** Urgent ** Need advice for GPU purchase about to happen today

[Dalkamyr]

maybe not the performance hike your wanting.. they didnt just start making dx12 with no direction. it came about with years of different game and app engine optimizations. great but making dx and drivers increasingly more complex adding support and optimizing for new scenarios. so here comes dx12 with more more more and easier to use with less not native proprietary stuff.
something dx12 would do is increase cpu threading and increase cpu overhead.. you would notice it on a weaker cpu.
also dx12 will help keep your gpu's fully utilized but again not really going to notice if you got a strong cpu because most dx11 are good at that.. especially the newer ones.

http://www.kitguru.net/components/g...a-geforce-gtx-980-ti-superclocked-acx-2-0/21/

no reason to be waiting for 4k if your getting a 980ti.. no reason to sli it strait away either. guru didnt even test a single one at 1440p because it does ultra fine around 60fps.
they explain it but yeah to run a high refresh at 1440p ultra is going to take the same gpu power as 4k ultra 60fps.

no mater the choice you make i really urge you to go gsync.. smooth sailing even with sli when your gpu's and monitor are in sync.

wise words indeed. I enjoyed reading your post. I know it'd make much more sense to wait for pascal, but I have zero graphics card atm so I need one lol. Just sold off the gtx 970 I had. I see 3 ways of looking @ my situation:

1) I focus on 1440p gaming @ 60-99 frames per second and go either single or double gtx 980. It's the option that seems logical to me because I just purchased my yamakasi catleap monitor (few months back) which is an overclockable 1440p monitor (glossy). I could deal with sli stutter issues like I did in the past, most of the time capping the FPS @ -1fps from the refresh rate usually does the trick... but yeah... it involves more tweaking around...

2) I focus on 4k gaming, which means I have to wait for Pascal (because it feels like still too early to go 4k... it's gonna be light years better in 2016). But here I'd buy a single gtx 980ti and wait for 2016 to upgrade my monitor and gpu again.

3) I go for the smartest decision for my current setup: Get a G-Sync monitor = 2x gtx 980ti. If I do this though, my wife will litterally KILL ME when she sees how much $$$ I'm spending. So I'd really have to sell my current yamakasi monitor @a good price. How much are G-Sync monitors atm ?? Are there any 1440p monitors smaller than 27 inch? What would be the TOP 3 G-Sync monitors to consider?

p.s. sorry about my previous post "typos" I was using my cell phone and it'S auto-correction went crazy

I just looked @ 1440p g-sync monitors and boy it's mucho mucho dollares $$$

 

[xfia]

yeah they are not cheep.. i like to give the ultimate picture and dial it back if needed.

i think 2016 will bring 8k and the new top teir hbm gpu's will be considered excellent for a single gpu at 4k and 2 for 8k.

 

[MxPhenom 216]

The 980 Ti SLi setup is the best.. Might as well get the best!

Then again, Nvidia really needs to get their drivers in order. Every day another driver crash.

353.06 having problems for you? I thought you werent having issues when you updated to it in the other thread. I haven't had any issues with my 780 on the 353.06.

 

[erocker]

353.06 having problems for you? I thought you werent having issues when you updated to it in the other thread. I haven't had any issues with my 780 on the 353.06.

I didn't at first... Then I did. Lots of people still having issues, just check the nvidia forums and reddit.

 

[rruff]

3) I go for the smartest decision for my current setup: Get a G-Sync monitor = 2x gtx 980ti. If I do this though, my wife will litterally KILL ME when she sees how much $$$ I'm spending.

Getting killed is not good! Probably...

I think you should consider GTX 970s SLI.... if the 3.5GB frame buffer is adequate. That means that a single 970 the game runs fine at 1440p with the eye-candy you want, except you aren't getting the FPS you like due to the processor's capability. Then adding SLI will get you more fps at the same settings. Since it sounds like high fps is what you are after, 970s in SLI would be the bang for buck solution at the present time.

 

[GhostRyder]

I can see why you'd think that but no... I was even considering gtx 970 sli because it does give me a "decent" amount of frames per second in the witcher 3 (and other demanding games) but I wanted to see how you guys would have handled the situation if you were in my shoes. And yes, I do see your point with AMD Fury. Do you guys know when "fury" releases ?

