Convince me to buy or not buy this right now.
I was going to wait for the AMD rx480, but I decided that I want more power. Is there a reason to not get this G P U ? anyone else bought it and are you happy so far?
>but I decided that I want more power.
why? what's your setup and future setup. If you're not running 4k then this card is overkill.
>>55213734
I'm on the fence too, but probably gonna wait for more reviews of both to see if the 1070 is worth the extra price jump.
>>55213734
Just fucking do it already
I was planning to get a 1070, even though I figured it was a bit out my price range at $399, assuming it would be around £340-£350. But considering that the ones I've seen are closer to £400, I feel like I'm gonna wait for AMD 's offerings, or maybe a gtx1060
Why tf would you pay over $400 for something that's going to get btfo'd before the end of the month
Pic very related
>>55213746
Oh, ok. I'm just gaming on 1080p so I guess it's really overkill. My current PC is 8 years old and I'm building a new one. Should I be able to play new games at 60 fps with the 480? I don't want any dips or performance drops.
The main reason I wanted more power is to "future-proof" my machine so I can keep it for the next 5 years.
>>55213734
>Convince me to buy or not buy this right now.
i have a family to feed and i get payed based on how many people here buy it
if i don't sell 10 more by the end of the month nvidia is taking my kids and forcing them to sit in a room filled with flammable materials while a 4x sli pc tries to do arithmetic
please buy one OP
I love my family
Do you have anything to play with it that it will make a difference?
If your gonna bust a nut get a 1080 at least you won't be half as pissed when the 1080ti comes out.
>>55213784
Gtx 1060 will cost 200-240 and will not offer any competition to the rx480.
>>55213811
>forcing them to sit in a room filled with flammable materials while a 4x sli pc tries to do arithmetic
..........reported for..... terrorism?
>>55213811
this is pretty fucking sad actually
>>55213807
>60 fps
>>55213734
Still waiting for my Pre-order of this exact card to come in stock.
If the rx480 releases before they can stock it I'm just going to get it instead.
>>55213734
the performance increases of the 1070 and 1080 are not that great and the performance leaps are mainly in the V.R. arena... if you aren't doing V.R. then don't buy a card that is all about V.R.
>>55213836
human eye can't see etc
>>55213815
This makes no fucking sense
Op if you're gaming at 1080p 60fps then the 1070 will probably be overkill. Maybe buy it anyways then upgrade to 144hz or a higher resolution in the future.
>>55213734
Games barely make a 970 break a sweat.
I dunno what nvidia is gonna do when everything runs on a old ass card and it makes no sense to spend lots of money on a gpu for any reason other than epeen
wait for 1070ti
>>55213807
>1080p 60fps
yeah, at max graphics aswell, 1080p is chump res these days
for what it costs, buy 2, just for the fuck of it, if you want a bit of extra "future proofing"
>>55213871
>Games barely make a 970 break a sweat.
At 1080p60
>>55213951
> thinking you need more than 1080p
>>55214012
>thinking you need more than 600p
I have an MSI r9 390 right now and this shit runs hotter than 90c despite them advertising 76c
I wouldn't trust them
>>55213807
A 480 will run anything at 1080/60, except perhaps The Witcher 3 with GoyWorks hair turned on.
>>55213746
The real question is what about 1440p. Going full 4k yet is stupid, but 1440 is pretty reasonable.
>>55214072
All memes aside, either your case airflow is fucking terrible or your card is actually faulty (possibly too much thermal paste or a misaligned cooler). Even overclocked it should be getting nowhere near that. Either fix your airflow, take the cooler off and repaste it or RMA it.
>>55214024
have a 1080p and a 1440p 144hz
you notice the extra frames FAR more than the resolution, and i'm betting 4k is much the same where the fps will be SO much more valuable than a hardware based aa pass.
>>55214151
put tessellation on 8x and it likely could.
>>55213807
Wait for the RX 480 , it will be good for you and in the future you can just buy another and crossfire.
>>55213746
So running 3 144hz monitors at 5760x1080 res is not taxing a 1070? I mean I hear you fucks all the time make this statement..if your only doing 1080 then this is overkill..but who the fuck runs single screens. Ever see a /bst/ thread? Most are using multi-monitor setups.
Doesn't that make a difference?
>>55213734
RX480 performs the same when overclocked, and costs half.
