Mana tahu you're gonna be painting the casing.

actually any cards RMA also sakit & pedih

Awwww, anyway here https://www.facebook.com/goldfries.fanpage/...20457247980790/

Tried Fury X on Thermaltake Core V1 - Horrible experience, the card is compact but the radiator block is huge and the tubes are long and tough.

at least doesnt need to be hard to begin with...nobody wants 2 times the "sakit & pedih".

Haha. He is the official one la.

EVGA is international warranty ?
i am thinking to get one from USA Amazon.

can i know what atx pc case u guys using? want to find case with good airflow, room for cable management. my bitfenix neos small liao. rm200 budget enough?

Hello, guys, i middle in stuck of Ultra Wide monitor or 4K G-sync one, if u own a 980ti, which one will u guy prefer for gaming?

1440p ips gsync. ASUS PG279Q.

Acer 4K 60hz G-Sync if you need it now, Asus PG278AQ 4K 60Hz IPS G-Sync if you can wait for it to release.

Put it this way: if it was me, and I've never seen 4K before, an UltraWide would be okay. If I've seen 4K, it'll be hard on me to go back to anything of lower resolution. Even if they're 144Hz. It's no small feat to get a game to run at 144 frames per second, and it may require you to drop game settings from Ultra or Very High to lower, and personally I dont game any lower than those two settings. Personal preference of course.

Also personal preference, if you had to go immersive gaming, that Ultrawide is better than putting three monitors together for Surround. Personally to me, bezels on monitors takes away immersion.

Most important of all, whichever monitor you choose, get G-sync.

I am dealing with supplier to get stock info of Acer XB280HK actually.
After few day on review researching, i found most people claiming that ultrawide is actually more immersive in gaming than 4k, despite 4k is higher resolution, but required more house power to push it at 60p,
also i worrying about the Windows and program scaling issue, do u facing it?

I will not consider QHD at 28" as it is just about 30% boost of image from 1080p.
144hz? never seems before, but i think current using 60hz monitor is quite satisfy for me d.
I am just quite curious how G-Sync is performing during i playing a 4K game, is it just a gimmic, hard to say.
So i gonna go for a G-Sync this time to taste it.

Your single 980Ti can run 4K at 35-60fps depending on game. Even as the framerate drops below 30, up to 24fps, G-Sync compensates to give a smooth experience. Believe me, I am more particular about settings on Ultra or Very High, I punish my system hard just so that they run at the ultimate settings, and even at a single Titan X card, I get similar results: 35-60fps, depending on games, with G-sync assisting on frame smoothing.

Scaling issue is nonexistant, either set DPI in Windows to 150% and/or in browsers to 150% and you're set.

Ultrawide is immersive, but I am particular about my IQ (image quality). The way the games render the frames at the wide edges means that it looks stretched. IF you're okay with that, then go for it. I dont like stretched look, even when it is only at the periphery of my vision. Personally I'd only go ultrawide if ultrawide means curved screen that completely envelopes my around 180 degrees without stretching at the wide edges. Think of it as a half circle 180 degrees display with me in the middle of it. Then THAT is immersive. The current immersion right now to me, isn't immersive enough. Your mileage may vary, you may like what's available in terms of ultrawides one, but personally it is not for me. The only way to determine this is to experience it yourself. That is kinda hard to do here since stores here dont do demos or dont stock them unless preordered (the sad state of purchasing high end items in this country), or the next best thing: YouTube reviews.

G-Sync is definitely not a gimmick, it works. For example, Assassin's Creed Unity has a broken SLI profile. I have three Titan Xs. With SLI profile broken in that game, I'm stuck with the game harnessing only a single Titan X horsepower, and with settings all the way up on Ultra on ALL settings, I get 25-40fps depending on how thick the crowd is in the game. A slight overclock would boost that to 30-50fps. At a normal 4K monitor (my Asus PQ321Q), once it drops below 30, you'll see fluid movement goes down to appreciable stutters, and destroys immersion (yes, immersion is also dependant on fluid smooth framerates). Switch over to my Acer 4K G-sync, stutter totally gone. G-sync compensates for it. The only reason why I still keep that Asus PQ321Q is because it is an IGZO display that portray images better than a Premium TN panel on the Acer 4K G-Sync panel.

If I were in your shoes, I'd head around and see if I can see these panels for myself and evaluate. You can hear me blab and talk about all this, but nothing beats seeing it for yourself. I had skeptics before being wary about my recommendations about G-Sync, my rig was at the most recent PIKOM PC Fair with my Acer 4K G-Sync at one of the booth there, and it basically shuts the naysayer up when they saw it in action. The only thing they bitch about (PC gamers, being the entitled lot that they are, will always bitch and complain no matter what) is the price (of the monitor and the cost of the hardware to run it). But you pay for the price of a good G-Sync experience, you cant get something for nothing/free.

Haha yeah

My Raven RVZ01 build complete. 980Ti and Devil Canyon in a small chassis with CPU watercooled with Corsair H55. Max temp around 75C.

"The Ampersand"

Is 90hz 4k ips g-sync too much to ask? I hope that pc monitors can get 4k at 90hz as standard in the future.

As my preference right now, i want to game at above 60fps. So my choice is 1440p ips monitor.

Depends on your level of tolerance when it comes to in-game quality settings. IF you can live with Medium, 90fps is certainly achievable. I try not to drop any lower than Very High or Ultra.

IF you meant 90fps at Ultra or Very High, the game either needs a good scalable SLI profile or was never really graphics intensive in the first place. OR overclock your cards to the highest you can get.

stable 4k/60Hz already so difficult & 1440p need at least dual gpu to satisfied enthusiast users. i personally still prefer single gpu while waiting gsync module to get mature 1st & wait win10 too.

Speaking of hz, this is the way I feel.

30 to 60 = Huge, day and night difference.
60 to 72/75 = Slightly noticeable, not much of a difference.
60 to 90/95 = Noticeable enough, but not at a point where I'd call it very significant.
60 to 120 = Quite a significant difference, but not as huge as going from 30 to 60.
120 to 144 = Barely noticeable to be quite honest.

Honestly I feel that 120hz is the very sweet spot for all types of games right now. 60 is still a standard, but I really feel that the industry should make that push to 120hz once and for all.

As said by a few here, we're still not at a state where a single card can push every recent AAA game to 144hz even at 1080p. I don't think that is a possibility until another 3 or 4 years tbh, but it entirely depends on how game development will evolve from here on out as well. Multi-cards is possible, but then SLI has its own set of issues that it needs to fix as well.

This post has been edited by SSJBen: Jul 2 2015, 08:35 PM

at least u're not linus always said human can only see 23/30 fps shit.

Who is linus?
Why would he say that?