Now I got a few remaining questions:

• What's the Very BEST Gtx 980 ti card to buy right now? (with the current non-reference lineup)
• If I ever decide to go for a 4k monitor, I'd probably go for something Ultra Wide (instead of 3x monitors, I Hate having to deal with the seperation between the monitors) But the question that pops up in my mind when I think of 21:9 monitors is: Do actual titles even support that format? I haven't done much research on that matter yet
• How does the Fury compare to the gtx 980ti? (if that information is out already)

Well for starters of the choices and with your request, the best option is going to be either a single GTX 980ti or a pair of them for your needs. I would not get a second GTX 970 in your shoes since you have a buyer for a decent price and 2 GTX 970's is just around (A bit above) the performance of a single GTX 980ti. To top it off you could probably get away with a single heavy overclocked GTX 980ti for now and wait until later to grab another as that would guarantee at least the least amount of issues.

As for the Fury, June 16th is when they are set for a launch of some sort.

 

[rruff]

I would not get a second GTX 970 in your shoes since you have a buyer for a decent price and 2 GTX 970's is just around (A bit above) the performance of a single GTX 980ti.

If they scale well, a pair of 970s should be ~40% quicker than a 980Ti. Since he is after high fps at 1440p I think this is a worthwhile consideration.

 

[Frag_Maniac]

Well to be honest, the cycle with nvidia always resets. If I want for pascal, the same stuff happens. They release the gtx 1070/1080 for instance which performs very well and then it will take a long while before they release something that maxes out everything like a "ti" card...

Of course waiting always means newer cards come in, but who really knows how much it's worth it to do so. At that point, would my cpu he obsolete? Would game Devs even support the architecture? Would it require a mobo upgrade?

I'd like to be gaming @1440p with everything maxed out like a madman... My objective is not really 4k eight away. Maybe in 1 or 2 years down the road yes. Then again, I don't even know what 21:9 will be like with games, don't even know if they'll support it.

And to be Frank, when dx12 becomes the standard, I expect better results for 4k performance with the gtx 980ti(s)

I'm not merely suggesting waiting, I'm saying get another 970 now and you'll have plenty of power until your next upgrade, which would be far better served with a Pascal than 980 Ti.

Don't forget Dx12 will bring optimizations that will also if anything make the 970s withstand the test of time even better. That vid I posted also clearly shows that even at 4k, the 970's mere 3.5+512 VRAM even edges out 6GB VRAM cards.

TWO 980 Tis WOULD be powerful, but it's also probably more than you realistically need to spend, even for 4k. Besides, your original post refers to 1440p, not 4k, and two 970s are easily enough for that.

There are a LOT of enthusiast gamers that feel 1440p is the sweet spot for best gaming performance when it comes to res, refresh, FPS, smoothness, etc. From what you're saying it's not even clear you know you want 4K, or whether it would serve you any better.

 

[Dalkamyr]

I'm not merely suggesting waiting, I'm saying get another 970 now and you'll have plenty of power until your next upgrade, which would be far better served with a Pascal than 980 Ti.

Don't forget Dx12 will bring optimizations that will also if anything make the 970s withstand the test of time even better. That vid I posted also clearly shows that even at 4k, the 970's mere 3.5+512 VRAM even edges out 6GB VRAM cards.

TWO 980 Tis WOULD be powerful, but it's also probably more than you realistically need to spend, even for 4k. Besides, your original post refers to 1440p, not 4k, and two 970s are easily enough for that.

There are a LOT of enthusiast gamers that feel 1440p is the sweet spot for best gaming performance when it comes to res, refresh, FPS, smoothness, etc. From what you're saying it's not even clear you know you want 4K, or whether it would serve you any better.

I appreciate your input. You've missed out on a few elements I posted in my OP.

indeed I'm not after 4k gaming as I've already mentioned. I also mentioned a few times that I have sold my one and only graphics card the gtx 970. So getting 2 other gtx 970 atm doesn't make much sense.

In fact I've done a lot of thinking today and the most logical decision for my setup and budget is to go for a single gtx 980ti and another 980 ti if I feel like I want absolute maximum frames and settings for a long while.