>>55214641
Yeah fuck 4K and 1440p, I'll be running 144hz 1080p for another 5 years.
>>55215939
Awesome. So how long have you had yours?
>>55213734
OP a 470 doesn't cost $439 you will have to pay over 550 for a piece of shit apple meme that AMD will btfo or $200
>>55215874
If you already have all the requirements for Xfire then sure, but if you're building from new you can just save money on PSU and mobo/ heat issues and buy a 1070 for a little more.
>>55213734
>Convince me to buy or not buy this right now.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814127955
>$439
>Out of Stock
>novidya paper launch
>cheapest 1070 card is selling for $570
>>55213734
Buy it OP!!!!
Then watch the CF 480 rigs get more frames then you for less money.
>>55213807
>"future-proof" my machine so I can keep it for the next 5 years.
My 670 barely lasted me three years. Fuck Nividia.
>>55213734
im an idiot ayy
>>55215926
Just go back to >>>/v/ and never post here again.
>>55216216
I'm still using my 660 and it runs good as new... I did upgrade my processor since i bought it, but I can run nearly everything at 60fps+
>>55216183
and only 75% of those frames will be runts!
>>55213807
You could get a 480 with a 1440p display for the same price as the 1070
>>55213734
i was in a similar boat op. was waiting for amd higher end polaris but decided to grab an asus 1080 strix off of newegg last week when they randomly came back in stock.
boosts crazy high. couldn't be happier.
>>55216521
Do you even have a 4k or 1440p 144hz display?
>>55216406
Thanks for popping out of a 'linux as a great everyday desktop OS' thread faggot. But I do not see anywhere in that post that a game was mentioned.
Now go be a faggot elsewhere. I took a dump this morning that had more value to the world than you do. And I flushed that piece of shit.
>>55213807
overkill is good
overkill means it will play games at high - max settings longer than at 1440p and higher.
later on you can upgrade to a new, higher resolution monitor and already have a video card to power it.
>>55216541
1080p 144hz.
as >>55216579 mentioned.
when 1440p 144hz screens come down in price i'm snagging one. now, i max out everything with ease.
>>55216587
Except you now have to pay a $200 or more nvidia tax if you want a-sync
you also should have upgraded your display before your GPU man, GPU prices drop more than display prices
hell for around the price of your 1080 you could have gotten a free-sync 1440p 144hz IPS display at $550 ish, plus the 480
>>55216607
i don't want to play my games at high or medium settings like the 480 will play them in a year with a 1440p screen. i also don't want to buy another graphics card in a year.
>nvidia tax
you sure sound like a amd shill
and gsync? who gives a shit about that? i'm not sensitive to this "tearing" so many of you talk about.
going on about "gsync" and behaving like its a requirement.... really you sound desperate trying to pull out any excuse to denounce nvidia and promote amd.
>>55216647
Pretty sure 1440p 144hz IPS at medium > 1080p 144hz TN at ultra
Especially for daily desktop use, I'm simply saying you could have gotten a better overall system
>>55216647
1440p should be easy for high settings even for a 980. If your going 4k then sure the 1080 is a good choice but im sticker to 480 which should be able to handle Ultra settings on those resolutions lower then 4K. Waiting for real benchmarks to come out.
>>55216659
better? to each there own.
>I'm simply saying you could have gotten a better overall system
no, not really
you clearly have a biased for amd and pushing it hard. kinda showed it going on and on about gsync. i'm sure if the 490x was coming out you be shilling hard for it right now.
>you pushing nvidia!
not really. i upgraded from a sapphire nitro 390. great card, but my 1080 is FAR better.
>>55216705
>high settings even for a 980
atm
seems like all of you are only thinking about the present.
>>55216707
TN panels make your eyes bleed man
and 1080 is too limited on vertical pixels for productivity
>>55216732
telling someone to buy a 480 and pair it with a 1440p or higher is the equivalent of promoting public beatings.
what bother getting a better screen if you're going to pair it with a shitty 480.
if op can afford a 1070 he should go for it. especially if he wants to upgrade to a 1440p or higher later on. if not, at least he can easily max out games for awhile. unlike the 480.
buying the 480 is the equivalent of buying a 960. its performance before release is already approaching lackluster for 1080p for newer games coming out. the performance of the 1070 will become the de facto standard for even 1080p gaming.
Not OP but can a 480 max out new games on 1440p? Is there any reliable benchmark or review yet?
I'll convince you.
At the very least to wait, maybe not even for the RX480
Wait for the 1070 price to go down. Wait just a little longer until the supply and demand can get save you the 70$ you're literally throwing away.
And even if the 70$ doesn't effect you, remember that you're setting a precedent that allows both Nvidia and AMD to set prices on midrange products well into the 400$ range which is just absurd.
>>55216732
>TN panels make your eyes bleed
Not good ones faggot.
>>55216762
barely.
all benchmarks show it being slower than a 980 ti and either the same or better than a 980. for current games its at its limit. newer games will require lowering settings. even for 1080p games in the future.
if you care about investing your money its better to save the extra $150 for the 1070 or whatever amd equivalent.
>>55216647
>i'm not sensitive to this "tearing"
Fix your eyes.
>>55216785
Ok, so I will wait until the 490 or 480x comes out and see how it can do
>>55216728
hoesntly the future proof meme is only comparable to cpus. Remember the original Titan cost 1 thousand dollars three years ago and today its performance is comparable to a measly mid range card. Your paying more for a technology that will become cheaper to produce and develop in a few months. Your paying more for being the first one to use that tech then then.
>>55216789
great response. much praise. really showed.
i haven't seen tearing since i stopped using shitty dell monitors from 2006. even my last ips 60hz display i could barely notice tearing, and only did if i actually tried to notice it. with my new tn 144hz i can't notice it at all even trying.
also helps knowing my 1080 will for awhile help me maintain 100+ fps at 1080p to keep up with my 144hz refresh.
>>55216801
those 980 ti's are sure lasting awhile. far longer than those 960's.
>>55216827
even the 970's lasted awhile for 1080p. going on three years for 1080p gaming. better than the 960's that already had to start dropping settings down to medium for 1080p.
>>55216783
The best TN panel is still a TN panel
>>55216760
OP only has a 1080p 60hz display, buying a 1070 would be retarded.
You replace GPUs way more than displays, especially if you buy a high end display, even if the 480 can't max out the display, you then have the high end display for the 1080ti or Vega cards
the 1080 is nearly there for 4k gaming, but it's still not quite there, it's about 80%+ for AAA games
>>55216827
its not comparable. A 960 will play most games on High resolution up to 1080p. In three years those games will become more advanced and paying another 250 bucks for another mid range card would be appropriate. A 980ti is for those that simply dont want to mess around in the graphics settings and turn everything to Ultra at the games start.
>>55216029
>2016
>not having a time machine
Pleb.
>>55216852
funny cause those people who went out and paid $600 for 780 ti's back in 2013 have had cards that have lasted for four years now.
people who bought the 680's had them last until last year until they started to have to drop settings down from high for 1080p.
some might try to claim its an "exception" "hurr no die shrink" is nonsense. my 6800gt from 2004 lasted till 2007 before i had to start dropping settings from high.
>>55216789
I have not seen tearing since I got a 144hz monitor on any game at all, only when I had 60hz
>>55216856
>You replace GPUs way more than displays
yeah because you keep buying $200 gpu's. buy a $600 one and they last a lot longer.
>>55216869
it is comparable. a 960 cannot max out witcher 3 and maintain a steady 60fps at 1080p as an example.
So is founders the new 3.5?
>says msrp is 379
>sell reference at 450 and call it founder
>now no one wants to sell below founder price even non-founder reference cards
>>55216910
amd needs to jump on the founders bandwagon.
they need the money the most
>now no one wants to sell below founder price even non-founder reference cards
really depends on location. here on newegg i grabbed mine (non-founders) for $60 less than the founders $700 msrp for my 1080.
>>55216416
My 690 stutters at Dark Souls 3, dont even try
Not OP but Ill ask anyways.
Would it be a good idea to just go ahead and get a 1080, or should I buy a 1070 and get a 1080ti when it comes out? I plan on upgrading to 1440p when my own new build is finished.
Only thing Im readlly uneasy with on the matter is that chances are the 1080ti will barely be better, and will cost $200 more.
>>55217081
buy a 480 and use the $200 in savings to get yourself a nice watch
>>55217107
Yea see, the issue with that is that Id like to still have a half decent GPU come this time next year.
And I prefer my house not smelling like smoke.
