xsimplyjosh

That doesn't sound right. Try to do a clean reinstall of your windows. That's what I did when my 1080Ti had me some problems, turns out was a bad install of a driver haha but getting programs on was cake

Played around a bit, with new MSI afterburner, managed to get 6339 on 1080p extreme. Considerable gap i was missing using asus GPU tweak 2. memclock manage to add another +200, which probably helped the result go up a bit more

I wouldn't gimp on the cable quality if I were you... That being said at the current markets; wide screen 1440p at 165hz highest as of now ultrawide screen 1440p at 100hz highest as of now 4k at 60hz... as of now a 1.2 should suffice w/o much issue. so i wouldnt be too fussed on which version you're getting.

I personally couldn't justify the extra cost of ultrawide monitors as of nowso I picked a widescreen 16:9 2560x1440p monitor and it's huge for me already. even at 27" [haha]. but the benefit of having 144hz is amazing. I like my monitor, it was a good discount too which made the purchase even more viable. That being said, since you like these first person type of games, an ultrawide would be better for your case scenario. maybe a 2nd monitor at 4k for productivity would be in your works/favor? Just a suggestion.. im kinda tired, will respond to your reply tomorrow if any

Swear I've been using HDMI on my 7870 and DP on my 1080Ti so frequently. DVI-D kept giving me problems in terms of connectivity with my card so I stuck to the gold standard [HDMI] back in the days. Future of DVI will be phased out eventually... like it or not, as long as you don't change your resolution often, you;ll be fine. But I believe the adoption for more streamlined connectors will be a focus for most companies, due to the ease of connectivity and it eventually will be the de-facto standard of cable connectivity.

GTA V is a relatively intensive game so I wouldn't be too surprised the frames are slightly lower. I would drop to high over ultra only if the frame gain is significant [25-30+], otherwise I would leave it at ultra. That being said I love my 1080Ti a lot, it is a real significant upgrade [over a HD7870 which couldn't pump 60fps on most current AAA games at 1080p on great quality settings] so it's a welcomed change [for me that is]. Went from 1080p <60fps to 1440p at 120-150fps As long as my minimums stay above 100-110fps I think it does the trick. Also the fact I can leave settings on ultra/maxed is amazing, which is impressive for a single card. Whereas before I would have to run on low/medium to actually get decent frame rates.

overdoing memory overclock will introduce artifacting and unusual colors. i've done it once before all in without going steady, never doing that again. go slowly up. worst case scenario just reset/force power off, and the settings will revert back to normal both cases will crash eventually, core clock is just a frozen frame... while memory nets u random artifacts if overdone beyond limit

Most of the games i play run at 120-150fps easily which is considered amazing on 1440p with a single 1080Ti if that helps. I find the duo combo to be amazing for now. Until 4k gets mainstream 144hz which is unlikely, the 1440p remains best in best for the time being. If you are playing PUBG, don't expect that high due to the unoptimization of the actual game itself, maybe in the 90-100s? Even so that should give you nominally better smoother frames overall rather than a consistent 60, if you could drop ultra to high it might benefit you a bit more since Ultra tends to kill frames often [unless you dont mind floating lower a bit for that game]

Won't be surprised... considering it only has one fan. To me I think it's normal. Bit like founders edition blower-style cards. just with slightly larger area of space for cooling*

I probably think Volta won't be out until April/May 2017. Since vega flopped against it in terms of performance, efficiency and current market pricing for it's value. Nvidia won't release volta too fast anyway since it would kill potential 1080Ti sales [if any most]... which I can understand from a company's perspective. Think Intel making mediocre upgrades over a stretch over many years until competition finally arrives then they pull out the full artillery. If you really need it now then there's no other option but to buy it. If you can live with slight compromises, and your current computer still works, I wouldn't upgrade personally. Put simply if you ain't changing your monitor resolution imo not worth to upgrade too. Normally upgrade means going higher overall in the entire system, at least thats how I sorta see how an upgrade works. You upgrade your tower, then you want the best visuals too I guess? or a slight bump/improvement. For me I only upgraded because i went from a HD7870 to a 1080Ti. 3550 to 7700k. That imo worth the upgrade alone. Also 1080p60hz monitor to 1440p144~165hz monitor gaming. Which I feel 1080Ti is the best at for now if you want an insight from me. These are what I personally deem as upgrades if it sorta "makes sense"... hope it helps. I guess my real reasoning was because I wanted to increase my resolution and try out high frame rate gaming after 7-8 years on 1080p60hz . That means I have no choice but to upgrade . Your PC build guide looks amazing, almost similar as mine with storage having the edge over... If you can answer what monitor you have right now (if keeping or upgrade later) maybe it might alter my response abit.

