I was going to perhaps wait but I am pleased with everything I have seen from the card and what it can do for my needs.
I love mine, I can run everything on max settings, and who knows if there is an MMO that looks amazing and supports SLI i might get a 2nd ( I hope crowfall will). Anyways I hope you will enjoy yours as much as I enjoy mine.
I don't know why everyone is going mad over these new cards, unless you plan to get into VR they are marginal upgrades over the last gen.
The Pascal architecture is a rather large step up from the Maxwell but if you already own a 980 you can just skip this one over unless you have way too much cash burning a hole in your pocket.
No matter if you have AMD or Nvidia every third generation is a good sequence for upgrading, every second for serious FPS players. That is counting you already have a top card of the earlier generation, a 960 to a 1080 is still a huge step but a 980Ti to a 1060 would be a really bad upgrade and actually make things slower instead of faster.
I don't know why everyone is going mad over these new cards, unless you plan to get into VR they are marginal upgrades over the last gen.
The Pascal architecture is a rather large step up from the Maxwell but if you already own a 980 you can just skip this one over unless you have way too much cash burning a hole in your pocket.
No matter if you have AMD or Nvidia every third generation is a good sequence for upgrading, every second for serious FPS players. That is counting you already have a top card of the earlier generation, a 960 to a 1080 is still a huge step but a 980Ti to a 1060 would be a really bad upgrade and actually make things slower instead of faster.
However, if you want to get into VR the video card cost is now $250 for the GTX 1060, which I have to say is what I tried to tell people 6 months ago
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
I don't know why everyone is going mad over these new cards, unless you plan to get into VR they are marginal upgrades over the last gen.
The Pascal architecture is a rather large step up from the Maxwell but if you already own a 980 you can just skip this one over unless you have way too much cash burning a hole in your pocket.
No matter if you have AMD or Nvidia every third generation is a good sequence for upgrading, every second for serious FPS players. That is counting you already have a top card of the earlier generation, a 960 to a 1080 is still a huge step but a 980Ti to a 1060 would be a really bad upgrade and actually make things slower instead of faster.
However, if you want to get into VR the video card cost is now $250 for the GTX 1060, which I have to say is what I tried to tell people 6 months ago
Really?
*edit* I should clarify: The 1060 is ~the~ card to get for VR? You tried to tell us 6 months ago? Anyone wants to get into VR?
I don't know why everyone is going mad over these new cards, unless you plan to get into VR they are marginal upgrades over the last gen.
The Pascal architecture is a rather large step up from the Maxwell but if you already own a 980 you can just skip this one over unless you have way too much cash burning a hole in your pocket.
No matter if you have AMD or Nvidia every third generation is a good sequence for upgrading, every second for serious FPS players. That is counting you already have a top card of the earlier generation, a 960 to a 1080 is still a huge step but a 980Ti to a 1060 would be a really bad upgrade and actually make things slower instead of faster.
However, if you want to get into VR the video card cost is now $250 for the GTX 1060, which I have to say is what I tried to tell people 6 months ago
Really?
*edit* I should clarify: The 1060 is ~the~ card to get for VR? You tried to tell us 6 months ago? Anyone wants to get into VR?
Yes.
I tried to tell you guys 6 months ago that the prices for the video cards that can/will support commercial VR will easily by the end of the year drop dramatically and $250 is pretty dramatic it appears I nailed it EXACTLY. I have been around awhile so I know that the price of technology drops over time, seemingly yourself and may others are not aware of that. The basic predictor here is Moores Law
and yes 1060 will do VR, any '970 or greater' is the requirement and I said 'dropped dramatically, 6 months ago and yesterday I said $250' so please dont be the guy that says 'how did I know it was the 1060 specifically because that is being intentionally disruptive.
and when I say VR I mean HTC Vive and Oculus if I should have been more clear then I apologize I am just looking to seal up any holes people might want to exploit
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
I don't know why everyone is going mad over these new cards, unless you plan to get into VR they are marginal upgrades over the last gen.
The Pascal architecture is a rather large step up from the Maxwell but if you already own a 980 you can just skip this one over unless you have way too much cash burning a hole in your pocket.
No matter if you have AMD or Nvidia every third generation is a good sequence for upgrading, every second for serious FPS players. That is counting you already have a top card of the earlier generation, a 960 to a 1080 is still a huge step but a 980Ti to a 1060 would be a really bad upgrade and actually make things slower instead of faster.