>>55216908
Except current top end GPUs can't do 4k/1440p 144hz gaming, it's almost there, but not quite
Prices for 980s and 980tis are dropping heavily.
I just can't decide if I should just pull the trigger for a 980ti for 350 bucks or wait for polaris.
>>55217298
wait for benchmarks lol its only two weeks. If Nvidia gets Btfo in benchmarks as expected then they will have to lower the prices even more.
>>55217320
MY SUMMER VACATION IS RUNNING OUT AND I NEED TO PLAY VIDEO GAMES RIGHT NOW~!!!!
>>55216541
even at 1080p 60fps a 390/970 struggle
>>55217332
>MY SUMMER VACATION IS RUNNING OUT
summerfag detected
>>55217338
In what? Rise of the tomb raider? Mirror's Edge catalyst on Hyper? for the most part they're going to be fine for high settings for a decent amount of time to come
>>55217463
gta 5 anywhere near grass
>>55217479
Except that the general average on pretty much any high end GPU is going to be over 60fps
>>55217521
well no shit
but it's minimum fps that matters. you never want to dip below 60 on any halfway decent computer
>>55217541
>but it's minimum fps that matters. you never want to dip below 60 on any halfway decent computer
This ain't VR, that has never been a thing, unless the game had major minimum fps issues that caused stuttering
just buy a free-sync display if you care that much about tearing
>>55217549
freesync wont matter when you're running at 30 fps as soon as you go off road
>>55217557
I don't remember having any frame rate issues on my 7850 2gb card, running the game at low for 60fps
>>55213734
Just get the RX 480 and overclock it
>>55217575
that's because you're running on low.
as soon as you turn the grass up above low it destroys your framerates
or you put it on low and the grassy areas look terrible.
neither of these are what you want when building a high end pc
>>55217624
It's seemginly only an issue then in one single game, that I already played through and will probably never touch again, I think someone can live with low quality grass
>>55213734
I will go with 480
>>55217600
This cant be true, right?
>>55218492
It's confirmed fake.
>>55213734
so you want a card thats
is below 980ti most of the time
doesnt provide any better perf under dx12
literally will get destroy on it
is almost x2 more money than 480 for literally 10% faster
lel
>>55218562
well you see the problem with that is the livestream that korean dude make...having a 480 running on 1607 and smoking a 1070
i understand is as far (at least i think.,.....)as a gcn can go on air given that cooler and he didnt really had the proper drivers but damn 1607 on a gcn having a base clock of 1180 or 1080 whatever it was is just hmm...
>>55215989
only thing i think that is more important than 120/144 is gsync and free sync,
I have both a 1200p60 and a 1440p144 but the 144 has freesync, officially 40-144, however, unofficially, it freesyncs as low as 18hz or 23hz,
we throttled the card back to see what the hell was up, and my god, does freesync make low fps SO much more playable... granted would rather have a very nice and smooth 144hz, but some games will dip in frames and the worse worse ones will murder frame rates due to poor programing. having a monitor, that no matter the frame rate, updates the monitor when a frame is ready, makes the game feel that much more responsive and playable.
>>55216137
a good 550 watt psu from a good brand is usually within 20$ of a 750-850 watt psu from same brand. never buy a just enough, always try to keep that psu at around 50% use.
>>55215926
no one realistically games on multiple monitors outside of racing and some sims.
hell, it would be better to get a 4k screen and simulate a dual screen setup.
and if you game on one monitor, other for other shit, its just as taxing on a gpu as running one screen for that game.
>>55213811
>sli
As long as it is not fermi...
get two 480's instead, its cheaper and better
>>55216647
its not about the tearing, the screen updates the frames when the gpu is ready, instead of the gpu sending as many frames as possible to the screen and the screen updating on a schedule, no matter if the frame is old or new.
a-sync displays make games feel just that much smoother.
use to say id rather have 144 then async, but now id rather have async than 144 if that was the options.
>>55216732
>TN panels make your eyes bleed man
Have a tn, have an ips that is worlds better...
the difference is so fucking small that it's a non issue, especially when calibrating the screen puts many tn's on par with non pro range ips in terms of colors...
viewing agnles on ips are just as shit as tn, or i have gots gift of tn panels (syncmaster t240hd)
>>55217145
144hz will never be there.
they will constantly increase the cpu demand or the gpu demand, unless something comes around and completely stops resources expansion for gaming (i think path tracing could do this, but its still years out)
>>55216216
Well next gen consoles came and with them even shittier ports.