My 1080Ti and 7700k works fine on a PG279Q monitor which is max rated at 1440p 165Hz... I'm getting around 120-150fps with ultra settings on most games that I play, which I'm really happy already. What CPU do you have?

PSUs are dirt cheap especially in the 300-500w range... you should consider getting a bit more headroom IMO, not operate at the near limit. a 300-400w should suffice for a 1050.

You should be fine PSU wise heck some people tell me 600W psu is enough for a 1080Ti which I'm averse towards to... I have a 1080Ti on a 750W 80+ Gold and people are telling me it's overkill but I like some headroom and the price is justifiable considering how much other parts cost, another 10$? over 650W, but eh I spend a lot outside anyways so I'm fair game w/ the little bit of extra. If i'm not mistaken, a 1080 uses 6+8pin [evga's 1080 ftw uses 2x8 pins... what?]

You can overclock the card if you want, I'm just saying as you get higher in MHz the differences become minimal... Unless you're chasing benchmark rated top charts, you should be fine with a modest overclock as long as your games give you the fps you want... You're only paying more or less for asthetics and cooling performance, they all use that same GPU. So if budgets a concern pick cheapest one with 3 fan or something. I personally would side with Asus or EVGA due to their quality but that's just me [also i have a brand preference alongside the reliability and the asthetic that fits].

Point the finger at Linus! Well it only works for 3rd party custom aib's as far as that video's concerned, more area of airflow giving better coverage. blower cards still SOL.

Depends on what resolution you are gaming on. On 4k it's all on the GPU so no worries about the PC since you're not exceeding 100fps [at least] on 1080Ti. 1440p I'm not sure yet, I'm rocking a 1080Ti at 2050MHz core clock and 7700k at 5GHz 1.35V on a 1440p 165Hz monitor, and... I feel personally its a mix between the two with the tradeoff in lower pixels over 4k for higher frame rate, altho still GPU bounded to some extent over the CPU, given the extra pixels to push... Judging by benchmarks from my analysis it looks like 1440p and 4k is more GPU bound. So in theory I don't really use bottleneck calculator as it's not precise.

When volta comes out That's a suggestion [yea I know it sounds bad but isn't it true]. Mining thing kinda forced me from initially 1070 to a 1080Ti, but I don't feel any regret now. Considering at the time I bought my graphics card [July 2017 middle] the 1070 was 800aud & 1080Ti OC was 900aud I'd say the extra 100 was worth it.

Mining is more of a long term income sorta thing. never short term. You gotta consider the initial investment for the cards and the actual rig itself. Then you gotta consider how long it takes to make back the money on the initial investment that was expensed. Then you gotta consider power usage costs (solar does help a bit but by how much i don't know) on top of the initial investments. Lots of things to consider

That's why I say save up and wait a bit, you're not going to even find a g-sync module in any kind of monitor thats around 300-350$ price range. Very very uncertain. G-sync monitors even the high frame rate TN ones are already starting approx 450usd let alone lower than that pricetag... PG248Q is one of them. and its TN...

nah is just the insane amounts of currents going through the card and given its not always a fixed current and is constantly changing due to the dynamic nature of the game, hence the "coil whine" as for an ideal inductor V = L*(di/dt) the di/dt bit is the constant change in currents, hence why voltage isnt always a fixed constant on your reading meter. another way I'm guessing is lock your graphics to the monitor's refresh rate... you might get some input lag as a setback but thats about it, but it should eliminate the coil whine to some extent.

thats coil whine you can't really do much about that. I have the same thing with my strix 1080Ti also but I hardly notice it now to be honest. You have to focus hard to hear it even.

Ahh i see what u mean now. Hit a cap on asus gpu tweak 2 (it only lets me up +550) max. I will try afterburner later on when free

For color accuracy, nothing can beat an IPS panel monitor as of now, especially if you're able to invest well in a 10Bit type. There are a few out there. OLED as much looks nice, I still think does not have the edge over IPS in terms of cololr accuracy if that's something you are concerned. Also OLED panels are relatively expensive, and carry the negative of burn-in especially during long periods of on-time... just a few things to consider i hope it helps.

Main downside of OLED panels is usually burn in. which is why we see them on smartphones rather than monitors which are usually left on for long periods of time. That being said I'm not sure about TV OLED panels [LG ones, samsung ones] and how they go along it. but they are also relatively premium priced due to it being a niche product. If you want to be the early adopter by all means do so, it will be just a freaking premium price tag for all i know... which means it wouldn't do well in sales for the pc segment.

If your choice is only between those two, then I'd say the samsung is better... primarily due to the resolution; at 24" 1440p is hardly noticable. 1440p is better noticed at 27" screens curved or non-curved imo. also would rate VA over TN anyday if i had the chance. response time is a minor issue as the difference is so hard to discern..