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 ?
I would say go with the 1050, But I’m not sure of the state of the Nvidia driver. On windows you would get 100+fps in the highest demanding scenes and mostly 160+. But this is nearly the same for my AMD under Windows but I have on GNU/Linux onaverage half the framerate.
So what is your performance in big battles (SpecOps/14v14PvP), higher the you hanager framrrate or closer to half of it?
The 1060 drivers have been a bit optimized for BF1,so I got a good trade over there,aside that I dont think I will have another game with high requirements that I will play for fun.
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
Since you are using Linux and don’t have a good budget, I’ll say a second hand gtx670 but I dunno the price for that in your country. Otherwise spend a little more and take a 1050, you will not regret it. But don’t go any further, with that cpu it makes no sense to spend more of 130€ on a gpu.
Vr support in this game was there since a couple of years, but I dunno if it is still supported atm.
…AMD is bound to screw up at one point,lets put the power-hunger and high temperatures aside for now.
…
You sure have a point regard old gen amd top gpus like 290X/390X. But the rx480 have no temp issues (like pretty all middle range card, max temp here was 72 (power draw can be a bit of an issue with 60+w in the worst case scenario against his competitor the 1060… for what it’s worth, laptop indeed yep). Also performance wise RX took the lead over the more expensive 1060. And let’s all not forget the gtx1080 FE that is an oven.
Amd cpu instead are way less hot then late Intel processors (and less single core performance for FX series, well ok).
Guys, did CinnamonFake actually mention the start of VR (e.g. Oculus) for Star Conflict, soon, or am I mistaken (from questions to the developers) ???
Fed hangar with the big animated ships come in: 30 fps (orange/red)
Fed hangar w/o animated ships ~45fps (orange)
PvP 6x6 ~40-50 fps (orange)
PvP 12x12 ~30/28 fps (orange/red)
So go with a 1050, since it looks like it doesn’t gave the scaling issues with big matches. My framerate drops from an hangar 180fps to 80(?) In 6v6 and 60 in 12v12.
So go with a 1050, since it looks like it doesn’t gave the scaling issues with big matches. My framerate drops from an hangar 180fps to 80(?) In 6v6 and 60 in 12v12.
Or another Nvidia card…
Is my rather stable 6v6 and 12v12 PvP fps vs hangar fps indicating the graphic-card as limiting factor? Or is my 1610 2x2.3GHz limiting factor already? (for SC oc)
You sure have a point regard old gen amd top gpus like 290X/390X. But the rx480 have no temp issues (like pretty all middle range card, max temp here was 72 (power draw can be a bit of an issue with 60+w in the worst case scenario against his competitor the 1060… for what it’s worth, laptop indeed yep). Also performance wise RX took the lead over the more expensive 1060. And let’s all not forget the gtx1080 FE that is an oven.
Amd cpu instead are way less hot then late Intel processors (and less single core performance for FX series, well ok).
Well 72 its not that bad,but my 1060 never goes past 60 even on maximum overclocks,80 is already too high so you weren’t too far,yes,the rx 480 is indeed catching up with the 1060 but on the bigger leagues,the 1070 and 1080 still dominate,for now,I mean,the 1070 costs double as much as the 1060 but also offers 50% more performance,it can be a worthy trade if you sell the 1060 for a good price,past that point,the improvement from a 1080 is not that big and even smaller from a 1080 to a Titan XP.(its like Titan X but on the Pascal architecture,just in case you didn’t know.)
Also,who cares about single-core performance?We have hyper threading and the Xeon series for a good reason,there are many other things that matter far more.
Well 72 its not that bad,but my 1060 never goes past 60 even on maximum overclocks,80 is already too high so you weren’t too far,yes,the rx 480 is indeed catching up with the 1060 but on the bigger leagues,the 1070 and 1080 still dominate,for now,I mean,the 1070 costs double as much as the 1060 but also offers 50% more performance,it can be a worthy trade if you sell the 1060 for a good price,past that point,the improvement from a 1080 is not that big and even smaller from a 1080 to a Titan XP.(its like Titan X but on the Pascal architecture,just in case you didn’t know.)
Also,who cares about single-core performance?We have hyper threading and the Xeon series for a good reason,there are many other things that matter far more.
I know 1060 is les hot, but 72 for an ovrclocked card (or for one at def.) was never a problem (i’ve reached 1400mhz on the core and 2070 for vram, pretty high oc @1.2v. it’s pretty high for a rock solid all day oc on rx series, on def frequencies it wuold stay cooler). Problems starts from 80 degree and up, so not the case here. Less heat is indeed cool, way less when is under a level that don’t need insane fan speed like new gen (both sides) are able of. Tbc if fans spins at a non audible.range, there is no problems at all if the temp is 70 instead of 60.
Indeed 480 are not meant to counter 1070/80. Amd is behind the schedule for their new gpus for that price/performance target. But if you check bench from october/nov you will see the rx on par or faster than 1060 on pretty much every new games. And they finally introduced relive in their drivers (shadowplay counterpart).
You have a really nice cpu, my choice if ryzen will fail my expectation in the range of 200-300€ (no the 7700k is not worth the price compared to a 6700k). I need to upgrade, my severly oced fx on single thread is pretty behind, and sadly st performance is still a thing. Way too many games and software still rely on that (war thunder anyone?, also pretty much every single indie game still are on single core). Multithreading is nice, even on my old fx, I do have some nice perfomance from it with a good oc (4.6), but it’s bottlenecking me on some stuffs I need.
