GTX 980 is not enough... 1440p

not enough to max everything at 1440p.... Great for 1080p though ! I think it's the vram that's holding it back... gtx 980 ti is a better choice. What do you guys think ?

980 Ti is the ideal card for 1440p. VRAM is not an issue on the 980. It is just a slower card.

980 Ti is the way to go. I owned the 980 but upgraded to the Ti because I noticed how big of a performance boost it offered for not much more money.

my 980ti is just barely enough for 3440x1440

or a fury x :P

If you're getting a single card for 1440P then yes 980 Ti is the way to go.

980 is not enough to max games but it's enough to play comfortably @ 1440P. I know that just because I'm able to play all new games on High/Ultra settings with just a single overclocked 290. Such as GTA V, Witcher 3, CoD BOIII, etc.

Currently using a 980 on a 1440p montior, I can max out some games no problem like Fallout 4 and Mad Max but some games like the Witcher 3 I would have to turn down some settings but not much.

Wish the 980TI wasn't 800$(can) :\

I have the 980. Thought about selling it on ebay and buying the GTX 980ti, used. But I think I should wait for Pascal, what do you guys think ? Or just get another980 ?

I don't know if DX 12 will stack vrams but if not then I shouldn't buy another 980

wait for pascal

@Hydrolex: Since you already have GTX980, I would wait for Pascal.

I mean it wouldn't heart to wait for some months with GTX980 LOL...

I play gta 5 just fine anywhere from 60-130fps witcher 3 maxed out minus the hair crap at 60fps

I have gtx 570sli

The thing is.. once Pascal comes out 980 will drop in price. If I was him, I'd most likely wait.

I'll wait for Pascal, coming out in less than 6 months, correct ?

Yeah true, but Pascal will offer him far better performance jump than GTX980ti.

Unless we will see what I am afraid we might see...

A 980 is still a very good card. It is not like you are struggling in the meantime. If you had a weak card, I would say go for the 980Ti now because 6 months is a long time. You will be perfectly fine waiting. Just lower the usual culprits like AA, shadows, etc. and you should be able to maintain good frame rates and have the games looking good.

Just barely? I'm running 3440x1440p as well and I'm not really seeing an issue with anything atm. Sure, you're not going to be running 90+ fps in really recent games, but you should be seeing over 60+ fps, maxed out with most everything correct?

Depends what you mean by "maxed out". I'm at 1440p and the only new games I can max these days at 60+ FPS are the ones that don't give you any AA options (the games that only have FXAA and SMAA n such).

The good things is that already at 1440p, the use of AA is very much optional and not a necessity. I rarely use AA as I prefer the extra fps. Jaggies are not very noticeable at 1440p. Of course they are there, but not distracting at all to me. At 4K, AA becomes completely unnecessary.

I'll just say I disagree, but my eyes are picky. Shimmering and aliasing stands out to me no matter what resolution. FXAA and SMAA helps but without 2x MSAA at 1440p, games feel a bit raggedy.

Time to cross the border bruh :P unless the currency exchange isn't in your favor than nm.

980 is a weird card to me for its pricing. I rather spend extra on dual 970 or single 980ti.

Yeah. I like to use just a touch of AA to clean up the jaggies. I find 2x usually more than adequate at 1440. If it's an older game, I may bump it to 4x as those games are usually running great with room to spare without taking any performance hits. One really neat thing about running 3440x1440 is that let's say there's a game that just runs horrible at that resolution (haven't seen it yet), is that you've still got 2560x1440 or 2560x1080 at your disposal. Although, I'd rather just take a few settings back a notch at 3440.

lol...that being said, I'm looking at adding a second 980 Ti after my new cpu arrives for added performance. Actually, I'm undecided if I want to wait for Pascal, or add the second card (darn you vr!)

@Bikouchu35: The $ can is currently in a terrible position, not really the time to shop in the States.

1$ Can ~. 80$ US

... and it just happens to be the most expensive card on the market!

Just goes to show that 4k still hasn't really arrived (for all but wealthy enthusiasts).

I agree with 1440p having less jaggies, but they still bother me LOL. I don't know about 4k but in GTA V, 1080p vs 1440p with same aa option, I notice less jaggies with 1440p

The 980ti kills 2K gaming. I was looking at the regular 980 but I'm glad I went for the ti.

That's always been the idea, and it won't really change any time soon.

I have a gtx 980 playing at 1440, I'm currently waiting for the next gen to upgrade.

Yup, I'm going to get another GTX980 (non-Ti edition) when that happens and run 'em in SLI.

Is SLI good now? Or does it still have problems?

This is hardware discussion, moved

No, SLI still has issues. Mostly lack of proper support in many games. I used to have 970 SLI and I sold them and got a 980 Ti because I was sick of dealing with SLI. I can only recommend SLI if you are trying to achieve something that you cannot with a single card. 1440p/144 fps, 4K/60fps on all games.

Well you should have gotten a Fury, more powerful than the 980 for a slightly more price.

Or a Fury X. :P

But anyways. I would wait for Pascal or Artic Island. You should at least wait for Artic Island because a prices may come down even more than. I mean if you spent $500 on a card that is barely a year old, you should get at least 2 years out of it, IMO. And VRAM is not the issue, doesn't have enough Cores.

I call it end of March. Knowing nVidia they will execute very well so definitely Q1 2016.

That's interesting. What kind of issues did SLI cause? I thought nVidia was "King" in the driver department.

Care to enlighten me on what games had issues and what type of issues did you experience?

SLI is still better than Crossfire, no need to worry. Nothing has changed in that regard. SLI may be better than crossifre, but neither setup feels as smooth as a single card. A lot of games simply do not support multi-GPU setups or take a while after release to support them. Also, sometimes there are glitches and other bugs that are associated with multi-GPU setups. Too many games release broken as it is. Developers don't even have time to finish the game, let alone support multi-GPU setups properly.

AMD stepped up their game in crossfire, it scales better than SLI, AMD uses a tech called XDMA for crossfire. It even has better frame times than nVidia's SLI.

But you didn't mention specific games that are affected?

@Xtasy26:

I would like to see some SLI vs. Crossfire comparisons from a well known source like Tom's Hardware, Guru3D, PcPer, etc..

In terms of listing games... have you ever used SLI or Crossfire? Almost every game has issues or delays with multi-GPU support. I don't even think Fallout 4 has proper profiles setup for it yet. I haven't had SLI for a while now, but I remember having issues with ARMA III, Batman Arkham Knight, TitanFall, Watch Dogs, Far Cry 4, Assasin's Creed Unity, Wolfenstein: New Order, Project Cars, Evolve, GTA V, COD:AW, Castlenvania: LoS, Darksiders 2, Dreamfall Chapters, Max Payne 3, Dragon Age: Inquisition, BF4, Wreckfest, Rage, Dying Light. I am sure there are more, but you get the picture.

So, as I said before, I can not recommend multi-GPU to anyone unless you are trying to accomplish something that you can not with a single card. I personally wouldn't even consider going 4K/60fps because of the reliance on mult-GPU setups.

I can tell you one thing back when I had CFX 290's and SLI 780 Ti's (a year and a half ago) CFX at that time was definitely scaling better than SLI.

They both have their up and downs.

CFX Scaling is much better than SLI. AMD uses a tech called XDMA,