Maxxtraxx

You're dodging it like a politician. I asked you a simple question, you refuse to answer it because it would be difficult for you and it might point out that your point was in fact coming from a very biased point of view and that my question might in fact HAVE MERRIT. You then proceed to degrade me by questioning my intelligence... that is a response that is both very childish and very much like a politician...

It's not irrelevant, I'm asking you whether the Iraqi people would be better off if Saddam Hussein were still in power. You're calling out the US for it's war in Iraq costing 1.7 Trillion dollars relative to the US's Safety. I'm asking you to consider whether the Iraqi people would be better off with Saddam because if it hasn't helped America has it given THEM whom the war affected a chance to make their country and their homes their business. You're dodging the question that I am asking you like a politican. Would the Iraqi people be better off with saddam hussein?

I'm asking you what you think, would the Iraqi people be better off with Saddam Hussein?

Would Iraqi people be better with Saddam Hussein?

Wait... So when you say "Finally Remembers" are you implying that he was very late in his recognition of the fact that Ali died?

It's the same price and offers higher frame rates BUT... it provides worse frame time latency and has frame pacing issues AND is not supported in all games AND leaves no path forward for future upgrades without replacing both cards(triple SLI/CFX are a generally bad solution).

I'll see if I can add some of my own thoughts to what is being said here. That is: AMD seems to adopt some technologies faster when it comes to memory and also seems to have larger memory buffers compared to Nvidia. I have to say up front, for the last few years I have preferred Nvidia's offerings to AMD's but I am hoping that Polaris is a sales and performance hit that pushes Nvidia's priceing down, also I'm hoping that Vega is a real star. Thought #1: AMD tends to look 1 generation ahead when it comes to VRAM capacity and Nvidia seems to look at the current generation and decide what best fits without going overboard. I can argue for both sides on this: - AMD's approach gives you potentially longer lifespan with the card due to next gen VRAM size. - Nvidia's approach to VRam size seems to fit well what the card is capable of, it may be nice to have 8gb VRAM but if the card is not powerful enough to take advantage of such a large frame buffer then you'll just have 4GB of never used VRAM... - Nvidia has been the first on the most recent Memory standards GDDR5X and HBM2 Thought #2: AMD is more forward looking on some of the hardware features but tends to be more of a follower of Nvidia when it comes to some other things. For example: G-sync/Freesync: freesync was a very creative(and better IMO) kneejerk reaction to the appearance of Gsync. - Geforce Experience came first followed by Crimson, also Nvidia tends to be much more active in GPU driver releases(despite some recent problems) - Nvidia seems to be really pushing the VR scene forward with great rendering techniques to reduce GPU load, increase image responsiveness(by making adjustments to the image at the last possible moment before outputting to the screen) - Nvidia has great color compression algorithms that do wonders for lowering needed memory bandwidth - Nvidia has GameWorks/VRworks to assist developers - Nvidia seems to be more aware of making the experience more seamless, for example Frame time latency on Nvidia cards tends to be very good, and really put AMD to shame about 6-8 years? ago and even still with AMD's HBM1 Fury cards that seem to have very noticeable frame time latency and pacing issues. Thought #3: Nvidia is more like Apple and AMD is more like Microsoft(from the early windows era) or Linux Explanation: Nvidia is a more closed ecosystem that also tends to be more expensive but also more polished and a bit more... arrogant/unfriendly/applely sometimes? AMD is more open source (because the need to be to stay competitive in ways IMO) and also more friendly and an advocate of the common PC user? Just some thoughts of my own. I'm trying not to be a fanboy (I did say I have Nvidia hardware) here but to provide some counter points to what was said.

It is possible to both comment and/or respond to something we do not like or agree with without talking down to/making fun of/attacking the other individual. Lets be adult PC enthusiasts in our responses here not Gawker/Jezebel please. EDIT: IMO it's unfortunately a bit too overwrought for my tastes... For looks, I perfer Stealth bomber to Tuner Car.

I am currently running my GM200 with an EVGA Hybrid AIO. Using a Custom BIOS "Sheyster's Ultimate GM200 BIOS" EDIT: at the Max Air Voltage 1.256v also allows 118% power limit Can be found HERE Temperatures max out around 63 deg C Clock speed is 1503 MHz ASIC: 65% Swapped the Terrible stock EVGA fan for a Fractal Venturi HP12(much quieter)

Well, you should get darn close to a steady 60fps or above, the game can be very demanding for both cpu and gpu. Sounds like 1440p would be a good fit for your new 980Ti but be prepared to turn down a few settings if 60+ fps is a very important factor for you.

I run at 1440p and I can't say that it stay's 60fps maxed out at all times you may need to drop some settings lower, i use vsync and run with the shadowplay fps counter on all the time and it does drop below 60 at times. You may be better waiting for some partner board gtx1080's to arrive in the next month or so, they'll likely do what you're asking.

How does P/P have anything to do with the card's performance? You/we were talking about the performance of the cards in comparison to one another to help him choose the best long term option for him, thats when you said 980 is 100fps ultra everything and the 1080 is shite at 4k, we were not discussing the jacked up price retailers are charging in Australia and it's relevance to his decisions.

You didn't say... you said 980 gives 100fps at ultra in every game and also said the 1080 is shite because it sucks at 4k.

Lots of good options there, and as huilun02 implied 1440p monitors tend to be larger than 24" I personally don't mind a refresh rate in the 60-85hz range and I love IPS panels for great color and view angles. I have and recommend this monitor: here It doesn't meet your refresh rate spec but it's only 25"... and IPS... and pretty cheap

Joking right? 1080 is creeping up on DOUBLE the 980's performance at 4k resolutions see: here fred32xp at nearly any resolution a GTX980(good) is very good, a GTX1070(better) would work great, a GTX1080(best) is excellent

Sooo, I reference the Titanic... a boat that you like but have no personal involvement with other than meeting some survivors and that's how you handle it? Hex4 actually poked fun but he's ok? I'm a little flabbergasted by the whole respose.

Consider my error corrected