GeForce GTX 1080 Ti Evaluation Thoughts

I'm a bit biased since I am not a fan of SLI. With that said...

I would do an initial review of just a single card configuration, then a followup review of a SLI configuration. The cards I would compare against:
  • nVidia 1080
  • nVidia 980Ti
  • nVidia 780Ti
  • The standard on-board video of your test system as a baseline.
The resolutions that should be tested at should include single-monitor 1080 and 1440 resolutions. As far as I know, there are multiple monitors that can support up to 165Hz refresh rates at both 1440 and 1080.

I know that with my current configuration, I am getting around 90FPS with my 980 card at 1440 resolution in Overwatch, so it should be interesting how the 1080Ti does. There is always Crysis.
 
i wonder if anyone will ever do a GPU review focusing on 1080p 240 Hz... probably impossible in a lot of games with current CPUs.
 
Brent_Justice said:
I don't normally poll these kinds of threads, normally because we cannot if under embargo, but this situation is unique, the 1080 Ti has been announced, the specs and pricing released. I'm interested in feedback this time and your thoughts.

With the upcoming 1080 Ti launch, now that specs are public and we can talk about it, how do you guys feel about a 4K focused video card evaluation this round? I'm feelin that, how about ya'll? Would you miss 1440p for this level of video card?

In addition, knowing the price ($699), and the fact we will include a 1080 for sure in the evaluation, what other GPUs do you feel warrant comparison to the 1080 Ti (NV and AMD) ?

I appreciate your feedback and thoughts :)
Click to expand...
I want ONLY 4K reviews ;) I own a 4K monitor.
 
ZLoth said:
I'm a bit biased since I am not a fan of SLI. With that said...

I would do an initial review of just a single card configuration, then a followup review of a SLI configuration. The cards I would compare against:
  • nVidia 1080
  • nVidia 980Ti
  • nVidia 780Ti
  • The standard on-board video of your test system as a baseline.
The resolutions that should be tested at should include single-monitor 1080 and 1440 resolutions. As far as I know, there are multiple monitors that can support up to 165Hz refresh rates at both 1440 and 1080.

I know that with my current configuration, I am getting around 90FPS with my 980 card at 1440 resolution in Overwatch, so it should be interesting how the 1080Ti does. There is always Crysis.
Click to expand...
I agree, 1440p 144hz Overwatch is my target res/game and would be an awesome bench addition.

IMO if a rig can do that then CS:GO or Dota 2/MOBAs can also do that. These types of games appear to be the 144hz multiplayer sweet spot. You could demo a replay with auto spectate for the bench too for consistency.

Brent_Justice one last thing, you
Could publish the demo used and settings so people can duplicate your bench to compare, much like the Ryzen blender. I'm sure you're busy with tests, thanks for reading :)
 
Last edited:
AMD Fury X should be compared over the RX 480


Comparing top end cards makes more sense than comparing a mid level card.

I have a pair of Fury X in crossfire that I picked up for $335 each in the last year. I am curious how the crossfire setup would compare to a single 1080ti.
 
Another vote for 3440 * 1440. Aren't some of these considered the best computer monitors you can get? 100Hz Gsync. The Predator, the Asus, and I think i might buy the Omen x35.
 
Napoleon said:
I agree, 1440p 144hz Overwatch is my target res/game and would be an awesome bench addition.

IMO if a rig can do that then CS:GO or Dota 2/MOBAs can also do that. These types of games appear to be the 144hz multiplayer sweet spot. You could demo a replay with auto spectate for the bench too for consistency.

Brent_Justice one last thing, you
Could publish the demo used and settings so people can duplicate your bench to compare, much like the Ryzen blender. I'm sure you're busy with tests, thanks for reading :)
Click to expand...

I get about 130 FPS with my 1080 in Overwatch at 3440x1440, so 144FPS would be no problem at 1440p even with a 1080. This is completely maxed out with the highest AA/AF settings.
 
N4CR said:
You know what I'm wondering...
There are enough people on [H] and other sites in the same boat. I should investigate crowd funding a damn monitor. Either modify suitable existing model or build from scratch (more costly). Gsync/Freesync 40"+ IPS with no bad pixels and at least 60Hz (see what can be done), I think quite a few would be keen for dual use set ups (game + WS).

I have experience and access to resources for mass producing almost any finished electronic part of this other than clamped internal LCD module. Working with other members here would significantly simplify this. If there is enough interest I could be keen to develop a prototype in future.
But this is getting OT.
Click to expand...

