I want to play witcher 3 in 4k :(

[Silent_Scone]

first thing don't sink yourself in this vram issue. at the moment it is more theory than actual world results. I played all the power thirsty games on 4K on gtx 970 sli (almost everything on ultra with AA off). Witcher 3 was just over 40fps with AA and hairworks off. Crysis 3 was pretty much the same. Farcry 4 stayed between 50-60fps. Tombraider around 60fps. All these are playable frame rates and no single card will do better than this. I overclocked my cards and I am confident that no single card beats a 970 sli setup at any possible resolution. You will want to buy a 980 ti or titan x at the moment only if you want to pick up another one down the line to sli. otherwise you will live with overall inferior performance to 970 sli. 970 sli is cheaper option for you because you already own one. but again that is assuming that games you play have good driver support for sli.

2-Way Sli Gtx 970

Firestrike

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/5014740

SCORE
17927 with NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970(2x) and Intel Core i7-4790K
Graphics Score 24330
Physics Score 13560
Combined Score 7198

Skydiver

2-way sli gtx 970

http://www.3dmark.com/sd/3094461

SCORE
39927 with NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970(2x) and Intel Core i7-4790K
Graphics Score 76614
Physics Score 13505
Combined Score 24102

Showing two sets of results from synthetic tests doesn't really prove anything. If you want to claim performance is acceptable at 4K which can be principally subjective you would need to show frame time data.

I'm guessing in most cases this would disprove what you are saying

 

[Born_2_Kill_83]

Showing two sets of results from synthetic tests doesn't really prove anything. If you want to claim performance is acceptable at 4K which can be principally subjective you would need to show frame time data.

I'm guessing in most cases this would disprove what you are saying

Agree'd, 4k won't work well on 970s, CF 290Xs were a struggle in some games for me and that was a year ago nearly.

Op start ignoring things you want to hear and pay attention to things you don't.

 

[Kaapstad]

Showing two sets of results from synthetic tests doesn't really prove anything. If you want to claim performance is acceptable at 4K which can be principally subjective you would need to show frame time data.

I'm guessing in most cases this would disprove what you are saying

Agree'd, 4k won't work well on 970s, CF 290Xs were a struggle in some games for me and that was a year ago nearly.

Op start ignoring things you want to hear and pay attention to things you don't.

+1

The cavalry have arrived.

 

[faheemrazzaq]

Showing two sets of results from synthetic tests doesn't really prove anything. If you want to claim performance is acceptable at 4K which can be principally subjective you would need to show frame time data.

I'm guessing in most cases this would disprove what you are saying

mate i respect your opinion. but i have shared my personal experience with 970 sli setup. I don't have 970's any more so thats all I had to share unfortunately. I own 980's now so I have no reason to bias my views on 970's.

 

[faheemrazzaq]

Agree'd, 4k won't work well on 970s, CF 290Xs were a struggle in some games for me and that was a year ago nearly.

Op start ignoring things you want to hear and pay attention to things you don't.

i bought a 295x2 and sent it back within 3 days and put my 970's back because most of the games i was playing simply crapped themselves with the xfire.

 

[faheemrazzaq]

the point is that 970 sli will not give the best 4k experience in the world. but if someone already has a 970 and dont want to break his bank, he can buy another and still enjoy games at 4k.

 

[Kaapstad]

the point is that 970 sli will not give the best 4k experience in the world. but if someone already has a 970 and dont want to break his bank, he can buy another and still enjoy games at 4k.

It is cheaper to sell the single 970 he has now and move on rather than find out that 970s in SLI are not up to the job.

The people you are arguing with have used 970s and 980s but have moved on.

I still have GTX 980s for example.

 

[faheemrazzaq]

It is cheaper to sell the single 970 he has now and move on rather than find out that 970s in SLI are not up to the job.

The people you are arguing with have used 970s and 980s but have moved on.

I still have GTX 980s for example.

I appreciate that. as i said I owned them also and moved on. I just shared my view and do not expect all people to agree. that's just fine.

 

[whyscotty]

Your wasting your time Kaap

 

[davewhite04]

It is cheaper to sell the single 970 he has now and move on rather than find out that 970s in SLI are not up to the job.

The people you are arguing with have used 970s and 980s but have moved on.

I still have GTX 980s for example.