However, if you want to get into VR the video card cost is now $250 for the GTX 1060, which I have to say is what I tried to tell people 6 months ago
Really?
*edit* I should clarify: The 1060 is ~the~ card to get for VR? You tried to tell us 6 months ago? Anyone wants to get into VR?
Yes.
I tried to tell you guys 6 months ago that the prices for the video cards that can/will support commercial VR will easily by the end of the year drop dramatically and $250 is pretty dramatic it appears I nailed it EXACTLY. I have been around awhile so I know that the price of technology drops over time, seemingly yourself and may others are not aware of that. The basic predictor here is Moores Law
and yes 1060 will do VR, any '970 or greater' is the requirement and I said 'dropped dramatically, 6 months ago and yesterday I said $250' so please dont be the guy that says 'how did I know it was the 1060 specifically because that is being intentionally disruptive.
and when I say VR I mean HTC Vive and Oculus if I should have been more clear then I apologize I am just looking to seal up any holes people might want to exploit
I don't know why everyone is going mad over these new cards, unless you plan to get into VR they are marginal upgrades over the last gen.
The Pascal architecture is a rather large step up from the Maxwell but if you already own a 980 you can just skip this one over unless you have way too much cash burning a hole in your pocket.
No matter if you have AMD or Nvidia every third generation is a good sequence for upgrading, every second for serious FPS players. That is counting you already have a top card of the earlier generation, a 960 to a 1080 is still a huge step but a 980Ti to a 1060 would be a really bad upgrade and actually make things slower instead of faster.
However, if you want to get into VR the video card cost is now $250 for the GTX 1060, which I have to say is what I tried to tell people 6 months ago
Really?
*edit* I should clarify: The 1060 is ~the~ card to get for VR? You tried to tell us 6 months ago? Anyone wants to get into VR?
Yes.
I tried to tell you guys 6 months ago that the prices for the video cards that can/will support commercial VR will easily by the end of the year drop dramatically and $250 is pretty dramatic it appears I nailed it EXACTLY. I have been around awhile so I know that the price of technology drops over time, seemingly yourself and may others are not aware of that. The basic predictor here is Moores Law
and yes 1060 will do VR, any '970 or greater' is the requirement and I said 'dropped dramatically, 6 months ago and yesterday I said $250' so please dont be the guy that says 'how did I know it was the 1060 specifically because that is being intentionally disruptive.
and when I say VR I mean HTC Vive and Oculus if I should have been more clear then I apologize I am just looking to seal up any holes people might want to exploit
Links or it didn't happen.
your focused on the wrong part of the story.
the part to focus on is $250 for a video card to enter high end VR
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
I don't know why everyone is going mad over these new cards, unless you plan to get into VR they are marginal upgrades over the last gen.
The Pascal architecture is a rather large step up from the Maxwell but if you already own a 980 you can just skip this one over unless you have way too much cash burning a hole in your pocket.
No matter if you have AMD or Nvidia every third generation is a good sequence for upgrading, every second for serious FPS players. That is counting you already have a top card of the earlier generation, a 960 to a 1080 is still a huge step but a 980Ti to a 1060 would be a really bad upgrade and actually make things slower instead of faster.
However, if you want to get into VR the video card cost is now $250 for the GTX 1060, which I have to say is what I tried to tell people 6 months ago
Really?
*edit* I should clarify: The 1060 is ~the~ card to get for VR? You tried to tell us 6 months ago? Anyone wants to get into VR?
Yes.
I tried to tell you guys 6 months ago that the prices for the video cards that can/will support commercial VR will easily by the end of the year drop dramatically and $250 is pretty dramatic it appears I nailed it EXACTLY. I have been around awhile so I know that the price of technology drops over time, seemingly yourself and may others are not aware of that. The basic predictor here is Moores Law
and yes 1060 will do VR, any '970 or greater' is the requirement and I said 'dropped dramatically, 6 months ago and yesterday I said $250' so please dont be the guy that says 'how did I know it was the 1060 specifically because that is being intentionally disruptive.
and when I say VR I mean HTC Vive and Oculus if I should have been more clear then I apologize I am just looking to seal up any holes people might want to exploit
Links or it didn't happen.
your focused on the wrong part of the story.
the part to focus on is $250 for a video card to enter high end VR
Well then, you're wrong, as the Radeon RX 480 tends to be faster than a GeForce GTX 970, and has an MSRP of $200, not $250.