In my eyes a single gtx 980 ti is better than 2 gtx 970 since I'd avoid all the sli issues (drivers, stuttering you name it...) and it would perform about the same. I can't afford to buy a g-sync monitor right away... Well I could if I buy a single gtx 980 ti but it wouldn't make sense for me to buy a g-sync monitor until I actually have sli going on. I know g-sync is better than traditional vsync but I feel like the true benefits of g-sync shine with sli

 

[xfia]

post your picks when your done!

dont forget about adaptive vsync.. only thing from nv i wish i had been using the past few years.

never really seen anyone talk about it.. always physx or efficiency but its easily one of the better things they have made.

 

[RealNeil]

The new AMD Fury and Fury XT will be out in 6 days. That is not long to wait. If you buy now, what if Fury kicks the crap out of 980Ti?
You might regret not waiting.

 

[xfia]

The new AMD Fury and Fury XT will be out in 6 days. That is not long to wait. If you buy now, what if Fury kicks the crap out of 980Ti?
You might regret not waiting.

i bet it cost more or they put it right at the same price point to shake up the market.

 

[RealNeil]

Yeah, but what if it costs more and it's worth it?

 

[xfia]

i remember the 295x2 costing like 1500us for awhile. i would pay a 1000 for it depending how well it delivers well with a 4k freesync.

 

[Dalkamyr]

I haven't liked my experience with amd products up to now...
Noise/heat/bios/driver support etc
And I love the eye candy nvidia brings about every now and then. Hair works, tessellation etc...
I guess I'm an nvidia fan boy. But yeah, I intend to wait for the fury release and see what happens

 

[Freedom4556]

Alright, I just sold my gtx 970 and I just realized I might not be able to hook my monitor to my mobo whilst I wait for my next video card because my monitor uses a dual link dvi cable which I'm pretty sure my mobo doesn't support because I'm not seeing any image on screen.

It's not the end of the world since I can use my HTPC while I wait but is there some sort of adapter I can get to hook em up?

I have a similar 1440p monitor, and it depends if it has a built in scaler or not. Does this monitor have an OSD? (If so, any old display port to DVI adapter should do you, though single link DVI should work at reduced resolution in that case). If not, you're going to need an expensive active DP to DVI adapter. Problem is, seems to me, that the IGP provides a dual link dvi physically, but not enough clock generators to actually do dual link. The cheap adapters are just physical converters that don't provide any extra clock signals. That was my experience with a i5-2500k and an MSI Z68MA-ED55 anyway.

edit: clarity

 

[Dalkamyr]

I have a similar 1440p monitor, and it depends if it has a built in scaler or not. Does this monitor have an OSD? (If so, any old display port to DVI adapter should do you, though single link DVI should work at reduced resolution in that case). If not, you're going to need an expensive active DP to DVI adapter. Problem is, seems to me, that the IGP provides a dual link dvi physically, but not enough clock generators to actually do dual link. The cheap adapters are just physical converters that don't provide any extra clock signals. That was my experience with a i5-2500k and an MSI Z68MA-ED55 anyway.

edit: clarity

Yes indeed that does make sense. And indeed, my catleap doesn't have any osd of any sorts or any other ports than the dvi-d port...

So I'm pretty much stuck with no image or graphics card until the end of June when I'll probably buy my new card.

But it's all good, I'm doin a lot of hours lately at work and I'm moving into my newly purchased house June 28th so I've got something to keep me busy while I wait

 

[Freedom4556]

Yes indeed that does make sense. And indeed, my catleap doesn't have any osd of any sorts or any other ports than the dvi-d port...

So I'm pretty much stuck with no image or graphics card until the end of June when I'll probably buy my new card.

But it's all good, I'm doin a lot of hours lately at work and I'm moving into my newly purchased house June 28th so I've got something to keep me busy while I wait

I've got my HIS 290X on RMA at the moment (bad vram), and I wasn't able to get my IGP to work either. For what it's worth, Intel lists the maximum supported resolution as 1920x1200 for the HD 3000. Hypothetically, there is enough bandwidth on a single link for 1440p @ 30Hz, but I know of no way to invoke that without a working screen as it tries to default to 60.