The electronics already exist in the form of the Acer XB321HK, but it's only a 32" screen (and it's $1400). Graft a 40" or 43" screen on it and I think they'll sell as many as they can make.
 
  • Like
Reactions: N4CR
like this
Here's a pretty thorough comparison of 980ti's SLI'd vs 1080/1070/980ti (1080p/1440/2160).

https://web.archive.org/web/2016071...-nvidia-geforce-gtx-1080-gtx-1070-benchmarks/

^Have to use the wayback machine. [H] sorry to keep spamming outside links. I did a ton of research considering the move to 4k + 1070/1080 so have a bunch of comparisons throughout the web.

We should do a poll in the display forum about what resolutions/refresh rates are currently popular here. At this point people are buying monitors first, then pairing the graphics card to the monitor. The monitor is the new limiting factor in most builds (I think that can be said?). Basically <60hz 1440p isn't a big deal anymore for moderate enthusiasts. You can get by on that for like $150-225 GTX 970/980 depending on game, yeah? Of course freesync/gsync are thorny subjects. And CPUs are (for the most part) hardly a consideration when planning a build (if you are just a moderate gamer).
 
As someone that's going to step up to a 1080ti from a freshly swapped out 1070 I am not particularly interested in the 4K review yet because I already know it's not fast enough for my recently converted appreciation for faster monitors.

This might be the perfect speed demons card for 1440 though until the next gen that hopefully gets us to fast 4K. I'm buying one asap though so I'm already sold but think that fast 1440 is still a bit more important than 4K right now. Not sure many gamers that are buying 4K right now are buying anything else unless they can't afford it (barring amazing amd release of course).

Either way, thanks for asking and all the review work.
 
5150Joker said:
I feel 1440p is absolutely essential to any review as 4k still isn't mainstream yet nor is it the sweet spot for this generation of cards.
Click to expand...

4K is not irrelevant to me.

Pushing the limit and being a bit Avant Garde is the [H] way.
 
I was thinking about polling over in the display forum, any input?

Thought it should be split into 2 polls, 1) What do you currently game at. 2) What do you realistically plan to game at in 2017 (upgrades)

I don't really know how to phrase the question/answers. The basic question to ask is: what fps and resolution do you *actually* game at the majority of the time, and what do you *want* to game at (on currently available tech). Trying to figure out how to avoid people clicking on their max refresh rates/resolutions. I figure if the multi monitor/3d/VR answers receive a popular enough response they can be separately polled again. I guess the answers should really be changed from hz to fps, or actual fps.

Maybe add a poll: "Do you regularly turn down graphics settings to achieve higher fps?"- with options
-No, I play at max settings, I prefer to sacrifice some fps for higher image quality
-Yes, to achieve 20-35 fps
-Yes, to achieve 35-50 fps
-Yes, to achieve 50-75 fps
-Yes, to achieve 75-100 fps
-Yes, to achieve 100-150 fps
-Yes, to achieve >150 fps
^ I don't know much about this. Don't know how to compensate for stuff like AA at high res or things like hair works etc. Don't think it's really helpful to hear about someone with a 960 lowering settings to get 60fps? Maybe it is?

Could somehow poll gsync/freesync & v sync as well.

Basic goal is to get a feel of what people are playing at & what they care about being able to play at.



Maybe the question should just be, "What benchmarks do you want to see as baselines for 2017-18?"
-1080p 240 fps
-1440p 60 fps
-1440p 120 fps
-2160p 60fps

And then lower image settings to meet those numbers(?). This is assuming that a ~$350 card (1070) can pretty much pull off 120/60/30fps at 1080p/1440p/2160p. Now that we can reliably hit 1440p/2160p, maybe it's time to revert to the style of reviews lowering graphics settings to hit framerate numbers.
 
Last edited:
I think 1080p should always be included and discussed because SO many screens, especially high end televisions, are still at 1080p.

I've been couching it with my 60 inch plasma for years because nothing comes close except OLED 4K which is just too damn expensive right now.
 
