Anyone else wanting to upgrade but just can't stomach paying so much for it?

[ljt]

I agree ...Any card that can run Superwide 3440x1440p for 370 is a good deal...

Its the people still on 1080p who are butt hurt...These need to jump on a 1060 as the 1070 isnt really a 1080p card..

those on a 970 gain very little for going for a 1060, it barely offers any upgrade other than the amount of ram! For roughly the same price as the 970 was on release!

The 970 was a gimped 3.5gb card

The 1070 is an 8GB card....

Of course the 970 was going to be cheap!

The 970 was 249 on release? Make the 8GB 1070 seem a bargain when they were selling for 349 just weeks ago...

If we take that logic then you could say the same from the 770 to the 970

The 770 was a 2Gb card

The 970 was a 4Gb card so double the ram,

Just the same as the 1070 has double the ram of the 970 but the 970 wasn't significantly more expensive than the 770, in fact i believe it was cheaper!

 

[Griffildur]

As above, Every other day I have a look at the 1070's and 1080's humming and hawing about it but in the end the asking price is just way to much for something i'll want to get rid of in about a years time.

I would not pay that much for a year of use, it's as simple as that. However, if you intend to keep it for about 3 years then it's worth getting.

 

[Nasher]

Just the same as the 1070 has double the ram of the 970 but the 970 wasn't significantly more expensive than the 770, in fact i believe it was cheaper!

1070 has more than double. 3.5 x2 = 7

Theres a reason the 970 was cheaper and that's because Nvidia ripped everyone off and the last 512mb was un-usable. They had to compensate everyone who bought one in the US, but we got shafted as always.

 

[humbug]

Like with the GTX 960 vs the GTX 970 there is no middle ground between the 1060 and 1070, the only difference in the performance range is the replacement has become a lot more expensive, which you have to spend if you want that performance upgrade.

All its done is create a situation where the new GPU in that price range is the same as the one in the performance rage you already have, so there is no upgrade path unless you are willing to move into a much higher cost tier, which is Nvidia idea behind it i'm sure.

what's actually happening, in my case at least, is i skip the generation, actually i'll most likely get Vega now as thats before Volta and frankly i don't like what Nvidia did here, i don't want to become locked into some one like this, which is also why i didn't get a G-Sync screen.

 

[easyrider]

The 970 was a 4Gb card so double the ram,

 

[Griffildur]

Like with the GTX 960 vs the GTX 970 there is no middle ground between the 1060 and 1070, the only difference in the performance range is the replacement has become a lot more expensive, which you have to spend if you want that performance upgrade.

All its done is create a situation where the new GPU in that price range is the same as the one in the performance rage you already have, so there is no upgrade path unless you are willing to move into a much higher cost tier, which is Nvidia idea behind it i'm sure.

what's actually happening, in my case at least, is i skip the generation, actually i'll most likely get Vega now as thats before Volta and frankly i don't like what Nvidia did here, i don't want to become locked into some one like this, which is also why i didn't get a G-Sync screen.

whichever way you go you will be locked into using one vendor. If you think any of them is out there to make the world a better place you are sadly mistaken. Both companies employ shady tactics and take advantage when they can, don't kid yourself.

 

[easyrider]

what's actually happening, in my case at least, is i skip the generation, actually i'll most likely get Vega now as thats before Volta and frankly i don't like what Nvidia did here, i don't want to become locked into some one like this, which is also why i didn't get a G-Sync screen.

Freesync works on AMD Gsync works on Nvidia

There is no difference.

You can use NV on a FS monitor just like you can use AMD on a gsync monitor

You just wont get the features...

One could argue if you buy a freesync monitor you are tied into AMD...

 

[ljt]

Technically it does have 4gb if that is what your being pedantic about. It can reference a full 4Gb, granted the last 500Mb is slower, but it does physically have 4Gb.

But as I've said, this whole price thing is pretty much down to £/$ strength and lack of competition

I believe there is only a small difference (something along the lines of $30-$50) between the RRP in $ between the 770/970 and 1070 on release.

This large gap in price between the 970 release and its 1070 replacement is unique to the UK unfortunately.

If the £/$ was the same 1.6 it was when the 970 was released I'm sure we wouldn't even be having this discussion!

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

whichever way you go you will be locked into using one vendor. If you think any of them is out there to make the world a better place you are sadly mistaken. Both companies employ shady tactics and take advantage when they can, don't kid yourself.

Freesync works on AMD Gsync works on Nvidia

There is no difference.

You can use NV on a FS monitor just like you can use AMD on a gsync monitor

You just wont get the features...