So of course it only lasted you 3 years you dumb nigger. A 1070 is going to last a long time.
>>55219442
if nvidia make the cards to last long than a generation they will loose money
they always do shady shit to cripple their cards
wether is from drivers side or putting 2 years old cards into legacy mode
>>55216516
And basically never play 1440p at reasonable graphics settings
>>55219490
>its this shitty meme again
I have 250 dollars, what card should i spend it on? If I save up, I'll have to wait till around December or January
>>55216890
I have a 280x
my cpu bottlenecks me, but i'm never concerned if my card can handle 1080p60 in a finished game, im worried about my cpu though. its a design that is 4 years old, and can likely go another 2 before i would be required to replace it, but ill likely repalce it with a 480 8gb to get rid of the cram bottleneck i have.
before that i had a 5770 which lasted me 4 years...
the highest of high end lasts you just about as long as the mid range. you only get fucked if you go low end.
>>55213746
>>55214156
You people are just the worst.
>strong GPUs are for high resolution only
Thats the fucking bullshit misinformation you are spreading around this board, so let me explain how fucking wrong you are:
>buy 144Hz 1080p monitor
>run games at 120fps for best experience
To be hones this card is still not strong enough to do THIS even, so what the fuck is your point?
>>55219507
well its true is there a reason to have the original titan the 780ti the 780 and the 770 yet on legacy?
those cards are the last gen of superscala cards nvidia every made and they still beat down some of their new ones on dx12..
compare those results with some of the maxwell 2.0 gen and you will see
>>55219554
>beat down some of their new ones in dx12
Like what, the 950? Even the 960 shits on my 770 sometimes and that's not due to gimping but because maxwell's architecture is simply superior.
>>55214151
A 390 runs TW3 at 1080/60 with goyworks on only Geralt. I've never tried with it enabled for all NPCs though.
>>55219588
or because nvidia pushes devs to implement things to a stupid extent that the 900 does well and the 700 don't do so well... like tessellation, or anything gameworks really.
>>55219526
the difference between ultra and high in most games is miniscule at best, but the framerate difference is massive.
you cant just go maxing everything like a retard.
>>55218668
The fuck are you doing? Writing some kind of poetry? It hurts to read that
>>55219588
well...
>>55219626
According to that graph, AMD also gimped their shit with newer drivers.
I think what actually happened is that the new drivers were probably just done badly or optimized for upcoming 1000 cards, so the 900 cards suffered a little bit.
Either way I heard Kepler cards suffered the most but it still only dropped one or so fps.
>>55219618
>you cant go max everything
Fun fact: I never do.
Try running modded Fallout 4 at 100fps+ on high settings and tell me how it went, for example.
>>55219657
its dx11... for some reason no one did a dx12 on 780ti **cough cough**
only a german site but it pains my eyes to find it
basicly a 780ti is trading blows with 980 on dx12 till 2k above it it lacks the memory to drive the chip
>>55219675
So what's your point? That the 780 TI is on par with a 980, but it triggers you that the 700 series is being called legacy?
>>55213792
Nice drawing Pajeet
>>55219690
yeap and for good reason as well
you see kepler is the last gen of nvidia that actually uses a hardware scheduler without the need of a driver to work it...and naturally its faster on dx12 because of that (and it has a lot more power draw because of it also..)
but since they moved into a superpipelined desing after that and basicly kept emulating everything eventually aots came and showcased that problem..you see kepler CAN do async by definition..thats why they cant gimp it through the drivers simply because it doesnt need a driver to prioritize the workloads being a dynamic desing as it is..
>>55219660
you mean the game that has very heavy implementations of gameworks and physx in it?
the game that is on gambro engine, that got modified to creation, then modified to whatever the fuck it is now but still has so much of gamebro in it that it still has all the exact same issues that morrowind had?
really this game runs like hell?
i'm fucking shocked.
oh, fun fact, if the game runs at over 60fps the physics go to hell, so you literally cant run it at over 60 without breaking the game.
what a well made game and engine, huh.
>>55219770
might as well try minecraft with full shaders on the most modded pack that exists....
bet i will get better fps than fallout but i guess the game has the best name for it
(also i think fallout has havok for physics not physx)
>>55219490
See this meme around
test my 780ti using old drivers VS brand new ones.
difference is 1.61% on synthetic benchmarks and 0.9% in real games.
it's basically bullshit made up by cucked AMD fans.
