If a 1070 is faster than 980ti then why......

Sanderson

Sanderson
If a 1070 is faster than 980ti then why won't a 1070 handle ED on Ultra settings? IIRC people were reporting running ED in VR on Ultra with a 980ti, so it makes no sense that a slightly faster GPU wouldn't do the same.

Either I'm daft (most likely) or a lot of people were greatly exaggerating their performance on a 980ti?

I'm really needing new GPU. While my GTX 770 runs EDH just fine, remarkably so I'd say considering, I'm struggling justifying a 1080 with the 1080ti around the corner and the inflated prices these days. I know the 1070 is the better "value" per dollar but, I'd hate to regret getting the 1070 to save a couple hundred dollars.

For those of you with a 1070 or 980ti what's the highest settings you can use to get 90fps?
 

Wolfox

Wolfox
There are a lot of people in here that they prefer saying they are better than you than saying what is negative in their system. "I play with my backet but at least i have all in ULTRA" , even if any HMD will reduce the quality in any case
You see my system in the signature, I run HIGH with some useless thing in Medium. I landed in some planets and the frame rate for sure drops, but with Oculus updates the comfort is not decreased I'm sure i go around 60fps getting in stations.
If you want to compare the GPUs you just have to search Benchmarks on the WEB.
 
Last edited:

Meanstreak242

M
I've got a 980ti, 4790k, 16gb of ram. I run on vr high, with smaa and oculus supersampling set to 1.3. I can get away with 1.4, but I will get the occasional judder in a station. Since that destroys the immersion for me, I went back to 1.3. Game is perfectly smooth for me. I could probably run on ultra, if I dropped the anti-aliasing settings down a notch or two and disabled supersampling, but I much prefer it as is.
 

han

han
Meanstreak242 said:
I've got a 980ti, 4790k, 16gb of ram. I run on vr high, with smaa and oculus supersampling set to 1.3. I can get away with 1.4, but I will get the occasional judder in a station. Since that destroys the immersion for me, I went back to 1.3. Game is perfectly smooth for me. I could probably run on ultra, if I dropped the anti-aliasing settings down a notch or two and disabled supersampling, but I much prefer it as is.
Click to expand...

so its always 90 fps with 1.3 supersampling?
 

TorTorden_VR

T
I have a 980ti, and no.
I'm not running at ultra in vr.
Or anything close really.

Yes, ASW made me think I could for five minutes and I probably could if all I ever did was ABA trading or sothis runs.

But I go to res sites and planet surfaces. for most of my time and often in wings. Playing in wings cost a fair amount of performance.

That regardless, if people are running ultra on a 980ti, they are either just not noticing the stutter or lying about it, I myself has had to drop shadows and SMP back to 1 on both SS and hmd.
And I still spend most of my time in 45 fps and ASW active.

Anyone who says they play on ultra in vr with a 970 is just supplying sothis with their wares.

I honestly even doubt those who claim they run this game at ultra and higher upsampling with a 1080 even, maybe titan or upcoming 1080ti, maybe.
I honestly don't think we will see a card capable of maxing ED in vr before the 1180, or even 1280.

I see no reason to upgrade this cycle, I will just stay with my medium to high settings until something that is at least 60-70% better than the 980ti.
 

Eminor

Eminor
Note that I think the defaults settings have now "shifted up". i.e. The highest in-game VR graphics quality setting before 2.2 was actually lower quality than after 2.2 dropped. Also if people have set ASW or made other settings tweaks, then this could account for differences in people saying a particular card can give 90 fps or not. Bit of a potential for conflicting info here...
 

TorTorden_VR

T
Eminor said:
Note that I think the defaults settings have now "shifted up". i.e. The highest in-game VR graphics quality setting before 2.2 was actually lower quality than after 2.2 dropped. Also if people have set ASW or made other settings tweaks, then this could account for differences in people saying a particular card can give 90 fps or not. Bit of a potential for conflicting info here...
Click to expand...

This was well known.

The old high was moved to a medium label.
And we got new higher setting for both high and an ultra.
 

Globusdiablo

Globusdiablo
Sanderson said:
If a 1070 is faster than 980ti then why won't a 1070 handle ED on Ultra settings? IIRC people were reporting running ED in VR on Ultra with a 980ti, so it makes no sense that a slightly faster GPU wouldn't do the same.

Either I'm daft (most likely) or a lot of people were greatly exaggerating their performance on a 980ti?
Click to expand...

Two things. I highy doubt anyone was running E: D on ultra at 90 fps with a 980ti IN VR. SS or no.

And....

FD bumped up the VR requirements with the release of the 10XX series Nvidia cards, so you will actually be seing worse performance if you try running E: D with the same settings after this latest update.

Fly safe
 

Meanstreak242

M
han said:
so its always 90 fps with 1.3 supersampling?
Click to expand...

I've not seen any drops below 90 since. (Also, pay attention to your render distance, i have mine at about 40% roughly. It can make quite a large difference).

Of course, different systems, drivers, software running in the background and so on, your mileage may vary.
 

shadragon

shadragon
No video card today can handle Elite on Ultra with all the bells and whistles turned on. Even a Titan X falls short.

VR needs a lot of resources and the GPU guys are still catching up.
 

Lowe1978

L
shadragon said:
No video card today can handle Elite on Ultra with all the bells and whistles turned on. Even a Titan X falls short.

VR needs a lot of resources and the GPU guys are still catching up.
Click to expand...

Err, I'm playing on Rift with an i5 4690k/GTX1080 and I run everything to max and 1.5 SS with FXAA. I'm either getting 45fps when ASW is on or 90fps when it's not needed. I'm seeing very little (read none) artifacting so I'm pretty happy all things considered.
 

shadragon

shadragon
Lowe1978 said:
Err, I'm playing on Rift with an i5 4690k/GTX1080 and I run everything to max and 1.5 SS with FXAA. I'm either getting 45fps when ASW is on or 90fps when it's not needed. I'm seeing very little (read none) artifacting so I'm pretty happy all things considered.
Click to expand...
The dream is 2.0 SS with everything in Ultra, AA and all the other graphics switches on. No GPU can do 90 fps in Elite at this time.

I have a 980Ti and run it at 1.5 SS with no issues. Looks quite good, but does drop to 45 fps in stations. The photo-realistic holodeck level of quality is many years away.
 

BaronVonDoon

B
I have a 980ti, I run nearly everything on high, with SS at .65 and HMD image quality set at 2.0, with ASW set at auto, I get a steady 45fps in stations and other busy areas, and it's a steady 90 out in space. I do get the very occasional judder, but it doesn't really detract, it looks great and text looks great too(with a hud colour change).

After much fiddling and reading about, I found lower SS and higher HMD gives a much better image
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom