you guys normally set auto update driver using geforce experience or manually update it?

why not go for lower card 970 or 980 its not that bad if gaming for 1080p

980ti kinda overkill lol at least for now . Unless you are talking about 1440p (just nice) or 4k gaming (need to lower some settings)

well if you are talking about 1080p at 144hz monitor I suppose its fine but who wants to be stuck at that resolution ?
once you got a taste of  WQHD or UHD its hard going back

Also , I have to disagree on future proofing graphic card .  With the likes of NVIDIA 780 being outperform or same by 970 , the gap for new card would be higher .  Not to mention the introduction of HBM ram I think I probably have to change cards every year 

Funny thing is for processor I'm still stuck with sandybridge cant see any reason to upgrade apart from  power efficiency  , ddr4

gsync ips 1440p monitor finally in malaysia

27" XB270HU-IPS RM2599 at Idealtech .... Sigh, if only IPMART would refund my money as soon as possible would grab this monitor without any hesitation

But I'm going to be frank with everyone here, the 3.5GB vram thing? It's not an issue. Honestly, it's been blown out of propotion. Stop looking at just numbers and charts, they cannot tell the whole story.

Concluding

Our product reviews in the past few months and its conclusion are not any different opposed to everything that has happened in the past few days, the product still performans similar to what we have shown you as hey .. it is in fact the same product. The clusterfuck that Nvidia dropped here is simple, they have not informed the media or their customers about the memory partitioning and the challenges they face. Overall you will have a hard time pushing any card over 3.5 GB of graphics memory usage with any game unless you do some freaky stuff. The ones that do pass 3.5 GB mostly are poor console ports or situations where you game in Ultra HD or DSR Ultra HD rendering. In that situation I cannot guarantee that your overall experience will be trouble free, however we have a hard time detecting and replicating the stuttering issues some people have mentioned.


The Bottom line

Utilizing graphics memory after 3.5 GB can result into performance issues as the card needs to manage some really weird stuff in memory, it's nearly load-balancing. But fact remains it seems to be handling that well, it’s hard to detect and replicate oddities. If you unequivocally refuse to accept the situation at hand, you really should return your card and pick a Radeon R9 290X or GeForce GTX 980. However, if you decide to upgrade to a GTX 980, you will be spending more money and thus rewarding Nvidia for it. Until further notice our recommendation on the GeForce GTX 970 stands as it was, for the money it is an excellent performer. But it should have been called a 3.5 GB card with a 512MB L3 GDDR5 cache buffer.

"priority access", looks like nvidia getting a taste of your own medicine. 

Looks like MSI 980Ti Gaming is in the local market now. RM3339 RSP. lol.

On the other hand, the EVGA 980Ti Classy was sold out within 2 hours on Newegg.
Didn't even have a chance to add into cart.

The EVGA GeForce GTX 980 Ti Hydro Copper is designed for watercooling enthusiasts. The Hydro Copper waterblock is a full-cover block that spans the entire length of the graphics card, complete with a swappable inlet/outlet for compatibility with custom watercooling solutions.

It is also factory overclocked, with a 1140MHz base speed and 1228MHz boost speed.

Retailers don't need to earn meh?

Basically EVGA Hydro is a reference card with EK waterblock whereby MSI Gaming is fully custom non reference card

If these alleged rumors hold true Pascal is looking like its going to be a massive leap in performance compared to leap in performance. If the full fat GP100 chip is going to have 17 billion transistors then that is over double the amount compared to GM200 and over 3 times the amount compared to GM204. Also 32 GB VRAM!? I can't wait to see what kind of setup you're going to need to even come close using up that much frame buffer. Also Pascal will be utilizing TSMC's all new 16nm FinFet + technology allowing for 65% higher speed, 2 times the density and 70% less power than that of 28HPM which is Maxwells production process. So expect to see even lower power usage, ultra low temperatures and cards finally breaking the 2GHZ barrier on air. Personally I was on the fence with upgrading to two 980 Tis from my 980s but I think Im just going to sit and wait a bit longer!
What do you guys think?

With Pascal GPU, NVIDIA will return to the HPC market with new Tesla products. Maxwell, although great in all regards was deprived of necessary FP64 hardware and focused only on FP32 performance. This meant that the chip was going to stay away from HPC markets while NVIDIA offered their year old Kepler based cards as the only Tesla based options. Pascal will not only improve FP64 performance but also feature mixed precision that allows NVIDIA cards to compute at 16-bit at double the accuracy of FP32. This means that the cards will enable three tiers of compute at FP16, FP32 and FP64. NVIDIA’s far future Volta GPU will further leverage the compute architecture as it is already planned to be part of the SUMMIT and Sierra super computers that feature over 150 PetaFlops of compute performance and launch in 2017 which indicates the launch of Volta just a year after Pascal for the HPC market.

