With the new releases this month of the gtx 1080ti and the new 7th gen i7 how long until prices adjust and stock hits shelves should I wait before building a new high end gaming rig.
I was looking at a 6700k i7 but will probably go the 7700k now and looking at a gtx 1080 8gb rather than the titan.
Obviously looking at best performance value for money but don't want to wait too long so looking for that sweet spot in pricing and performance
Best bang for buck (with future upgradability in mind) seems to be a H170, Core i5-6500 and RX 470 (4GB).
That's assuming availability and RRP prices.
You could probably step up to a RX 480 (8GB) for an extra $50 if you snag some of the great deals we've had last quarter.
I think the GTX 1070 is balanced, but not really great in terms of bang for buck. And the GTX 1080 is an outright rip-off.
I don't find it meaningful upgrading from a Core i5-6500 to a 6600K or even a 6700K.
Not unless you really need the extra processing performance (eg Rendering), it might be a much better value to get a 6 core/12 thread AMD RyZen chip in 2017 with a new AM4+ motherboard.
vvvRANT
Speaking of AMD, there are also Vega chips coming in 2017.
If history repeats itself, the RX 490 is going to be hell of a chip, and priced around $399.
Compared to the GTX 1070, it should be a lot more powerful in terms of hardware but alot "weaker" in terms of driver optimisation.
But AMD will slowly polish its driver problem to get more out of the hardware, and it should be slightly weaker than the GTX 1080 in the future.
AMD Fans call it "FineWine"… I think its stupid, because drivers/software/optimisations are just as important (or MORE) than the hardware itself.
However, AMD seems to be in a great position with its ReLive Driver update, Vulkan, and DirectX 12.
We saw a similar thing happen with AMD's HD7950/HD7970 chips against Nvidia's GTX 680.
And a similar thing with AMD's R9 290 compared to Nvidia's GTX 780.
Both AMD cards were more powerful on paper, but in-game Nvidia won most of the time because of efficiency.
But as drivers got better and better for AMD (because they sucked really bad on release), the hardware was utilised more efficiently.
Then the AMD cards surpassed their Nvidia counterparts.
As far as architecture efficiency goes;
Fermi ~ Kepler < GCN 1 ~ GCN 1.1 < Maxwell ~ Polaris (GCN 2) < Pascal ~ Vega (GCN 2.1)
Whats monitor resolution will you be using? That's the key factor in GTX1070 vs 1080 vs 1080Ti decision. Anything under a 4k monitor go for the 1070.
I have a 28" 4k monitor
I expect prices to go a bit higher. AUD/USD will most likely test the 70 cents barrier.
I don't expect the US Federal Reserve to lower their interest rates in the near future. It's gonna go up and up. Trump will sacrifice the environment for more growth.
And Kaby Lake has released and demonstrated almost zero reason to upgrade.
7700k and z270 boards are out and pricing is around the same. Although the improvements are hardly impressive the pricing makes them a reasonable option.
Well that's disappointing. 1080ti wasn't announced at CES and kaby lake focuses on power efficiency and integrated graphics but almost everyone who is buying a high end CPU will have a dedicated graphics card.
That'd be the gtx 1070 - but the 1080 is better from that POV than the Ti. But then you get more GPU powahs so meh ;)