Reply With Quote
This is the route I'm going as well.
It would be funny as to watch you guys flip your s if I bought a 1080.
I'm still going to wait to see how AMD answers with Vega and how much a difference HBM2 is going to make. If I go Nvidia I'll probably go 1080 though unless the 1070 is lightly cut down like 970 was vs 980, or even better if it's barely cut down like 670 vs 680.
This is the route I'm going as well.
It would be funny as to watch you guys flip your s if I bought a 1080.
If you buy a 1080,This is the route I'm going as well.
It would be funny as to watch you guys flip your s if I bought a 1080.RIP AMD
I say that because if AMD can't deliver this generation with their gpus and with Zen the company is probably going to go bankrupt. They have enormous debt payments due in 2019 and their market share in both cpu and gpu is horrible. I don't think they're making a whole lot off the consoles they power. Vega is going to have to mop the floor with the 1080 for similar price (eg within $100 or so) for me to take the risk because of this, I'm scared they're going to have to start mass layoffs in a year or two or that they'll declare bankruptcy and have Intel, Samsung, and Nvidia picking over their IP. I can't imagine how bad the driver support is going to be if their cards and cpus don't turn the company around this year.
Don't get an Nvidia TBH, we need at least one AMD fanboy to mention as the butt of all AMD jokesThis is the route I'm going as well.
It would be funny as to watch you guys flip your s if I bought a 1080.
Console peasants can be considered AMD fanboys though.
AC Brotherhood just makes me want to smash my ing controller with the instant fail missions any time I'm detected. I don't think I have had a game piss me off since the Super Nintendo, but this game is frustrating as .
Damn the 1080 looks pretty disappointing for overclocking. At stock it beats a stock 980 Ti by roughly 25-30% in games, but if you overclock to 2 GHz and match it against a 1500 MHz 980 Ti (a pretty achieveable OC with some of the better models) the OC 1080 only wins by about 15% over the OC 980 Ti. This guy pulled the card apart and slapped a water cooler on it and didn't get much extra out of it.
The semiconductor industry is at another technological wall. They have only been making minor progress in speeds. Transistors can only switch so fast.
I'll bet they will do better on games that implement newer features in the card, as it is probably streamlined to handle certain instructions faster.
But then... I am only guessing at that.
This generation the clockspeed improved by something like 400 MHz vs last, but they definitely had to sacrifice some in the clocks per instruction to bring back all of the compute power they stripped out of Kepler (two generations back) when they moved to Maxwell (previous generation). AMD has been hammering Maxwell in games with lots of compute heavy effects. In this comparison video are the GTX 970 and R9 390, which sold for the same price and were generally on par with each other in DX11 games:
hey if u had the option of same price budget, would u op for a smaller ips panel vs 34inch tn panel? both have same specs resolution 1440 and 144mhz refresh rate...
Definitely. IPS is leagues better than TN.. Took me a long time to get used to my TN G-Sync panel, not to mention how much tweaking to the colors before you finally find a setting you can settle for. The only drawback to IPS is the refresh speed, and tbh, my panel is 1ms, and it hasn't gotten me any better on any first person shooters. 3-5 ms GTG refresh is perfectly fine, and tbh I can't notice a difference.
Man this 1080 Founders Edition throttles like after about 10 minutes of gaming, reference cards are such . I can't believe this throttles at 80C. Anyone who buys a Founders Edition 1080 at $700 or Founders Edition 1070 at $450 is re ed.
Thankfully when EVGA slaps on their ACX cooler, MSI their TwinFrozr, Gigabyte their Windforce cooler, etc, this thermal throttling should be eliminated.
1080
1080FE
so what happens when nvidia releases the TI and GTX version? that TI specs/price>fe or more expensive?
LOL this is painful hearing Nvidia try to explain why they're charging $100 over MSRP for a reference card.
Hearing them talk about how good the board is is ing hilarious. Nvidia reference boards always suck, and this one is no exception with its ty power delivery that seems to be limiting overclocking. And then the terrible cooler. Damn a $100 premium for the worst version of the card. I really hope the AIBs like EVGA, Asus, Gigabyte, MSI, and so on aren't going to be able to charge $700 for the good versions of the card. Typically the nicer aftermarket cards are anywhere from $20-$50 more than reference and you don't go way above unless you're buying really high end boards like EVGA Classified or EVGA K|NGP|N with cherry picked chips. But damn if cards like the Gigabyte G1 Gaming or the EVGA FTW are $100 more than MSRP.
