Only 1.18% of Steam users use a resolution above 1920x1200! 660ti is overkill!

[MentalIlness]

Yea, but its damn cold down there. And the sun doesn't shine for 6 months. Not to mention your primary clientèle would be the local penguin population...

:biggrin::thumbsup:

 

[badb0y]

I am the 1%

 

[Makaveli]

I do not put alot of faith in steam survey numbers for the above mentioned reasons. Anyone that has been doing this long enough knows you can never have enough GPU power.

When I buy videocards I always think is it powerful enough to go through one hardware upgrade cycle. If not I don't buy, this has kept me in the comfort zone of always having a gpu capable of playing the latest and by the time its EOL I should still be able to play most games at my native res but with decreased settings.

When I cannot do that its time to upgrade.

 

[96Firebird]

Not to mention your primary clientèle would be the local penguin population...

I bet they're all running Linux...

 

[jsedlak]

Huh? 1920x1200 is not really the line... Pay attention more to 1920x1080+.

Btw, am I reading this wrong?
http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey?platform=pc

1920 x 1080 27.85% +0.89%
3840 x 1080 18.01% +0.37%

That would suggest that 27%+ of single monitor usage is at or above 1080p and that 18%+ of multi-mon usage is at or above 2x1080p.

Btw, resolution is only one factor that drives performance requirements. I upgraded to a 680 because, among other reasons, I could not run Skyrim at 1920x1200 with my mods smoothly on my 570.

 

[moonbogg]

sure you and me both average 55-60 fps on our 670 s .... but 660 ti averages 35-45 .... is this playable ?

35-45 is indeed a hindrance, especially as an average. My FPS bottoms out at about 50-55 on BF3 and it actually sucks a little at that FPS. Boycott the 660ti !

 

[tweakboy]

1080p vsync on, 8x CSAA FXAA 16xAF high Quality, and high in games NOT ULTRA.

I get 60fps all the way,, 50 to 60fps ,,, if it drops to 55 it comes back up in a instant.. thank you gl

 

[NickelPlate]

Another reason why high end hardware is never overkill IMO is that some games (an increasing number it seems unfortunately) are being released with mediocre and in some cases poorly optimized graphics engines which means you need some heavy duty hardware to run them.

 

[Makaveli]

1080p vsync on, 8x CSAA FXAA 16xAF high Quality, and high in games NOT ULTRA.

I get 60fps all the way,, 50 to 60fps ,,, if it drops to 55 it comes back up in a instant.. thank you gl

????

 

[Olikan]

Only in North America and Europe. LAN cafes are alive and well in Asia, Africa, and South America.*

* I hear Antarctica still doesn't have one. Business opportunity!

in South America it only rest some very small ones...mostly used for facebook, orkut and msn...

 

[skipsneeky2]

Another reason why high end hardware is never overkill IMO is that some games (an increasing number it seems unfortunately) are being released with mediocre and in some cases poorly optimized graphics engines which means you need some heavy duty hardware to run them.

It is currently one of those generations a $400 gpu could easily be justified for gaming.

A single gtx670 can still tank to the 40's in the most demanding of games like BF3,heck even at 1600x900 it can,trust me i have tested this out for myself.

Of course if you kill msaa then you get some pretty fluid game play but certain people just aren't gonna run their games without it.

 

[BallaTheFeared]

High level hardware will always be the minority because of settings.

I can play BF3 on my 9800GT with near minimal settings at 1080p and still get over 30 fps avg.

This forum is a minority within a minority, it's heavily pro one side, and strongly anti multi GPU. If you go to other forums you can see this same minority group in a polar opposite.

Even the idea of 60 fps being required is a minority opinion within a minority, most are happy with slightly less than 30.

The 560 Ti, 550 Ti, 460, and 560 make up 4 of the top 6 cards in the steam survey. None of those are high end cards, most of them were below $200 for the majority of their time on the market and none of them will min 60 in the latest games let alone max them.

 

[blastingcap]

This forum is heavily in favor of price/perf and against multi-GPU, just like many other forums online.

Even the idea of 60 fps being required is a minority opinion within a minority, most are happy with playable framerates which vary from game engine to game engine.

Fixed that for you.

Honestly, you were trying to argue that some forums were the "polar opposite" of multi-GPU? I'd love to see a single large forum where most people heavily recommend going multi-GPU instead of single-GPU.

And there is no need to obscure what you're trying to say when you say this forum is pro "one side." I disagree with that "one side" insinuation. Every forum I've ever seen, even ones filled with enthusiasts, have considered price/perf very strongly... that's why the initial GTX 6xx vs HD 79xx prices got a lot of scrutiny in favor of NV. Price/perf is continually scrutinized, however, so after AMD's price drops and driver updates, AMD went from worse price/perf to better price/perf, so the recommendations started going the other way.

