How possible is it for Pascal to hit the shelves in early 2016 with a budget card being released near the end of the year, similar in price to 960 or 950? Or is it completely impossible and I should just buy 950 (or 960 once its price drops a bit)?
Maybe I should just wait for the American economy to collapse and China's to take over so that I can buy the card for threefiddy?
>>319876397
Come on, guys, I don't want to spend cash on card just to have it rendered completely irrelevant by a new technology that I could've bought had I waited for a few months.
They'll come around March or April at the earliest and a budget card usually comes out the year after.
Intelligent people just get a R9 380.
>>319876850
then never ever buy a card, literally. That's how it works and this stupid discussion will keep happening constantly with the next card, then the next card, etc. Get a $300-400 card and you will be able to play ultra high graphics for 3-4 years, that's my rule of thumb. Wait for the next high end card and you will still pay 3-400 for 3-4 years of graphics, but you waited 6 months.
>>319876974
>R9 380
That's too expensive.
960 is a tiny bit cheaper and I'll probably wait for it to drop even more.
I don't really want to spend too much on the card and I also have to buy a new PSU so that means even more money being spent.
>>319877081
But the performance ratio Maxwell:Pascall is much higher then it was in the previous Kepler:Maxwell generation so that's why I'm so cautious.
bump
>>319876974
>Intelligent people
>Buy AMD
lmao
>tfw got into 3d work and been looking for best gpu to speed up render
>tfw looking at used thousand dollar quadros
>tfw read news about pascal and that its specs a real
>tfw being able to render super heavy shit with a game card
feels good man
>>319876397
>How possible is it for Pascal to hit the shelves in early 2016 with a budget card being released near the end of the year, similar in price to 960 or 950?
Literally 0
First the 2 top cards come, the x70 one and the flagship. Then a bit later the x60 and MAYBE the x80Ti will come, then after that the x50 comes.
If Pascal hits in April, you won't see an x50 level card until probably December or 2017.
>>319878138
Workstation cards are NOT worth it for hobbyists and home 3D modelling work. They scale best in multicard render farm solutions. Just buy a high end desktop card.
I can't believe how many times I've had to help people avoid this pitfall on /3dcg/
>>319878138
This is what indie games should look like. Beautiful lowpoly. Maybe with some Nintendo style lighting.
>>319878282
>Nintendo style lighting.
Fullbright?
>>319877952
>>319877303
don't you fucking stop now you asshats.
>>319878282
I'm learning low polly because i'd like to do a megaman legends esque style game, a small one at least and see if there's any interest.
>>319876850
>Come on, guys, I don't want to spend cash on card just to have it rendered completely irrelevant by a new technology that I could've bought had I waited for a few months
Buy AMD.
>>319876397
>November 16th
Wait what? I never heard anything about this, not even from my ech news sites I follow.
>>319878138
If you're doing pure 3d VFX and shit, get a workstation card.
If you're modelling for games, get a titan or some other nvidia non-workstation card.
Titans are literally made for game artists.
I do game art with my 970 and it cuts it easily. Substance, PS, maya, UE4, marmorset all run silky smooth
If you are buying a gaming PC right now and have a desire for longevity, just get a good card with at least 4gb VRAM in my opinion.
Look at this 380. It's 189 after a rebate, 209 without it.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814131673
And it's a good one. If this is too much for you, maybe you should consider saving up a little more money, rather than buying something underpowered.
>>319878427
did you make this?
>>319878608
Yes, you can check out my work here if you'd like, i released a game recently using mgs/lowpoly:
http://qwerty.itch.io/
http://qwerty.itch.io/the-chicken-pain
Rule of thumb, unless the release date is set in stone it's going to be several months from now. Considering the current situation, just buy that grafics card, otherwise you'll be stuck in an eternal loop waiting for the next big thing. Don't forget, traditionally the high-end GPUs are unveiled first and then the company works their way down, holding the title of the fastest grafics card is better PR than using 10 less watts than the previous generation of low-mid range GPUs.
>>319877303
>But the performance ratio Maxwell:Pascall is much higher then it was in the previous Kepler:Maxwell generation so that's why I'm so cautious.
You mean it's going to be a massive leap, like AMD's Fury was supposed to shit over everything on the market? Or how anything Intel's put out since Sandy Bridge was supposed to finally be THE chip warranting an upgrade from the previous generation? And while we're on the topic of CPUs, remember how Bulldozer was supposed to slay Sandy and put AMD back in the lead?
Unless the benchmarks are out, it's bullshit. Plain and simple, end of story, discussions closed.
