Call me when the next generation Video Cards Arrive

Tudz said:
Yeah, I bought myself a GTX460 which was on special as a stopgap when my 4870 died so I could bide my time and get something better. That was nearly 2 years ago now and I just haven't felt the need to get anything else for 1920x1080 gaming, most games play at or close to high settings and while I may not be able to max out BF3, frankly it still looks pretty damned good and it doesn't impede my enjoyment of games in general. I've often been tempted to get something new, came very close to getting a GTX570 just before the 7000 series came out, but thought it best to wait since I wasn't desperate, and in the end just didn't end up getting anything.
Click to expand...

Similar experience here, got 480 2 years ago and haven't really felt the need to upgrade (granted I don't play games like BF3 that much)
 
SonDa5 said:
Why would they do that if they have problems building them and are unable to sell the higher priced video cards? Makes more sense to build a card on a cheap gpu size that is simple to build and will sell much better.
Click to expand...

Because a die shrink from a competitor gives them an advantage. The reason why foundries announce tapeouts publicly is due to competition. Like this, or this or this, etc.

There are advantages in a shrink in node despite prices being higher (take a look at Anand's review of IB) so the massive amounts of cash, research and time invested in shrinking ever smaller isn't an empty goal. Yes, there will be a wall but like I said, it's just a matter of inventing something new to get over it. Also have to consider that process maturity will bring prices down as well as the shift to 450mm wafers. They'll still be higher but just because the price is high doesn't necessarily mean people don't want it. Hell, look at all the people who bought 2011 and SB-E :p
 
I've been running two 470's for about a year now ever since I went 30". I'm upgrading to use less power, reduce noise, and heat for my machine (plus I like to play games full screen windowed mode so when i alt tab to do things on my other monitors I don't lose sight of what's happening in game - with my current setup my fps drops). First time I'm buying the latest and greatest video card, so I hope I can get a decent return for my 470s.
 
I had an EVGA 680 for $499.99 in my cart at newegg with the free shipping code, and was so close to clicking "Check out" ... but I couldn't do it. If AnandTech hadn't made those comments about "Big Kepler" existing, but not being out yet, I probably would've pulled the trigger. I at least want to wait to buy something until I can get a 680 within the 90 day step-up window with EVGA. Perhaps I'll just ride it out until it's actually released. I was sure torn yesterday looking at that 680 in my cart. I have a GTX 295 now that just does great, but I've been wanting to go single card with a potential SLI path in the future should I ever need more. The problem is, I can't afford more monitors that would be required to enjoy anything bigger than a single 680, or even a single 580. There are benefits in going to a single GPU though, especially with regards to case space, heat, power requirement aspects. Plus, I currently have a buyer for my 295 that will likely want it soon.

I do have a GT 250 to limp by on until "big Kepler" comes out. It will not be much fun to play after gaming on a 295 for a while though, especially with my Batman games, which I'll be back to playing soon since I just beat ME3. Decisions, decisions.
 
Nytegard said:
(I'm not really a fan of multiple screen gaming. If, on the other hand, a monitor with 4k resolution came out...),
Click to expand...

That's why I bought my 7970, I bought my first 4k display in 2007, it's nice to be able to drive one with a single card.
 
Xeth said:
T221? Other than that there were no 4k displays under $50k in 2007.
Click to expand...

I see what your talking about now, I was talking technical 4k, 2560 x1600, thus 4k as referred too in vid card reviews, where you were talking in marketing terms, so technicaly pushing around 8 million pixels, vid cards nowadays couldn't handle that
 
My 2 580s are getting the job done for the most part right now. I'd love 2 new 680s, but I can't really justify it.

Problem is if I wait til next gen, the price I could fetch for my 580s will be that much lower.

Anybody know what people are getting for their 580s?
 
I've always been a bit behind the curve, my 8800GTX just died two days ago so I bought a 570sc. There's a good bet when the next gen comes out I'll just get a second 570 and call it a day.

I don't know, I just haven't gone out of my way to buy a new release card since my old 6800GT. Perhaps I'm getting old?
 
Roach said:
I've always been a bit behind the curve, my 8800GTX just died two days ago so I bought a 570sc. There's a good bet when the next gen comes out I'll just get a second 570 and call it a day.