 

[moonbogg]

It is currently one of those generations a $400 gpu could easily be justified for gaming.

A single gtx670 can still tank to the 40's in the most demanding of games like BF3,heck even at 1600x900 it can,trust me i have tested this out for myself.

Of course if you kill msaa then you get some pretty fluid game play but certain people just aren't gonna run their games without it.

Yep, tried that myself and it tanks hard to low 40's.

 

[Siberian]

Most gamers use steam so it's probably the best gauge for what is going on in the gaming community. I'm not at all surprised that very few people go above 1920 x 1200. For the majority a 660 is more than enough.

 

[hokies83]

Meh then there was 120hz monitors where 2 680s can struggle to hold 120fps.. i feel sorry for 660ti people..

 

[BallaTheFeared]

Fixed that for you.

Honestly, you were trying to argue that some forums were the "polar opposite" of multi-GPU? I'd love to see a single large forum where most people heavily recommend going multi-GPU instead of single-GPU.

And there is no need to obscure what you're trying to say when you say this forum is pro "one side." I disagree with that "one side" insinuation. Every forum I've ever seen, even ones filled with enthusiasts, have considered price/perf very strongly... that's why the initial GTX 6xx vs HD 79xx prices got a lot of scrutiny in favor of NV. Price/perf is continually scrutinized, however, so after AMD's price drops and driver updates, AMD went from worse price/perf to better price/perf, so the recommendations started going the other way.

Fixed what? My opinion? :whiste:

Yes this form is strongly against more than one GPU, you could start with overclock.net you'll find a large community of MTGPU users running both AMD and Nvidia. I wouldn't say "recommend" I would say get them, because generally speaking people who know what they're doing don't ask for assistance.

Again your opinion I was just in a conversation where a stronger card that was both faster and cheaper was argued against based on power consumption. Ironic how we have two different opinions, though I respect yours but disagree with it completely.

 

[blastingcap]

Fixed what? My opinion? :whiste:

Yes this form is strongly against more than one GPU, you could start with overclock.net you'll find a large community of MTGPU users running both AMD and Nvidia. I wouldn't say "recommend" I would say get them, because generally speaking people who know what they're doing don't ask for assistance.

Again your opinion I was just in a conversation where a stronger card that was both faster and cheaper was argued against based on power consumption. Ironic how we have two different opinions, though I respect yours but disagree with it completely.

Usually FTFYs are meant to be somewhat in jest. So don't take it literally. If you need me to spell it out for you: I disagree with your characterization of this forum.

You said polar opposite. Polar opposite. So if you think this forum is that strongly pro-single then I'd like to see a forum--not subforum--that is strongly multi. Strongly. Of course there will be sub-forums, informal or formal, of multi-enthusiasts but we're talking about the graphics cards forums as a whole since Anandtech only has one forum for all of video cards and graphics with no subforums. I mean, DUH, if AT VC&G had a subforum called multi-GPU then you would expect that subforum to be full of pro-multi people. Gotta look at the entire video forum to make an apples-to-apples comparison.

The NV vs AMD price/perf thing changes by the hour depending on price levels and I don't really prefer either company and can understand power arguments, particularly for those living in high-power-cost areas. About the only constant is that GTX 680s look to remain overpriced until Tesla/Quadro are well-supplied, because as long as NV is capacity-constrained and Tesla/Quadro demand is high, NV would be stupid to sell perfectly good GK104 CPUs as GeForce when they can make way more money selling them as Tesla/Quadro. GTX 670 and below is a different story altogether since they don't sell those GPUs as Tesla/Quadro.

 

[BallaTheFeared]

Little strong there blastingcap, I can tell you don't post at overclock.net nor have any idea where I'm actually coming from.

Agree to disagree, moving on.

 

[lavaheadache]

Cool, I'm part of the 1% for once.

lol, good way to think of it

 

[blastingcap]

Little strong there blastingcap, I can tell you don't post at overclock.net nor have any idea where I'm actually coming from.

Agree to disagree, moving on.

Lmao I do post at OCN, but under a different username. I do not think it is a fair characterization of OCN's video and graphics forums (all of them put together including subforums) to say that overall OCN's equivalent of AT's VC&G is strongly multi-GPU. But yes, let's move on.

 

[BallaTheFeared]

lolololololol final word two main forums rest are driver and cooling related tally ho.

 

[Dark Shroud]

I wouldn't have thought I was a one percenter. That's kind of sad for gaming.

 

[DaveSimmons]

Minimum framerate is more important than average.

 

[Keromyaou]

I am among 1% then. But at this moment there is a huge gap in the price between 1920x1200 and 2560x1440 (or 1600). I can imagine that most of people hesitate to spend $600-1400 for a display (1440p, 1600p) when they can get the one (1080p 1200p) for $180-350.