10 minutes ago, xXThunderFlameXx said:
Hm,I think I flipped the wrong switches there,lemme have a look…
I use 2560x1600 ingame even though my Monitor only supports 1920x1200
55 minutes ago, xXThunderFlameXx said:
Too bad DSR doesn’t work with SC,imagine playing the game on 4K,and not needing a 4K monitor,well,that’s a new goal for you over there,maybe now I will go under 200 FPS,would be great to finally have a proper strain on my 1060 from SC…
I had my resolution once 8x (or 16 ikd) of my monitors resolution, so it IS definitly working. (made it with GeDoSaTo backn then since neither the AMD nor the Nvidia driver had DSR)
Ok,I got the thing done,I’ll just post the image with its original size for proof:
now the forum downscaled it already,that’s nice
On 12/31/2016 at 10:33 AM, John161 said:
What is Fast Sync?
I know Free Sync, GSync and V-Sync
Here’s my quick overview of Fast Sync: http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/id-3070457/discussion-nvidia-fast-sync-successor-sync.html
I get about 220fps in game. Sometimes it spikes to 400fps but then the game engine limits it back to 200fps.
7 hours ago, Shotan said:
Ships schedule already mapped out for streams and some mission vids to come ”)
Also, Robwashere omg :o
What, I was here all the time…
14 hours ago, HBZK100 said:
Here’s my quick overview of Fast Sync: http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/id-3070457/discussion-nvidia-fast-sync-successor-sync.html
I get about 220fps in game. Sometimes it spikes to 400fps but then the game engine limits it back to 200fps.
Hello! I’ve read the topic on the tom’s forums and I would help you out by let you notice there are some errors.
- Fast-sync helps a lot against tearing under some circumstances, but it could and will introduce some input lag. Most probably none of the regular joes will notice that, but it’s a thing for competitive gamers.
- It works smooth only when your Fps are at least double the refresh rate of the monitor, which means it’s pure gold for who have a 60hrz monitor, less for 144/120 or 75 hrz owners (to double 144 or even 75 fps under every circumstance is kinda hard for majority of people out there).
-Borderless Window mode: do have Vsync by default, and it cannot be removed (since Win 7 iirc). On average, it introduce a bit less input lag than full screen mode + vsync, but it’s still quite noticeable (depends on the game, and the hardware setup etc…).
Best case scenario is always a 144hrz monitor with full screen setup and a solid gpu/cpu combo that feeds the monitor with constant high frame rate, however some nice results can be done even with mid tier configuration on general purpose 60hrz monitors, without any issue and/or “software/driver technique” ”)
Guys, what would be a reasonable nvidia graphic-card for this game atm?
The new 1050 is a bit too pricy for me right now. Will the older cards not get down in price? I am waiting, but thats not coming it seems.
P.S.: nvidia because its more *BSD supported atm
30 minutes ago, avarshina said:
Guys, what would be a reasonable nvidia graphic-card for this game atm?
The new 1050 is a bit too pricy for me right now. Will the older cards not get down in price? I am waiting, but thats not coming it seems.
P.S.: nvidia because its more *BSD supported atm
I used to play this with NVIDA GTX 9800 - medium settings 1680x1050,
Then i think i had GTX 760 and was running it on max 1920x1200
1 hour ago, avarshina said:
Guys, what would be a reasonable nvidia graphic-card for this game atm?
The new 1050 is a bit too pricy for me right now. Will the older cards not get down in price? I am waiting, but thats not coming it seems.
P.S.: nvidia because its more *BSD supported atm
Wait a little bit since the 1050 came out recently. The prices will drop - not by much but it will.
If a 1050 is too expensive for you, you are better off buying AMD cards. They may not offer the best raw performance but their price-to-performance ratio is unbeatable, especially for budget gamers. However, I would wait for AMD Vega cards to come out later this year before considering a purchase.
What are your system specs?
I still use 7950 card, still go everything maxed out  and it’s super cheap
13 hours ago, avarshina said:
Guys, what would be a reasonable nvidia graphic-card for this game atm?
The new 1050 is a bit too pricy for me right now. Will the older cards not get down in price? I am waiting, but thats not coming it seems.
P.S.: nvidia because its more *BSD supported atm
1050 should be overkill for this game, idk how the good Nvidia driver runs, but the AMD radeon driver gives me with my r9 280x 60+ fps and the 1050 is stronger and the Nvidia driver probably works better with SC.
as the new architecture jump probably will make 10x0 series cheaper faster, than previous generations, simply because of the efficiency upgrade, i would expect older cards to hold their price as long as possible, so it will really depend on the 10x0 series.