I don't know why everyone is going mad over these new cards, unless you plan to get into VR they are marginal upgrades over the last gen.
The Pascal architecture is a rather large step up from the Maxwell but if you already own a 980 you can just skip this one over unless you have way too much cash burning a hole in your pocket.
No matter if you have AMD or Nvidia every third generation is a good sequence for upgrading, every second for serious FPS players. That is counting you already have a top card of the earlier generation, a 960 to a 1080 is still a huge step but a 980Ti to a 1060 would be a really bad upgrade and actually make things slower instead of faster.
However, if you want to get into VR the video card cost is now $250 for the GTX 1060, which I have to say is what I tried to tell people 6 months ago
Really?
*edit* I should clarify: The 1060 is ~the~ card to get for VR? You tried to tell us 6 months ago? Anyone wants to get into VR?
Yes.
I tried to tell you guys 6 months ago that the prices for the video cards that can/will support commercial VR will easily by the end of the year drop dramatically and $250 is pretty dramatic it appears I nailed it EXACTLY. I have been around awhile so I know that the price of technology drops over time, seemingly yourself and may others are not aware of that. The basic predictor here is Moores Law
and yes 1060 will do VR, any '970 or greater' is the requirement and I said 'dropped dramatically, 6 months ago and yesterday I said $250' so please dont be the guy that says 'how did I know it was the 1060 specifically because that is being intentionally disruptive.
and when I say VR I mean HTC Vive and Oculus if I should have been more clear then I apologize I am just looking to seal up any holes people might want to exploit
Links or it didn't happen.
your focused on the wrong part of the story.
the part to focus on is $250 for a video card to enter high end VR
Well then, you're wrong, as the Radeon RX 480 tends to be faster than a GeForce GTX 970, and has an MSRP of $200, not $250.
again your focused on the wrong part of the story.
getting a VR PC is no longer expensive the story
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
I don't know why everyone is going mad over these new cards, unless you plan to get into VR they are marginal upgrades over the last gen.
The Pascal architecture is a rather large step up from the Maxwell but if you already own a 980 you can just skip this one over unless you have way too much cash burning a hole in your pocket.
No matter if you have AMD or Nvidia every third generation is a good sequence for upgrading, every second for serious FPS players. That is counting you already have a top card of the earlier generation, a 960 to a 1080 is still a huge step but a 980Ti to a 1060 would be a really bad upgrade and actually make things slower instead of faster.
However, if you want to get into VR the video card cost is now $250 for the GTX 1060, which I have to say is what I tried to tell people 6 months ago
Really?
*edit* I should clarify: The 1060 is ~the~ card to get for VR? You tried to tell us 6 months ago? Anyone wants to get into VR?
Yes.
I tried to tell you guys 6 months ago that the prices for the video cards that can/will support commercial VR will easily by the end of the year drop dramatically and $250 is pretty dramatic it appears I nailed it EXACTLY. I have been around awhile so I know that the price of technology drops over time, seemingly yourself and may others are not aware of that. The basic predictor here is Moores Law
and yes 1060 will do VR, any '970 or greater' is the requirement and I said 'dropped dramatically, 6 months ago and yesterday I said $250' so please dont be the guy that says 'how did I know it was the 1060 specifically because that is being intentionally disruptive.
and when I say VR I mean HTC Vive and Oculus if I should have been more clear then I apologize I am just looking to seal up any holes people might want to exploit
Links or it didn't happen.
your focused on the wrong part of the story.
the part to focus on is $250 for a video card to enter high end VR
Well then, you're wrong, as the Radeon RX 480 tends to be faster than a GeForce GTX 970, and has an MSRP of $200, not $250.
again your focused on the wrong part of the story.
getting a VR PC is no longer expensive the story
You're now claiming that the most important part of your claim was that the cost of getting GTX 970 or better performance would drop by $50 from $300 at the start of the year to $250 now. And you were off by a factor of two, as it actually fell by $100. And since you were only off by a factor of two, you want credit for hitting it on the nose.