I tested FreeSync monitor, and I couldn't product screen tearing.

Hori crap. I'm sure skylinelover will like this.  

Well,the card might run out of processing power even before reaching its max vRAM capacity,but since "add a huge jump in performance",you'll never know.

32GB is for their Quadro cards.

8GB is pretty much a given for the next x70/x80 cards, whatever Nvidia is going to call them (1080 would be hilarious).
Question now is, if Hynix has enough stock left for Nvidia or not since AMD will get he major bulk of HBM2 in Q1 2016.

Obviously things can change very quickly, it's business after all.

Except that HBM2 is a drop-in replacement for HBM1 on AMD's Fury parts, so even before Greenland arrives, AMD could get a Fury-X revision to market with 8, or more gigs of HBM memory. The interposer work is done for AMD and its the bottom chip in the HBM stack that hosts the control logic for the HBM die stacks above, and the interposer memory traces for HBM2 are not increasing. A Fury-XA revision may be available just as the HBM2 memory stacks arrive hot off that final assembly line. That and some Tweaks could put Fury over the Ti's performance metrics, and maybe with process refinements and some more overclocking on any Fury-X revisions. AMD has exclusivity on that lines process, and its HBM, Nvidia has got to take the available to all standards and make a line of its own, outside of AMD's line that has AMD's name on it!

that is the end of the days of using long ass big ass card

guess i selling off my huge casing 4 the new drawer casing then

You can deduce the difference between double precision floating point (FP64) and single precision floating point (FP32) from the name. FP64 results are significantly more precise than FP32. This added precision in the results is crucial for scientific research, professional applications and servers. And less so in video games. Even though FP64 is used in games in a very limited subset of functions, the bulk of video game and graphics code relies on FP32. As such this added precision in turn requires more capable hardware which would net higher costs by increasing the size of the chip while simultaneously increasing power consumption.

So, since the GTX Titan Black has a peak of 5.1 TFLOPS single precision floating point performance, a 3:1 ratio means that double precision compute goes down to 1.7 TFLOPs. And with AMD’s Hawaii XT which has a peak of 5.6 TFLOPs of FP32 compute performance, a 2:1 ratio means that it will go down to a more respectable 2.8 TFLOPs of FP64 compute performance. This advantage in FP64 compute is why AMD succeeded in capturing the top spot in the Green500 list of the world’s most power efficient supercomputers with it’s Hawaii XT powered FirePro S9150 server graphics cards.

The FP32 to FP64 ratio in Nvidia’s GM204 and GM206 Maxwell GPUs, powering the GTX 980, 970 and 960 is 32:1. Which means the GPU will be 32 times slower when dealing with FP64 intensive operations compared to FP32. As we’ve discussed above this is mostly OK for video games but downright unacceptable for professional applications.

If Nvidia’s GM200 does end up with a similarly weak double precision compute capablity the card will have very limited uses in the professional market. However in theory the reduction of FP64 hardware resources on the chip should make it more power efficient in games and FP32 compute work. Even though I’m not entirely convinced that it’s a worthwhile trade off. Especially for a card that is poised to go into the next generation Qaudro flagship compute cards.

With Pascal GPU, NVIDIA will return to the HPC market with new Tesla products. Maxwell, although great in all regards was deprived of necessary FP64 hardware and focused only on FP32 performance. This meant that the chip was going to stay away from HPC markets while NVIDIA offered their year old Kepler based cards as the only Tesla based options. Pascal will not only improve FP64 performance but also feature mixed precision that allows NVIDIA cards to compute at 16-bit at double the accuracy of FP32. This means that the cards will enable three tiers of compute at FP16, FP32 and FP64. NVIDIA’s far future Volta GPU will further leverage the compute architecture as it is already planned to be part of the SUMMIT and Sierra super computers that feature over 150 PetaFlops of compute performance and launch in 2017 which indicates the launch of Volta just a year after Pascal for the HPC market.

One thing bro, don't quote wccftech too much. Their articles are all opinions (yet they think it's facts).

I believe it  would be a late Q2 or mid-Q3 2016 release, just my estimated guess following Bethesda's fiscal release. They have their Q1 covered with Fallout 4 already.

If all goes well and Nvidia stays on track, Pascal should come out by Q3 2016. There are rumors circulating that Nvidia will release big Pascal first, as oppose to what they did with Kepler and Maxwell. Just a rumor though, depends on the market as always.

If all goes well and Nvidia stays on track, Pascal should come out by Q3 2016. There are rumors circulating that Nvidia will release big Pascal first, as oppose to what they did with Kepler and Maxwell. Just a rumor though, depends on the market as always.

