2X performance of GTX 970 @1440p, what should I be looking at?

[simas]

Is there a card in the market place that would give me 2X or more of GTX 970 performance now and if yes what price range would it be?

I am also looking for new larger monitor and likely to pick freesync/gsync depending on the card chosen.

Games played
Total war : Warhammer
Witcher 3
XCOM 2

Thank you

 

[daveybrat]

A GTX 1080 should be roughly double the performance at that resolution.

 

[[DHT]Osiris]

Is there a card in the market place that would give me 2X or more of GTX 970 performance now and if yes what price range would it be?

I am also looking for new larger monitor and likely to pick freesync/gsync depending on the card chosen.

Games played
Total war : Warhammer
Witcher 3
XCOM 2

Thank you

A GTX 1080 should be roughly double the performance at that resolution.

Having moved from a 970 to 1080 at 1440p, I can confirm that it is roughly double. If you are searching for recommendations for monitors, I personally recommend the Acer Predator 271HU, 1080 is perfect @1440p. If you plan to push 60+fps@4k, I'd recommend a 1080ti.

 

[simas]

Thank you. I am looking for monitor recommendation because next card would be purchased alongside the monitor - hopefully something within 32-42 inch in size , IPS, and >60 Hhz refresh rate , <$1k

 

[lehtv]

@simas Samsung C32HG70 32" 1440p VA curved FreeSync 144Hz, and Vega 56/64 custom cooled card.

Also, VA > IPS for gaming, movies etc. Deeper blacks have a pretty big impact on atmosphere

 

[simas]

Thank you. I actually stumbled into CF791 reviews when searching for monitor. Curious if you have perspective on CHG70 vs CF791.

As for Vega - I cant find anything in the market that isn't marked up and would buy a custom cooled Vega 56 in a heartbeat for $400-450. I don't see paying the current premium as making sense..

 

[Headfoot]

tbh at the prices 1080's are going at these days its almost worth just going whole hog to the 1080 ti if you can afford it, IMO

 

[simas]

@Headfoot , I am considering that as well thinking that 11GB RAM GPU and higher speed would have better longevity (3 years) vs Vega options. I really like the idea of best display I can afford (as I do not change displays as often as video cards) so if I go with Nvidia it would likely be gsync display..

 

[Headfoot]

Yea the 1080 Ti is quite a bit faster than the 1080 despite how close they named them, id suggest reading a couple of reviews on it, its in totally different class of GPU

 

[lehtv]

Thank you. I actually stumbled into CF791 reviews when searching for monitor. Curious if you have perspective on CHG70 vs CF791.

As for Vega - I cant find anything in the market that isn't marked up and would buy a custom cooled Vega 56 in a heartbeat for $400-450. I don't see paying the current premium as making sense..

CF791 looks excellent as well given the 100Hz refresh rate, but 3440x1440 is going to be tougher to run smoothly than 2560x1440 - framerate will be about 20% lower at the same settings. It looks like CF791 is also $200-300 more expensive which IMO is not worth it for just a bit more horizontal area.

The current premium for Vega is just due to poor availability. It'll sort itself out in a few months, hopefully.

 

[lehtv]

@Headfoot , I am considering that as well thinking that 11GB RAM GPU and higher speed would have better longevity (3 years) vs Vega options. I really like the idea of best display I can afford (as I do not change displays as often as video cards) so if I go with Nvidia it would likely be gsync display..

What use is longevity if you have to pay something like $200 more for GSync vs. FreeSync (and have to forgo Samsung's excellent VA panel), and you also have to pay more for the graphics card itself. It would make much more sense to save money by buying the best bang for buck parts (CHG70 and Vega 56, IMO), then upgrade to a next-gen AMD card when Vega doesn't cut it anymore.

In the words of the wise @Ken g6 , the best way to future proof is to save money and spend it on future components.

 

[Shmee]

A custom vega 56 or a 1080Ti makes the most sense to me IMO. For those who don't know, vega 56 can be flashed to vega 64 bios, more details can be found if you read up on it. Hopefully this remains true with custom cards, though with custom bios's it may not be necessary. Whichever you get, look around, and get a good cooler, and do some research.

 

[simas]

Thank you all , that is generally how I am thinking about it. Either
1080 TI + GSync monitor (negatives, price. positives - current year tech vs 1080/1070, performance)
or
Vega 56 + Freesync/Freesync 2 monitor (immature drivers, higher power draw/noise/etc).

the question I ask myself is 'when' - there is always something better around the corner or next quarter or next year. will we see any of AIB boards for Vega within the next month or two? I know ASUS announced few but timing is not known. Will they be at all available? 1080 TIs are available now.. And at what price would Vega 56 be available? If they are truly $399 vs $700 1080 TI it is one thing, if Vega 56 board makers and market sets the price to $600 on these it is a different animal..

 

[Mopetar]

I think that right now with prices being what they are, a 1080 Ti makes the most sense as it will do great for anything now and will have better longevity. Vega 56 is going to be cheaper if you can get one at MSRP, but I'd wait on better third party cards and maybe the first major driver update from AMD just to get a better feel for how its going to pan out longterm as it feels like a bit of a gamble at this point, because while you'll certainly get similar performance to a 1070 now and there's potential to be a lot closer to a 1080 in the future, there's no guarantee that AMD will be able to get the card there in the amount of time before a lot of people here would be considering a new card anyways.