The 1060 already comes close to the 200 bucks range - both the 1050 and 1060 are intended to attract buyers to buy newer generation cards and a bit of a hasty answer to amd; still the 980 wont get cheaper until the 1070 gets cheaper. So I would either go for the cheapest possible 1060 or plan for an investment at least in a 1070, if its for the future.
I guesstimate, the 10x0 series will be overall cheaper than their predecessors in their respected classes once they balance in, if either one of the manufacturers brings out new stuff, or the pre-titan tech-generation (6x0-9x0) just doesn’t sell anymore, since they seem to be also less expensive to produce, while of course, they are a good buy, since it might take a few generations until they make yet another scale jump in nanometers, and they just outperform the more power hungry cards there a lot.
I am also thinking about soon replacing my card, hence my research. Not done yet tho, so pls no smartpanting me.
I can say that buying 10 series card is no mistake,I was about to buy a 960 but as they had none on stock,they recommended me a 1060,cool if you turn the fans all the way up,yet you can easly cover them out with in-game audio,while reaching really high clock speeds while keeping a low power consumption,Nvidia really did the trick with these so far,I am planning on buying a 1070 soon,yes,a 1060 is already overkill for SC but not as much for BF1,I can keep on 75 FPS but sometimes it just goes down,to make sure that wont happen again,a 1070 will sure get me covered,even on 1440p or 4K but not everything maxed out,that is what a 1080 does,tbh,this is my first Nvidia card that I ever owned and I can say I’m impressed by its performance for a not-so-entry card,I know that the 1050 was released but I bought mine before so that was the entry back then,also,I can guarantee nothing is getting bottlenecked in my system,the 6700K is the way to go for gaming and a bit of content creation(the stupid videos I make),as far as I know,I only used the Radeon series card,5450,8750M,not too much performance,one was an earlier generation,the other was in a laptop,stuffing an AMD card in a tight space with no air is no good,hot and uneffective,no thanks,yes,AMD is the more budget-friendly alternative,but maybe not so reliable,we will see what Vega and Ryzen have for us,I am putting my hopes in Kaby Lake tho,not like I’m going to buy one any time soon,my 6700K should survive a few more years and keep up the same performance.
1 hour ago, xXThunderFlameXx said:
I am putting my hopes in Kaby Lake tho
Kaby Lake is just a refresh of Skylake. It’s not exactly going to be earth-shattering performance relative to your 6700K. Intel’s research has slowed to a crawl and they’ve abandoned their tick-tock model long ago partly because they didn’t have a good competitor in the CPU market. I’m hoping that AMD’s Ryzen will give Intel some competition so that another Processor War will launch.
1 hour ago, g4borg said:
as the new architecture jump probably will make 10x0 series cheaper faster, than previous generations, simply because of the efficiency upgrade, i would expect older cards to hold their price as long as possible, so it will really depend on the 10x0 series.
The 1060 already comes close to the 200 bucks range - both the 1050 and 1060 are intended to attract buyers to buy newer generation cards and a bit of a hasty answer to amd; still the 980 wont get cheaper until the 1070 gets cheaper. So I would either go for the cheapest possible 1060 or plan for an investment at least in a 1070, if its for the future.
I guesstimate, the 10x0 series will be overall cheaper than their predecessors in their respected classes once they balance in, if either one of the manufacturers brings out new stuff, or the pre-titan tech-generation (6x0-9x0) just doesn’t sell anymore, since they seem to be also less expensive to produce, while of course, they are a good buy, since it might take a few generations until they make yet another scale jump in nanometers, and they just outperform the more power hungry cards there a lot.
I am also thinking about soon replacing my card, hence my research. Not done yet tho, so pls no smartpanting me.
It’s the same thing with Nvidia. They don’t have a competitor since AMD and Nvidia are in two different weight classes. Hopefully Vega will be able to compete with Pascal/Volta and actually make things interesting for once.
That’s also the reason why Nvidia card prices tend to stagnate for a few years at a time.
EDIT: It also doesn’t help that the price of these cards is like 657x more expensive in countries that are not the US.