As a comparison for the total cost of buying a gaming PC, a $50 difference on the video card probably isn't going to the difference between "is expensive" and "is not expensive" in that generality.
That's a very, very weak basis for an "I tried to tell you guys 6 months ago". It's only slightly better than "I tried to tell you guys 6 months ago that the sun would rise in the east today." Of course the price for a given level of performance tends to drop as time passes.
You're now claiming that the most important part of your claim was that the cost of getting GTX 970 or better performance would drop by $50 from $300 at the start of the year to $250 now. And you were off by a factor of two, as it actually fell by $100. And since you were only off by a factor of two, you want credit for hitting it on the nose.
As a comparison for the total cost of buying a gaming PC, a $50 difference on the video card probably isn't going to the difference between "is expensive" and "is not expensive" in that generality.
I am going to ask that we get back on topic. I would love to debate with you on VR and how the cost of entry has falled dramatically as I had predicted and that the cost of getting in VR for the PC side is the same as getting into new games but that is not what this thread is about.
so lets get back on topic create a new thread if you like
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
You're now claiming that the most important part of your claim was that the cost of getting GTX 970 or better performance would drop by $50 from $300 at the start of the year to $250 now. And you were off by a factor of two, as it actually fell by $100. And since you were only off by a factor of two, you want credit for hitting it on the nose.
As a comparison for the total cost of buying a gaming PC, a $50 difference on the video card probably isn't going to the difference between "is expensive" and "is not expensive" in that generality.
I am going to ask that we get back on topic. I would love to troll you on VR and how the cost of entry has failed dramatically as I had predicted in my own mind but have no actual proof for, and that the cost of getting in VR for the PC side is the same as getting into new games because you need an expensive video card to play any new games even though the Steam Survey shows that isn't true, but that is not what this thread is about.
so lets get back on topic create a new thread if you like
2 GB Radeon RX 460 for $110 4 GB Radeon RX 460 for $140 4 GB Radeon RX 470 for $200 6 GB GeForce GTX 1060 for $250 8 GB GeForce GTX 1070 for $424 8 GB GeForce GTX 1080 for $700
The RX 460 and GTX 1060 are at MSRP, but everything else is still above it. The only Radeon RX 480 is at stupid prices, but at least the cards are mostly available now.
2 GB Radeon RX 460 for $110 4 GB Radeon RX 460 for $140 4 GB Radeon RX 470 for $200 6 GB GeForce GTX 1060 for $250 8 GB GeForce GTX 1070 for $424 8 GB GeForce GTX 1080 for $700
The RX 460 and GTX 1060 are at MSRP, but everything else is still above it. The only Radeon RX 480 is at stupid prices, but at least the cards are mostly available now.
I wasn't too far off in my prediction which was that the 1080 wouldn't be widely available before the end of August. The reason for my expectation is that GDDR5X wouldn't be available in mass quantities before the end of the month and that this coupled with potential binning/quality issues would make it difficult to keep shelves and online retailers sufficiently stocked. They're still having issues with that and the card is still well over MSRP, but it's available.
The surprise, for me, is that both manufacturers had paper launches with the 1080 and the 480. I expected AMD to launch a lot more solidly than they did.
several months ago because of the GDDR5X people were suggesting not this year, let alone Q3
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
2 GB Radeon RX 460 for $110 4 GB Radeon RX 460 for $140 4 GB Radeon RX 470 for $200 6 GB GeForce GTX 1060 for $250 8 GB GeForce GTX 1070 for $424 8 GB GeForce GTX 1080 for $700
The RX 460 and GTX 1060 are at MSRP, but everything else is still above it. The only Radeon RX 480 is at stupid prices, but at least the cards are mostly available now.
I wasn't too far off in my prediction which was that the 1080 wouldn't be widely available before the end of August. The reason for my expectation is that GDDR5X wouldn't be available in mass quantities before the end of the month and that this coupled with potential binning/quality issues would make it difficult to keep shelves and online retailers sufficiently stocked. They're still having issues with that and the card is still well over MSRP, but it's available.
The surprise, for me, is that both manufacturers had paper launches with the 1080 and the 480. I expected AMD to launch a lot more solidly than they did.
several months ago because of the GDDR5X people were suggesting not this year, let alone Q3
Links or it didn't happen.
