NVIDIA have officially announced the GeForce RTX 2000 series of GPUs, launching September

Quoting: 14$500 for the least expensive one. No thanks.

Believe me when I say that I spend 80% or more of my gaming time on PC. Still, I can't convince myself that a $500 video card is worth it when you can buy an entire console gaming system for $300. Come on.

Exactly my point of view. And don't forget some models from ASUS/MSI/Gigabyte will in fact be more expensive.

Also if you buy a 200€ card and upgrade to another 200€ card 3 years later, you get the same performance as if you bought a 800€ card but kept it for 6 years. Exemple : a GTX 1050 Ti has the same performance as a GTX 680. So I prefer to buy lower end but upgrade more often.

Quoting: dubigrasuI was waiting for the these cards to hit the market, not because I intend to buy one (way too expensive) but because it means I will be finally be able to get a GTX 1080ti, which will serve me for another few good years. My last Nvidia card was a GTX 780ti, which is still a very good card (although a bit power hungry).

Prices for 1080ti already dropped significantly (at least on Ebay), and is a hell of a good card to have, with no current rivals.
I am also somewhat tempted to wait and see AMD's counter-offer, but who knows how long will that take.

How safe is to get a pre-owned card on eBay? With this kind of items I'm always scared the previous owner overclocked them a lot or any other heavy use, resulting in an early breakage.

Quoting: TheRiddickIn all honesty nobody was asking for this crap in their games.

To me, this was pretty clear with the half applauses, bored faces and timid aaawwweeesss and cheering during the key note.

Quoting: 14$500 for the least expensive one. No thanks.

Believe me when I say that I spend 80% or more of my gaming time on PC. Still, I can't convince myself that a $500 video card is worth it when you can buy an entire console gaming system for $300. Come on.

You are not wrong, but a console has many many drawbacks but that has always been the downside of pc gaming yes it offers a far superior gaming experience than a console however upgrading a pc is expensive if you intend to keep it bleeding edge however a console is a one and done expense. But given a 750 ti @ 1080p either out performs or performs the same as a base xbox 1 and ps4 given most console games the equivlent pc setting is either med/high but in some more demanding games when its upscaled from 900p like last of us remastered its more like 1600x900 high.

Quoting: Guest

Quoting: TheRiddick

Quoting: Perkeleen_VittupääBoycott Nvidia now!

Yeah except there are no other real options, at least when you go past 1060GTX performance level!!!!!

When there is no alternatives then boycotts are VERY hard to do, your asking people to accept a more expensive and MUCH slower option (Vega)!!!!

You are on a Linux gaming website. Please enlighten us, what do you absolutely need a gpu better than the Rx580/GTX 1060 for? Running Graveyard Keeper at 4k and 600fps?

Even on windows the vast majority of people have no need for anything better than an Rx570 with 4gb vram. Most monitors are 1080p.

Nvidia is great at producing halo products that nobody needs then proceed to have 2x the marketshare for their inferior low and mid range products, based on this fact alone.

I can understand when windows users fall for this, but seeing all this Nvidia love on a gaming on linux site makes me cringe. Even if AMD gpus had 10% worse price/performance ratio, a proper linux gamer should still buy them because of the open source support. You should vote with your wallets and as long as you vote for companies that are abusing their market dominance and don't give a shit about open source, things will never change.

I don't believe any of that true linux gamer a true linux gamer is someone who chooses to game on linux the end. I dont care if they are using open source or proprietary drivers just use whatever works for you in the price range you can afford. Nvidia whether you like them or not basically either outperform or have parity with amd at every price point there is no card in AMD aresnal you could point at and say nvidia doesnt have an answer for that. Also the one area AMD could compete on ie price they dont if you were on a budget at the minute and say you had 130 pounds about 155 usd to spend on a graphics card you could either get an RX 550 (basically a gt 1030) new or a gt 1030 for 125 pounds so you would have change, nvidia not only have the performance they have price too and that should not be the case. Now am sure some people would say of well a true linux person would buy the underdog card no nodbody shops like that nobody says oh please let me have worse price performance model.

Wow, theres a lot of comments here. I usually read them all but I'll have to skip this time.

Anyway, with the price inflation that has been going on every generation, and games not really getting much more demanding outside of really niche cases, the only sane thing to do these days is to stay one or two generations behind.

Many seem to be afraid of getting used cards that got overclocked. Personally, I think computer parts have no moving parts (fans excluded), so this rule doesn't really apply to them. They either work or not. Computer parts generally stall themselves if they get too hot. Is it known that GPUs die earlier if they are overclocked? I never heard about that. Are there sources?

Quoting: TheRiddickWhen there is no alternatives then boycotts are VERY hard to do, your asking people to accept a more expensive and MUCH slower option (Vega)!!!!

If a fast GPU is more important than all other things, then there is indeed no alternative.

Just putting a post here to say that I have a 1080Ti and my next card will not be nVidia. Also unlikely to upgrade in the near future.
Probably looking to the next-after-next AMD cards, but still keeping an eye on Intel. :)

Quoting: Doc AngeloMany seem to be afraid of getting used cards that got overclocked. Personally, I think computer parts have no moving parts (fans excluded), so this rule doesn't really apply to them. They either work or not. Computer parts generally stall themselves if they get too hot. Is it known that GPUs die earlier if they are overclocked? I never heard about that. Are there sources?

While generally I agree with this, there is theoretically a degradation process in the silicon of the chips as they are used and it gets exponentially faster as the voltage and clocks are increased. Generally not a problem though becouse the parts will be obsolete long before they have degraded anyway. A CPU running at default speed might last 30 years of heavy use, while it might only last 10 years if overclocked, but that still plenty of time. Usually the motherboard will have given up long before something like a CPU anyway.

With that said, I did experience an overclocking accident with an MSI GTX970 not too long ago. My brother had an Ubuntu machine with two of those cards mining crypto. Mining is not usually a problem but it can be if recklessness is involved. So one of the cards suddenly stopped working and there was a smell of burned electronics he said. I asked him to send me a picture of the PCB and I discovered a couple of burned mosFET's in the VRM-section of the card. I asked if the fans were working properly and if he overclocked it. Apparently he had been messing around with nvidia-smi and accidentally made the card overclock way to much which has led to the VRM's overheating and burning out.

So yea, generally parts will try to protect themselves but it doesn't always work as intended.