|
Josh Lyman posted:LOL at people saying the 1070 is only good enough for 1080p You mean barely good enough for 1080p you need at least sli titan xp for 1440p.
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 10:55
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 15:46 |
|
|
Obviously, you need four Tesla P100s for 4k
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 10:58
|
|
|
I will admit that the 1070 is probably overkill for most games at 1080p...for now. I'm sure 2-3 years down the line there will be a game that will bring a 1070 to its knees at 1440p or even 1080p.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 11:06
|
|
|
star citizen already does and its never coming out
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 11:07
|
|
|
also xcom 2 and that's already out
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 11:08
|
|
|
Anime Schoolgirl posted:also xcom 2 and that's already out why does firaxis make games that run nicely at low settings on anything but like poo poo with high settings on a super computer?
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 11:11
|
|
|
I said for most games it would be overkill but I take it those games are just horribly optimized? I'm not interested in playing those games anyway.
spasticColon fucked around with this message at 11:16 on Aug 19, 2016 |
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 11:13
|
|
|
Fauxtool posted:why does firaxis make games that run nicely at low settings on anything but like poo poo with high settings on a super computer? 
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 11:30
|
|
|
spasticColon posted:But then I would have to upgrade my video card again that much sooner. If I was on 1440p already I probably would have gotten the 1080.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 11:43
|
|
|
Josh Lyman posted:LOL at people saying the 1070 is only good enough for 1080p I received a laptop with a 1070 and a 75hz 1080p screen yesterday. It's pretty pointless because all the games (mostly CPU-bound blizzard games) I play now hover well over 130 fps with all settings maxed and even SSAA in some cases. Should have waited for better (1440p or 144hz) screens or bought a model with the 1060 instead. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 11:53
|
|
|
Can't you plug in a gsync screen and play on that? Or does that not work that way? Also, any news on these new laptops supporting VR?
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 12:00
|
|
|
Truga posted:Can't you plug in a gsync screen and play on that? Or does that not work that way? I dont see why not unless the display outs are wonky on a laptop. I didnt even know the 10xx laptops were even out yet. Im pretty jealous.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 12:01
|
|
|
Oh now Newegg sends me a coupon code for 10 percent off a video card purchase. I could have gotten a 1070 for ~$390 instead of for $429.
spasticColon fucked around with this message at 12:05 on Aug 19, 2016 |
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 12:02
|
|
Fauxtool posted:I dont see why not unless the display outs are wonky on a laptop. I didnt even know the 10xx laptops were even out yet. Im pretty jealous. That is actually something they specifically engineered for in the new 10X laptops, all display outs are handled by the video card directly so that gsync, high refresh and so on will work properly.
|
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 12:08
|
|
|
Fauxtool posted:I dont see why not unless the display outs are wonky on a laptop. I didnt even know the 10xx laptops were even out yet. Im pretty jealous. Laptop video is often routed from dgpu to your intel gpu and then gets displayed through that, so switching between them can be seamless, or so you can have your desktop running on the intel gpu, but the game window runs on nvidia. This, however, breaks VR headset compatibility, and possibly also gsync. Plus, introduces a bit of latency, though not likely something you'd notice outside VR. AVeryLargeRadish posted:That is actually something they specifically engineered for in the new 10X laptops, all display outs are handled by the video card directly so that gsync, high refresh and so on will work properly. That's great to hear. I, too, am jealous now. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 12:09
|
|
|
Truga posted:Can't you plug in a gsync screen and play on that? Or does that not work that way? I could but buying an external monitor would require a keyboard and extra space on my desk and I bought a laptop to get around that. VR should probably work fine, the Steam VR test gives me a score of 11. I don't have anything to compare it to but it maxed out the scale at "Very High" with 0 frames below 90fps. Perhaps I'll buy a Vive in the future to justify the GPU. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 12:21
|
|
|
spasticColon posted:I think I'm just going to pull the trigger on a 1070 so I don't have to upgrade my video card again for a while. Is there a specific make and model to get? And how badly would my old 2500K@4.2 with 8GB DDR3-1600 RAM bottleneck it in newer games? What's your monitor resolution/frequency? From what I've read it might come into play if you're gaming at 1080p144Hz, but we're talking 10-20 FPS at most.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 12:57
|
|
|
What current gen card would have the nearest equivalent performance to a (reference) gtx680? I want to provide some stats to a friend who's considering buying a second hand 680 from someone.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 13:19
|
|
|
For the previous generation, a 960 or 380, which are both hovering around $140, and if they are getting the 680 for significantly less than that there's no reason to deter them.
