Should I get the Nvidia GTX 1080? or wait for the 1080 TI for Overwatch?

[kooper]

I currently run a regular GTX 780 which I've had for years with a 1440P 144hz monitor. For most games I play this has been fine but since Overwatch came out I cannot play above 120+ FPS unless I low the settings to medium or below. I played TF2 for years so playing at FPS above 120 has been the norm for me for years, and although Overwatch is playable at the lower graphical settings I'd really love to play it on max settings, 144hz 1440P. On medium settings alone it tends to drop up and down a lot too especially in full screen windowed mode.

Should I invest in the GTX 1080 as my upgrade? Will it be enough for what I am looking to do with Overwatch? Or would it be wiser to hold out for the GTX 1080 TI which I've read about?

Edit:
I am running an i7-4770K with 32 GB of RAM.

Suggestions would be great, thanks guys.

 

[Wayfall]

^ one difference is the 1070-80 will allow you to game at decent levels for a few years, but as it stands, a 970 is already fairly behind, and won't even let him turn on some ultra graphical settings.

thinks like doom/gtav won't give you all they have already because they need 4gb+ vram.

I'm using 5gb+ in gta v

Well I have played Doom 3 maxed at out 1080p 60fps no issues so I don't see why your saying the card is way behind, all the new games I have tried with it ultra have been fine. The card is still really good, if they want more VRAM they can try the R9 390 which has 8GB and its only around £280 which I very good.

 

[zornyan]

because doom won't even let you activate nightmare mode with under 5gb of vram?

the 970 has only 3.5gb, lots of games already use that, and as time goes on they will use more and more

 

[Vikerules]

I have a GTX 970 and it can do ultra 60fps 1080 easy so if you put it to medium-high 1440p it should be fine.

I'll get 1440p when my monitor dies if it ever does.

i get 115+ constant fps with my msi gtx 970 at ultra (shadows on high) and 1920x1080 (100% render scale)

i think your card is broken

 

[Wayfall]

because doom won't even let you activate nightmare mode with under 5gb of vram?

the 970 has only 3.5gb, lots of games already use that, and as time goes on they will use more and more

What is it with the whole 3.5GB nonsense...yes the GTX 970 has 3.5GB of fast VRAM and the 500mb more to make up the 4GB is slightly slower, only a small number of my games have used like 3.6GB of my VRAM and I have had no issues. The GPU has 4GB.. its just the 500mb is very slightly slower which does not effect the card performance wise at all.

 

[zornyan]

it does trust me, I tried my 970s at 4k and as soon as 'real' usage goes above vram, fps hits the floor and you get massive stutter.

the ingame tools only give a rough vram used, not actual vram usage, if you see when you actually use 3.5gb or over it'll be a big drop.

 

[Wayfall]

it does trust me, I tried my 970s at 4k and as soon as 'real' usage goes above vram, fps hits the floor and you get massive stutter.

the ingame tools only give a rough vram used, not actual vram usage, if you see when you actually use 3.5gb or over it'll be a big drop.

Well I have gotten to 3.8GB with no frame drops

 

[zornyan]

what software were you using to monitor that? most games or software like afterburner report the wrong smount, not the true value being used.

anyway, this isn't relevant to the OP, his current gpu is not strong enough, and the jump to a 1080 should bring him up to 140fps for his monitors resolution

 

[dantheman0809]

Wait for amd rx 480 😀

 

[kooper]

The GTX 1000 series is completely overkill for Overwatch on 'Epic' preset at 1080p, the GPU may work a bit harder at 1440p but really why should you pay £600+ for a GTX 1000 card when a £250 GTX 970 can easily max the game at 1080p no issues.

I just don't see why you think you need a 1080 unless your going to play at stupidly high resolutions.

I am not playing at 1080P

I am playing at 1440P @ 144FPS. I want to always be hitting 144+ FPS.

That's why I asked.

 

[gokitty199]

it does trust me, I tried my 970s at 4k and as soon as 'real' usage goes above vram, fps hits the floor and you get massive stutter.

the ingame tools only give a rough vram used, not actual vram usage, if you see when you actually use 3.5gb or over it'll be a big drop.