So many mixed messages. Basically I'll get £200 after fees for my 970gtx I think. So that means the upgrade to a 980ti would cost me £320 if I get the Zoton standard 980ti.

If I bought another 970gtx it would cost me £280 but I have had issues with some older games I like to play like Crysis 3 using Sli in the past.

I'm going for the 980i gtx mate, I just want to know that the Zoton standard version will do, as its just £520 and will use up less power and generate less heat.

Also I will be running both video/audio through my 4k av receiver via HDMI, do you need to use a display port to get the best 4k experience?

 

[whyscotty]

Always better off with one card - less issues to deal with.

Plus have more vram wont hurt.

 

[Kaapstad]

So many mixed messages. Basically I'll get £200 after fees for my 970gtx I think. So that means the upgrade to a 980ti would cost me £320 if I get the Zoton standard 980ti.

If I bought another 970gtx it would cost me £280 but I have had issues with some older games I like to play like Crysis 3 using Sli in the past.

I'm going for the 980i gtx mate, I just want to know that the Zoton standard version will do, as its just £520 and will use up less power and generate less heat.

Also I will be running both video/audio through my 4k av receiver via HDMI, do you need to use a display port to get the best 4k experience?

For detailed information on individual GTX 980 Ti brands it is probably better to ask the guys in the 980 Ti owners thread as they have tried nearly all the non ref ones between them.

http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showthread.php?t=18674122

Check out "The Roll of Honour" at the beginning of the thread to see what I mean.

 

[davewhite04]

For detailed information on individual GTX 980 Ti brands it is probably better to ask the guys in the 980 Ti owners thread as they have tried nearly all the non ref ones between them.

http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showthread.php?t=18674122

Check out "The Roll of Honour" at the beginning of the thread to see what I mean.

Do you have any knowledge of using the HDMI socket for 4K instead of the display port? This is a biggy because my surround sound goes through my av receiver.

 

[davewhite04]

For detailed information on individual GTX 980 Ti brands it is probably better to ask the guys in the 980 Ti owners thread as they have tried nearly all the non ref ones between them.

http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showthread.php?t=18674122

Check out "The Roll of Honour" at the beginning of the thread to see what I mean.

Thanks for the links.

This is what I'm on the verge of going for.

Monitor
Video Card

It does mean I'll need to use a display port, but I'm going to test if I can run a display port from my 970 now to get video and hdmi lead to get sound through my av receiver.

What are your thoughts mate.

Sorry for swaying all over the place, I just want to make the right decision you know.

The video card seems to get positive feedback from the link you provided.

 

[gronf]

Agree'd

Jesus...


Anyway, I'm aiming for Witcher 3 etc. in 4K next year when I finally upgrade, maybe.. But I'm not very picky with graphics; I simply want frames to stay above 40-ish with a mixture of high/medium/offp) settings (but the majority set to high...-ish). Fingers-crossed that a single 6-8GB HBM2 card will be able to handle that for most games around that time...

 

[traveyb]

4k will be interesting with the next gen cards from AMD and Nvidia.

 

[africanos23]

I wouldn't touch GTX970SLI with a 5039240293834ft pole for 4k.

I had GTX970s and sent them back due to that strange stutter/slowdowns I was getting when vram was touching 3.5gb in some games. I put my trusty R9-290s back in until moving to a Titan X and now Titan X Sli.

 

[SeanDrake]

4K is one place that gsync shines in my experience, running 1x980ti and can get most settings to ultra whith it still feeling smooth.

 

[VEGACORTEZ]

I can play Witcher 3 at 4k with 1 980ti clocked at around 1460mhz and a massive memory OC. I get a minimum of 40fps at the heavy bits and i have all settings on max apart from hairworks off, SSAO instead of HBAO and shadows on medium. AA, vignette, chromatic abb, motion blur etc all off and no v-sync on. The shadows and SSAO hardly look any different but save a decent amount of fps. The important thing is the draw distance of foliage, shadows and grass are all at max which is what makes the game look so much better. If you have g-sync, 40fps and above you are good to go. SLI is a pain in the arse which is why i went back to single GPU, 980ti aftermarket editions kick ass for 4k.

 

[bemaniac]

If you want ultra and always 60 then you need minimum 3x980ti. My 2 overclocked 980tis are alright for 60 fps most of the time but in some games they hit 100% load each at 50-55fps.