Upgrade now or wait?

[rattacko123]

Wait until RX500 series at least (polaris refresh), maybe the price will be appealing to you.

You can't go wrong with a gtx 1070, since you only get 30fps it is better getting a new GPU sooner rather than later. A 1070 should be good for years to come, especially if you stick with 1080p. The only concern with getting a 1070 is price, you might prefer getting a cheaper card like an rx570 (or a 1060) when that comes out since you are sticking with 1080p then later on in the future you could get a new monitor and a new GPU (when the 10nm ones come out).

 

[crzyces]

11 hours ago, Skull_Zockt said:

My model doesnt. Bought it 2 years ago and didn't think about Gsync or Freesync. https://amazon.de/gp/product/B00B19T7QC/ref=oh_aui_detailpage_o05_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1

There is now a newer model with Freesync for an extra 40$. And one with Gsync, but it costs an extra 150$.

I am stunned, but you are right. I would sell them on ebay and pick up the free-sync versions. You can grab them for $189usd (curved 24"), and perhaps sell your current monitors for $179 and $159 respectively. Just use auction with a "Buy it now" option. The difference is noticed immediately, and also improves gpu performance as you can turn down anti-aliasing as freesync takes care of most of it.

 

G-sync monitors are just too expensive imo.

[DildorTheDecent]

On 08/04/2017 at 4:36 PM, Skull_Zockt said:

VEGA will hit the market?

It's just around the corner...for the past half year. 

[SteveGrabowski0]

I'd personally wait for Vega. The 1070 feels pretty overpriced IMO. If I was going to spend that much on a gpu it would be between the 1080 and Vega. I think the 1080 is quite a bit better value than the 1070.

[SteveGrabowski0]

On 4/8/2017 at 10:36 AM, Skull_Zockt said:

Do we know when the RX500 series and VEGA will hit the market?

Vega is probably going to release around Computex. It has always been rumored as a 1H 2017 card so that would line up perfectly.

[crzyces]

1 minute ago, SteveGrabowski0 said:

I'd personally wait for Vega. The 1070 feels pretty overpriced IMO. If I was going to spend that much on a gpu it would be between the 1080 and Vega. I think the 1080 is quite a bit better value than the 1070.

I think 2 Saphire Pro 4 gig rx 480's for $360 are better than both in most cases. If it is NVidea; better bang for the buck, the gtx 1070 for $349 or the GTX 1080 for $499? Tough call. They are both great options, especially the:

 

Zotac ZT-P10700G-10M

Mini for $339

Gigabyte GV-N1080WF3OC-8GD

WINDFORCE OC 8G ffor $503

[crzyces]

1 hour ago, DildorTheDecent said:

It's just around the corner...for the past half year. 

(Skull_Zockt)

 

I expect the 5 series to drop by the end of the month. Unless they are trying to tweak stock specs much higher (like to 1450 or so, as a slight boost would not take long) I see no reason why they have not dropped yet, as they seem to have been done for a bit now. Unless they are trying to make them crossfire compatible with the 4 series as rumored, but I doubt that.

 

I'm starting to think Vega is a prolonged April fools joke from last year ;^) .

[Skull_Zockt]

14 hours ago, crzyces said:

I am stunned, but you are right. I would sell them on ebay and pick up the free-sync versions. You can grab them for $189usd (curved 24"), and perhaps sell your current monitors for $179 and $159 respectively. Just use auction with a "Buy it now" option. The difference is noticed immediately, and also improves gpu performance as you can turn down anti-aliasing as freesync takes care of most of it.

 

G-sync monitors are just too expensive imo.

I currently own a GTX 770, so it wont make any difference, right?

[crzyces]

Yep, if you are running NVidea it'd have to be G-Sync. Why they made it so expensive to put in monitors is beyond me, as it is only mildly better than Free-sync for gaming. Heck, they are starting to implement free-sync in normal TV's since almost every console uses an AMD based APU, and it's only about a $5 difference, as opposed to a $50-$600 price hike (I saw a 42" curved 4k display (not TV) that was on sale for $449 with free-sync and the g-sync enabled model over 1k usd. The markup is crazy high. This was a few months ago and prices have dropped, but still...

[JabroniBaloney]

On 4/8/2017 at 11:35 AM, Princess Cadence said:

The RX580 is supposed to already beat the 1070, VEGA is going to compete with the 1080 / 1080ti / Titan XP¹

No. It's not. It's a 480 refresh.

I hate these forums due to people like you giving people bad information. 

[crzyces]

21 minutes ago, JabroniBaloney said:

No. It's not. It's a 480 refresh.

I hate these forums due to people like you giving people bad information. 

(Princess Cadence)

It's because of the recent console hyping of teraflops and people not having a full grasp of stream processors, cuda cores, core speed, memory speed, and the bazzillion other things. To match the 1070 the card would have to be putting out about 8 teraflops. I'm not saying it won't. In Resident Evil 7 the 480 exceeds, but that is one game, and the 480 is oc'd over 1500, while the 1070 is a reference model. I read a great post on this the other day, by someone like me, but more knowledgeable ("My boyz wickehd smaht") that explains it pretty well in laymans terms. Lets see if this helps her, or anyone else that doesn't know the intricacies of gpu architecture (I sure don't know them all or I'd be rich on a resort Island and not typing in a forum).