Is my rather stable 6v6 and 12v12 PvP fps vs hangar fps indicating the graphic-card as limiting factor? Or is my 1610 2x2.3GHz limiting factor already? (for SC oc)
Lower the resolution is, more cpu are the performance bounded. Plus, more players on the map means more work fo the cpu. But in your case, the gpu is so “bad” that it bottleneck your cpu before it’s limits can be shown.
Switching to a faster gpu, you will see not a big improvements fps wise (you will get better perf in hangar and in small matches up to 6vs6) in large games 12vs12, 'cause your cpu will start to suffer. That’s why I told you to not spend more than 130€ on a new gpu unless you are planning to upgrade also the cpu any soon.
I know 1060 is les hot, but 72 for an ovrclocked card (or for one at def.) was never a problem (i’ve reached 1400mhz on the core and 2070 for vram, pretty high oc @1.2v. it’s pretty high for a rock solid all day oc on rx series, on def frequencies it wuold stay cooler). Problems starts from 80 degree and up, so not the case here. Less heat is indeed cool, way less when is under a level that don’t need insane fan speed like new gen (both sides) are able of. Tbc if fans spins at a non audible.range, there is no problems at all if the temp is 70 instead of 60.
Indeed 480 are not meant to counter 1070/80. Amd is behind the schedule for their new gpus for that price/performance target. But if you check bench from october/nov you will see the rx on par or faster than 1060 on pretty much every new games. And they finally introduced relive in their drivers (shadowplay counterpart).
You have a really nice cpu, my choice if ryzen will fail my expectation in the range of 200-300€ (no the 7700k is not worth the price compared to a 6700k). I need to upgrade, my severly oced fx on single thread is pretty behind, and sadly st performance is still a thing. Way too many games and software still rely on that (war thunder anyone?, also pretty much every single indie game still are on single core). Multithreading is nice, even on my old fx, I do have some nice perfomance from it with a good oc (4.6), but it’s bottlenecking me on some stuffs I need.
I can reach 2126 Mhz core clock and 4500 Mhz on the memory,all while still staying under 60 with the fans on 80% speed,it can be easly drowned out with some headphones,its just that I have the 3GB version,5% less performance than its 6GB counterpart which means it has 128 less CUDA cores totalling 1152 of them and a memory bus of 192-bit,what a shame…
But still,I am going for that 1070 as soon as I can,I just need to sell my old mobo and then sell my 1060,then I’ll have it,o boi.
I can reach 2126 Mhz core clock and 4500 Mhz on the memory,all while still staying under 60 with the fans on 80% speed,it can be easly drowned out with some headphones,its just that I have the 3GB version,5% less performance than its 6GB counterpart which means it has 128 less CUDA cores totalling 1152 of them and a memory bus of 192-bit,what a shame…
But still,I am going for that 1070 as soon as I can,I just need to sell my old mobo and then sell my 1060,then I’ll have it,o boi.
Dude 80% is pretty high! And I don’t approve the 3gb choiche.
But you have a nice plan, 1070 is an overkill card for competitive gaming on 1080 or 1440 with some nerf on effects.
Dude 80% is pretty high! And I don’t approve the 3gb choiche.
But you have a nice plan, 1070 is an overkill card for competitive gaming on 1080 or 1440 with some nerf on effects.
It may be but it sure is a good match for 1440p gaming with ultra and everything on BF1,I still have to find other games that have high requirements that I would play for fun,preferably something that is free,BF1 was quite the drawback for someone that cannot earn money from work just yet,but I’m close to start doing so.
It may be but it sure is a good match for 1440p gaming with ultra and everything on BF1,I still have to find other games that have high requirements that I would play for fun,preferably something that is free,BF1 was quite the drawback for someone that cannot earn money from work just yet,but I’m close to start doing so.
I will still go for a 1060, as it already seems to have almost reached the targeted price, and the difference between 1050 and 1060 in price is minimal - however the 1050 has a 14nm chip so its basicly a notebook version in the desktop - which is kinda cool - literally. but still, hardwarewise, the 1060 is like such a jump…
22 hours ago, Mecronmancer said:
That’s also the reason why Nvidia card prices tend to stagnate for a few years at a time.
each nanometer jump is usually followed by optimization and increasing specs on the same platform. That’s why Kepler and Maxwell cards got more complex with each generation, but they were basicly still 28nm tech since the 660. The price holding does have to do also with simply their actual complexity and size increase over the years being more expensive to manufacture, while the actual performance gain is smaller (while also less profitable). Bottom line is, the GeForce 10 is a larger switch, than what happened in the time between 660 and 980. It is indeed a completely new generation of chips, down to the physical properties. It is expectable, that from now on, nv will continue developing on the 16/14 nm platforms and do the same as before for a few years: add more memory, add more units, make the chip bigger and do more stuff, sell it with a new name.
They always do that.
lack of competition mainly delays release and development speed. the 1050 and 1060 were quite hasty answers from nv to amds success on the budget market, so it was already a reaction to competition in the first place.
But I think we all agree, there are many good reasons to buy in right now. It’s almost like GeForce2 times.
I would not get a 750 to be honest, i mean, the sell difference is so small, you can get a cheap 1050 almost for the same price. Who cares if it isnt utilized, at least the 1050 might sell again in the future, the 750 for sure doesnt.
That is not a bad config if you settle at 1080p resolution and lower some effects in games.
1080 i got settled, played my hand right, got a whole computer part by part ultra cheap. Surprisingly being a budget gamer I can run my games on mostly high to ultra. Havent played anything else other than SC tho from september last year.