The "likely not this year" was for GP100, which uses HBM2, not GDDR5X.
2 GB Radeon RX 460 for $110 4 GB Radeon RX 460 for $140 4 GB Radeon RX 470 for $200 6 GB GeForce GTX 1060 for $250 8 GB GeForce GTX 1070 for $424 8 GB GeForce GTX 1080 for $700
The RX 460 and GTX 1060 are at MSRP, but everything else is still above it. The only Radeon RX 480 is at stupid prices, but at least the cards are mostly available now.
I wasn't too far off in my prediction which was that the 1080 wouldn't be widely available before the end of August. The reason for my expectation is that GDDR5X wouldn't be available in mass quantities before the end of the month and that this coupled with potential binning/quality issues would make it difficult to keep shelves and online retailers sufficiently stocked. They're still having issues with that and the card is still well over MSRP, but it's available.
The surprise, for me, is that both manufacturers had paper launches with the 1080 and the 480. I expected AMD to launch a lot more solidly than they did.
several months ago because of the GDDR5X people were suggesting not this year, let alone Q3
Links or it didn't happen.
The "likely not this year" was for GP100, which uses HBM2, not GDDR5X.
Funny how Moores law and past video card generations ended up randomly being correct aint?
also odd how when I predicted 'widely aviable by October' somehow that prediction is a problem but august is not?
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
My guess of October availability for the GTX 1080 was based on Micron's then public guidance of GDDR5X mass production starting in summer. It's been inoperative ever since they said they started mass production in May. I could believe August.
One thing to remember is that, for whatever corporate reasons, Nvidia is willing to take much larger risks than AMD's GPU division. AMD GPUs generally try to make something pretty good, and they nearly always succeed at that. Nvidia tries to deliver something awesome, and it's very hit or miss. Nvidia is much more likely to fail at what they tried to do because they try to do much harder things.
When Nvidia is able to build what they tried to, they win the generation handily. They did with Maxwell, but before that, I think you have to go all the way back to the original Tesla (GeForce 8800). And when Nvidia fails, it can blow up spectacularly, as with Fermi. AMD Evergreen won that generation handily, not because it was awesome, but it only looked great as compared to the train wreck that was Fermi.
How will it play out with Pascal? I'd say the verdict is still out.
as some of us said (and shall say again)
'we believe given Nividias expertise in this area that they are not going to release a card that they can not sell until Q4. They likely know something we dont'
Literally the very next day the micron statement/news came out. Literally the next day.
I call that an accurate guess
here it is (well one of many anyway)
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
My guess of October availability for the GTX 1080 was based on Micron's then public guidance of GDDR5X mass production starting in summer. It's been inoperative ever since they said they started mass production in May. I could believe August.
One thing to remember is that, for whatever corporate reasons, Nvidia is willing to take much larger risks than AMD's GPU division. AMD GPUs generally try to make something pretty good, and they nearly always succeed at that. Nvidia tries to deliver something awesome, and it's very hit or miss. Nvidia is much more likely to fail at what they tried to do because they try to do much harder things.
When Nvidia is able to build what they tried to, they win the generation handily. They did with Maxwell, but before that, I think you have to go all the way back to the original Tesla (GeForce 8800). And when Nvidia fails, it can blow up spectacularly, as with Fermi. AMD Evergreen won that generation handily, not because it was awesome, but it only looked great as compared to the train wreck that was Fermi.
How will it play out with Pascal? I'd say the verdict is still out.
as some of us said (and shall say again)
'we believe given Nividias expertise in this area that they are not going to release a card that they can not sell until Q4. They likely know something we dont'
Literally the very next day the micron statement/news came out. Literally the next day.
I call that an accurate guess
here it is (well one of many anyway)
And where exactly does that say "not this year"? Indeed, the post you quoted explicitly says, "I could believe August."
My guess of October availability for the GTX 1080 was based on Micron's then public guidance of GDDR5X mass production starting in summer. It's been inoperative ever since they said they started mass production in May. I could believe August.
One thing to remember is that, for whatever corporate reasons, Nvidia is willing to take much larger risks than AMD's GPU division. AMD GPUs generally try to make something pretty good, and they nearly always succeed at that. Nvidia tries to deliver something awesome, and it's very hit or miss. Nvidia is much more likely to fail at what they tried to do because they try to do much harder things.