 

[ibex333]

@simas Samsung C32HG70 32" 1440p VA curved FreeSync 144Hz, and Vega 56/64 custom cooled card.

Also, VA > IPS for gaming, movies etc. Deeper blacks have a pretty big impact on atmosphere

Umm.... NO. This guy is planning to buy a GTX 1080, and you are recommending him a FREESYNC monitor?!

He is better off with Dell 27 Gaming Monitor - S2716DG

This is completely and totally IMO, but I recommend against AMD, Freesync, and the Red Team in general. This is not something I just made up. This comes from extensive experience with both Red and Green teams. AMD cards tend to be louder, hotter, larger, more power hungry, do not support PhysX, perform worse than nVidia on average, and their only advantage, the price, is no longer even true. Because of mining, the prices are ridiculous.

Besides, I heard G-Sync works better anyway. At least for now.

 

[tential]

Looks like prices are only going up too.
Honestly not sure if you take Shmee's advice and buy one of those 2 cards ASAP, or if you just wait for everything to stabilize... if it ever does.

This might just be the new way GPUs are priced now. We may just have to accept this.

 

[lehtv]

Umm.... NO. This guy is planning to buy a GTX 1080, and you are recommending him a FREESYNC monitor?!

You might want to read the whole sentence you're replying to.

"Samsung C32HG70 32" 1440p VA curved FreeSync 144Hz, and Vega 56/64 custom cooled card."

Is that me recommending a FreeSync monitor for an NVIDIA card?

 

[ibex333]

You might want to read the whole sentence you're replying to.

"Samsung C32HG70 32" 1440p VA curved FreeSync 144Hz, and Vega 56/64 custom cooled card."

Is that me recommending a FreeSync monitor for an NVIDIA card?

Sorry, I didn't know what Vega was. But is Vega something that's available already? Either way, Vega is already showing less performance than a vanilla 1080 in benchmarks online.

 

[tential]

Sorry, I didn't know what Vega was. But is Vega something that's available already? Either way, Vega is already showing less performance than a vanilla 1080 in benchmarks online.

Yes Vega is already available...
Are you an active user here?

That's a huge data point you need when giving advice is to know how what products are out.

 

[simas]

Piece, friends . I did not mean for this to be contentious and am thankful for assistance already provided. Thank you!
A bit of background , the video card and monitor is a for the new build (currently on 2600K + GTX 970 + 27 inch 1080p monitor) for which I got Ryzen 1700 already, was waiting on MB BIOS to improve for memory speeds, and waiting on Vega release to make Nvidia vs AMD decision.

For monitor, I would like to get at least 32 inches (ideally 34-38) , which rules a lot of current good models out. Also, I never used ultra wides before so it is new to me and probably more comfortable with standard resolutions 1440p, 4k, etc. So a question of tradeoffs - want 4k? say hello to 60Hz refresh rate. want larger screen - welcome to new/strange resolutions. want >60Hz - then you are 'professional gamer' and will pay through the nose for some crazy stated refresh rates. What about 34 inch 1400p or better, not TN, 60-90 refresh rate with either gsync or freesync?

For Nvidia I see things like Asus PG348Q (1200) to be coupled with things like 1080 TI (750) so almost 2k for GPU + monitor
Samsung 32 inch CHG70 is 700 + Vega (??? and who knows when available, Asus said their custom Vega cards should be ready "early September")

 

[ibex333]

Yes Vega is already available...
Are you an active user here?

That's a huge data point you need when giving advice is to know how what products are out.

Yes, I am an active user. Not of Vega though. What qualifies me to give advice are two simple facts:

1)GTX 1080 has a better performance.
2)Vega is out of stock. Good luck getting one for any reasonable amount of money.

 

[Rifter]

Unless you are buying into the Vega is going to receive a magical driver update to turn on the disabled features with large performance increase fluff the AMD supporters are parroting right now, you know yet another wait for AMD rhetoric. I would just buy a 1080/1080Ti and a gsync display.

Then you are getting known performance without having to rely on AMD to fix it later, if that even ever happens.

Or, if you can wait, see what volta has to offer in 6 months. This is what im doing, waiting for volta then im jumping on the Nvidia/Gsync bandwagon unless AMD has something up their sleeve to sway me with within 6 months..

 

[Headfoot]

Sorry, I didn't know what Vega was. But is Vega something that's available already? Either way, Vega is already showing less performance than a vanilla 1080 in benchmarks online.

So you make a broad overarching statement about AMD cards, yet you didn't even know what their latest cards were? Stop giving advice.

 

[Headfoot]

Looking at prices, I think the 1080 Ti is still the best buy with how inflated 1080 and Vega pricing is. If you could even find Vega. 1080 Ti will last longer too, it's quite a bit faster than the 1080 or Vega.

 

[[DHT]Osiris]

Looking at prices, I think the 1080 Ti is still the best buy with how inflated 1080 and Vega pricing is. If you could even find Vega. 1080 Ti will last longer too, it's quite a bit faster than the 1080 or Vega.

1080 has been largely unaffected by the mining trend, 1080ti slightly less so. 1070, 1060 6GB (to a lesser extent), and the AMD 470/80 and 570/80's, as well as the Vega boards have been the hardest hit.

You can buy a 1080gtx right now for $500 on newegg, which is about $30 under the (pretty solid) sale price I got mine for around 12mo ago, not a sharp downtrend but a downtrend.