>>319878742
>http://qwerty.itch.io/
You're pretty ace dude. Keep it up
>>319876397
>believing nvidia after 3,5 GB
you faggots will never learn.
>>319879052
970 works fine and has only a few frames difference to the AMD competitor.
Other than that, unless you're a generic gamer who only plays vidya and doesn't dev at all, Nvidia cards are a no-brainer.
I'm sorry, buy AMD is not putting up good enough competition especially in the industry where literally everyone uses Nvidia
>>319879185
>Other than that, unless you're a generic gamer who only plays vidya and doesn't dev at all
In which case the R9 380 is the best choice.
It's really the only card that has a good price-performance ratio across the whole segment, unless you get a 970 for 270€ like me.
>>319878138
What kind of 3D work? Some generic 3D modeling and rendering is just as fast on a Geforce than a Quadro, but some tasks require the special snowflake Quadro drivers to run at full speed. Seriously, even the mid-range used Quadros will fucking annihilate the highest end Geforce-branded Pascal cards in certain tasks
What's a decent card for 1440p?
>>319879448
How much is that in real money?
>>319878159
>Then a bit later the x60
I'm ok with this.
It dropped like 6 months after the 970 and 980 did for some 200bucks.
So if I wait for a while, Pascal 60 may be out after the summer next year and by then there will be some games to play.
>>319878408
That's all I've got.
Have a strong loli.
>>319878441
NEver had one, don't know what to expect and have heard some bad stuff about it.
BUT is there any difference in their motherboard slots? Or is it a unified slot so one motherboard can take both brands?
>>319878565
Asus R9 380 4GB costs here about 250 to 260usd and that's now when everything is10% down due to christmas sales. 4GB 370 is for 200bucks.
>>319878937
There aren't all that many games so I may easily wait for the Pascal x50 to be announced, which is why I'm even considering the waiting. At the moment there's MGSV, TW3, there are some games that are to come next year so I'd have to wait anyway.
>>319878427
This is pretty good. Nice work.
>>319879494
Thats a resolution....
>>319879448
My 980 handles 1440p easily
>>319876850
>rendered
hehehe
seriously though just fuckin wait, chances are the games you are playing on your current card run fine anyways
or if you lack a card entirely, there's still good games you can play
>>319879513
>posting 3DPD
>>319879513
>3DPD
You fuckin sicken me you normalfag.
Should I get a 750 Ti or an r7 360 to game at 1360x768? I am poor and they cost about the same but I heard the AMD card is a bit better.
>>319879261
You're forgetting that literally all dev programs are built with nvidia in mind and the drivers for nvidia are more stable and nvidia has far better library and dev support.
Amd just doesn't give a fuck.
>>319879879
I had an HD 7870 before the 970 and had absolutely no problems with the drivers.
Unfortunately VSR took longer to implement for my chip, but that still ended up being in the driver.
I also never had any nvidia driver problems.
They're just both bloated as fuck.
>>319876397
Pascal will most likely be released in the first half of 2016.
Generally, the X80 card comes out first, and the X70 comes out within 0-1 months after the X80 card (same time with 900-series, a week later with 700-series, 1½ months later with 600-series, 1 month later with 500-series). On the other hand, the X60 comes out within a few months (4 months with 900-series, 1 month with 700-series, 5 months with 600-series, 2 months with 500-series). This means the Pascal midrange card will very likely release in 2016.
Cards below X60 are often not worth even buying.
it will be out around April or May, it's very possible the first released cards will have similar performance or less than a 980Ti, Nvidia wouldn't be releasing the biggest chipset right from the start. They are probably going to release small Pascal and work and try to improve CUDA cores efficiency to try to bring power usage to the minimum then after that is done release big Pascal 6 months or 1 year later.
>>319879652
>you are playing on your current card run fine anyways
I had 560 and I loved it, however it committed sudoku a month ago and ever since I've been stuck with a laptop.
If I still had it I would not be thinking about buying a new card.
>>319879661
>>319879724
>calling little girls 3DPD
Undo yourself, mongrels.
>>319879837
I've been looking for a card for the past few days and don't have that much money either, so I was thinking about 750Ti, 950 or, if I wait for a few months, 960. But upgrading from 560, I was told that 750Ti wouldn't be all that much of an improvement and that I should go for the 950.
>>319876397
>How possible is it for Pascal to hit the shelves in early 2016 with a budget card being released near the end of the year
That's not going to happen. Also the the 950 is a shit budget card for poorfaggots. Same can be said for 960. Better save up your money and wait
>>319880221
Well I'm upgrading from an 8800GT so even an integrated graphics card would be an improvement at this point.
I'd sat that these won't hit until Summer 2016 by the earliest.