Unlucky me. I bought an 1080 two weeks ago. Back then I didn't hear anything about the Ti:(
 
I'd like these all graphed in what are generally considered in the GoTY pc games + a few otherwise most popular games/series of the last few years:

gtx 1080, gtx 1080 sli, titan pascal, gtx 1080 ti , gtx 1080 ti sli
============================================

1080p.............120fps-hz avg or better . graphed to show the actual frame rate "roller coaster" band

2560x1440..... 100fps-hz + avg dialed in settings with fps graphs
.............................with the detail settings a variable in the graph
.............................(e.g. gtx 1080 on very high/very high+ to get 100fps-hz + avg on most demanding titles,
....................................gtx 1080ti sli graphs shown on both very high and ultra)

3440 x 1440.... at 60fps avg target
3440 x 1440.....at 60fps minimum/common low target
3440 x 1440.....at 100fps-hz + target for 144hz 3440 x 1440 monitors on dp 1.4 in 2017


4k 60hz at 60fps avg target
4k graphed at 60fps minimum/common low target
4k graphed at 100fps-hz + target for upcoming 4k 144hz monitors on dp 1.4 in 2017
 
Last edited:
DrLobotomy said:
The point is some of us know that is a lie and use SLI. I will ALWAYS buy 2 cheaper cards if they can perform as well as a higher priced single card. If a title doesn't support SLI then I didn't want it anyway.
Click to expand...

UWP and DX12 really has ruined people's enthusiasm for mult-gpu.
Console games like Forza and GOW I didn't expect to enable SLI/CF. But we still have PC centric devs like DICE that still support it.

The good devs not under MS control know DX12 is dead in the water and a replacement needs to come soon.
DX11 can still be enabled in the graphic settings to use SLI/CF in many of the games not linked to MS.

My backlog of games massively outweigh the small amount of desirable titles released in 2016.
I'm still going SLI because so many of the games I bought over the years support it.
 
texuspete00 said:
Another vote for 3440 * 1440. Aren't some of these considered the best computer monitors you can get? 100Hz Gsync. The Predator, the Asus, and I think i might buy the Omen x35.
Click to expand...

2560x1440 (non-gysc/freesync) and 4K. This will become a monitor review instead of a GPU review.
You can do the math buy calculating the amount of pixels less than 4K to get 3440x1440 estimated numbers.

3440x1440 should be on average 40% faster than 4K, depending on game title.
If it's a demanding title I would use 20% faster. If it's well optimized game, I will start at 40% faster.
 
Last edited:
WorldExclusive said:
UWP and DX12 really has ruined people's enthusiasm for mult-gpu.
Console games like Forza and GOW I didn't expect to enable SLI/CF. But we still have PC centric devs like DICE that still support it.

The good devs not under MS control know DX12 is dead in the water and a replacement needs to come soon.
DX11 can still be enabled in the graphic settings to use SLI/CF in many of the games not linked to MS.

My backlog of games massively outweigh the small amount of desirable titles released in 2016.
I'm still going SLI because so many of the games I bought over the years support it.
Click to expand...

Pretty much every GoTY going back several years supports SLI, and many other popular games. Early bird may get the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese as far as drivers and patches go.

Also


Unreal Engine 4.15 supports Nintendo Switch, HDR, and AFR for Nvidia SLI

elvn said:
misterbobby said:
That is not a lie at all. When techpowerup tested GTX 1080 SLI last year literally one third of the games tested did not support multi GPU at all. And that did not even get into all the games that have additional issues with multi-gpu setups such as flickering or poor scaling or no support on release. But I do love the BS excuse that if the game doesn't support SLI then you did not want it anyway. Just keep on buying two cards and keep on deluding yourself.
Click to expand...


http://techbuyersguru.com/4k-gaming...1070-sli-vs-1080-sli-vs-titan-x-pascal?page=2


https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/NVIDIA/GeForce_GTX_1080_SLI/13.html


http://www.techspot.com/review/1195-palit-geforce-gtx-1080-sli/


Though we mostly focused on games that support Nvidia’s multi-GPU technology, these also happen to be some of the most popular PC games released as of late. On average SLI enabled 63% more performance -- or 71% if we ignore Ashes of the Singularity. We'd call that a solid score for SLI scaling.
Click to expand...