 

[Frag_Maniac]

You've missed out on a few elements I posted in my OP.

No, actually I didn't. I was going by what you said in your OP, and it's STILL worded like this...

• GTX 970 SLI 2-Way (I would then keep my current gtx 970 instead of selling it today and buy another 970)

...so if you're going to reference your OP, make sure you update it with an edit.

Otherwise help threads that start out well structured, end up being fail. Don't assume everyone reads every post. It's a lot easier to just check and see what you've done by looking at your OP, which again, wasn't updated. As is some might assume you held off selling the 970.

Still think you made a bad choice selling that and not just getting another. Easily would have been the cheapest option and plenty adequate for 1440p for some time. And I wasn't implying you WERE planning or using 4K, it was just the way you responded to my showing what SLI 970 can do, even at 4K, that was confusing.

I'll specify for you, a guy named Joker on YouTube has a bench vid where he recommends 980 Ti SLI for 1440p, but that is because he's using a 144Hz display and feels he needs 85 FPS min for smooth gameplay, which is overkill for most. He clearly states that the typical 1440P display can easily be driven by two 970s and yield 60 FPS.

So, it really comes down to how deep your pockets are and what frame rates you feel are acceptable, but for the majority of people, 970 SLI at 1440p is the sweet spot for high performance gaming without getting into a ridiculous overkill budget.

 

[Dalkamyr]

No, actually I didn't. I was going by what you said in your OP, and it's STILL worded like this...

...so if you're going to reference your OP, make sure you update it with an edit.

Otherwise help threads that start out well structured, end up being fail. Don't assume everyone reads every post. It's a lot easier to just check and see what you've done by looking at your OP, which again, wasn't updated. As is some might assume you held off selling the 970.

Still think you made a bad choice selling that and not just getting another. Easily would have been the cheapest option and plenty adequate for 1440p for some time. And I wasn't implying you WERE planning or using 4K, it was just the way you responded to my showing what SLI 970 can do, even at 4K, that was confusing.

I'll specify for you, a guy named Joker on YouTube has a bench vid where he recommends 980 Ti SLI for 1440p, but that is because he's using a 144Hz display and feels he needs 85 FPS min for smooth gameplay, which is overkill for most. He clearly states that the typical 1440P display can easily be driven by two 970s and yield 60 FPS.

So, it really comes down to how deep your pockets are and what frame rates you feel are acceptable, but for the majority of people, 970 SLI at 1440p is the sweet spot for high performance gaming without getting into a ridiculous overkill budget.

Yes indeed, it makes sense I should update the OP as the thread moves forward. I grant you that. As for your recommendation for a 2nd gtx 970, that is also the conclusion I came to (even after selling the actual 970). I was taking a shower and I started running the different scenarios in my mind (gpu upgrade options along with a possible monitor upgrade if need be). And I came to 3 consecutive logical conclusions for my preferences which are the following:

• For 1440p gaming @ a decent Frame Rate 2x gtx 970 is a logical upgrade and a good "price per buck ratio" purchase.
• BUT: SLI usually brings about a few issues including: Stutter, input lag, increased heat in the case therefore increased noise level, therefore a potential for lower OC results as well, driver issues or delays... etc... which brings me to my 2nd conclusion: ONE card is always going to be less trouble than 2x cards. And my mobo supports 16x (8x|8x for sli) ... which means: a SINGLE gtx 980ti @ 1440p would be a very acceptable upgrade for me. Having sold my gtx 970 for 300$. This here, taking into account my personal preferences and aiming for a Reasonnable purchase seems like the most logical conclusion
• BUT I also came to a 3rd conclusion concerning the monitor upgrade. Because of my budget (which is big but not Crazy high stupid), I cannot afford 2x gtx 980ti AND a G-sync monitor in the same budget. So I thought about 1x gtx 980 ti with 1x g-sync monitor vs 2x gtx 980 ti with my current monitor (yamakasi catleap 99hz 27 inch 1440p monitor) and I came to the conclusion that I'd prefer a 2nd gtx 980ti to a new gsync monitor. I find gsync monitors (1440p) to be quite expensive and find that the best justification for a gsync monitor purchase would be if I'm using SLI or if I can't maintain a 90+ frames per second performance. I concluded that going for either 1 gtx 980 ti or 2 of them for now seems perfect to me and that I'll consider g-sync and 4k upgrades later (in 1,2 or 3 years time.)