Also, kind of jelly at that vram&bandwidth and I have 2way SLI 980 TIs.
AMD is finished and bankrupt
Suicide watch
>>319876850
Now is probably the best time to buy a card, actually. New tech is always priced too high, whereas the current offerings are probably at the best price/performance ratio they're ever going to reach.
>>319880856
AMD just reconsolidated their GPU efforts into a separately run company specifically so they can get back to the Radeon glory days, they aren't going anywhere.
>>319876850
>Come on, guys, I don't want to spend cash on card just to have it rendered completely irrelevant by a new technology that I could've bought had I waited for a few months.
Do you realize that the 'technology' is already way ahead? Nvidia doesn't sell it's latest product straight off R&D, they're competiting with AMD. They're post-poning consumer grade gpu's until their competitor is trying to sell monkeys like yourself a slightly better gpu - in which case they'll put their own slightly better version on the market themselves. It wouldn't suprise me if NVIDIA and AMD formed a cartel to make sure that both companies would get an equal market share by offering a slightly cheaper/better product than the other and alternate that.
And that's only the end-consumer gist of it, they've probably already finished manufacturing a prototype that would hit the market in 2030.
The goto standard workstation solution of NVIDIA already has 12GB which is publicly available, now what do you think NVIDIA offers to enterprises?
>>319880969
>Now is probably the best time to buy a card, actually.
Yeah, buying a card when their prices have stayed the same for an entire year is the smartest thing you could do.
>>319881207
but they haven't.
>>319880969
>Now is probably the best time to buy a card, actually. New tech is always priced too high
How about price drops on current hardware when the new line is released?
>>319881293
http://camelcamelcamel.com/EVGA-GeForce-Cooling-Graphics-04G-P4-3975-KR/product/B00R3NK2LE
>>319881317
The prices usually drop in January-February by a large margin. I'd wait until that.
Oh man i can't wait for pascal so i can play all those graphically intensive.... uh..... ports?
Shit i don't know, maybe you have a 4k 120hz screen it might be worth it, otherwise i can't see a reason for it.
>>319880341
wow, cool
>>319880283
>That's not going to happen
After some searching, Pascal is probably gonna come out in the summer of 2016 and since 960 came out some 6 months after 980 and 90 a year after 980, we could expect Pascal60 to arrive in January 2017.
>Also the the 950 is a shit budget card for poorfaggots. Same can be said for 960. Better save up your money and wait
Well I don't want to spend a fortune on a GPU, I'm still at uni and not all that rich. Also, from what I've seen, 950 and 960 both run well.
>>319880969
I was more thinking about waiting for the summer maybe? Some good games will come out in that time and the PAscal may hit the shelves by then as well, so the prices will drop.
>>319881202
>Do you realize that the 'technology' is already way ahead?
Yes, but as I said, MAxwell:Pascal ratio of performance is higher than that of Kepler:Pascal so that's why I'm considering waiting.
>>319881424
>so i can play all those graphically intensive.... uh..... ports?
There are not many games so that's why I don't really rush into buying a new card and am willing to wait.
>>319881340
>shows a trend of price dropping
thanks for proving my point
>>319881515
>Yes, but as I said, MAxwell:Pascal ratio of performance is higher than that of Kepler:Pascal so that's why I'm considering waiting.
How do you know this? Do you work for Nvidia, did you have visions of the future or did you just go OH MY GOD THIS HAS BIG NUMBERS IN A SPECIFIC SECTION SO IT MUST BE FAST?
Once again, I recommend you take a look at the R9 Fury X, which was supposed to be the ultimate in performance because HBM and assloads of VRAM bandwidth.
>>319881584
>$20 difference
>relevant
Pick one.
>>319881796
Just google 'nvidia pascal'
>>319881796
>I recommend you take a look at the R9 Fury X, which was supposed to be the ultimate in performance because HBM and assloads of VRAM bandwidth.
You probably should stop listening to /g/.
>>319878138
same
I'm AMD atm, but everything seems to support NVIDIA gpu rendering so I'll have to probably go with them next time.
Just waiting for Pascal now. How it comes out mid-next year so I don't have to wait that long, I'm willing and able to buy a new PC right now but I'm holding off.
I wonder if AMD zen will be good too, would really like a decent n' cheap 8 core, should help too.
>>319881976
I haven't visited /g/ in ages, I saw the immense Fury hyping and shilling happen over here on /v/. It went on and on, intensifying in the weeks and days before release, and mysteriously stopping the very second the reviews came out and revealed it wasn't actually any faster than the existing cards.
>>319879879
>You're forgetting that literally
Try to sound more like a pretentious cunt, please.