Pretty much every GoTY going back several years supports SLI, and many other popular games. Early bird may get the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese as far as drivers and patches go.


skyrim SLI


far cry SLI

far cry 2 SLI

far cry 4 SLI DX 11, TXAA, HBAO+, Gamestream, 4k


fallout 3 SLI

fallout 4 SLI, DX11, PhysX, HBAO+, Gamestream, 4k



bioshock SLI

bioshock infinite SLI (great scaling)


dragon age: inquisition (some flickering reports, forum cfg fixes)


witcher 3 SLI, DX11, PhysX, HBAO+, 4k, Hairworks

witcher2 SLI


overwatch 4k, DSR, SLI

http://www.techspot.com/articles-info/1195/bench/Overwatch_01.png

http://www.techspot.com/articles-info/1195/bench/Overwatch_02.png


dark souls


dark souls 2 SLI

dark souls 3 SLI


S.T.A.L.K.E.R.: Shadow of Chernobyl SLI


Metro: Last Light SLI, DX11, Physx


Thief: Deadly Shadows: SLI


Shadow Warrior 2: SLI, Gamestream, 4k, Surround, DSR


GTA:San Andreas SLI

gta IV SLI

gta V SLI DX11, TXAA, Gamestream, 4k


middle earth shadow of mordor: SLI since official patch Nov 2014, forced profile prior



titanfall 2 Use TF1 SLI profile + forum config fix. some flickering looking at sun in multiplayer

https://forums.geforce.com/default/topic/973578/sli/titanfall-2-sli-profile/3/



Borderlands 2 SLI, 3D surround, PhysX

Borderlands 2: the Pre-sequel SLI, PhysX, DSR


battlefield 2142: SLI

battlefield Vietnam: SLI

battlefield 2: SLI

battlefield 3: SLI,DX 11, MFAA

battlefield hardline: SLI, 4k

Battlefield 1: SLI fixes and general gameplay fixes from DICE and drivers Dec 6, 2016

Some reports of occasional flickering remain in forums for some people

"at the start of round for 2 - 3 seconds, occasionally in chat menu in round, slight flickering of numbers and words at end of round screens.Situation is much better than before the December patch.." - suspect overlays - some recommend using dx11 rather than dx 12

-many others report no sli problems after patch and driver updates


call of duty: black ops III: SLI, DX11. 4k, DSR


assassin's creed syndicate: SLI, DX11, TXAA, HBAO+, gamestream, 4k

assassin's creed unity: SLI, DX11, TXAA, HBAO+, Gamestream, 4k


batman: arkham origins: SLI, DX11, Physx, TXAA


Starcraft II: Heart of the swarm SLI


xcom: enemy unknown SLI


dead space SLI

dead space 2 ????

dead space 3: SLI



star wars battlefront: SLI, DX11, 4k, DSR


Tom Clancy's the Division: SLI, DX11, HBAO+, Gamestream, 4k


the walking dead SLI via forced profile edit


project cars: SLI, DX11, 4k, Surround, DSR


The crew: SLI, DX11, TXAA, HBAO+, Gamestream , 4k


Elite Dangerous: SLI, DX11, Gamestream, 4k, DSR, VR


Evolve: SLI, DX11, 4k, DSR


Metal Gear Solid V: Ground Zeroes: SLI, 4k, DSR


portal 2 SLI


World of Warcraft: SLI, HBAO+, 4k, Surround, MFAA, DSR


The Elder Scrolls Online: SLI


Guild Wars 2: SLI


Path of Exile: SLI


Diablo III: SLI


The Secret World: SLI, DX11, PhysX, TXAA, MFAA,


Torchlight2 SLI


AION SLI


Tomb Raider: Angel of Darkness SLI

Tomb Raider: Legend SLI

Tomb Raider: Anniversary SLI

Rise of the Tomb Raider: SLI . DX11 HBAO+, Gamestream, 4k , surround


Resident Evil 5 : SLI

Resident Evil 6: SLI

Resident Evil 7: Forced profile, hopefully sli patched in officially later




Dishonored: SLI

Dishonored 2: SLI patched in, jerky mouse fixed in patch



Dishonored 2, gtx 980 SLI USER:

Using defaults! This thread inspired me to run one more of those "benchmarks", with the latest betapatch of the game and the 375.95 driver. It looks like the SLI support is much improved since the first measurement, and it's using my GPUs much better: usage graphs


On release: 2016-11-11 22:31:40 - Dishonored2 Frames: 748 - Time: 41297ms - Avg: 18.113 - Min: 12 - Max: 31

375.86 driver from NVIDIA (introduced SLI for DH2): 2016-11-15 12:03:57 - Dishonored2 Frames: 1219 - Time: 44594ms - Avg: 27.336 - Min: 16 - Max: 39

v1.1 patch: 2016-11-16 01:16:45 - Dishonored2 Frames: 1588 - Time: 50032ms - Avg: 31.740 - Min: 16 - Max: 45