 

"Those driver updates are not "simple". It took AMD a while to get even with the GTX 1060 6gb, although I agree on AMD's fine whine, it won't save every GPU.
RX 480 and GTX 1060 6gb are still even in performance and while RX 480 has much headroom to grow on like memory bandwidth and asyncronous compute, the Polaris architecture produces more compute performance then it actually can effectively use in graphics, which is good news for crypto mining.
Now then the scaling becomes an issue and GTX 1070 is a different core then GTX 1060 and the number of texture units and  pixel engines are not linear in terms of performance.
If you increase the RX 480 to 7 tflops it simply won't scale to match 1070. That's why you would really need 7,5 to 8 tflops to drive those small units faster to match a bigger core in every situations.
Sure 7tflops should in theory match 1070, but certain games simply require more texture and pixel engines to actually feed that extra performance into real use.
Similar thing can be seen with gtx 1080 and Titan X. Titan X has more texture and pixel engines relative to it's tflops and out beats 1080 in scaling. 1070 is the same chip as 1080, but has more resources available to it and Polaris 10 chips with lower performance range can't get to the same level by simply adding extra ~20% more clockspeed. "

 

Make sense?

Edited April 10, 2017 by crzyces
Typos

[JabroniBaloney]

5 hours ago, crzyces said:

(Princess Cadence)

It's because of the recent console hyping of teraflops and people not having a full grasp of stream processors, cuda cores, core speed, memory speed, and the bazzillion other things. To match the 1070 the card would have to be putting out about 8 teraflops. I'm not saying it won't. In Resident Evil 7 the 480 exceeds, but that is one game, and the 480 is oc'd over 1500, while the 1070 is a reference model. I read a great post on this the other day, by someone like me, but more knowledgeable ("My boyz wickehd smaht") that explains it pretty well in laymans terms. Lets see if this helps her, or anyone else that doesn't know the intricacies of gpu architecture (I sure don't know them all or I'd be rich on a resort Island and not typing in a forum).

 

"Those driver updates are not "simple". It took AMD a while to get even with the GTX 1060 6gb, although I agree on AMD's fine whine, it won't save every GPU.
RX 480 and GTX 1060 6gb are still even in performance and while RX 480 has much headroom to grow on like memory bandwidth and asyncronous compute, the Polaris architecture produces more compute performance then it actually can effectively use in graphics, which is good news for crypto mining.
Now then the scaling becomes an issue and GTX 1070 is a different core then GTX 1060 and the number of texture units and  pixel engines are not linear in terms of performance.
If you increase the RX 480 to 7 tflops it simply won't scale to match 1070. That's why you would really need 7,5 to 8 tflops to drive those small units faster to match a bigger core in every situations.
Sure 7tflops should in theory match 1070, but certain games simply require more texture and pixel engines to actually feed that extra performance into real use.
Similar thing can be seen with gtx 1080 and Titan X. Titan X has more texture and pixel engines relative to it's tflops and out beats 1080 in scaling. 1070 is the same chip as 1080, but has more resources available to it and Polaris 10 chips with lower performance range can't get to the same level by simply adding extra ~20% more clockspeed. "

 

Make sense?

Yeah, it won't beat a 1070.

[crzyces]

34 minutes ago, JabroniBaloney said:

Yeah, it won't beat a 1070.

Unless they have Will Hunting programming their algorithms and code for the next drivers, and figure out a way to nitrogen cool with air to get the stock core up over 1500, I will have to agree. The ONLY game I have seen 1 480 beat (by 3 fps at 1080p and 1 fps at 1440) was an OC'd black xxx oc'd to 1502 core (forget the vram) and that was Resident Evil 7. That's it. There is certainly room for improvement, but the can't unlock anything else. It all has to be software based at this point.

 

The 480 does normally beat the 1060 now, but not by much. Before the new drivers it was about 40% the 480 would win, 60% the 1060. Now it's the opposite. I have no doubt the 480 and 580 will beat the 1060 more consistently, but the 1070, under the same circumstances (stock vs stock, oc'd vs oc'd) is out of reach. I don't know why people still argue about it. 2 unlocked 4 gig 480's (Which cost roughly the same as a 1070) yes. 1 8 gig? Not happening.

[Skull_Zockt]

On 9.4.2017 at 11:13 PM, crzyces said:

I am stunned, but you are right. I would sell them on ebay and pick up the free-sync versions. You can grab them for $189usd (curved 24"), and perhaps sell your current monitors for $179 and $159 respectively. Just use auction with a "Buy it now" option. The difference is noticed immediately, and also improves gpu performance as you can turn down anti-aliasing as freesync takes care of most of it.

 

G-sync monitors are just too expensive imo.

Thanks for the tip, but I don't need Freesync. I am staying with my current screen, which is good enough for what I am doing