Anyone getting the 1080ti?

Anyone getting the 1080ti?

Looks to be almost double the fps at 1440p than a 980ti, and that thing is a beast (I own a 980ti)

I wish I could afford the 1080ti

buy amd if you're poor :^)

Are you unhappy with the 980ti?

Already 1080 SLI see no reason

I downgraded to a 980Ti from a 1080.

Fuck ngreedia.

Why

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

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.

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

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.

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

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

>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.

Retard.

>you bought a 1080

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

Hello izo1

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.

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

> 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

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.

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.

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

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.

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

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

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

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

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.

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.

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.

>being an early adopter, enthusiast, pioneer etc.

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

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

The 1920x1200 only being 1.11 disgusts me the most.

Fucking 1080p plebs.

>i should do what everyone else does

>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

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.

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

>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.

But that wasn't my point.

yeah it was you dumb faggot

>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

>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.

>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.

>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*

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

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

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

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

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.

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.

>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?

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.

>1080ti
I have a Titan X Pascal already.

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

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?

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

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

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

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

>real usage vs gddr5

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

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

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.

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.

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

>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.

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

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.

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.

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

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.

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

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.

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.

>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.

>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.

>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"

>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

>tfw single least common resolution on there

>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?

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

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?

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.

>buying cards with non premium materials

Why?

>Fuck you faggots, if everyone listen to AMDrones on Sup Forums 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

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.