375.95 driver from NVIDIA: 2016-11-18 00:25:44 - Dishonored2 Frames: 1542 - Time: 47187ms - Avg: 32.678 - Min: 19 - Max: 46

v1.2 patch: 2016-11-22 00:33:09 - Dishonored2 Frames: 2233 - Time: 45422ms - Avg: 49.161 - Min: 25 - Max: 60

GameUpdate 1 Beta: 2016-12-20 20:36:24 - Dishonored2 Frames: 2361 - Time: 43187ms - Avg: 54.669 - Min: 28 - Max: 61


Beyond game optimizations, Nvidia's newest drivers add support for the notebook versions of the GeForce GTX 1050 and 1050 Ti. There's also a bunch of new SLI profiles. They include:


Battlefield 1
Deus Ex: Breach Standalone - added DirectX 11 profile
Diablo III - added DirectX 11 profile
Dreadnought (2016) - added DirectX 11 profile
Lego: Minifigures Online: added SLI-single profile
Sid Meier's Civilization VI
Shooter Game (HDR) - added DirectX 11 profile
Sniper Elite 4 - added DirectX 11 profile
Space Hulk DeathWing - added SLI-single profile
Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon: Wildlands
Watch Dogs 2

Nvidia crammed nearly a dozen bug fixes specific to Windows 10 in the 378.49 driver release as well. Here they are:


[GeForce TITAN X][Just Cause 3] Random flashes occur in the game.
[GeForce GTX 1080][Wargames: Red Dragon]: The system reboots after switching to full-screen mode while playing the game.
[GeForce GTX1080]: Random TDR/black screens occur when running GPU-intensive Direct X applications after updating to Windows 10 Anniversary Update.
[GeForce GTX 1070][Alienware Graphics Amplifier] The graphics card is not detected upon installing the driver.
[GeForce GTX 1070][Battlefield 1] Rain puddles appear dark.
[GeForce GTX 1060] A superfluous audio end point entry appears in the Windows Sound Devices panel after resuming from hibernate mode.
Assassins Creed - Syndicate shows intermittent flickering black or white patches on game character faces.
[SLI][Battlefield 1]: Texture flickering occurs in the game with SLI enabled.
[Hitman pro][DirectX 12] Flickering corruption appears in the game if the multi-GPU option is enabled from the in-game settings.
[Folding @ Home] Work unit errors occur.
[Diablo 3 DirectX 11] SLI profile needed.
Click to expand...


edit:

Unreal Engine 4.15 supports Nintendo Switch, HDR, and AFR for Nvidia SLI
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
When are official reviews out for this? I want to see what it does at 1440P compared to my current setup.
 
I've got crossfire and it's rare that I encounter a game that doesn't support it. (Unless it's older and doesn't need it anyway). I play mostly well known, big player base games. Not into indie titles.
 
I posted a robust but incomplete list of very popular games including most of what are considered the top 10 and GoTY's for years up to present on most sites. 0 day sli support might not be 100% on some of them but the matured list speaks for itself otherwise. A huge loss and valid argument would have been the new unreal engine eliminating sli support outright since a lot of games tend to license/use that engine - but as I linked, they are supporting sli in the unreal engine.

Forza and mafia 3 were plagued with performance problems for many and weren't even made with high hz monitors in mind (forza also took massive perf hit on ultra for little gain, defaults to 30fps in settings until you unlock it too lol)... so they aren't modern full featured pc gaming hardware games really. Those two and gears of war are outliers. With unreal engine going for HDR and sli support there should be a lot of games in the future that support SLI just on that engine alone.


Another SLI game list from top games (incomplete list)

The Witcher 2, 3
Dishonored 1, 2
Half-Life games
Portal 2
Orange Box ganes
Middle Earth: Shadow of Mordor (assuming the sequel "Shadow of War" will too)
The Elder Scrolls V:Skyrim
Borderlands 2 games
Mass Effect games
Fallout Games
Far Cry Games
Overwatch
DOOM 2016
Alien Isolation

Path of Exile
World of Warcraft
Guild Wars 2
The Elder Scrolls Online
Diablo III
Torchlight games
Tomb Raider Games
Bioshock Games
Assassin's creed games
Grand Theft Auto Games
Star Wars games
Civilization games
Quake games
Doom games
Homeworld2 -(some SLI problems at 4k remaster release, then patched and fixed among other gameplay bugs)
Thief games
Resident Evil Games
Evolve
Starcraft 2
Doom 3
Dirt Rally

