run BF1 at medium to high settings then how in gods name is a top of the line intel i7 struggling?


Remember when certain jap games came out on steam and they maxed out cpu load due to bugs? You're conclusion completely ignores every benchmark conclusion drawn in the last 2 decades. And yet still you'll continue to sit here and talk dumb shit.

>>388943121
>if the PS4 with it's baby netbook CPU at ~1.8Ghz from 2012 can run BF1 at medium to high settings then how in gods name is a top of the line intel i7 struggling?
This, the minimum specs for BF1 are a 6600K, when it runs ok on the shitty CPU in the Xbone and PS4. That's not a sign 4 cores are dead, that's a sign that BF1 runs like a shit. If you can make a game run on a low power Jaguar CPU, but you can't make it run on an overclocked i5 or i7, you fucked up badly somewhere.

>>388943110
The funny thing about waiting for Coffee Lake is that it supposedly will have worse single core performance compared to Skylake. So you either get bottlenecked by lack of cores or by lack of single core perf. Pick your poison, or wait for Cannon Lake/Zen2.

File: When you're trying so hard.png (353KB, 500x596px) Image search: [Google]

353KB, 500x596px

>>388943110

There's a clear diminishing return when it comes to added threads in gaming. Putting software work loads into other threads, is highly difficult and not all that rewarding considering so many PCs still still have dual cores.

Having your software be dictated primarily by single threaded performance is much easier, safer and allows higher compatibility for a wide amount of PCs. Yes we are slightly better now at using more cores than 10 years ago but you don't get much more performance over 4 threads. There's a lot of analysis on this on benchmark sites and channels like digital foundry.

The highest CPU performance will come from the CPU that has just enough threads to cover the games demands but with the highest possible clockspeed. Unlike with threads, games will never tell you no we can't make use of that higher clock speed. And this little piece of knowledge is why benchmark authorities recommend high clocked i7s vs something like a 8c 16 thread broadwell e.

>>388943650
You have it backwards, Cannonlake is worse than Kaby Lake due to Intel's fucked 10nm process. Cannonlake is low yields and poor performance which is why it's relegated to mobile and low end. There won't be any high end Cannonlake processors, Icelake will be the first "good" 10nm. Coffee Lake is just a Kaby Lake refresh, so I can't imagine how it would perform any worse, unless the move to 6 cores results in a much lower clockspeed to maintain TDP.

It's the next logical step but it's being pushed far too soon. 1440p is basically the standard right now or at least should be.

>>388944986
high end card do 4K 60fps just fine
it will be the standard for next gen

If I only want to play at 1440p 60fps at most, what card should I get?

Is a 1070 enough for that? and is a i7 a requirment or can I get a i5?

>>388926202
Are you retarded? unless you play on a TV, a big one, and that supports 4k, 4k is useless on pc, unless you have 4 or more monitors, also with that 1080 TI, you should be worried if the actual games will run at 60fps on ultra or not, now in 4k? forget it, buy an xbox one x if you plan on playing games on 4k

>>388945876

I'd recommend an i7 so u dont have to worry about ur cpu for a long time. A 7700k or that new skylake x one that can clock at 5Ghz would be great. A 1070 is perfect for 1440p and can give up to 120hz as well if you adjust ur settings. I got one running at 2100mhz and it does very well.

>>388945876
1070 is enough, and you need to get R5
i5 is dead

What's the best replacement for a 980?

>>388946162
>PC can't run 4k/60fps maxed out in every game
>so you should buy a console that can barely run 4k/30/high settings, and usually lower resolution than that

>>388945530

Keep in mind that a weaker AMD 580 can get 60 fps 1440p depending on the title. The 1070 is overqualified for 60 fps.

>>388946495
what for?
depends what you want, 980 is pretty strong for 1080p

>>388946495
1080 or Vega 64. IMO you should always upgrade at least two "tiers." 980 is roughly equivalent to the 480/580/1060, so skip 1070 and go to 1080-tier or higher.

>>388946515
considering you can't buy one or it costs as much as 1070
1070 it is
i';d also recommend AIB v56, but it's not on sale yet or facing same problems as 580

>>388946598
My 980 has little trouble with most things at 1080p, although it does get vram limited sometimes.
I wanted to wait for Volta, but I'm getting these weird screen flickers lately and I think it be dying.

>>388946713
probably dying
i'd recommend undervolting but nvidia doesn't let you do that

File: meme.png (5KB, 420x91px) Image search: [Google]

5KB, 420x91px

>not opting in for as many PC memes as possible

>>388947042
>not having 240hz
pleb.

>>388926202
Should I buy a second RX 460 for 4K?

>>388926368

/thread

>>388947950
i bet you love aliasing

>>388948132

I bet you love Reddit

>>388948486
nice argument
it's clearly superior for mobile porn browsing

>>388948645

Nice logical fallacy kiddo!

>>388946418
Whats the difference between the 7700k and 7700 besides clock speed I think.

>>388946476
Why would I need an R5 with a 1070?

>>388949084
7700 K can overclock if you have the right motherboard
R5 are cheaper ,perform similarly (have more cores which is good with dx12 and Vulcan )and you won't see any difference in most games

but if you want to extract the most of your 1070 right now go with the 7700k but it will cost you more and maybe no be the best choice in the future

>>388949084
>Whats the difference between the 7700k and 7700 besides clock speed I think.
because 7700 is worthless without clock speed
does it answer your question why you'd need R5 with 1070?

>>388949447
>but if you want to extract the most of your 1070 right now
he can't run 144fps with 1070 either way, 1600/x would extract the most of it anyway, 7% due to high clock is not worth another $200 for cpu/motherboard
and if he would go 7700 NOT K, it's pretty much exactly the same as 1600x but with zero potential

File: 1504263158193.jpg (243KB, 768x1024px) Image search: [Google]

243KB, 768x1024px

>>388949084

Once you have enough cores clockspeed is everything. That is why.

>>388949447
>>388949715
Then why would I want a 7700k anyway, the R5 is more cheaper and its basically the same.

>>388950687
you are talking to three people with two opinions, anon