Soldato
- Joined
- 1 Apr 2010
- Posts
- 3,034
+ 1
-
Competitor rules
Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.
Pascal Titan-X Launch
- Thread starter Vega
- Start date
+ 1
Not sure there is enough of a gap. If the tx only ends up been faster by 13% then a TI might only be 5-6% faster than a 1080.
You would have to slot the 1080ti into the 1080 price level and drop the 1080 down in price.
Videocardz apparently have some 3DMark results.
http://videocardz.com/62738/nvidia-titan-x-pascal-3dmark-performance
http://videocardz.com/62738/nvidia-titan-x-pascal-3dmark-performance
There was a tiny tiny part of me that thought that without etailer involvement, just maybe the price wouldn't be so very silly. I quickly shut that part of me down.
If it's a really silly price I'll go for a Zotac Amp Extreme and see what next year brings.
If it's a really silly price I'll go for a Zotac Amp Extreme and see what next year brings.
But for example any games with very good graphics will probably run at 40fps 4k on a 1080 with all settings ultra etc, to get to 60 you need a 50% performance increase over a 1080. 20% increase would get you from 50 > 60 or 40 > 48.
Last edited:
Which if SLI works in the game, you would get from two 1080s...................
I am happy with 1 x 1080 at 3440x1440, yes I would like more performance but 1 x 1080 is good. The 980ti I had before was a bit slow at 3440x1440, the 1080 is a lot smoother FPS, for example 55 > 70. If this TX was 200 more than a 1080 I would regret getting 1080, but double the MSRP no chance.
Last edited:
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 31,179
A 1080 at 1440p is pretty much perfect and will probably max out stuff for the next year. If this is a total beast though it certainly won't stop me wanting one!!
Vega must be pretty far off (6 months at least), or this would be the new Ti
Vega must be pretty far off (6 months at least), or this would be the new Ti
At no point was I only talking about max settings. If you want 4k/60fps and max settings with every game, you'll probably be waiting a couple more years. I'm talking with a good set of settings. Usually a mix of medium/high/ultra depending on which ones are most demanding and provide value for the performance. That said, turning down settings to mostly all medium and some high is also not something I'd be willing to do to play at 4k. At that point, you're noticeably gimping the raw graphics(in most cases) just to achieve a certain resolution, which seems like a bad compromise.Yea, spend £1200 for that 5-6fps... Or just move the shadow distance slider from Ultra to Very High.
I was also not commenting at all on price or trying to say it was good value. Just talking about the smaller relative gains you get in terms of frames per second when playing at very high resolutions. They are still meaningful even if 5-10fps doesn't sound like a big improvement simply because we're chasing 4k and aren't quite there yet. If that 5-10fps finally gets us there, then it's a meaningful improvement.
So for the 48fps game, turn down the settings a bit. 48fps -> 60fps is usually quite do-able without compromising visuals very much at all as I've been in that situation many a times.
Whereas 40fps -> 60fps is probably not doable without sacrificing graphics significantly.
This is mostly reinforcing what I'm saying. A 20% improvement in performance over a GTX1080, even if it's only 8-10fps at such a high resolution, could be very meaningful in hitting that 4k/60fps target.
Last edited:
Pure fantasy.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 31,179
Vore
Vore
Feel the same, was in for two of them and now I am seriously reconsidering - might just get a Seahawk and see what happens. Hopefully we get to see some gaming benchmarks today as well as OC performance.
It did, but both previous Titans were both bigger relative jumps in die size compared to their top 'midrange' brother in the range, which plays a big part.
Doesn't stop this from being disappointing or overpriced for most people, of course, just explaining the big reason this card isn't as impressive as previous ones in terms of performance improvement.