Metal Gear solid V
Hitman
Crysis
Batman Ark
Battlefield games
Call of Duty games (incl Black Ops 2)
Dark souls games
Dota 2
Pillars of Eternity
Wasteland
Grid
Saint's Row
Watch Dogs 2
Max Payne
The Talos Principle
Dying Light


edit:
http://www.tweaktown.com/news/56156/final-fantasy-xv-pc-tech-test-uses-dual-gtx-1080s-sli/index.html
 
Last edited:
I just need a card to run my triple S2417 monitors at 80-100fps. Am i asking too much of the 1080ti?
 
MorgothPl said:
This gets my vote too... I'd love to see how much I'll gain when switching from 980 Ti to 1080 Ti in 1440p :)
Click to expand...

I'm in the same boat. I have a 980Ti and run at 1440p/60. If it's 35% faster than a 1080, that should make it about 55% faster than my 980Ti.
 
Darkswordz said:
I'm in the same boat. I have a 980Ti and run at 1440p/60. If it's 35% faster than a 1080, that should make it about 55% faster than my 980Ti.
Click to expand...
Me too; I hope this is going to be a better Ti than the previous generation.
 
chx said:
I would love to see more on this, is there an article?
Click to expand...


"GTX 1080 SLI cannot escape the biggest limitation of multi-GPU setups since the dawn of time - software support. There continue to be big AAA game titles (5 out of 16 in our testing) that lack SLI support due to engine limitations, which NVIDIA cannot fix through a driver update. More and more modern game engines come with such caveats, which is why classic AFR frame rendering doesn't have much of a future looking forward."

https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/NVIDIA/GeForce_GTX_1080_SLI/23.html
 
  • Like
Reactions: chx
like this
http://www.techspot.com/review/1195-palit-geforce-gtx-1080-sli/page4.html


"Though we mostly focused on games that support Nvidia’s multi-GPU technology, these also happen to be some of the most popular PC games released as of late. On average SLI enabled 63% more performance -- or 71% if we ignore Ashes of the Singularity. We'd call that a solid score for SLI scaling.

Granted, this may not convince many to spend another $600+ on a second GPU but in a good number of scenarios at 4K, it pushed performance from playable to smooth-as-silk.

Overall, while I'm not generally a big advocate of multi-GPU technology, it does make sense here assuming that you can afford it.
The 4K gaming experience delivered by these cards is the best I have seen yet. For those willing and able to drop four figures on this GPU configuration, you won’t be disappointed with the results."

http://techbuyersguru.com/4k-gaming...1070-sli-vs-1080-sli-vs-titan-x-pascal?page=4

"All told, both Titan X Pascal and modern-day SLI make playable 4K framerates the rule rather than the exception. But alas, TBG's motto is "bringing tech to light," and sometimes that means shining a harsh light on chasing the limits of technology for technology's sake. As we've shown, you can certainly game at 4K with SLI or the Titan X Pascal, and enthusiasts no doubt consider 4K benchmarks to be the ultimate test of a modern gaming PC's mettle. The problem inherent in this approach is that 4K gaming may in fact not be the end-all-and-be-all of modern PC gaming. That's because 4K monitors are currently limited to 60Hz, and throughout our testing, it was painfully obvious that our overall gaming experience on our 27" 4K monitor wasn't nearly as good as it is on the Acer 27" 1440p 144Hz G-Sync monitor we typically test with. Yes, the added resolution is nice when you're sitting still admiring the scenery, but once the action starts up, the tearing, lag, and just plain sluggishness of a 60Hz monitor rears its ugly head."

Practically every game I play on the GoTY and top pc games of 2016, 2015 and top pc games of all time lists supports SLI once the dust settled on patches and drivers. The only one I miss it on is forza 3 personally.

While you are eliminating sli you may as well eliminate high hz monitors .. /s. If you aren't getting at least 100fps-hz average (~ 70 - 100 - 130+ fps-hz band), you aren't getting anything out of having a high hz monitor. DP 1.4 144hz 3440 x 1440 and 3840 x 2160 monitors due out later this year.

Both unreal engine and work on final fantasy XV are implementing SLI support too, and I'm assuming the sequel to shadow of mordor.. so there should be a lot of titles going forward.