Yup.
And remember all the claims they made about Kepler before launch... lol, many of which is untrue other than the "state-the-obvious" remarks.
It makes sense, 50-60% is quite similar to that of Kepler from Fermi and Maxwel from Kepler. HBM while interesting, I don't think we will see most of its potential until 2017, when DX12 and Vulkan is much more matured. NVLink apparently will be focused for supercomputers only, not sure if it will make it to the consumer grade cards or not? There's no confirmation on this.

Yeah, there is a rumor circulating around that PK100 will make the scenes first, instead of PK104. I honestly... doubt it?

Coming to the final pillar then, we have a brand new feature being introduced for Pascal: NVLink. NVLink, in a nutshell, is NVIDIA’s effort to supplant PCI-Express with a faster interconnect bus. From the perspective of NVIDIA, who is looking at what it would take to allow compute workloads to better scale across multiple GPUs, the 16GB/sec made available by PCI-Express 3.0 is hardly adequate. Especially when compared to the 250GB/sec+ of memory bandwidth available within a single card. PCIe 4.0 in turn will eventually bring higher bandwidth yet, but this still is not enough. As such NVIDIA is pursuing their own bus to achieve the kind of bandwidth they desire.

The end result is a bus that looks a whole heck of a lot like PCIe, and is even programmed like PCIe, but operates with tighter requirements and a true point-to-point design. NVLink uses differential signaling (like PCIe), with the smallest unit of connectivity being a “block.” A block contains 8 lanes, each rated for 20Gbps, for a combined bandwidth of 20GB/sec. In terms of transfers per second this puts NVLink at roughly 20 gigatransfers/second, as compared to an already staggering 8GT/sec for PCIe 3.0, indicating at just how high a frequency this bus is planned to run at.

Multiple blocks in turn can be teamed together to provide additional bandwidth between two devices, or those blocks can be used to connect to additional devices, with the number of bricks depending on the SKU. The actual bus is purely point-to-point – no root complex has been discussed – so we’d be looking at processors directly wired to each other instead of going through a discrete PCIe switch or the root complex built into a CPU. This makes NVLink very similar to AMD’s Hypertransport, or Intel’s Quick Path Interconnect (QPI). This includes the NUMA aspects of not necessarily having every processor connected to every other processor.

But the rabbit hole goes deeper. To pull off the kind of transfer rates NVIDIA wants to accomplish, the traditional PCI/PCIe style edge connector is no good; if nothing else the lengths that can be supported by such a fast bus are too short. So NVLink will be ditching the slot in favor of what NVIDIA is labeling a mezzanine connector, the type of connector typically used to sandwich multiple PCBs together (think GTX 295). We haven’t seen the connector yet, but it goes without saying that this requires a major change in motherboard designs for the boards that will support NVLink. The upside of this however is that with this change and the use of a true point-to-point bus, what NVIDIA is proposing is for all practical purposes a socketed GPU, just with the memory and power delivery circuitry on the GPU instead of on the motherboard.

DIA is touting is that the new connector and bus will improve both energy efficiency and energy delivery. When it comes to energy efficiency NVIDIA is telling us that per byte, NVLink will be more efficient than PCIe – this being a legitimate concern when scaling up to many GPUs. At the same time the connector will be designed to provide far more than the 75W PCIe is spec’d for today, allowing the GPU to be directly powered via the connector, as opposed to requiring external PCIe power cables that clutter up designs.

With all of that said, while NVIDIA has grand plans for NVLink, it’s also clear that PCIe isn’t going to be completely replaced anytime soon on a large scale. NVIDIA will still support PCIe – in fact the blocks can talk PCIe or NVLink – and even in NVLink setups there are certain command and control communiques that must be sent through PCIe rather than NVLink. In other words, PCIe will still be supported across NVIDIA's product lines, with NVLink existing as a high performance alternative for the appropriate product lines. The best case scenario for NVLink right now is that it takes hold in servers, while workstations and consumers would continue to use PCIe as they do today.

haswell benefit

if u want more
faster encoding via the huge dmi bandwidth.
sata 3 native ports
usb 3 ports

skylake benefits
NVME ssd
native usb 3.1 ports ( not sure just assuming at this point)

skylake still deciding should i go nvme. definately no obvious gain other then watching ssd benchmarks.
zero benefit on gaming to be honest.

usb 3.1 seriously is there any device out there thats taking advantage of its direct access to dmi gen 1 speeds??

nvlink  its not something ure gonna see beneficial on daily commercial gaming setups.
it will how ever open up to a possible octa titan pascal. also with such tech i am pretty sure nvidia has solve some multi gpu scaling here.
also interesting part about nvlink is .. the ability of gpu to access ram and vram of the other gpu directly if i am not mistaken.
the tech is gonna solve current issues with multi gpu.

go get yourself a 144hz IPS monitor . You wont regret it man , game that you play feels really buttery smooth without sacrificing colors and viewing angle . I have not experience g-sync or freesync but 144hz is really worth it  provided you have a decent gpu

Think of it like having the COD esque movement feeling  when playing non COD games even on RTS or games like Diablo 3 .

