"Nextgen" GPUs

[joxer]

http://videocardz.com/61116/nvidia-geforce-gtx-980-ti-gtx-980-and-gtx-970-receive-a-price-cut

In the last 24 hours the prices of many GTX 900 cards has dropped by almost 20%. According to the information provided by HWI, GeForce GTX 900 series receive the following price cuts:
GeForce GTX 980 Ti: 125 USD
GeForce GTX 980: 75 USD
GeForce GTX 970: 25 USD

Partnered shops and distributors have already applied their rebates, which means you should be able to see much lower prices for those cards in Europe. Price change will take effect worldwide in a matter of hours or days.

There you go. If GTX 1070/1080 is too much for your wallet, you can't wait till AMD gives a birth to rx480 because you need a new card right now, there's nothing wrong to wait a few days and go for now cheaper 9xx card.
Maybe I do that too.

btw, did anyone analyze 970/980 prices on 2nd hand sites like ebay?

 

[Gorath]

These prices are still uninteresting.

 

[lostforever]

These prices are still uninteresting.

Yes but the I have feeling these will drops even further one AMD cards arrive. Most places are saying that the 480 will match 980.... (goes to the corner and pray it does!)

 

[Kordanor]

According to leaked Benchmarks the RX 480 is almost as fast as the 980 but much, much cheaper.

So unless you are a nvidia hardcore fanboy it makes no sense to buy a new gtx 970 or 980 right now. Second hand might be more interesting.
Doubt they will drop much, as the production was already stopped a while ago and they will vanish out of shops before they actually make sense (again).

 

[Zloth]

1080... not available, sold out, out of stock, not available, available from some guy for an extra $200, out of stock...

 

[Kordanor]

Well, the reference cards are widely available, at least in europe.

Just the 3rd party cards aren't widely available yet.

 

[RPGFool]

Maybe things have changed very recently -- Press is currently reporting shortages of NVidia 1080s; see Nvidia’s GTX 1080 and 1070 are in short supply, experiencing price spikes and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 stock won't improve until at least late July.

Definitely agree that this is the right time for a 'wait and see' approach.

__

 

[Zloth]

The cards are just trickling out. EVGA forums are saying they expect to have all the PRE-ORDERS out by the end of the week.

The wait-and-see approach is pretty painful for me. My Rift is just sitting there in it's pile of wires! But even running an old game like Skyrim using a 780 isn't going to cut it.

 

[Kordanor]

Personally I prefer Nvidia over AMD by a huge margin. But the prices of decent 1070 cards are just insane. The founders card is 500€ and the custom cards hardly go below it and most of them are more expensive going up to 550€ for air cooled cards.

So even as a NVIDIA "fanboy", I am now considering buying a RX 480.
While the 1070 is 44% faster according to videocardz.com , with the current pricing it costs more than twice as much. So even if I buy a RX 480 now, and throw it away after 2 years, replacing it by a newer card when I am actually going for more than 1080p, it's probably a more money efficient choice. And the first VR games can be played with the RX 480 as well anyways.

 

[joxer]

Why would you throw rx480 away?
Currently the only reason to go new expensive nVidia is just hairworks. A thing how many games use?
At least in my opinion that's already knwon - 4K is IMO overrated, 1080p with 60+FPS matters more.

In two years games will go dx12 or vulkan, instead of throwing rx480 you'll just add another card in the rig.

 

[lostforever]

Why would you throw rx480 away?
Currently the only reason to go new expensive nVidia is just hairworks. A thing how many games use?
At least in my opinion that's already knwon - 4K is IMO overrated, 1080p with 60+FPS matters more.

In two years games will go dx12 or vulkan, instead of throwing rx480 you'll just add another card in the rig.

I hooked my laptop(GTX 980M) to the 4K TV last night and manged to get Witcher 3 to run at 10/20ish FPS with tweaks. I will take this over 1080p with 60+FPS any day. The amount of the world you can see is staggering and immersion factors goes through the roof. So 4K is not overrated...

 

[joxer]

Now I see where those Ubi statements about "cinematic experience" come from.

 

[sakichop]

I hooked my laptop(GTX 980M) to the 4K TV last night and manged to get Witcher 3 to run at 10/20ish FPS with tweaks. I will take this over 1080p with 60+FPS any day. The amount of the world you can see is staggering and immersion factors goes through the roof. So 4K is not overrated…

This, unless your playing competitive multiplayer 4K@30 trumps 1080p@60 every time for me. Having played both the added resolution and detail is much more noticeable than another 30 fps.