I must admit that I haven't been seduced yet by g-sync. It sounds good, but I'm not sure how much of a difference I'd feel and exactly when I'd feel it. In fact, I'd really have to try it before I'm convince I need to buy it. Also, I would much more prefer to "Mod" my current monitor with a g-sync module (if that is even possible) then actually paying another 1k$ for a gsync monitor right now.

I think I'm a little biased by the fact that I've almost Always found ways to bypass and completly fix my SLI issues in the past by capping the frame rate just below the refresh rate (which often results in a complete removal of any forms of stutter in my experience)

 

[Frag_Maniac]

That's a LOT of text that doesn't mention one of THE most crucial things, what FPS you're shooting for. Do you run your Catleap at 99Hz all the time and expect to hit 100 FPS, or are you fine averaging 60 FPS?

THAT is what you need to ask yourself and clarify here, because it's the single most important determining factor in what GPUs you'll need.

You only hinted at FPS once, vaguely saying if I can't maintain 90 FPS, but is that the FPS you INSIST on in all games? You're getting into elite territory there in what you expect and what you'll pay though. That is def 980 Ti SLI stuff, and we don't even know yet if that is a very cost effective setup going forward.

You might consider one R9 Fury X, which is going to be pricey, but cheaper than two 980 Ti, or even two 980s. Plus you'll have 8GB HBM VRAM going forward, which will likely handle even very high res.

In fact if NVLink between CPU and GPU doesn't become a reality on Intel based MBs some time in 2016, and the price on the R9 Fury X, is decent by the time Pascal launches, I just may get a Fury X myself instead.

 

[Dalkamyr]

That's a LOT of text that doesn't mention one of THE most crucial things, what FPS you're shooting for. Do you run your Catleap at 99Hz all the time and expect to hit 100 FPS, or are you fine averaging 60 FPS?

THAT is what you need to ask yourself and clarify here, because it's the single most important determining factor in what GPUs you'll need.

You only hinted at FPS once, vaguely saying if I can't maintain 90 FPS, but is that the FPS you INSIST on in all games? You're getting into elite territory there in what you expect and what you'll pay though. That is def 980 Ti SLI stuff, and we don't even know yet if that is a very cost effective setup going forward.

You might consider one R9 Fury X, which is going to be pricey, but cheaper than two 980 Ti, or even two 980s. Plus you'll have 8GB HBM VRAM going forward, which will likely handle even very high res.

well yeah, I want as many frames per second as I can get... preferably in the 80+ range at a constate rate with everything maxed...

One more thing: I've never experienced 3D gaming in the past. I'd like to get your input on what you think about it. What kind of GPU performance is needed for 3d gaming? Frames are split to 50% right? (half the images for one eye and half for the other if I got it right) What would the difference be between 3d gaming with glasses vs occulus rift gaming for instance ? (out of all the VR devices out there, which one is best atm?) is it worth it at all, or better to wait a bit more?

 

[xfia]

you wont need to worry about enough power for occulus rift with the gpu's your looking at getting.
the 3d glasses are cool for what games they are supported.. not really a good investment unless your planning on watching movies with them.
yeah i would wait for the furyx to come out since its possible for every gpu to change prices on both camps being its the whole line up.
i can tell you for sure a furyx will do 1440p ultra with great fps.. the question is how well it performs at 1600p 4k 3x1080.. i mean who is going to be the first to hook up 3 4k with 2 or 3 in crossfire.

 

[Dalkamyr]

can't wait to buy my new GPU upgrade. Today is supposed to be the
r9 fury release, but I haven't seen it on any webstore yet

 

[ChevyOwner]

Well in my case it's a dvi-d port on the monitor (not standard dvi) u know the difference right?

Yes, and DVI-D is nothing special it just means a digital only signal with a single or dual link. For the resolution you are using it would be a dual link DVI-D.
The way I understand it a single link is limited to 1920x1200 and 60hz