Cannonlake wait till hair drop wont come out so soon pulled the trigger from lynfield 2 haswell last february with no regret haha

As 4 pascal, i still can hold out my kepler till Q3 next year if everything went according 2 plan. Being 30s means i no longer able 2 buy gpu every year unlike student days using sugar daddy money. Haha.

P/s : having 1500 per month used 2 be heaven like being student but now salary double that not enough 2 cover myself probably need quad only enough and dont start talking about after having children with me

That is unless i live malay way of 5 children with low grade milk powder hahahaha i know my 15 yrs longest serving malay supervisor ever with slightly higher salary than me already working in 2 years can support his 5 kids comfortably and maybe with some help from the G perhaps aiks

Moogle Stiltzkin
Well depending task but generally clock to clock

haswell DC has 10% single thread gain
Skylake has around 5 percent to haswell.

so 15.5% faster. Also comparing ivybridge to haswell is unfair as it depends on the task. Things like avx/avx2 encoding .. haswell is about 20-30 percent faster.

Skylake real benefit is the 20 pcie lane. So u can run sli with nvme. Also now mobile gpus can have either sli or native 16x single gpu with m.2 pcie ssd.

The cons is ddr4 is too immature. Any platform that has ddr3/ddr4 dimm slots.. dont expect too much from it. Same like p55.
DDR4 atm too immature. Generally i hoping for 4800 CL18-21

but expect rams to evolve slower this time since most rams in the world nowadays is either micron, samsung or sk hynix.
The later two seems to be concentrating on die stacking.

An update from sweclockers.com has revealed the code name of the next-next-gen AMD Radeon R9 400 Series GPUs. It goes without saying that the naming is pretty much irrelevant at such an early stage. The revealed codename for the series is Arctic Islands and the actual GPU name could be of any island present there. There is currently zero information regarding the Radeon R9 400 Series apart from the fact it will be based on a 20nm or lower node (most probably 16/14nm FinFET).

Hello guys..

Hope to get some opinion here..currently using strix980.. And a 1080 monitor..
Selling my 980 off and upgrading to 980ti? Or get the acer predator?

Im leaning toward the monitor as my current one isnt great.. If i get the 980ti , could be a waste using it on a dell nom gsync monitor right?

Problem with Acer? Great panel, nice tech. But the cheapest ass looking glossy plastic and bezels as thick as 2008 monitors. Oh and don't get me started on the QC.... 
Over RM2k+ for a monitor, it is only right to expect something much better. It barely costs half as much to produce the monitor.

This is why I want Dell and LG to come up with their Gsync monitors. LG already makes their own IPS panels anyway, their curved screens has been doing pretty decent considering how niche that market is. So what the hell is stopping them?

Panel Coating
Light AG coating

Glossy black bezel and stand, some red trim on base

Anti-Glare Coating (AG)

The most common type of protective coating is ‘Anti-Glare’ (AG). This is often described as a matte coating as it is non-reflective to the user since it diffuses rather than reflects ambient light. It provides a method for manufacturers to avoid glare on the viewing surface from other light sources and has been used in the LCD monitor market for many years since the first TFT displays started to emerge.

This matte coating is included as an outer polarizing later which has been coarsened by mechanical or chemical processes. This achieves a surface coating which is not smooth and so can diffuse ambient light rather than reflect it. What is particularly important to understand is that this AG coating can be applied to panels with varying thicknesses, which has an impact on the anti-glare properties, but also on the underlying image of the screen. Where the coating is particularly thick and aggressive, the image from the screen can deteriorate as the light being emitted is also affected. This can have some impact on contrast and colour vibrancy and the perceived image can sometimes look dull as a result. Sharpness degradation can also occur in some extreme cases where AG coating is too thick. Users may also sometimes see the graininess of the coating, particularly when viewing white or light backgrounds. This can be particularly distracting for office work and images can look grainy or dirty if the coating is too aggressive. I would point out that not everyone would even notice this at all, and many users are perfectly happy with their screens even where aggressive AG is used. It’s just something to be wary of in case you have found problems with image quality in the past or are susceptible to it.

In other cases, AG coating is applied but it is light and far less obtrusive. The polarizer is less rough and has a lower haze value. Sometimes users refer to it as “semi-gloss” to distinguish the difference between these and the heavy AG coatings. This provides anti-glare properties but does not result in the grainy appearance of images. It is not a fully glossy solution though.

AG coating has long been the choice for nearly all professional-grade displays as well, helping to avoid issues with reflections and external light sources which are vital for colour critical work. In addition it should be noted that AG coating is less susceptible to dust, grease and dirt marks which can become an issue on reflective glossy coating alternatives.