With unreal engine going for HDR and sli support there should be a lot of games in the future that support SLI just on that engine alone.


Another SLI game list from top games (incomplete list)

The Witcher 2, 3
Dishonored 1, 2
Half-Life games
Portal 2
Orange Box ganes
Middle Earth: Shadow of Mordor (assuming the sequel "Shadow of War" will too)
The Elder Scrolls V:Skyrim
Borderlands 2 games
Mass Effect games
Fallout Games
Far Cry Games
Overwatch
DOOM 2016
Alien Isolation

Path of Exile
World of Warcraft
Guild Wars 2
The Elder Scrolls Online
Diablo III
Torchlight games
Tomb Raider Games
Bioshock Games
Assassin's creed games
Grand Theft Auto Games
Star Wars games
Civilization games
Quake games
Doom games
Homeworld2 -(some SLI problems at 4k remaster release, then patched and fixed among other gameplay bugs)
Thief games
Resident Evil Games
Evolve
Starcraft 2
Doom 3
Dirt Rally

Metal Gear solid V
Hitman
Crysis
Batman Ark
Battlefield games
Call of Duty games (incl Black Ops 2)
Dark souls games
Dota 2
Pillars of Eternity
Wasteland
Grid
Saint's Row
Watch Dogs 2
Max Payne
The Talos Principle
Dying Light


edit:
http://www.tweaktown.com/news/56156/final-fantasy-xv-pc-tech-test-uses-dual-gtx-1080s-sli/index.html
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
kasakka said:
144 Hz displays are already coming Q4 this year. Unfortunately in rather small 27" sizes and with big price tags due to FALD backlights. I'd prefer something in the 30-32" range for that resolution.

As for TN panels, the 8-bit ones are nothing like the 6-bit ones most are familiar with. I moved from an IPS to 8-Bit TN and I've been very happy with it. Main difference visually is tiny bit of vertical color shift at the top of the screen and color space is limited to full sRGB (which is what all games and most content on the web is).
Click to expand...
Yeah, I've been pleasantly surprised with the xb280hk Acer TN I got. It isn't as good as an ips obviously but it i still enjoy gaming at 4k60 with it, and no other panel had gsync then in 4k. I can't wait for the 144hz 4k panels to arrive and come down in price. $1200 is a bit steep for a 27 inch one in my opinion. I'd prefer a 32 inch one as well.
 
Darkswordz said:
I'm in the same boat. I have a 980Ti and run at 1440p/60. If it's 35% faster than a 1080, that should make it about 55% faster than my 980Ti.
Click to expand...
Thats compared to a stock 980ti with no overclocking.
The 1080ti wont get near the same overclock %, it will already be much closer to its max.
I expect around 40% difference once both are clocked, perhaps a bit less.
 
Nenu said:
Thats compared to a stock 980ti with no overclocking.
The 1080ti wont get near the same overclock %, it will already be much closer to its max.
I expect around 40% difference once both are clocked, perhaps a bit less.
Click to expand...

A GTX 980 Ti OC'd to max levels is about equivalent to a GTX 1070 OC'd to max as well, as per:
http://www.overclock.net/t/1601896/...ck-showdown-gtx-980ti-vs-gtx-1070-vs-gtx-1080.

So not too far away from a OC'd GTX 1080 (about 18%, and frequently even 20% + difference). We'll know for sure once the reviews come in.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nenu
like this
I think the biggest thing on peoples mind is going to be 4k performance. Clearly the 1080ti is going to smash 1080p content.

I have a 1080 Strix Advanced edition and it does very well at 4k content with high / ultra settings.

I'm trading it in on the 10th at Microcenter for the 1080 TI and I am super excited.

I want to see a lot of gaming benchmarks at 4K
 
SixFootDuo said:
I think the biggest thing on peoples mind is going to be 4k performance. Clearly the 1080ti is going to smash 1080p content.

I have a 1080 Strix Advanced edition and it does very well at 4k content with high / ultra settings.

I'm trading it in on the 10th at Microcenter for the 1080 TI and I am super excited.

I want to see a lot of gaming benchmarks at 4K
Click to expand...

At that point, it depends on the games. I had a Zotac GTX 1080 AMP Edition, and Fallout 4 w/all options turned up was still slow as fudge on my rig @ 4k, for example. Ditto with Deus Ex: Mankind Evolved, and a number of other games.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top