ElNono man, tell me you're not dying laughing at the idea of a huge price premium for the loudest, hottest, and tiest versions of the cards.
I never buy reference. Heck, wait it out 4-5 months and you'll hit a deal on a "premium" model from EVGA or Gigabyte. I'll normally wait to see what's available in Black Friday. I'm happy with my 960 and 970 ATM...LOL this is painful hearing Nvidia try to explain why they're charging $100 over MSRP for a reference card.
Hearing them talk about how good the board is is ing hilarious. Nvidia reference boards always suck, and this one is no exception with its ty power delivery that seems to be limiting overclocking. And then the terrible cooler. Damn a $100 premium for the worst version of the card. I really hope the AIBs like EVGA, Asus, Gigabyte, MSI, and so on aren't going to be able to charge $700 for the good versions of the card. Typically the nicer aftermarket cards are anywhere from $20-$50 more than reference and you don't go way above unless you're buying really high end boards like EVGA Classified or EVGA K|NGP|N with cherry picked chips. But damn if cards like the Gigabyte G1 Gaming or the EVGA FTW are $100 more than MSRP.
ElNono man, tell me you're not dying laughing at the idea of a huge price premium for the loudest, hottest, and tiest versions of the cards.
It's really until "mega game x" needs one of this to run great, otherwise it can wait. Now, this year we're going to be doing some 4k dev for the Neo, so I might have to plunge sooner to test 4k under Windows, but it's only probably gonna be for work. Even in that case, it can wait for another 2-3 months easily.
It's disappointing that the only cards that look like they're coming out soon are ty reference boards for $100 extra.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...PPSSVYJXPPLKEI
I hope they don't pull that with the 1070 since I was recommending RandomGuy wait until June 10th for that card, as Nvidia claims an X performance for $380 MSRP. But if it's only Founders Edition 1070s for $450 that takes a lot of the value away. I don't anticipate AMD's Polaris 10 being able to compete with the 1070 with only a 232mm^2 die (1070/1080 is 314mm^2), but that might offer R9 390 performance for cheaper than the 390.
RandomGuy, June 1st is when we should find out about AMD's Polaris 10 cards at Computex, they have an official press event for the cards. I would guess they'll be out pretty soon after to try to maximize the time they can sell in that midrange price bracket (where they should murder the GTX 960) before Nvidia releases the GTX 1060 to compete with it. I imagine they won't be anywhere near as powerful as the GTX 1070, so AMD is going to have to price them pretty aggressively I anticipate. Though we haven't heard a lot of rumors about Polaris yet like we did the Nvidia 1080 over the weeks before it was officially announced.
They really shouldn't even be selling TN panels anymore. In general, they suck badly.
TN is good for gaming on smaller panels (say 24 inches), especially because of the response time. For a larger panel (27 inches or more) the viewing angles become a real problem and IPS is worlds better.
It's not just viewing angles. Color accuracy seem so much better on IPS as well.
RandomGuy man, this is pretty exciting news about the upcoming Polaris 10 GPU. AMD Polaris 67DF:C7 looks like it could be a really nice card to look at too, if this leaked benchmark putting it in between the GTX 980 and R9 Fury is accurate. AMD has already officially said these cards will be less than $300, that the sub $300 price point was what they were targeting with Polaris in an effort to expand the total accessible market for VR. R9 Fury and GTX 980 are $500 cards.
This looks like it would be about a 20% gain in performance for $30 less than the R9 390 at much lower power consumption. The $30 who cares, but 20% is a lot for a gpu. And then double the vram too.
Last edited by baseline bum; 05-23-2016 at 10:51 AM.
Polaris looks like a beast.
I really have a hard time believing it's going to be almost on par with their 596mm^2 Fiji chip at 232mm^2, but if so holy Vega will be killer.
As always though, show me the in game numbers.
I have to turn up Nvidia's vibrance in the settings to get colors that look like they do default on my Dell IPS
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