>>55219862
its not actually and you will see it in a year when the 970/980 will go on legacy too..
but as i said 780ti has a hardware sc that is impossible to gimp it via drivers unless they remove the whole section of it kinda like what they did with 770 and the outgrade on their forums begin
>>55219894
Nvidia GIMPS OLD CARDS!
just not 700 series cuz that doesnt work
just wait for 900s series gimps
you sir are fucking retarded.
>>55219909
give me proof that they dont do it
i dare you
>>55219341
Yeah I do iRacing and DCS and some other stuff. In fact if I can't play a game in triple screen..I don't. So far not a one I can think of that won't let me. You name it, seems to do it.
I have triple 144hz and a Vive so a 1080GTX will be put to good use. Gonna keep my 770GTX in there as well to drive my projector and 2 7inch lcd's and also use it for physx. I will upgrade monitors down the road I am sure. Have not really looked into 1440p panels, but would need 3 of them for sure. Never can go back to a single screen setup.
>>55219922
iracing...the game that will soon charge gas prices as dlc
or changing tyres will cost you 10 dollars..
or crashing your car will involve you having a real insurance...
why people still play this game while there are literally a lot more and better simulations?
>>55219920
i already posted the proof that they don't.
Supply me proof that they do.
Oh ya, you don't have any...
fuck off AMD shill.
>>55219948
where is your proof? your own word?
in that case
ayymd is better than novidia and intel and ibm and and and
here my proof has the same value as your own words..
also wanna see real proof? the consistend decrease in perf on the same games among various drivers released
pretty easy to find since 2015 especially on geforce forums
>>55219942
I worked for Sierra-Online/Vivendi back in the day. Am a Dave Kaemmer fan and I always get a deal on it.
Real drivers use it, not really better competition anywhere else.
>>55213734
Grab the EVGA version instead. all the benchmarks are saying that the EVGA SC card is literally 10~ FPS behind the 1080 in most AAA titles and astronomically cooler.
>>55220068
actually they use it because they get paid to play not because its a real sim...the days that this game was a sim has long past especially if you compare it to rf2 or ac (ok ac being restricted of not having weather modes or night and day patterns does make it stupid but still its one of the best out there)
>all amd shills are poorfags
>all nvidia pros are richfags
this pretty much sums up this thread, if you got money to shit out buy nvidia, if you don't buy amd.
>>55219770
I get your point, the game is badly optimized. Sadly this is not t he only game that literally cant be played above 100fps unless you are using one of the strongest GPUs on the market.
My point is: GPU performance is not only needed for high resolution but high frame rate aswell, which everyone with a decent monitor benefits from.
Tl;dr: the "buy strong GPUs for 4k only" argument is still bullshit and will most likely remain bullshit for a long time.
>>55220361
Also
>if you play above 60fps the game breaks
I'd be happy if I could run the game at 59fps modded on my 970 but oh well, seems like I need a fucking 1080.
>>55213734
if you have to buy nvidia, at least don't pay extra for founders and wait a bit for regular cards.
>>55213871
MY fucking sides, what games are you playing.
And yeah before we go, I had a 970 before I bought my 1080.
>>55214151
I await to see a 480 run battlefield,hardline,arma3, etc at 60fps 1080p on decent acceptable settings. Think I will see a chocolate fireguard before I see that.
>>55219830
nope, patch 1.3 put physx in the game, or nvidia locked havoc to their cards alone, considering physx is part of the gameworks suite, i assumed physx.
>>55219922
why use multi monitors if you have a vive? shouldn't it kick the shit out of it?