One could argue if you buy a freesync monitor you are tied into AMD...

Well considering plenty of the cheaper FreeSync monitors cost more or less the same as non-FreeSync monitors with the same specs,I think many people will buy one by mistake without even realising it.



Some of the cheapest monitors with displayport are also FreeSync monitors - for instance the first £100 Displayport monitor was a FreeSync one.

You are paying a premium for G-Sync. Usually around £50 to £100 minimum. That is easily the difference between a cheaper RX470 4GB and the best RX480 8GB or even the difference between the cheapest GTX1060 3GB and the best GTX1060 6GB,or a RX460/GTX1050 and a RX480 4GB or GTX1050 3GB.

 

[humbug]

whichever way you go you will be locked into using one vendor. If you think any of them is out there to make the world a better place you are sadly mistaken. Both companies employ shady tactics and take advantage when they can, don't kid yourself.

Your only looked in if you get something like Free-Sync or G-Sync.

And yet even then Free-Sync because its a VESA standard has a chance to be employed by Nvidia.

G-Sync has 0 chance of running on AMD because its not a VESA standard, its Nvidia propitiatory.

I actually have a Free-Sync screen running right now ready and waiting for Vega, i have already made the decision post Pascal, maybe in 2018/19 when it comes to choosing again i have a choice between AMD or Nvidia and get to keep this screen.

 

[easyrider]

Well considering plenty of the cheaper FreeSync monitors cost more or less the same as non-FreeSync monitors with the same specs,I think many people will buy one by mistake without even realising it.



You are paying a premium for G-Sync. Usually around £50 to £100 minimum. That is easily the difference between a cheaper RX470 4GB and the best RX480 8GB or even the difference between the cheapest GTX1060 3GB and the best GTX1060 6GB.

But upgrading means at least 1440p now in 2016 if buying a new monitor...Most people wanting a new monitor in 2016 are already on 1080p

The 1060 isnt a 1440p card a 1070 is

I bought an X34 Gsync 3440 x 1440p monitor and quite frankly its the best upgrade I have done to my PC...

Gaming and BF1 look incredible!

In Life if you want the best you gotta pay for it...If you want a Gibson USA guitar you gottapay...

If not get a epiphone!

 

[~>Dg<~]

You've got to bloody laugh, 980Ti was around £550-£600 upon release, 1070, around the same performance as it, has 2GB more memory, but is only around £380, yet people are saying its too expensive, and needs to be about £100-£150 cheaper, just LOL.

whats laughable about it ?

every card when its replaced by the new model sits in the same position of the end of line until these cards dropped.

the 970 for eg was 300 on launch.for decent brand it was nigh on as fast as the old titan. so its the same thing just we got gouged and the pound vs dollar got crappy.

it is too expensive.

1070 is the 970 replacement.
1080 is the 980 replacement.

they sit in same sector of the market.just the pricing doesnt.

1070 wont be worth 250 in year second hand it will be that new.more like 150.

 

[Griffildur]

Well considering plenty of the cheaper FreeSync monitors cost more or less the same as non-FreeSync monitors with the same specs,I think many people will buy one by mistake without even realising it.



Some of the cheapest monitors with displayport are also FreeSync monitors - for instance the first £100 Displayport monitor was a FreeSync one.

You are paying a premium for G-Sync. Usually around £50 to £100 minimum. That is easily the difference between a cheaper RX470 4GB and the best RX480 8GB or even the difference between the cheapest GTX1060 3GB and the best GTX1060 6GB,or a RX460/GTX1050 and a RX480 4GB or GTX1050 3GB.

Well, don't forget everyone has their reasons to buy anything.

When I bought my monitor it was the first one at this quality, resolution and features. I didn't buy it for any brand reason, I just wanted the size and everything it had. Yes it was expensive, but I don't care since it's something I use every day and it's been amazing. I am sure I'll get at least 2 more years our of it. Sometimes yes it's about price, but not always and not for everything.

 

[easyrider]

1070 wont be worth 250 in year second hand it will be that new.more like 150.

I very much doubt that...

970 goes for 125 still in MM !

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

But upgrading means at least 1440p now in 2016 if buying a new monitor...Most people wanting a new monitor in 2016 are already on 1080p

The 1060 isnt a 1440p card a 1070 is

I bought an X34 Gsync 3440 x 1440p monitor and quite frankly its the best upgrade I have done to my PC...

Gaming and BF1 look incredible!

In Life if you want the best you gotta pay for it...If you want a Gibson USA guitar you gottapay...

If not get a epiphone!