Well I have gotten to 3.8GB with no frame drops

same here in dead rising beta i was hovering around the 3.7gb mark in heavy areas without stuttering.

 

[zornyan]

that's because you went using 3.7gb.

when some of the vram is empty the gpu will load up some textures in the available space, but not really use them, if you use some proper monitoring software I guarantee you'd be under 3.5gb

there's no magic about it, the .5gb is very slow in comparison and WILL cause stutter in game.

 

[Wayfall]

Well we have never had stutter okay...

 

[zornyan]

that's because you haven't hit the 3.5gb limit....

anyway, your not helping the OP, he's gaming at 1440p, and 144hz, a 970 does not have near enough the balls to do that.

hell go look at a decent graphical game like wither 3 or crysis 3, the 1080 will just about do 120fps at that resolution at max settings.

 

[zornyan]

besides you have to consider, the 970 is dated now, it barely does 40 fps 1080p in dx12 titles like ashes, I wouldn't recommend a card like that to anyone imo

 

[DustinV]

People sill crying about 3.5gb in 2016 lel

 

[gokitty199]

that's because you went using 3.7gb.

when some of the vram is empty the gpu will load up some textures in the available space, but not really use them, if you use some proper monitoring software I guarantee you'd be under 3.5gb

there's no magic about it, the .5gb is very slow in comparison and WILL cause stutter in game.

you say proper monitoring software and yet we never mentioned what software we were using in the first place. stop pulling stuff out your rear. not to mention the fact that you use the typical ashes of singularity option where nvidias maxwell bogs down and none of the other games which it performs well in.

 

[zornyan]

again, you haven't even consider what monitor the OP is using...

144fps is the target at 1440p.

a 970 will not get anywhere near there, at 1080p it just about does decent games at 45fps.

so how is it any sort of decent suggestion? he wants 3x that fps, at a higher resolution.

again, I had sli970s, they did not even perform as good as my current 980ti, this Friday my 1080 arrives. even the 1080 can't push 144fps at 1440p witcher 3, it'll be more around 80-100.

the 970 is a last gen card, the 1070 is far better value for money in every respect, it did fine for its day, but it's not going to even get you 60fps at 1080p in decent games now, and 1080p is getting old, more and more people are switching to 1440/4k.

 

[gokitty199]

again, you haven't even consider what monitor the OP is using...

144fps is the target at 1440p.

a 970 will not get anywhere near there, at 1080p it just about does decent games at 45fps.

so how is it any sort of decent suggestion? he wants 3x that fps, at a higher resolution.

again, I had sli970s, they did not even perform as good as my current 980ti, this Friday my 1080 arrives. even the 1080 can't push 144fps at 1440p witcher 3, it'll be more around 80-100.

the 970 is a last gen card, the 1070 is far better value for money in every respect, it did fine for its day, but it's not going to even get you 60fps at 1080p in decent games now, and 1080p is getting old, more and more people are switching to 1440/4k.

were not talking about op

 

[dantheman0809]

I think to hit 144 you'd prob have to turn down to ultra instead of epic. (or possibly to high.) on 2k.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JfSS5diWSCo
hardware canucks ran this game in 2k with an 2.0 ghz overclocked 1080 founders and he was getting around 130 fps on epic settings. So if you overclock yours a bit and lower the graphics settings from epic to ultra or even to high you should be able to get 144 fps or close. You also need to make sure to lower the render scale setting under graphics to 100%.

tl:dr If you can live with ultra instead of epic and you are willing to OC gpu you should get 144 fps

By the way, if you plan on getting gtx 1080 soon, you should wait for the aftermarket (non-founders or reference) editions. They have much better cooling solutions. Something like the evga atx 3.0 or the msi gaming x

 

[kooper]

Thanks Dan that pretty much answers my question. After finding similar details myself I've come to the conclusion that the current 1080 is simply not what I need yet- I'm not going to pay big dollars for an 'almost there' solution, it'll bother me too much. I've been playing fine with my 780 @ medium settings at around 100 fps so I can just continue to use that while I hold out longer. Maybe when the 1080 TI rolls around it would be capable of what I am looking for?