- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: PC Discussion - Gaming, Performance and Enthusiasts
Posted on 7/13/16 at 5:04 pm to UltimateHog
Posted on 7/13/16 at 5:04 pm to UltimateHog
quote:
Yes we're talking HBM here, it was mostly from someone linking the R9 Fury on sale for $349 and asking if 4GB is enough.
I was mainly looking for it for acoustics. My windforce I have now, I basically lock it to 60(144hz) instead of letting it go up due to noise. <<< mouthful
But with only a 20% or so increase and the paltry vram for 350 in 2016, I decided to pass. =/
1
Posted on 7/13/16 at 5:05 pm to hoojy
I don't blame you, I was gonna grab one to crossfire and decided against it and to just wait for Vega.
Posted on 7/14/16 at 1:38 pm to UltimateHog
Would a Fury X or 480 rx be better for 1080p gaming? $399 for the Fury X is tempting and I just got a 1080p freesync monitor.
Posted on 7/14/16 at 2:45 pm to GalvoAg
A Fury X was over kill for 1440p, definitely just get a 480.
Posted on 7/14/16 at 4:50 pm to UltimateHog
quote:
A Fury X was over kill for 1440p, definitely just get a 480.
What? Fury X isn't even overkill for 1080P.
Well, I guess is for realistic settings, but still. But, ya RX 480 for decent 1080P settings.
Posted on 7/14/16 at 4:56 pm to UltimateHog
quote:
A Fury X was over kill for 1440p, definitely just get a 480
Serious question.
Do you do drugs?
Posted on 7/14/16 at 5:08 pm to hoojy
I mean if it's overkill for most 1440p titles it definitely is for 1080p. 
Even at $399 there is absolutely no need.
Even at $399 there is absolutely no need.
This post was edited on 7/14/16 at 5:10 pm
Posted on 7/14/16 at 5:09 pm to UltimateHog
1080P can crush my 290x to like 30ish fps. That extra 30% isn't making it a locked 60, much less 144.
Posted on 7/14/16 at 5:11 pm to hoojy
My old 290 was money for 1080.
I couldn't even imagine a Fury X or 980ti.
I couldn't even imagine a Fury X or 980ti.
Posted on 7/14/16 at 5:13 pm to UltimateHog
Money for decent settings, yes. Hell, my 290x is money for decent 1440P. Overkill? No.
Any AA cranked up that super samples? Buh, bye anything on the market. I really hate the overkill tag.
Any AA cranked up that super samples? Buh, bye anything on the market. I really hate the overkill tag.
Posted on 7/14/16 at 5:14 pm to hoojy
I don't know, my Fury X was overkill at 1440p about 90% of the time.
Be a complete waste at 1080p.
Hell it is pushing 4K 60FPS right now like a champ in most games.
Be a complete waste at 1080p.
Hell it is pushing 4K 60FPS right now like a champ in most games.
Posted on 7/14/16 at 5:17 pm to UltimateHog
Not on max settings it isn't. It's great for 1440P and 1080P no doubt. Overkill it is not. Overkill means to me that you can just crank everything up and not give a frick. Sure it is on some games, but that phrase just rubs me wrong way.
Posted on 7/14/16 at 5:18 pm to hoojy
As I said, I found that to be true for 90% or so of the games I played. So for me, max settings for 9/10 games, is overkill. Or doing its job correctly as a 1440p/4K card I suppose.
Posted on 7/14/16 at 5:25 pm to UltimateHog
You're not wrong that it will crush games. 
Posted on 7/15/16 at 9:42 am to hoojy
quote:
Not on max settings it isn't. It's great for 1440P and 1080P no doubt. Overkill it is not. Overkill means to me that you can just crank everything up and not give a frick. Sure it is on some games, but that phrase just rubs me wrong way.
Yeah not overkill at all. IMO its barely enough.
Posted on 7/15/16 at 10:01 am to LSU Coyote
quote:
Yeah not overkill at all. IMO its barely enough
When Ilike said his 980ti's couldn't max 4K I knew something was up, but didn't say anything.
Posted on 7/15/16 at 10:03 am to DoUrden
Think he has 980s, but regardless yes. I cant max everything out with my 980Tis, much less 1 being enough.
I'm starting to think UH is a troll or terribly misinformed.
Edt: also just talking about 1440, something we have all had since 2012. Not even speaking to 2160. We won't have true 4K chips until Big Pascal/VEGA
I'm starting to think UH is a troll or terribly misinformed.
Edt: also just talking about 1440, something we have all had since 2012. Not even speaking to 2160. We won't have true 4K chips until Big Pascal/VEGA
This post was edited on 7/15/16 at 10:09 am
Posted on 7/15/16 at 11:17 am to LSU Coyote
If you don't include hardware-based Antialiasing, my 980s can do typical "ultra" settings at 1440P on a lot of games and still maintain 60fps. But some amount of anti-aliasing is important to me, so I try to incorporate it when possible in games with egregious jaggies, and it's taxing on vram and compute. There are even some AAA games where I can throw 4x MSAA at it as well, then there are others that need to stay at "high" with no AA, and in those cases the issue is always vram. If my 980s could pool vram I'd be happy keeping them for another 18 months, but it's clear DX12 multi-GPU implementation will be a slow process that may never make its way to the shittier PC devs like Ubi. A single overclocked GTX 1080 would be like the SLI 980s I never had.
Some older games I can almost pull off 4K 60fps if I disable NVidia gimmicks, but there are still very frequent frame dips and latency issues. That's really the primary symptom of low vram. If you saunter around an environment that isn't too dynamic, everything looks nice and smooth. Once you start running, adding NPCs, manipulating the camera quickly, etc., you start to see the nastiness of saturated vram. Smooth and consistent framerate is my number 1 priority. 60fps+ 95-99% of the time (accounting only for hiccups that can't be mitigated no matter what).
Some older games I can almost pull off 4K 60fps if I disable NVidia gimmicks, but there are still very frequent frame dips and latency issues. That's really the primary symptom of low vram. If you saunter around an environment that isn't too dynamic, everything looks nice and smooth. Once you start running, adding NPCs, manipulating the camera quickly, etc., you start to see the nastiness of saturated vram. Smooth and consistent framerate is my number 1 priority. 60fps+ 95-99% of the time (accounting only for hiccups that can't be mitigated no matter what).
Posted on 7/15/16 at 11:48 am to ILikeLSUToo
So I have all my parts other than my GPU, is it bad to put it together before then? Just don't know how long I will be waiting around for the 480rx AIB's.
Also any cheap ways to get windows for a new build? I see sites like Kinguin and G2A have them but didn't know if they're legit.
CPU: i5 6600k
CPU Cooler: Hyper 212 Evo
MB: MSI Z170A Gaming M7
PS: Evga 750 G2
RAM: 8x2 Ripjaws V DDR4 3000
SSD: Mushkin 480gb
Case fans: 140mm x 2 Noctua NF-A14
Case: Phanteks Enthoo Pro
Also any cheap ways to get windows for a new build? I see sites like Kinguin and G2A have them but didn't know if they're legit.
CPU: i5 6600k
CPU Cooler: Hyper 212 Evo
MB: MSI Z170A Gaming M7
PS: Evga 750 G2
RAM: 8x2 Ripjaws V DDR4 3000
SSD: Mushkin 480gb
Case fans: 140mm x 2 Noctua NF-A14
Case: Phanteks Enthoo Pro
This post was edited on 7/15/16 at 11:58 am
Posted on 7/15/16 at 12:20 pm to GalvoAg
The i5-6600k had an integrated GPU.
I would just build it.
I would just build it.
Page 1222 of 1912
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News