Apart from all the people I know who have either started with a new build(either had a laptop or a console gamer) or the monitor has gone kaput,or they have an ancient monitor which frankly is a bit meh.

Other things include people also upgrading from older monitors,since more and more cards are moving to new generation connectors.

The monitors sell otherwise we wouldn't have dozens of ones available under £200. There are probably far more monitors available under £250.

Almost every person I know has bought a new monitor in the last two years. In fact I know people with Nvidia cards who have bought monitors with FreeSync capability because they just wanted a monitor,not necessarily because it was FreeSync and the specs seemed OK for the price. In fact some of the cheapest 120HZ/144HZ monitors have FreeSync.

Its to be expected - FreeSync is just an AMD software interface for adaptive sync which is a VESA standard. Even Intel will implement an interface at some point just because they can.

G-Sync is technically a bit better,but it uses custom hardware so it raises the costs. Great if you buy £300+ cards but I doubt someone look for a £100 or £200 monitor is looking to spend £300 all of a sudden!

Well, don't forget everyone has their reasons to buy anything.

When I bought my monitor it was the first one at this quality, resolution and features. I didn't buy it for any brand reason, I just wanted the size and everything it had. Yes it was expensive, but I don't care since it's something I use every day and it's been amazing. I am sure I'll get at least 2 more years our of it. Sometimes yes it's about price, but not always and not for everything.

You are on an enthusiast forum - I bought my last monitor since I am into photography and it had an expanded colour gamut. So by that extension,everybody wants an expanded gamut monitor?? I doubt it.

But if price was not so important for monitors,then why is there more sub £250 monitors overall??

Please,don't try and deflect the fact GSync is £50 to £100 more than a FreeSync monitor even at the low end - I have a Nvidia card,and for me GSync is just expensive for what it is.

The only people I know who own GSync monitors are enthusiasts. I know far more people having FreeSync monitors(even with Nvidia cards) and that is because they were looking for a sub £200 monitor and the specs looked OK.

The first £100 monitor with Displayport happened to have FreeSync.

Plus for me,both are useless since there is a lack of half decent monitors for image editing which have either functionality under £300 anyway.

 

[easyrider]

Apart from all the people I know who have either started with a new build(either had a laptop or a console gamer) or the monitor has gone kaput,or they have an ancient monitor which frankly is a bit meh.

Other things include people also upgrading from older monitors,since more and more cards are moving to new generation connectors.

The monitors sell otherwise we wouldn't have dozens of ones available under £200. There are probably far more monitors available under £250.

Almost every person I know has bought a new monitor in the last two years. In fact I know people with Nvidia cards who have bought monitors with FreeSync capability because they just wanted a monitor,not necessarily because it was FreeSync and the specs seemed OK for the price. In fact some of the cheapest 120HZ/144HZ monitors have FreeSync.

Its to be expected - FreeSync is just an AMD software interface for adaptive sync which is a VESA standard. Even Intel will implement an interface at some point just because they can.

G-Sync is technically a bit better,but it uses custom hardware so it raises the costs. Great if you buy £300+ cards but I doubt someone look for a £100 or £200 monitor is looking to spend £300 all of a sudden!

So your saying people are buying 1080p monitors coming from a 1080p monitor?

What a complete and utter waste of money! lol

 

[Griffildur]

So your saying people are buying 1080p monitors coming from a 1080p monitor?

What a complete and utter waste of money! lol

I wouldn't find that so surprising tbh. I bet most people don't even realise what a huge difference 1440p is compared to 1080p.

But if all you have is low end budget and are happy at 1080 then I don't see them worrying too much about the monitor. For some, the monitor and GPU are the most important parts and a lot of time goes into research and choosing the right ones. Price comes in last, up to a certain point of course, there's always an upper limit .

 

[humbug]

So your saying people are buying 1080p monitors coming from a 1080p monitor?

What a complete and utter waste of money! lol

i went from a 1080P to 1080P screen.

Sometimes a replacement of your existing screen is necessary, 1440P screens are still a lot more money than 1080P, its still a premium, some 4K screens are the same price as lower priced 1440P screens, because most people cannot run games at 4K they still don't sell anything like as well.

 

[easyrider]

I wouldn't find that so surprising tbh. I bet most people don't even realise what a huge difference 1440p is compared to 1080p.

But if all you have is low end budget and are happy at 1080 then I don't see them worrying too much about the monitor. .

Then why would you buy a new one if you were already on 1080p?

 

[easyrider]

i went from a 1080P to 1080P screen.

.

why...I can understand if your original one died...But any other reason is just madness!!!!!