When Nvidia is able to build what they tried to, they win the generation handily. They did with Maxwell, but before that, I think you have to go all the way back to the original Tesla (GeForce 8800). And when Nvidia fails, it can blow up spectacularly, as with Fermi. AMD Evergreen won that generation handily, not because it was awesome, but it only looked great as compared to the train wreck that was Fermi.
How will it play out with Pascal? I'd say the verdict is still out.
as some of us said (and shall say again)
'we believe given Nividias expertise in this area that they are not going to release a card that they can not sell until Q4. They likely know something we dont'
Literally the very next day the micron statement/news came out. Literally the next day.
I call that an accurate guess
here it is (well one of many anyway)
And where exactly does that say "not this year"? Indeed, the post you quoted explicitly says, "I could believe August."
since you have asked to bring this subject back to live you have by intentions inspired me to go look for the quotes.
thank you for brining the history back that helps me it just might take me awhile, thanks again!
sorry I dont know how to link specfic quotes but it in you will see my errors, as well as my predictions based on Moores Law and past generation of cards as well as those suggesting that its possible we will not see supply unitl 2017.
now if you are done calling me a liar i would like to move on to the main point from the beginning.
'predictions based on moores law are a problem?' YES or NO
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
My guess of October availability for the GTX 1080 was based on Micron's then public guidance of GDDR5X mass production starting in summer. It's been inoperative ever since they said they started mass production in May. I could believe August.
One thing to remember is that, for whatever corporate reasons, Nvidia is willing to take much larger risks than AMD's GPU division. AMD GPUs generally try to make something pretty good, and they nearly always succeed at that. Nvidia tries to deliver something awesome, and it's very hit or miss. Nvidia is much more likely to fail at what they tried to do because they try to do much harder things.
When Nvidia is able to build what they tried to, they win the generation handily. They did with Maxwell, but before that, I think you have to go all the way back to the original Tesla (GeForce 8800). And when Nvidia fails, it can blow up spectacularly, as with Fermi. AMD Evergreen won that generation handily, not because it was awesome, but it only looked great as compared to the train wreck that was Fermi.
How will it play out with Pascal? I'd say the verdict is still out.
as some of us said (and shall say again)
'we believe given Nividias expertise in this area that they are not going to release a card that they can not sell until Q4. They likely know something we dont'
Literally the very next day the micron statement/news came out. Literally the next day.
I call that an accurate guess
here it is (well one of many anyway)
And where exactly does that say "not this year"? Indeed, the post you quoted explicitly says, "I could believe August."
since you have asked to bring this subject back to live you have by intentions inspired me to go look for the quotes.
thank you for brining the history back that helps me it just might take me awhile, thanks again!
sorry I dont know how to link specfic quotes but it in you will see my errors, as well as my predictions based on Moores Law and past generation of cards as well as those suggesting that its possible we will not see supply unitl 2017.
now if you are done calling me a liar i would like to move on to the main point from the beginning.
'predictions based on moores law are a problem?' YES or NO
So now your strategy consists of giving random links that do absolutely nothing to support your claim. Try reading the link. It doesn't say that the GTX 1080 won't be available this year.
sorry I dont know how to link specfic quotes but it in you will see my errors, as well as my predictions based on Moores Law and past generation of cards as well as those suggesting that its possible we will not see supply unitl 2017.
now if you are done calling me a liar i would like to move on to the main point from the beginning.
'predictions based on moores law are a problem?' YES or NO
So now your strategy consists of giving random links that do absolutely nothing to support your claim. Try reading the link. It doesn't say that the GTX 1080 won't be available this year.
the bottom line is this
'predictions based on moores law are a problem?' YES or NO
I say yes
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
sorry I dont know how to link specfic quotes but it in you will see my errors, as well as my predictions based on Moores Law and past generation of cards as well as those suggesting that its possible we will not see supply unitl 2017.
now if you are done calling me a liar i would like to move on to the main point from the beginning.
'predictions based on moores law are a problem?' YES or NO
So now your strategy consists of giving random links that do absolutely nothing to support your claim. Try reading the link. It doesn't say that the GTX 1080 won't be available this year.
the bottom line is this
'predictions based on moores law are a problem?' YES or NO
I say yes
That has nothing to do with the dispute. You are claiming that people said that GDDR5X would not be available this year. Arrival of a new memory standard has nothing to do with Moore's Law.
sorry I dont know how to link specfic quotes but it in you will see my errors, as well as my predictions based on Moores Law and past generation of cards as well as those suggesting that its possible we will not see supply unitl 2017.
now if you are done calling me a liar i would like to move on to the main point from the beginning.
