GTX 980 ti or wait for 2016?

If it's going to be used for 300+ hours before Pascal comes out, just buy now.

The [H] review of the MSI 970 says load max was 69°, SLI and overclock them.

Or find a 980 Ti maybe already depreciated from a private seller, they are new or basically new but the seller changes plans, etc.
 
Who knows - if you aren't insider you are making gamble anyway based on educated guesses.

In 2016 we might see Pascal but it probably be not the big one. I personally expect Pascal Titan to be early 2017 release so I got 980ti now.
 
Well GF110 (580) to original Titan was 27 months, and Titan to Titan X was 25 months. Only 2 data points, but unless nVidia decides to go back to their Fermi era cycle of releasing big chip first, probably safe to say GP100 would likely be another ~2 years away from Titan X.
 
Buy now and sell and upgrade when the new stuff comes out.

If that's not your style - just wait. 970 to 980 Ti isn't that huge, anyway. I mean, it's big but it is not going to blow you away for the cash outlay. It's not like you're currently running a 580 or 680. The 970 is absolutely no slouch.
 
Can you answer a couple questions? What do you do with your computer? If you use it for gaming, what games do you play? Finally, what's your current system?

I mostly play RTS and turn based strategy games. So my system (listed below) is already overkill. Upgrading to a GTX 980 Ti wouldn't make any sense for me.
 
You're always "throwing away" money compared to waiting.
But you can't think like that. You have to decide that you want more performance now, or X months from now? So you're not really throwing away money, you're paying for having the extra performance earlier.

If you don't play any games that don't perform to your satisfaction, then you're throwing away money whenever you buy. If you actually need the performance now, then you're just punishing yourself by waiting.
 
FPS won't tell the whole tale. The 970 SLI generally just doesn't have enough VRAM for 4K whereas the 980 Ti is just barely enough to run games at 30-40 fps depending on the game if you want to keep high details. I've had both 970 SLI and now a single 980 Ti and there is no real difference in frame rates at 1440p but the 980 Ti is maybe a bit smoother overall.

At the moment we know nothing about Pascal performance. The first cards might just as well be a slight upgrade on 970 and 980 (possibly more of an upgrade for laptops as they can run at lower temps) and the full blown cards could come out much later. Or at least that's what I'm hoping as a 980 Ti owner! :D

But seriously, I don't recommend upgrading OP's display or graphics card right now. 3440x1440 and 4K still require lots of performance and can't run at as high refresh rates as 144 Hz G-Sync displays. When Displayport 1.3 cards start becoming available then we might start seeing 4K displays at 100-120 Hz and that's when you want to get the best GPU available. For now 970 is adequate for 1440p as long as you don't use MSAA and max settings.

I'm running a Sony 55" 4K (XBR55X850C) that runs 120hz natively. Obviously, 120hz is AWESOME compared to a 60hz monitor so maybe the smoothness gained on my monitor helps keep the action flowing as intended. Pushing my graphics are (2) Zotac AMP! GTX 970's in SLI on my i7-6700K setup. I can assure you.. I have PLENTY of muscle to run all of my games on super high settings! Only twice have I benched less than 30 fps in a few games and even then, it was for just a fraction of a second, hitting 28 and 29 fps respectively, with FULL eye candy on (and that was with my old i7 2600K setup). I've since upgraded to Skylake. Does the extra $450 - $500 (or more) dollars merit the minimal performance that you would gain? For me, NOT EVEN CLOSE. At that point, with my setup, it would only be a bragging rights and a benchmarking numbers game. 90% of the time, I am well over 60 fps. The cheapest solution would be to keep your GTX 970 and snag a used one for SLI (assuming you have a SLI ready mobo). A lot of peeps are in a holding pattern until the release of the next gen GTX x70 / GTX x80 cards.
 
Buy now and sell and upgrade when the new stuff comes out.

If that's not your style - just wait. 970 to 980 Ti isn't that huge, anyway. I mean, it's big but it is not going to blow you away for the cash outlay. It's not like you're currently running a 580 or 680. The 970 is absolutely no slouch.

970 to 980ti is like 80% gain - in places where i had 45 fps in TW3 I now have 70+
 
970 to 980ti is like 80% gain - in places where i had 45 fps in TW3 I now have 70+

More like around 50% on average. 45 FPS or 70+ FPS both suck and are "around" 60.

Believe me, I'm all for buying now. Some people are waiters.
 
More like around 50% on average. 45 FPS or 70+ FPS both suck and are "around" 60.

Believe me, I'm all for buying now. Some people are waiters.
Except 45 is well below 60 fps and 70 is above it. :rolleyes:

That means vsync on and no tearing which is a huge reason people want 60 fps.
 
At that res you'll require at least a 980Ti.

If it were me I'd go for broke: Predator X34@100Hz and 980Ti (SLI if possible).

You'll get to enjoy the immense benefits for at least a year before you need to scratch the upgrade itch.
 