Anime Schoolgirl fucked around with this message at 13:24 on Aug 19, 2016 |
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 13:22
|
|
|
Anime Schoolgirl posted:For the previous generation, a 960 or 380, which are both hovering around $140, and if they are getting the 680 for significantly less than that there's no reason to deter them. We're in Australia, so I'd say he'd be saving quite a bit then, thanks. The card itself is nearly 3 years old, but I'm guessing it should keep trucking on for at least a year.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 13:28
|
|
|
Strictly limiting ourselves to current-gen, it's probably the RX 470 (though with the RX 470 being significantly better). How much are they asking for the GTX 680? Phlegmish fucked around with this message at 13:31 on Aug 19, 2016 |
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 13:29
|
|
|
A GTX 680 is a little faster than a GTX 960 2GB, a little slower than a R9 380, though it depends on the game a little bit. Considerably slower than a Polaris card or GTX 1060 3GB.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 13:31
|
|
|
Phlegmish posted:Strictly limiting ourselves to current-gen, it's probably the RX 470 (with the RX 470 being better). That I'm not sure about, all I know is that my friend is considering it. a gtx960 is about $250 here, an rx470 starts at $300.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 13:32
|
|
|
So, in this case I'd recommend against getting the 680 unless he can get it for significantly under $250. If they're asking for more, it's better to go with one of the low to mid-tier cards of the last two generations.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 13:38
|
|
|
Phlegmish posted:So, in this case I'd recommend against getting the 680 unless he can get it for significantly under $250. If they're asking for more, it's better to go with one of the low to mid-tier cards of the last two generations. I told him he should be asking around $50, considering the age and remaining lifespan. Maybe closer to $100 - he's getting it from a mutual friend of ours, so it'll be a mates rates sale (the card was actually originally mine before I sold it to the friend that is now selling it to him) when does the 680 stop getting driver support? The Lord Bude fucked around with this message at 13:47 on Aug 19, 2016 |
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 13:44
|
|
|
Oh. Not sure about the exchange rate, but that sounds like a good deal.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 13:46
|
|
|
The Lord Bude posted:when does the 680 stop getting driver support? It's far more likely that card putters out from wear before that happens.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 13:50
|
|
|
Anime Schoolgirl posted:When Fermi stops getting driver support, which will be quite a while. Kepler.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 14:05
|
|
|
I was more referring to CUDA itself, which has been an iterative architecture since Fermi. When/if Nvidia decides to replace that, the support will start to stop.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 14:06
|
|
|
I'll have to try bumping the MSAA down to x4 and see what gains I can get. I tried out the new Doom last night - thankfully steam has rebates - it was cool, ran at ultra everything 1080p without breaking a sweat. But... it wasn't for me. I am 33 -- ive done this before many, many times. But cool to see my card pushed hard and looking great. Now to upgrade my monitor.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 16:27
|
|
|
You're suffering a fate worse than death: buying computer products only because you want to see better benchmark numbers. You're in good company with a lot of this thread, at least. I'd just be happy to see Witcher 3 looking crisp and beautiful with all the frames. With a tiny, eetsy bitsy card. 
Anime Schoolgirl fucked around with this message at 16:30 on Aug 19, 2016 |
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 16:28
|
|
|
Vintersorg posted:But... it wasn't for me. I am 33 -- ive done this before many, many times. But cool to see my card pushed hard and looking great. Hey man, I'm 40 and DOOM is my GOTY so far. I think you might just be dead inside.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 16:39
|
|
|
Apparently DX:MDs DX12 path is slower than DX11 across the board in single-GPU setups    http://gamegpu.com/action-/-fps-/-tps/deus-ex-mankind-divided-test-gpu repiv fucked around with this message at 16:54 on Aug 19, 2016 |
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 16:51
|
|
|
Some interesting PCIE testing results from Reddit. Obviously requires more investigation, but it wouldn't surprise me if "PCIE 3.0 16x is no improvement over 8x" is the next computer building knowledge tidbit to fall after "system memory speed has no effect on gaming performance".
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 16:53
|
|
|
OTOH it took a card as powerful as the Titan XP to saturate PCIE3 beyond 8x. Nice to see that wall is finally being hit.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 16:58
|
|
|
repiv posted:Apparently DX:MDs DX12 path is slower than DX11 across the board in single-GPU setups Something something 1070 not overkill for 1080p?...That engine is either broken as hell or we're going to need at least $1500 just to play the drat thing at 1080p.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 17:01
|
|
|
Seamonster posted:Something something 1070 not overkill for 1080p?...That engine is either broken as hell or we're going to need at least $1500 just to play the drat thing at 1080p. Those benches are making me glad I sprang for a GSync monitor along with my 1080. Yikes.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 17:04
|
|
|
repiv posted:Apparently DX:MDs DX12 path is slower than DX11 across the board in single-GPU setups Weird to see AMD cards doing relatively well there. The Fury X is over the 1070 and the 480 beats a 980.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 17:05
|
|
|
Horn posted:Weird to see AMD cards doing relatively well there. The Fury X is over the 1070 and the 480 beats a 980. DX:MD is an AMD Gaming Evolved title, it's expected to see a performance bias.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 17:10
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 15:46 |
|
|
my poor 780ti... I certainly won't be playing this at 1440p
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 17:11
|
|