'predictions based on moores law are a problem?' YES or NO
So now your strategy consists of giving random links that do absolutely nothing to support your claim. Try reading the link. It doesn't say that the GTX 1080 won't be available this year.
the bottom line is this
'predictions based on moores law are a problem?' YES or NO
I say yes
That has nothing to do with the dispute. You are claiming that people said that GDDR5X would not be available this year. Arrival of a new memory standard has nothing to do with Moore's Law.
oh and I am 99.9% you are doing something that involves a word i cant use here without getting a warning and I have suspected it for a long time but I play along anyway. (and Ridelynn as well)
just so you know.
but with that said basically 'predictions based on moores law are a problem?' you seem to suggest is a problem
what I dont understand is why you think predictions based on Moores law and past releases is unreasonable
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Comments
No matter if you have AMD or Nvidia every third generation is a good sequence for upgrading, every second for serious FPS players. That is counting you already have a top card of the earlier generation, a 960 to a 1080 is still a huge step but a 980Ti to a 1060 would be a really bad upgrade and actually make things slower instead of faster.
거북이는 목을 내밀 때 안 움직입니다
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
*edit*
I should clarify:
The 1060 is ~the~ card to get for VR?
You tried to tell us 6 months ago?
Anyone wants to get into VR?
I tried to tell you guys 6 months ago that the prices for the video cards that can/will support commercial VR will easily by the end of the year drop dramatically and $250 is pretty dramatic it appears I nailed it EXACTLY. I have been around awhile so I know that the price of technology drops over time, seemingly yourself and may others are not aware of that. The basic predictor here is Moores Law
and yes 1060 will do VR, any '970 or greater' is the requirement
and I said 'dropped dramatically, 6 months ago and yesterday I said $250' so please dont be the guy that says 'how did I know it was the 1060 specifically because that is being intentionally disruptive.
and when I say VR I mean HTC Vive and Oculus if I should have been more clear then I apologize I am just looking to seal up any holes people might want to exploit
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
the part to focus on is $250 for a video card to enter high end VR
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
getting a VR PC is no longer expensive the story
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
As a comparison for the total cost of buying a gaming PC, a $50 difference on the video card probably isn't going to the difference between "is expensive" and "is not expensive" in that generality.
That's a very, very weak basis for an "I tried to tell you guys 6 months ago". It's only slightly better than "I tried to tell you guys 6 months ago that the sun would rise in the east today." Of course the price for a given level of performance tends to drop as time passes.
so lets get back on topic create a new thread if you like
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
2 GB Radeon RX 460 for $110
4 GB Radeon RX 460 for $140
4 GB Radeon RX 470 for $200
6 GB GeForce GTX 1060 for $250
8 GB GeForce GTX 1070 for $424
8 GB GeForce GTX 1080 for $700
The RX 460 and GTX 1060 are at MSRP, but everything else is still above it. The only Radeon RX 480 is at stupid prices, but at least the cards are mostly available now.
거북이는 목을 내밀 때 안 움직입니다
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
The "likely not this year" was for GP100, which uses HBM2, not GDDR5X.
also odd how when I predicted 'widely aviable by October' somehow that prediction is a problem but august is not?
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
thank you for brining the history back that helps me it just might take me awhile, thanks again!
Here is the orginal:
http://forums.mmorpg.com/discussion/451499/gtx1080-manufacturer-release#latest
sorry I dont know how to link specfic quotes but it in you will see my errors, as well as my predictions based on Moores Law and past generation of cards as well as those suggesting that its possible we will not see supply unitl 2017.
now if you are done calling me a liar i would like to move on to the main point from the beginning.
'predictions based on moores law are a problem?'
YES
or
NO
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
'predictions based on moores law are a problem?'
YES
or
NO
I say yes
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
just so you know.
but with that said basically
'predictions based on moores law are a problem?' you seem to suggest is a problem
what I dont understand is why you think predictions based on Moores law and past releases is unreasonable
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me