Good PC Builds

AskWazzup said:
"Following AMD's lead with Mantle, Microsoft aims to provide console-level efficiency with "closer to the metal" access to hardware resources as well as reduced CPU and graphics driver overhead."

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2015-why-directx-12-is-a-gamechanger

"The figures demonstrate in particular how under-utilised the geometry engines are on our GPUs."

It seems the fx 6300 get's a pretty good boost too:

"Also note that the FX 6300's DX12 results on R7 260X, GTX 970 and R9 290X comprehensively beat the more expensive Core i3 4130."

But most benefits will come in the future:

"Massively increasing draw calls is a fascinating metric, but it is only one small component of a typical game engine. It's going to take new engines built explicitly around the new API to see real gains in terms of denser, more richer worlds, but the opportunities of the inevitable DX12 patches we'll see in the short term are still exciting"

All of this is also true for the open standart API "Vulkan" (directx 12 competition).
Click to expand...
so i heard about console and microsoft obviously behind the dx 12, i remember that the reson why console choose amd cpu/gpu is because it support directx 12.
 
eissa said:
so i heard about console and microsoft obviously behind the dx 12, i remember that the reson why console choose amd cpu/gpu is because it support directx 12.
Click to expand...

They have an amd apu (with two quad core modules). An apu is a cpu with an integrated graphics card. From what i understand nividia was not interested in the console market and amd offered low prices, so that's why both ps4 and xbox one have an amd apu inside them.

Note that this is a custom apu not avaivable otherwise.
 
Last edited:
So anyone looking for a new graphics card might want to wait for while, Nvidia just announced a new set of graphics card that are not only vastly better than the GTX 970 and 980 (and apparently on par with the Titan X!), but also surprisingly affordable, the GTX 1070 and 1080. They're apparently priced at like 380$ and 600$ or so, respectively.
 
But do you really need it? Just curious, really. I am thinking about buying a new PC soon enough. But it doesn't seem like games really utilize all this graphic power anyway ...
Also, if you're correct, it must be fun to own a Titan now, if they release the new cards, on par with the power of a Titan but maybe for 1/3 of the price. Hahaha.
 
Hassknecht said:
So anyone looking for a new graphics card might want to wait for while, Nvidia just announced a new set of graphics card that are not only vastly better than the GTX 970 and 980 (and apparently on par with the Titan X!), but also surprisingly affordable, the GTX 1070 and 1080. They're apparently priced at like 380$ and 600$ or so, respectively.
Click to expand...

I think they claimed that the new 1080 is about 30% better than Titan x. Of course these are all Nvidia marketing claims, it remains to be seen if the gains are representative in real world situations.

"FYI: Embargo for all the PASCAL info we're getting today and @nvidia GTX 1080 reviews is May 17th"

We will soon find out i guess.

Crni Vuk said:
But do you really need it? Just curious, really. I am thinking about buying a new PC soon enough. But it doesn't seem like games really utilize all this graphic power anyway ...
Click to expand...

If you want to game on 4k (or VR), yes. Otherwise you should wait for amd Polaris 10/11 cards (that's my plan at least), they will fill the low/mid segment, while also being very efficient with power draw. The polaris 11 will be the smaller one (though the 11 could only be for the mobile market, i'm not sure).

http://static1.gamespot.com/uploads/original/1290/12904714/3057260-polaris+watts.png
 
Last edited:
Well, "need" is a bit subjective. With VR coming fast the amount of graphic processing power needed will go up quite a bit, as they basically have to render twice the amount of frames, and these new cards can apparently handle that. Also, with more and more monitors capable of more than 1080p and 60Hz you need quite some power to be able to use that. It's especially useful for people doing streaming and casting, because you can downsample the graphics and record with no framedrops for maximum quality.
 
What's also interesting, is even though the price for performance is good, it's actually higher for the segment these cards occupy, compared to 980 and 970 on release date (correct me on this if i'm wrong, as i read this on a forum).
 
