Yep, in this day and age, it's always a good idea to wait at least a couple of weeks before getting a game on PC, unless it is a PC only game. But I won't complain, that will give me time to replay The Witcher 1 & 2 in order to import my savefiles.

As for the Ultra settings, they've already said that a GTX 980 should be able to handle it (at 1080p, I assume) and, with a few tweaks and lowering some settings to high, the 970 and both 290 will handle it too.

Just bought GTA V... my most wanted game for years!

The wait is a bit longer... PC version ain't playable until 14th

@Conina: Good for you... and also for us. You'll be able to tell us if the game is broken or not and if it is indeed broken, how much.

Looks like another 28nm monster.

Edit - and reading the news now, it should be. A whooping four years on 28nm. Naughty TSMC.

Although even Intel is now saying they'll take some three years to move from 14nm to 10nm... so yeah.

Those incompetents at Intel, TSMC has promised 10nm in 2016 and 7nm in 2017...

Ha! Like someone's going to believe them when they haven't been able to get their 20nm work and their 16nm is late as usual.

Regarding that rumor/news that I posted, it caused some debate with this pic

with quite a few people claiming that what was written on it was R9 380, not 390.

In any case, after the latest results from Q1, AMD had a Q&A session where she said this

Vivek Arya - Bank of America Merrill Lynch Got it. And then do you think PC gaming is a growing or a declining market? You mentioned that you expect some share games in the back half. What specifically do you think will help you regain that market share?

Lisa Su - President and CEO Yes. So thanks for the question, Vivek. That, I do believe PC gaming and gaming in general is a growth opportunity in the market and a growth opportunity for AMD. So as I look forward, we're launching Carrizo on the APU side and we're also launching some graphics products in the second half of this year. So I think from the standpoint of being able to capture more of the market and increase more to where our normal shares are in graphics, I think that's something that we believe we can make progress towards.

So there we have it. They may announce the 3XX series in June at Computex, but they won't launch them until at least July.

So, with The Witcher 3 finally out, the first benchmarks for the PC version of the game will start appearing and with them the usual discussions between AMD and Nvidia fans. And I wanted to see some of that here but free of console fans.

Because of that, I decided to not make a thread about them but to post here the first of those benchmark reviews of The Witcher 3, directly from the site PCGamesHardware.de.

Results at 1920x1080 at MAX settings with HairWorks off and HBAO+ replaced for SSAO

The results are clear: To get the best experience, use an Nvidia card... but one of the new ones!

Because, while the TitanX, GTX 980 and GTX 970 are the fastest cards, with AMD's 290 and 290X almost tied to the 970, the performance of the older Nvidia cards are surprisingly poor. The 780Ti is 9 fps slower than a 290X, but even more bizarre is the fact that in this game an AMD R9 285 card will give you the same average fps as the original Titan card.

See this worries me because my new spec is going to include a 980, results with all settings on max without HW/GW are showing around the 49fps mark, so to get a solid 60 I'm going to have to SLI or get older cards to SLI with and even then that's more money to throw on the pile for a a few more FPS, I don't see the gains with HW/GW from what I've seen, sure it does look a little nice to look at but it doesn't feel game changing to me and requires more fps from you.

I'm all for pushing for more hardware but this doesn't feel like it is, at least not in the crysis dept, it just feels like it's taxing on purpose when we've already seen the differences from medium to ultra to what the reviewed system outputs at, I know it's going to sound stupid and misinformed from me but I feel like it;s bloated just a bit, just for 1080p gaming and the high end cards struggle, I kinda had my build in mind for this game alone but now I feel I won't be able to get the basic 1080p full settings (minus the two settings) package in 2015, it feels like I'll have to wait till 2016/17 just to get the whole deal.

I think that now is the worst time to pick a new GPU for several reasons:

1-We still don't know which will be the min. amount of VRAM to game without having to worry about it.

2-Developers are still making the jump to the new gen of consoles, making the games and the PC ports of those games and engines. Until they release their games, we won't know how taxing the ports will be for our PC and how the cards deal with them.

3-We still don't know how DX12/Vulkan will afect PC gaming, nor which cards support both of them (AMD says that their Hawaii cards are already DX12_Tier3 compatible while Nvidia says that Maxwell is DX12_Tier2, but I don't know what that means in reality or how many Tiers there are).

4-The next generation of cards will finally move from the 28nm process to the newer 16nm Finfet+. That, along with both camps using HMB, will mean smaller cards that outperform the current ones by a large margin while also consuming less power.

If you can wait, I think that the best decision is that, wait. Unfortunately for me, I have a 5850, and if you look at that table... yeah

yeah I've been doing that for a while but really how much longer do we have to wait though?, I mean the 980 is one of the latest and it's apparently not cutting it too well with some games on max which is worrying, I really don't want to stay with my 680 for another 2 years let alone another full year since it means having to dial back down more settings which to me defeats one of the reasons I got into PC gaming, I'm in it for the mods, free online, cheap games, sales and mostly performance and eye candy, settling for less isn't really my forte, not when I've settled for less for years to a point where it;s crushed my expectations and hopes for so long.