Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Quizz, Ride, questions
So, ive pretty much decided if the 980ti is $750 or less im gonna pick one up (assuming they're not back ordered for 700 years when they release).
Im on an I7-2700k @ 4ghz. Think thats enough horsepower for the card or should i consider upgrading my proc/mobo as well? My intention was to wait till skylake and my bonus this december and do the upgrade then, but, since the ram will work with a new proc, and my PSU/case, etc is all still fine, shelling out for another mobo/proc isnt a huge deal.
"The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently."
- Friedrich Nietzsche
Comments
Whether the 980 Ti is under or over $750 is riding on AMD, pray to AMD to destroy everything with its Fiji XT or it's gonna be over $750
I'd say stay with the 2700k for 2 reasons, some leaked benchmarks as of few hours ago show and confirm previous leaks that the skylake flagship 6700k is gonna be 5-8% faster than 4790k, so it's again minimal IPC improvement. It will however overclock better because they removed the integrated voltage controller from the cpu, so less heat (and possible not toothpaste between chip and heat spreader so maybe finally 5Ghz on most of the chips on air ?)
The second and the more important reason is that the 6700k seems only supports low power laptop style ddr3, and not regular ddr3, so you would have to buy DDR4 ram on top of cpu and mobo, which further doesn't pay off.
Oh and rest assured then 980 Ti doesn't have 970 memory style problem even with disabled parts, it has full rop count by the latest leak, so no 5.5GB+0.5GB, it launches in 4 days so we'll know for sure really soon.
I would be very surprised if a 2700k @4ghz was an issue.
I am using a 2500k and havent upgraded simply because nothing I do has come close to maxxing it out.
I was recently reading a thread similar to this (on a different forum, I'll see if I can dig up a link later on) - they were running X58/i920 - that's a generation before your Sandy Bridge.
They were asking more or less the same question - my rig is 5+ years old now, is it time to upgrade the CPU/Motherboard?
I was interested, because I previously had a X58/i920, and I recently upgraded (not really because I needed to, but I wanted to and got a bonus, so yay).
A few replies of conjecture, a few had actually upgraded both CPU and video but not tested the video in the old system (like I have), a few are running 970/980's in X58 systems now.
For myself, I can say - the new system is smaller and quieter for certain (Nehalem was particularly hot and hungry when overclocked, and it overclocked very well, which is not small part in why it's still viable today). But as far as games go - I play in 1920x1200 on a single monitor. I could run everything comfortably before even with stock clocks, and pretty much MAX MAX most titles if I really wanted to with an overclock. After I upgraded, I didn't really notice any change in gaming performance, everything was 60+FPS for the most part before. But now my rig is a microATX with much quieter fans, not a full ATX tower that takes up the entire underside of my desk - and I am happy with that. Titles that are heavy CPU did see improvement (Think Civilization, GW2, etc) - but most games are pretty light on CPU. If I'm honest about it - my gaming experience is pretty much identical.
This is pretty similar to what other people reported as well that just performed a full upgrade - it worked pretty well before, a few options that may have been turned off for performance can now be turned on, but those options don't have a huge impact on gaming quality.
For people that used the faster card in the older systems. They work great, they definitely noticed the GPU upgrade. Comparing across systems, they were a few FPS off from the people with the newer CPUs, but it wasn't a huge disparity - usually single digit FPS differences.
And then there is the overclocking debate: Nehalem was a great overclocker, Sandy was a great overclocker, Ivy was a meh overclocker, and Haswell has been a meh overclocker (in general). Nehalem could often overclock to nearly match a stock Sandy. An overclocked Sandy would beat a stock Ivy, and often match or beat a stock Haswell - and there were many cases where specific Ivy/Haswell CPUs could not overclock to match their Sandy equivalents.
So... my recommendation would be - wait. Drop the card into your current system. If your happy with it, great. If you see something you can't stand, you know what upgrade to look at next.
Prices for 980 Ti are out, evga dun goofed
http://www.guru3d.com/news-story/evga-leaks-geforce-gtx-980-ti-sku-lineup-and-prices.html
Base price seems to be $800 at least for evga, idk if someone will do cheaper right away, but a gigabyte model could be $20-$30 cheaper in a few months when things settle.
Out of luck Hrimnir, best bet is if somehow non-evga models are a bit cheaper but still gonna be minimum $750 either way.
EDIT: It's possible price is inflated, it's all up to AMD now, Fiji XT is gonna determine the price and it launches june 16th.
Yeah who knows. This website: http://www.digitaltrends.com/computing/gtx-980-retail-price/
"Sources we’ve spoken with have indicated the leaked price point is correct."
Says its been "confirmed" at MSRP of $650, so, current theory is that those are pre order inflated prices, etc. There is *some* credence to that because normally if you were buying from the manufacturer it would be 799.99 or 749.99 etc, not weird random cent amounts, etc.
Who knows. I'm not holding my breath. $750 is still my break point, if its $800 then its a no go. At that point ill either wait for Fiji and hope that knocks prices down (although theory on that is fiji is gonna release at an $800 price point as well), or just wait till Pascal and keep chuggin along on my 760's /shrug.
"The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently."
- Friedrich Nietzsche
I don't see any real reason to upgrade from a Core i7-2700K unless you need more CPU cores. If you're willing to overclock, it's still awfully close to being top of the line. Those 18 core Xeons exist for good reasons, but consumer gaming rigs aren't among them.
As for prices, a lot depends on both how good Fiji is and how it's priced. HBM adds substantially to the cost which is why it is restricted to the top end for now. But there's a big difference between adding $300 to the cost of building a video card and adding $20, and I'm not sure where HBM lands.