980TI SLI is overkilll for 1440p, unless you're one of the crazy ones wanting pegged 144fps all the time.
I got on the 144Hz boat, but frankly can't really make out any difference above 70 fps. In hindsight I wish I'd stayed at 60Hz 4K. And I'll be going back as soon as an appropiate display arrives on the market.
 
980TI SLI is overkilll for 1440p, unless you're one of the crazy ones wanting pegged 144fps all the time.
I got on the 144Hz boat, but frankly can't really make out any difference above 70 fps. In hindsight I wish I'd stayed at 60Hz 4K. And I'll be going back as soon as an appropiate display arrives on the market.

Well, it's the other way around for me. Ever since I've tasted 144hz + g-sync there's no going back. I don't want any SLI though so while the 980 ti is great at 1440p with no AA, my previous 970 was not quite up to the task - by my standards. I've even thought about going back to 1080p but there would have to be a high end 1080p g-sync panel for me to even consider doing that (something like a smaller Rog Swift - high quality TN with excellent factory calibration or something like the Acer IPS panel). 1440p is lovely though (and 4k even more so), the extra pixels make a world of a difference.
 
Am I the only one that expects another year of Maxwell?

this is quite likely, given all that we've seen with manufacturing issues at Intel on 14nm. It stands to reason TSMC et al. will have similar struggles, and comparable delays.
 
Don't forget this is TSMC we're talking about. You know the one that messed up both the 40nm and 28nm nodes initially?
 
I'm holding out until next year. I'm running a gtx 570, and almost bit on the 900 series, but it's just a re-iteration of the 800 series. I'm waiting until they come out with brand spankin' new everything. Plus, by then, hopefully, hopefully, AMD will put out their new processor and breathe some fresh air into the marketplace, and our wallets win. I plan on upgrading everything at once as well.

What 800 series? There was no 800 series desktop Nvidia GPU. Their flagship went from the 780Ti to the 980/980Ti.
 
What 800 series? There was no 800 series desktop Nvidia GPU. Their flagship went from the 780Ti to the 980/980Ti.
Really everything he said was bizarre. We have had two architectures since his 570 and even a dinky 750 Ti would match or beat his 570. Just let him keep holding on forever waiting for something that is "fully brand new" in his mind....
 
The 800 was laptop and in between 700 and 900(non ti). Heh... Because 7 eight(ate) 9...
:cool:

Maybe more along the lines of 700 series performance....i would have to check the benchmarks.
 
The 800M series were simply rebadged 700M GPUs with higher clocks. In particular the 880M was a 120W part that ran hotter than the sun, with even the mighty Alienware 18 struggling to handle its gratuitous amount of heat.
 
I have a 980 ti. it is not all what people say it is. the 980 ti cant handle 2560x1440 with all settings on ultra in games, it just cant handle 1440p all the way, final. I think sli is the way to go, just 2 980 ti's would be the best thing, if you can afford (I can't).
 
I have a 980 ti. it is not all what people say it is. the 980 ti cant handle 2560x1440 with all settings on ultra in games, it just cant handle 1440p all the way, final. I think sli is the way to go, just 2 980 ti's would be the best thing, if you can afford (I can't).
A 980 Ti can most certainly run every game at 1440 on "ultra" settings. Maybe not always 60 fps in every game but it can easily run it. There will always be some games that will have a setting or two that kills the framerate and can be turned down a notch. so that is where common sense prevails.
 
I jumped from a GTX 260 to SLI 970's. I'd say get a 980ti now and then SLI later when prices drop.
 
I run a 970 and 34" ultra wide. Games run fine with settings turned down. I am waiting for the next generation to upgrade.
 
We'll probably see flagship Pascal cards around August 2016 or so. If you're really worried about DX12, then just wait. Why buy now if you don't have the information you want?
 
We'll probably see flagship Pascal cards around August 2016 or so. If you're really worried about DX12, then just wait. Why buy now if you don't have the information you want?

Why?

Pascal seems to be taped out and is already in the process of verification. Assuming there's no need for more than 1 stepping, Feb/March for a new Titan is possible. Why do you suggest August?
 
Why?

Pascal seems to be taped out and is already in the process of verification. Assuming there's no need for more than 1 stepping, Feb/March for a new Titan is possible. Why do you suggest August?

You're right. The Titan complete skipped my mind as I always thought of the series as a compute card. I was addressing more of the X80Ti or X90 series cards when I was making my statement.
 
A 980 Ti can most certainly run every game at 1440 on "ultra" settings. Maybe not always 60 fps in every game but it can easily run it. There will always be some games that will have a setting or two that kills the framerate and can be turned down a notch. so that is where common sense prevails.

"IT CAN RUN ALL GAMES!!" BUT it can't. didn't I just say that?!
 
Waiting only makes sense when the next big thing is a couple of months away. We're pretty far from it.
 
Back
Top