Currently I have a projector that does 1080p@60, a 21:9 monitor that does 3440x1440@100 and a tv that will do 4k@60.

When supported I much prefer the 21:9 monitor and wish the industry would go in that direction but I have a feeling it won't. It's going to be all about VR, which I'm not currently super excited about. I don't see me pulling 8 hour gaming sessions in those goggles. Let me know when it's wireless and the size of sunglasses.

 

[JDR13]

I hooked my laptop(GTX 980M) to the 4K TV last night and manged to get Witcher 3 to run at 10/20ish FPS with tweaks. I will take this over 1080p with 60+FPS any day. The amount of the world you can see is staggering and immersion factors goes through the roof. So 4K is not overrated…

I'm not interested in playing a slideshow no matter how good it looks. 10-20 fps is not playable for most people, especially with games that have any kind of fast-paced action. 30 fps is the bare minimum for me to be able to enjoy most games.

 

[lostforever]

I'm not interested in playing a slideshow no matter how good it looks. 10-20 fps is not playable for most people, especially with games that have any kind of fast-paced action. 30 fps is the bare minimum for me to be able to enjoy most games.

Yes I agree, 30 is the minimum but the point I was trying to make is that 4K as 30 FPS+ is bloody awesome and not overrated. So if console can do 4K at 30 FPS with decently graphics quality, then there is worth in them.

 

[JDR13]

Yes I agree, 30 is the minimum but the point I was trying to make is that 4K as 30 FPS+ is bloody awesome and not overrated. So if console can do 4K at 30 FPS with decently graphics quality, then there is worth in them.

I don't think I've seen anyone claim 4K is overrated. An increase in display resolution is always a good thing. The issue is whether or not it's really viable right now for gaming, and for the vast majority it's not. If the next generation of consoles can do it though then that's a certainly a step in the right direction.

 

[lostforever]

I don't think I've seen anyone claim 4K is overrated. An increase in display resolution is always a good thing. The issue is whether or not it's really viable right now for gaming, and for the vast majority it's not. If the next generation of consoles can do it though then that's a certainly a step in the right direction.

I was replying to joxer who claimed that in post above mine but then again he is special..

 

[joxer]

I don't think I've seen anyone claim 4K is overrated.

You're not reading my posts then. I'm saying that. Thanks to phones the gaming community is now all over resolutions instead over FPS.

 

[Caddy]

According to leaked Benchmarks the RX 480 is almost as fast as the 980 but much, much cheaper.

So unless you are a nvidia hardcore fanboy it makes no sense to buy a new gtx 970 or 980 right now. Second hand might be more interesting.
Doubt they will drop much, as the production was already stopped a while ago and they will vanish out of shops before they actually make sense (again).

Please link leaked benchmarks, i'm very interested.

Currently i've been converted to the Ultrawide (4K is just an improved experience of the same, not a changed new and better experience) crowd and I will be looking soon to upgrade to a 3440x1440 curved, and a card that will push that. The problem is the reasonably priced monitors all support ATI's Freesync and not the nVidia G-sync. So if I can find an ATI card that pushes 3440x1440x60 then that would be ideal. If I have to wait for an RX 480 or whatever Polaris 10 has to offer then I will wait. Even if I have to do a Crossfire setup.

EDIT:

Here's the benchmarks

 

[Caddy]

This, unless your playing competitive multiplayer 4K@30 trumps 1080p@60 every time for me. Having played both the added resolution and detail is much more noticeable than another 30 fps.

Currently I have a projector that does 1080p@60, a 21:9 monitor that does 3440x1440@100 and a tv that will do 4k@60.

When supported I much prefer the 21:9 monitor and wish the industry would go in that direction but I have a feeling it won't. It's going to be all about VR, which I'm not currently super excited about. I don't see me pulling 8 hour gaming sessions in those goggles. Let me know when it's wireless and the size of sunglasses.

I've very much in the 21:9 believers camp too. I see nothing but positives for it over 4k. More "usable" screen space, but actually pushing less pixels. A lot of movies are filmed in 21:9, so i'm hoping that the TV market is just being slow to adapt and it will eventually trickle into gaming and bring the prices way down.