AskWazzup said:
What's also interesting, is even though the price for performance is good, it's actually higher for the segment these cards occupy, compared to 980 and 970 on release date (correct me on this if i'm wrong, as i read this on a forum).
Click to expand...
Hm, price seems comparable, I think. The GTX970 is still around 300$, as far as I can tell. 600$ for the flagship card of a new generation doesn't seem too far off, especially for that kind of performance.
Too bad I just bought a GTX970, which I don't really need, either :D
 
AskWazzup said:
Is that because you are an avid larper with a vivid imagination?
Click to expand...
No, I just don't really play many video games anymore, especially not new ones. I actually bought the card specifically because Fallout 4 didn't run on my old card (disposable income, wee), but since then I've been mostly playing Soldier of Fortune and Quake II.
 
heh. sweet marketing of green team shall not convince, gonna see the benchmark first and how closer the spec to real world (remember the 4gb vram of gtx 970 controversies?)
 
eissa said:
heh. sweet marketing of green team shall not convince, gonna see the benchmark first and how closer the spec to real world (remember the 4gb vram of gtx 970 controversies?)
Click to expand...
Yeah, the lack of cold, hard benchmarks is very suspicious. We'll see what the real performance will be.
 
AskWazzup said:
If you want to game on 4k (or VR), yes. Otherwise you should wait for amd Polaris 10/11 cards (that's my plan at least), they will fill the low/mid segment, while also being very efficient with power draw. The polaris 11 will be the smaller one (though the 11 could only be for the mobile market, i'm not sure).

http://static1.gamespot.com/uploads/original/1290/12904714/3057260-polaris+watts.png
Click to expand...
Just to make this clear, I was talking about normal human beings. As Hass said, "need" is a strong word here. And experience tells me, you can, for a normal gaming experience, usually go for the lower cards. I mean you do have the low, mid and high tier ranges with graphic cards.
 
Hassknecht said:
No, I just don't really play many video games anymore, especially not new ones. I actually bought the card specifically because Fallout 4 didn't run on my old card (disposable income, wee), but since then I've been mostly playing Soldier of Fortune and Quake II.
Click to expand...
I bought a GTX960 for the same reason. My venerable old 730GT was decent enough, but Fallout 4 ran like crap even at 720p. So I figured it was time for an upgrade to tide me over the next couple of years. Plus, writing posts on games and other subjects as I do, a 960 provides 1080p screenshots with ultra settings, looks better than making do with 720p low-mid settings.
 
Crni Vuk said:
Just to make this clear, I was talking about normal human beings. As Hass said, "need" is a strong word here. And experience tells me, you can, for a normal gaming experience, usually go for the lower cards. I mean you do have the low, mid and high tier ranges with graphic cards.
Click to expand...

Normal users with 1080p screens don't buy these... Do they? I'm currently rocking a r7 360 (low end) and playing borderlands 2 on high in 1080p just fine. It also helps that linux does not have a plethora of super taxing AAA games which i would not buy anyway.

Radiosity said:
I bought a GTX960 for the same reason. My venerable old 730GT was decent enough, but Fallout 4 ran like crap even at 720p. So I figured it was time for an upgrade to tide me over the next couple of years. Plus, writing posts on games and other subjects as I do, a 960 provides 1080p screenshots with ultra settings, looks better than making do with 720p low-mid settings.
Click to expand...

Did you read Lovecraft by any chance?
 
Last edited:
Radiosity said:
I bought a GTX960 for the same reason. My venerable old 730GT was decent enough, but Fallout 4 ran like crap even at 720p. So I figured it was time for an upgrade to tide me over the next couple of years. Plus, writing posts on games and other subjects as I do, a 960 provides 1080p screenshots with ultra settings, looks better than making do with 720p low-mid settings.
Click to expand...
I had an HD7850 before, the game actually ran ok, but since it only had 1GB VRAM it crashed all the time and didn't load half the textures because Bethesda is good at optimisation like that.
Decided to get a new one because why the hell not.
 
All I can say is, either try to build it yourself or get the parts from a local computer store. Don't go to a chain. For example I'm currently getting a computer that has all the latest equipment currently available, from the graphics card to the RAM, for only 1200. Meanwhile this computer I'm using right now from over 7 years ago costed me the exact same price of 1200 dollars back when I bought it at Best Buy. That should give you an idea of how much computer chains mark up prices.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top