17 minutes ago, Mecronmancer said:
Kaby Lake is just a refresh of Skylake. It’s not exactly going to be earth-shattering performance relative to your 6700K. Intel’s research has slowed to a crawl and they’ve abandoned their tick-tock model long ago partly because they didn’t have a good competitor in the CPU market. I’m hoping that AMD’s Ryzen will give Intel some competition so that another Processor War will launch.
It’s the same thing with Nvidia. They don’t have a competitor since AMD and Nvidia are in two different weight classes. Hopefully Vega will be able to compete with Pascal/Volta and actually make things interesting for once.
That’s also the reason why Nvidia card prices tend to stagnate for a few years at a time.
EDIT: It also doesn’t help that the price of these cards is like 657x more expensive in countries that are not the US.
Yeah,I’m not sure if Moore’s law is still relevant now,how can you fit more transistors in one CPU than there are people on the planet(they didnt do that yet but they are not far from it, for the record,the 6700k has 1.75B of those while the Broadwell-EP Xeon has 7.2B of those,that is the CPU from Intel that has the most transistors),all these performance improvements will have to stop at one point,only the flagships may make a difference but consumer grade or not,they will still be not as accessible to everyone,its also the fact that AMD has to fight both on the GPU and CPU fronts,while Intel makes SSDs from time to time,and Nvidia,well,I heard they worked on some self-driving cars so that is something.AMD is bound to screw up at one point,lets put the power-hunger and high temperatures aside for now.
Also,its either buying a card from your own country and most likely have the shipment to be free rather than ordering from USA and having to pay the shipment,the price to begin with its not the same but still,its also the time it takes for it to arrive,don’t expect to get a SR-71 to drop it with a parachute right at your doorstep.(that would be cool tho)
18 hours ago, Mecronmancer said:
What are your system specs?
6 hours ago, John161 said:
1050 should be overkill for this game, idk how the good Nvidia driver runs, but the AMD radeon driver gives me with my r9 280x 60+ fps and the 1050 is stronger and the Nvidia driver probably works better with SC.
Linux (Ubuntu 16.10) kernel 4.8.0
Celeron CPU G1610T @ 2.30GHz × 2
GeForce GT 730 (GK208) (nvidia proprietory driver)
1440 X 900 Hz?
red 30 fps in hangar (grafics: low)
4 hours ago, g4borg said:
as the new architecture jump probably will make 10x0 series cheaper faster, than previous generations, simply because of the efficiency upgrade, i would expect older cards to hold their price as long as possible, so it will really depend on the 10x0 series.
The 1060 already comes close to the 200 bucks range - both the 1050 and 1060 are intended to attract buyers to buy newer generation cards and a bit of a hasty answer to amd; still the 980 wont get cheaper until the 1070 gets cheaper. So I would either go for the cheapest possible 1060 or plan for an investment at least in a 1070, if its for the future.
So :
GT 730 – 55€ per 773GFLOPS (Single)
GTX 750 Ti – 115€ per 1389GFLOPS (Single)
GTX 1050Ti – 150€ per 2138GFLOPS (Single)
GTX 1060 3GB – 210€ per 3993GFLOPS (Single)
GTX 1060 6GB – 270€ per 4436GFLOPS (Single)
GTX 1070 8GB – 420€ per 6563GFLOPS (Single)
GTX 980 – 320€ per 5239GFLOPS (Single)
… 1050Ti or cheaper is my target, 1060 is reasonable
I do only play this game, none else and thought of a 1920 x 1080 monitor, therefor I will need another graphics card in future ( com on 30 fps is so bad!)
What CPU min. would the GTX 1060 require for SC?
6 hours ago, John161 said:
1050 should be overkill for this game, idk how the good Nvidia driver runs, but the AMD radeon driver gives me with my r9 280x 60+ fps and the 1050 is stronger and the Nvidia driver probably works better with SC.
Yes with my Linux or a FreeBSD I would like to stay with nvidia because of less problems with this game.
If the GTX 1050 was overkill, would the GTX 750 Ti – 115€ per 1389GFLOPS (Single) be good for 1920x1080 ?
Unless you guys plan on doing serious gaming other than SC, you are killing a tiny bird with an orbital laser. 
2 hours ago, ORCA1911 said:
Unless you guys plan on doing serious gaming other than SC, you are killing a tiny bird with an orbital laser. 
Isn’t that what PC gaming is all about? 
1 hour ago, Mecronmancer said:
Isn’t that what PC gaming is all about? 