>>55220361
>>55220370
its not badly optimized, hell i'm willing to be this is literally as good as they could do it and that its the pinnacle of programing perfection...
the thing is, once you stretch and engine to far it fucking breaks. its hard to explain because open world games are the only ones that ever push engines this far.
look at gta5, sadly another gameworks title, but they put all the graphics settings that will break the engine in another category entirely.
with fallout, there are 2 areas that fuck you hard, down town boston, and the lift in diamond city, you will never get these areas running well, but there are mods that change settings on the fly for downtown boston, it will lower some of them making that area not as big a shit hole to walk through.
also, do yourself a favor and look up some optimization guides, witcher 3 had a few settings you could turn down, like grass, from max to the second or third highest, and you would never see grass pop in because the game rendered the shit to far out. fallout 4 also has this issue to some extent too where shits rendered so far away its a spec on your screen.
also, the game breaks at above 60fps, no point in going over.
as for the 970 person, look into texture mods, bethesda is fucking incompetent when it comes to texture work, and they put in textures with no data on one level, which bloats the textures out, you can save a fair amount of vram space if you install that shit.
but seriously, overall, horrible fucking game to point to and tell me 'what can run it at 100fps'
>>55218881
http://www.douyu.com/pc666
>>55221260
Nevermind its been removed :/
>>55221066
go to havok you will find it there
it has animation and physics libraries of havok unless they removed it now and got full retard into physx
>>55221281
1.3 patch, i believe they added physx destruction for depree.
>>55221260
here anon
http://radeonfury.com/thread-5798-1-1.html
>>55221243
I am both people you quoted, sorry for not making this clear. Also since you keep bringing up arguments that do not counter my initial one, lets try one last time:
I understood that F4 breaks above 60FPS and why.
I was just using F4 as an example. I could have just as easily said Crysis 3, Whicher 3 etc.
F4 doesnt even run at 60fps on my 970, even with optimized grafics settings (due to mods desu, but the game is shit without them) so because I cant really change the game, I have to throw better hardware at it for it to run better.
So again: my argument still stands:
>better GPU
>more FPS
>closer to the theoretical sweetspot when using higher end monitors
>better experience
You dont need a 4k monitor. Its worth buying the new GPUs even if gaming at 1080 @ high(er) fps.
Also another thing worth mentioning:
>game is badly optimized / runs on a shitty engine
>want to play at higher FPS
>cant change game or engine
>solve problem by buying a stronger GPU
Hardware is literally the only variable that can give you a better gaming experience if you cant / dont want to change the software.
Get my argument now?
>>55221349
actually the hardware can only give you better perf if it has a fully programmable pipeline which so far only one (cancelled project) had the larrabee...
and quite possibly since we keep hearing about the polaris being able of OoO execution amd might actually done it too..
>>55213734
It's your money why do you even ask
>>55221391
Glad to hear AMD finally did something.
Also thoughts on my personal situation, maybe?
Im using DX11 to run my games because I cant change Windows 10 to a degree where I think its not shit.
So my only option seems to be throwing newer GPUs into my RIG to get a performance boost.
Do you know the theoretical performance loss of DX11 vs 12?
And please no "lel, ur buying a new GPU but it runs X% worse on your machine because your a W7 pleb"
I guess everyone has their preferences, and I hate W10 so much, that this is actually fine for me.
>>55221428
personally i keep hearing lots of people comparing the adoptation rate of dx11 vs dx12..
dx11 had almost 2 years run before the first full dx11 appeared..
now we have already various ones (in most cases with some glitches here and there)
literally if you dont go into windows 10 you will fall behind waiting for vulkan to come(remember this is the same team behind opengl lol)
and no dont even think about waiting dx12 on w7 as people where able to do with dx11 on xp (or was it 9 i dont remember)ms had to create feature levels to accomodate nvidia in order to emulate certain stuff on OS level
that is pretty much the grim condition of how the w7 will get behind very quickly regarding gaming ecosystem
BUT
if you dont mind waiting or playing any new dx12 game then by all means but be adviced you better buy a card thinking about the future regardless of your current system.. there are quite a lot of dx12 for 2016 that have yet to come with deus ex being the best of them
>>55221557
Thanks a lot, m8.
Also I dont plan on waiting for DX12 for W7 (because as you said its obviously never going to happen).
What Im thinking of is using W7 with DX11 as long as I can (meaning till the W7 support runs out) and think about what to do later. Thank god most upcoming games will still support DX11 so I can actually play them.
Also thx for reminding me of Vulkan. I was focusing on Microsoft and Nvidia so much, that I almost forgot that team red might have something quite awesome up their sleeve.
>>55221428
DX12 has MANY new features but the biggest increase due to performance is draw calls. See demo on links below.
