| Chazore said: Again I am aware of the test results, but unfortunetley the results don't always 100% pan out like they do on a console, such is the nature of PC gaming. What works in your rig for 1440p/1080p will not always work for someone else. My 980 should have been more than enough for GTA 5, as the same should have been for my i5-4670k, yet they were not able to give me a decent and constant 60fps with GTA V and that wasn't with everything maxed either at 1080p and I know I'm not one in 7 billion on this rock that would have experienced that either (because you know not everyone within PC gaming ahs the likes of a 980 either). I know of the mining situation, but that is only a temporary issue and not one that will be around for years at a time, thus the 1070 as you put it would be the defacto buy, just do what the average person would do and wait, it won't kill you. So it's not really a need then, it's a factual illusion that I bought the 1080ti for my monitor and needs?, because that's honestly how that sentence is going. I've watched the benchmarks for multiple takes on the i7-6700k being paired with a 1080 at 1440p max settings for various games and I wasn't too happy with how far the frame dips had gone (because a 1080 is more than enough right?, so who's fault is it for the stupidly low eprformance dips, the devs?), which is why I went for the 1080ti, because I wanted to avoid said dips. |
You are basing everything around something that is ancedotal. I cannot possibly adhere to such things.
--::{PC Gaming Master Race}::--