I don't know, I just haven't gone out of my way to buy a new release card since my old 6800GT. Perhaps I'm getting old?
Click to expand...

It's fun to have the biggest and "bestest" at least for a while. I snagged a GTX 295 via BFGs trade-up program. Being able to basically pay it off in two segments like that was fantastic, not to mention the 265 it replaced came with a $20 rebate, a flashlight, a copy of Futurmark Advanced, and Far Cry 2. I made out like a bandit on that, ended up paying a total of $480 for a brand new dual GPU beast that was the undisputed single card king for over half a year, if memory serves. Of course the first three 295's were defective, but when they sent me the improved single PCB version my problems disappeared. I would've been fine with the old dual PCB body style, but they kept having issues. The first one gradually went wonko and started displaying all kinds of artifacts. The second one had bad memory chips (per their own diagnostic) out of the box, and the 3rd was DOA. The one I have now has been running strong for some time, and buying the top end has saved me from needing to upgrade for a considerable amount of time. The 295 still keeps up phenomenally well with whatever new games I throw at it, and I threw in a GTS 250 for my batman and other physx games.

The benefit is not being quite as tempted to jump on every new architecture. I remember buying the 4850 when it came out and brought serious firepower to the midrange gamer for cheap. Go AMD!! I still felt myself wanting for some of the tougher games, like Total War series games and Crysis-like games. I have definitely enjoyed games more over the years with a powerful card.

If you can buy the top end and keep it for two to three years it can sometimes be the same as upgrading your midrange card more often. Depends on what you do, but it doesn't have to be uneconomical if you watch yourself. Just skip a generation or two, then it makes the top end more affordable.

The 570 is a venerable card, though! The 2nd best of a generation is still no slouch, and since SLI and crossfire are scaling better nowadays, a second future card (even a used one on the cheap!) makes a lot more sense than it did in the past.
 
call me when actually demanding, limit pushing games are released. It's ridiculous that crysis is still one of the major benchmarking games.
 
680 is just too tempting to let go, maybe the most tempting card ever released.
 
cthulhuiscool said:
call me when actually demanding, limit pushing games are released. It's ridiculous that crysis is still one of the major benchmarking games.
Click to expand...

and in ten years from now it will still run like shit.

when are people going to accept the fact that Crysis is poorly coded.
 
680 cant beat 7970 in crysis... "Crysis is poorly coded"

I'm with the OP on this one.
 
79xx prices have certainly dropped in Australia. Started out in the 700's, now down to high 500's, low 600's.
 
Close enough. USD has been close to AUD for a long time (right now 1 USD = 0.957044 AUD, so it's actually MORE).

Cheapest I've seen a 680 is $645.
 
i know it's almost 1:1 fxrate, the reason that i was surprised is that newegg is selling the card at 550-600? i thought only video games have such price disparity between regions.
 
SirKronan said:
I had an EVGA 680 for $499.99 in my cart at newegg with the free shipping code, and was so close to clicking "Check out" ... but I couldn't do it. If AnandTech hadn't made those comments about "Big Kepler" existing, but not being out yet, I probably would've pulled the trigger. I at least want to wait to buy something until I can get a 680 within the 90 day step-up window with EVGA. Perhaps I'll just ride it out until it's actually released. I was sure torn yesterday looking at that 680 in my cart. I have a GTX 295 now that just does great, but I've been wanting to go single card with a potential SLI path in the future should I ever need more. The problem is, I can't afford more monitors that would be required to enjoy anything bigger than a single 680, or even a single 580. There are benefits in going to a single GPU though, especially with regards to case space, heat, power requirement aspects. Plus, I currently have a buyer for my 295 that will likely want it soon.

I do have a GT 250 to limp by on until "big Kepler" comes out. It will not be much fun to play after gaming on a 295 for a while though, especially with my Batman games, which I'll be back to playing soon since I just beat ME3. Decisions, decisions.
Click to expand...


Lol, i went one step further. Ordered EVGA on day 1 from Egg and then cancelled 30 seconds later. Wonder if i did the right thing now? I'm scared if i see them in stock again i will order one. I want to upgrade but i want that big Kepler too, oh well... It'll be nice Christmas present to myself :D
 
skcorpio said:
i know it's almost 1:1 fxrate, the reason that i was surprised is that newegg is selling the card at 550-600? i thought only video games have such price disparity between regions.
Click to expand...

Ahh. Yeah, Hardware's usually got a price markup down here as well. Sucks living on an Island :p Lucky I've got enough friends in the States that I don't have to pay Steam prices for games down here.
 
I don't think we can automatically assume that big Kepler will be significantly better for gaming though. I think it's safe to say it will be significantly better at computing apps, but it could very well end up the same as 480 GTX was compared to 460 Ti. 480 GTX was much better at computing and testellation, but in terms of gaming it could be outpaced by an overclocked 460 Ti. And to top it off 460 Ti used less power and generated less heat.

SirKronan said:
I had an EVGA 680 for $499.99 in my cart at newegg with the free shipping code, and was so close to clicking "Check out" ... but I couldn't do it. If AnandTech hadn't made those comments about "Big Kepler" existing, but not being out yet, I probably would've pulled the trigger. I at least want to wait to buy something until I can get a 680 within the 90 day step-up window with EVGA. Perhaps I'll just ride it out until it's actually released. I was sure torn yesterday looking at that 680 in my cart. I have a GTX 295 now that just does great, but I've been wanting to go single card with a potential SLI path in the future should I ever need more. The problem is, I can't afford more monitors that would be required to enjoy anything bigger than a single 680, or even a single 580. There are benefits in going to a single GPU though, especially with regards to case space, heat, power requirement aspects. Plus, I currently have a buyer for my 295 that will likely want it soon.

I do have a GT 250 to limp by on until "big Kepler" comes out. It will not be much fun to play after gaming on a 295 for a while though, especially with my Batman games, which I'll be back to playing soon since I just beat ME3. Decisions, decisions.
Click to expand...
 
TroyX said:
and in ten years from now it will still run like shit.

when are people going to accept the fact that Crysis is poorly coded.
Click to expand...

here's the real question, do people really still play crysis

how many people are playing the game for the first time

how many people are playing the game as a re-run right now

i'd venture to say, very few, the game has run it's course, why use a game as a gaming benchmark that no one plays anymore, it doesn't represent anything except its own performance, it doesn't tell you the performance of any other game
 
Brent_Justice said:
here's the real question, do people really still play crysis

how many people are playing the game for the first time

how many people are playing the game as a re-run right now

i'd venture to say, very few, the game has run it's course, why use a game as a gaming benchmark that no one plays anymore, it doesn't represent anything except its own performance, it doesn't tell you the performance of any other game
Click to expand...

I've read on some review sites, such as Anand, that they do so because of how demanding it still is on hardware. And it's certainly not Crytek's fault that no one has drastically outpaced them visually speaking in game graphics yet. There are some graphically demanding titles out, but Crysis set the bar, and Crysis Warhead specifically, continues to be a reliable benchmarking tool, and does indicate performance comparisons that will be reflected with many games. If Crysis Warhead runs significantly better on one card versus another, there is a good chance many other games will as well.

I'm not saying it's the end all be all of benchmarking, but it's still a useful tool and is pretty idiot proof to use in benching hardware. It continues to be demanding on hardware while producing impressive scenery even by today's standards. There are still only a handful of games capable of producing better visuals.
 
FragMagnet said:
I see what your talking about now, I was talking technical 4k, 2560 x1600, thus 4k as referred too in vid card reviews, where you were talking in marketing terms, so technicaly pushing around 8 million pixels, vid cards nowadays couldn't handle that
Click to expand...

Just so you know, if you are speaking in terms of resolution and use the term 4K people will assume you mean 4096x3072 (16:9) typically.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4K_resolution
 
FragMagnet said:
I see what your talking about now, I was talking technical 4k, 2560 x1600, thus 4k as referred too in vid card reviews, where you were talking in marketing terms, so technicaly pushing around 8 million pixels, vid cards nowadays couldn't handle that
Click to expand...


Yeah I don't think anyone refers to that as 4K. If anything 4M makes more sense (though I don't see anyone using that either)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top