Still, if AMD is more competitive than Nvidia expects, that can crater prices in a hurry. Remember the launch of the Radeon HD 4870?
hwbattle is the only source for $650 price, and wccftech is the source for the $800 price, all other websites are just reporting on these 2 findings.
I have nagging feeling, that Fiji may end up very expensive and that its gonna be the polar opposite of 4870 situation, as in that Fiji is gonna be so expensive and positioned between 980 Ti and Titan X that Nvidia won't feel the need to drop any price at all. i hope i'm wrong.
The $800 makes sense from Nvidia point of view if Fiji XT is also around $800 and same performance or slightly better, while the $650 makes sense if the Nvidia feels FIji XT is gonna be faster than TItan X and 980 Ti by a quite bigger margin, and if it's leaving 980 Ti in the dust, that's when $650 makes sense.
Yea, guess we'll know for sure in a couple days.
"The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently."
- Friedrich Nietzsche
Forbes is reporting 980Ti is basically a Titan X with only 6G VRAM (down from 12).
Also in the same report: $650 for the Ti, with the base 980 getting a price drop to $500.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/jasonevangelho/2015/05/31/nvidias-new-gtx-980-ti-delivers-titan-x-level-performance-for-350-less/
Now that may or may not end up being accurate, and Forbes isn't exactly a tech-heavy site, but it's also not one for just throwing out random rumors; I suspect this is a review article that was published too early.
Yeah, im not in any rush, i got plenty of games to play. If i have to wait a couple months to get one for $650 or close to it, i will. I'm not pay through the nose just for some kind of ridiculous "street cred" or whatever. Those days are long past me. Maybe when i was still going to LAN parties and showing off my rig i would of considered paying an extra 50 or 100 for bragging rights, but now? not so much.
"The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently."
- Friedrich Nietzsche
Yup, it's official 99% of the performance of Titan X for $650, and 980 indeed drops to $500
You're in luck Hrimnir
I agree, when I show off now--I use my house, cars, or even the sexy thing holding my arm
Originally posted by laokoko
"if you want to be a game designer, you should sell your house and fund your game. Since if you won't even fund your own game, no one will".
Another nail in the coffin?
I hope not, this would be a disaster for AMD nobody will buy this card then.
http://www.hardwareluxx.com/index.php/news/hardware/vgacards/35572-computex-amd-fiji-aka-fury-x-slower-than-geforce-gtx-980-ti.html
Will take this with grain of salt.
Hope to build full AMD system RYZEN/VEGA/AM4!!!
MB:Asus V De Luxe z77
CPU:Intell Icore7 3770k
GPU: AMD Fury X(waiting for BIG VEGA 10 or 11 HBM2?(bit unclear now))
MEMORY:Corsair PLAT.DDR3 1866MHZ 16GB
PSU:Corsair AX1200i
OS:Windows 10 64bit
Well, they confirmed 4GB on the card, that in itself is a nail in the coffin. No "High" end part should be releasing with 4gb. But, there was a lot of speculation from smart people that it would be limited to 4gb until the next revision of the HBM standard was released. Whats even worse IMO is that the card can draw up to 375, that means it likely has a TDP in the 300w-325w range...
AMD may have just killed themselves.
"The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently."
- Friedrich Nietzsche
At the moment, New Egg has exactly four single-GPU video cards in stock with over 4 GB of video memory and a price tag under $1000. A game that can't get by on "only" 4 GB of video memory is doing something severely wrong.
-----
If you want my speculation, it's that AMD is going to do something like the "AUSUM mode" for the 6990, though hopefully with a less stupid name. Make a card that has a sensible TDP in the ballpark of 250 W, then note that it loses by a significant though hardly enormous margin (say, 10%) to a Titan X. So you have a BIOS switch to overclock the thing far enough that it beats a Titan X, and the liquid cooler keeps the chip from melting. This comes at the expense of runaway power consumption going significantly over 300 W, but does let Fiji win benchmarks. And even stand up pretty well against an overclocked Titan X, which is pretty limited by memory bandwidth and never going to come close to Fiji's HBM.
Its not the point. This is supposed to be a "high end" premium part. While 4gb is currently sufficient for most games on the market, that is changing and changing fast. Especially with 4k. GTAV for example people are getting it close to 6gb at max settings. Now, if you're not concerned about 4k then yes, a 4gb should be fine for the next year or two. But, you have to keep in mind the intended market. These cards aren't being marketed to people looking for "good enough" or high value propositions. These are $700+ cards, people buying these want the best of the best, and they don't want to gimp themselves for the future if a game comes out that needs more than 4gb of ram. Realistically nobody in their right mind would buy this card if its roughly the same speed as a 980ti and has 2gb less memory, nobody in that market at least.
The only way they could make it succesful is to make it cheaper than a 980ti, which may prove difficult or impossible from a business standpoint.
Also, memory bandwidth is not nearly as important as people think when it comes to graphics performance. People thought that was the case for a long time because video cards had a chokepoint on memory bandwidth, they've now reduced that significantly to where cards are mostly compute bound now, not memory bandwidth bound.
"The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently."
- Friedrich Nietzsche
Saying that a game can be made to use 6 GB at max settings is not at all similar to saying that you need 6 GB to play the game. The project that I'm working on can use arbitrarily large amounts of video memory if you have it. If you have 1 TB and choose your settings appropriately, it can all fill up. But that doesn't mean you'll need 1 TB of video memory to play. Or even 1 GB, for that matter.
Really, though, let's wait and see how it performs and how it is priced. AMD has now announced that they will announce something or other on June 16. Maybe on June 16, they'll announce some other date when they'll announce something else.
"The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently."
- Friedrich Nietzsche