DX11 - 2,211 Draw Calls in 881 Seconds
DX12 - 15,161 Draw Calls in 171 Seconds
Demo stops when FPS drops below 30
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TV864UUnF2w
Another link for DX12 efficiency
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yVdXy7t9oJs
>>55221557
DX12 Adoption rate is pretty high
Ark survival evolved
Ashes of the singularity
DayZ Standalone
Descent Underground
Deus Ex Mankind Divided
Fable Legends
Far Cry Primal
Gears of War Ultimate Edition
Hitman
Mass Effect Andromeda
Caffeine
Sea Of Thieves
Squad
Star Citizen
Tom Clancy's The Division
W.N.C Infantry
(Some games listed will get a patch for dx12 compatibility)
>>55221597
nope at least for 2016 very few games will actually be dx11..
even fewer will have support for both api's
if you have time to read see here as to why mixing both api's is stupid and bad for gamers (recent rotr and gow is a prime example)
http://www.dualshockers.com/2016/03/14/directx12-requires-different-optimization-on-nvidia-and-amd-cards-lots-of-details-shared/
>>55221708
ark will never ever have dx12 path due to gameworks(rotr and gow is an example of how bad they perform under dx12 )
dayz as per 0.60 has some dx12 but being bethesda means their dev is still a pile of shit
fable is cancelled sadly
far cry primal will have dx12? havent heard about that
gow is a dx9 slapped on a dx12 path with hbao+ literally killed amd cards lol a fury x was perfoming near a 960...
the division? havent heard something
squad? dont even know it
tl dr dont expect gameworks infested games to have any sort of dx12 with it inside whoever claims it its lying nvidia will never give that kind of advantage to amd
>>55221668
Wow, thats actually quite impressive.
To bad Ill be missing out on this for the next years.
I just hope that gaming on Linux will become big till then, so I can drop Windows completely, even if my performance will still be bottlenecked by software like the API.
>>55221708
Most of those use DX11 aswell though, as far as I know.
>>55221712
>mixing both apis is stupid
Thought so. Also with Microsoft pushing us all to use W10 I wouldn't be surprised if they do everything they can to make devs stop developing DX11 support for upcoming games.
But as long as no game that really interests me uses DX12, I'm still not willing to adapt. Call be stupidly stubborn if you will, but most I'm willing to do is maybe dual boot W10, W7 and Linux, which sounds stupid because it is. But this is how much I hate the new OS.
>>55221763
you know what was the tipping point?
https://www.reddit com/r/pcmasterrace/comments/367qav/mark_my_word_if_we_dont_stop_the_nvidia_gameworks/
there are even videos of cd projects devs along nvidia devs saying "we created it we get to regulate it"
>>55221785
I remember this, but whats your point?
Am I doing something that encourages this behavior from Nvidia and some gamedevs?
>inb4 its because you buy Nvidia
I actually dont favor one manufacturer over another and almost all the hardware I buy is second hand (especially Nvidia and Intel).
The whole argument I gave about "buying a 1080 just to have decent framerates in some games" (>>55220370) I gave just because this GPU seems to be the best one at this moment.
So, mind explaining what you meant to tell me with that post?
>>55221763
A wiki list of DX12
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_games_with_DirectX_12_support
>>55221879
Again, a lot of these also have DX11 support.
>>55221879
2/3 of the games in the 'current games' are actually games that don't have dx12 modes, patches, or releases yet.
The other 1/3 is Ashes, and some garbage that no-one cares about.
>>55221763
I think I'm going to try dualbooting w7 and w10- booting into W10 just for the DX12 games.
>>55221911
Glad I inspired someone to do something reasonable. Ill be doing the same, once relevant games drop DX11 support.
>>55221901
yeah
no one cares about
hitman
or ashes
or qb
or mirrors edge
>>55221934
Well I didn't even read your post.
But this was a 'in the future I will try dualbooting' rather than something I'm going to do now.
I'm not going to dualboot windows just to run ashes in dx12 mode
Ashes and the other DX12 game.
>>55221986
>qb
>Requires a Microsoft Account. Windows Store exclusive.
IE; not a game worth playing.
>mirrors edge
What?
>Ashes
Already mentioned that
I'll give you hitman, but really you should play the earlier hitman games.
>>55222025
so because its on ms store its not worth playing? thats not what you meant..
catalyst is on frostbite
frostbite has mantle
dx12/vulkan is mantle
aka it has already support for it
>>55219494
What are you talking about? the 390x/980 already do 1440p gaming fairly well
