Will the gtx 1080ti be worth the money

[Bawan]

Will the gtx 1080ti be worth the money for 4k 

[KyleKyleKyle]

Yes

[nobiggieBIG]

Just now, Bawan said:

Will the gtx 1080ti be worth the money for 4k 

It depends on the games, and what your willing to give up for it.

[Mira Yurizaki]

Considering it's release for the same price as the GTX 1080 FE did and is expected to perform 35% better than the GTX 1080 FE, yes.

 

Though it won't get to 60FPS in 4K, it should come close in some cases.

[m0k]

sounds like an austin evans video title

 

answer: sure.

[TheKDub]

Yes.

[smokefest]

Also, AMD claimed to aim for 4k 60 fps+ with their second tier VEGA in second half 2017. That would be awesome but yet again its AMD ... Always Making Dreamclaims

[roylapoutre]

Compared to the 1080 launch with the inflated prices and the Fanboy Edition debacle, it will be a great value if the MSRP is the actual price in stores 

[Shiv78]

2 minutes ago, smokefest said:

Always Making Dreamclaims

and (almost) Always Missing Dreadfully

[Hydraxiler32]

6 minutes ago, nobiggieBIG said:

It depends on the games, and what your willing to give up for it.

4k gaming or kidney

 

choose one

[Shiv78]

Just now, Hydraxiler32 said:

4k gaming or kidney

 

kidneys are not $700

[Hydraxiler32]

Just now, Shiv78 said:

kidneys are not $700

4k 144hz?

[RadiatingLight]

8 minutes ago, M.Yurizaki said:

Considering it's release for the same price as the GTX 1080 FE did and is expected to perform 35% better than the GTX 1080 FE, yes.

 

Though it won't get to 60FPS in 4K, it should come close in some cases.

It should do 4K 60FPS all the time

 

the 1080 missed the 60FPS mark in half the games tested, but this is WAY more powerful. with overclocking, I would be shocked to see it go under 60FPS at 4K

[RadiatingLight]

1 minute ago, Hydraxiler32 said:

4k 144hz?

Now that's a dream that pascal can't deliver on.

 

wait until 2020

[Shiv78]

2 minutes ago, Hydraxiler32 said:

4k 144hz?

that isn't possible at max settings in AAA titles right now since Pascal doesn't support more than 2-way SLI for games

[roylapoutre]

1 minute ago, RadiatingLight said:

It should do 4K 60FPS all the time

Titan XP doesn't get to 4k ultra 60fps, 1080 Ti will be the same in terms of performance. It won't be THE 4k 60fps card

[Hydraxiler32]

1 minute ago, Shiv78 said:

that isn't possible at max settings in AAA titles right now since Pascal doesn't support more than 2-way SLI for games

BUT, if you get 2 quadro P6000s...

[Shiv78]

3 minutes ago, Hydraxiler32 said:

BUT, if you get 2 quadro P6000s...

That's still not getting near 144 FPS... and anyway for $3800 I could build a 6950X + SLI 1080Ti rig. 3800 is the price of two P5000s, not even two P6000s which would be 10K aka a 2 year old car...

[Guest]

12 minutes ago, Shiv78 said:

and Always Missing Dreadfully

Fixed.

[The Sloth]

nope, its a waste, get a 1440p gsync monitor and a 1070. 

[GamersCouch]

If it pushes frames faster than a Titan xp,  it's worth it. 

[Shiv78]

2 hours ago, GamersCouch said:

If it pushes frames faster than a Titan xp,  it's worth it. 

It doesn't, it is very close but has 1 less GB of VRAM and a few other things that make it a *bit* slower but MUCH better value.

[Bawan]

8 hours ago, smokefest said:

Also, AMD claimed to aim for 4k 60 fps+ with their second tier VEGA in second half 2017. That would be awesome but yet again its AMD ... Always Making Dreamclaims

So i should just go for gtx 1080ti 

[TheNaitsyrk]

1080 TI has better memory, and 1GB of VRAM less is not going to affect it at all, even at 4K. Not to mention, if 1080 tickles 60 FPS at 4K, this should definitely get there.

 

Titan X gets 60 FPS in most if not all games, and reducing quality from ultra to high isn't going to change a single thing, unless you're some sort of an OCD alien that can see microscopic details.

[roylapoutre]

50 minutes ago, TheNaitsyrk said:

 reducing quality from ultra to high isn't going to change a single thing, unless you're some sort of an OCD alien that can see microscopic details.

Such broad statements... It all depends on the settings. Generally, the ones that don't see any improvement from high to ultra are the less demanding. In a lot of games, high vs ultra is the difference between terrible blocky shadows to smooth beautiful ones. And guess what? Shadows are one of the most intense settings for a GPU. Saying there's no difference between high and ultra is like saying AA is not needed at 1440p, it doesn't make any sense because it depends on too many variables, and one of them is subjective perception. But I agree with you on the fact that compromises on image quality are not always terrible for sure