And combined they would still be less powerful than this card.

​
Enjoy your 720p, 30fps gaming

Near £400 for a card that isn't even the flagship is extortionate. Trouble is, nvidia are so far ahead of AMD they can get away with it.

Last gen prices maybe? 970 was £260 at launch, in fact I got an EVGA SC 970 with Far Cry 4 for £260. I'd expect a small bump in prices for the extra ram, but most of this price difference is because nvidia have no competition.

​

I bought this card from here and in some games it works ok but in others it wont work to its full potential and usage will be at about 40% or 50% measured by afterburner. There are a lot posts on nVidia forums and tomshardware about similar things across the whole 1070 and 1080 range so not just this particular brand. I just wondered if anyone who bought this one as I did is seeing low usage too in some games?

Does anybody know if this will fit a Corsair 250D case? Or what 1070 cards fit? Thanks

I saw a pic of the 1070 extreme on r/PCMR and youre not kidding the size of the thing is huge, a lot of people were saying you would get GPU sagging it was that extremely big.

Just 1 question if you dont mind, why the Zotac in the 1070 range, it seemed pretty cool in testing but any other reasons why you'd go straight for this. I am really thinking about ditching the rx 480 now and going the route youre going down instead.

Prices on the rise again on the 1070, amazon have increased the price of the MSI armour model 3 times in last 24 hours, now at £490! Way to go amazon!

The Gamerock Premium cooler seems to be the dogs **** so far, have played Just Cause 3 and Battlefield Hardline and the fans have not been noticeable so far.

That premium one is obviously a better chip grade tho, but agree with the temps being key

It's worth noting that buying any 1070/1080, aside from the silicon lottery, you're basically buying the same thing with a different look. They ALL overclock to mostly the same top speeds +/- 30-50mhz at most.
I can guarantee you almost 100% that if you buy an aftermarket cooled card at 359.99 that features base and boost clocks that are the same as the founder's edition, it WILL overclock to and be 24/7 stable at frequencies matching any £400+ 'OC' version of a card, as none of them have a base clock higher than 1700mhz out of the box.
It literally comes down to looks and how well the cooler performs on a cooling:noise ratio

I'm frankly worried about power consumption.

The 470 and 480 are power hogs at the supposed budget range.

170W at peak for the 480. If you throw in 60% more cooling requirements, we're talking 272 Watts.

The cooling solutions for the 480 are already stressed, it seems we are heading back to the same old same old with AMD cards.

Bit early to say but could still be an option, pricing is key.Hopefully they get that right.

I mean, what do you expect from the 490? If the 480 is any indication, the 490 is going to barely compete with the 1070.

(4096 shaders versus 2560 == 160% the performance of the 480).

https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Zotac/GeForce_GTX_1080_Amp/23.html

The 1080 is almost exactly double the 480... And the 1070 is nearly 44% higher straight away.

https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/ASUS/RX_480_STRIX_OC/23.html

That's before OC, where the 1070 that is seeing around 14% gains while some 480 cards are seeing 3-7% gains.

I just don't see the 490 competing very well.

Yes I am aware of all that, just not convinced it would be much of an issue with a decent card like the 1070.However I am hoping to get more details and possible pre-order the RX490 in the next few weeks as I believe it is an October release date.Waited this long with my trusty GTX660,another month or so will not hurt.

Your monitor will not support the FreeSync functionality while using a Geforce card.

Similarly, the G-Sync monitor will not support a FreeSync enabled card.

You absolutely can use the monitor for the 1070 card, you will simply not get the dynamic sync tech.

You may need to consider getting a Dell 27 inch g sync monitor and selling your Asus monitor?

I have pre-ordered the XFX RX 480 on amazon.I am thinking of buying the 1070 ( as i want to do gaming at 1440p however my asus 27 inch Asus monitor is FreeSync.I still might go for the 1070 (ZOTAC ZT-P10700B) as i am not fully convinced by arguments advising an amd card only if you have a freesync monitor.So my only worry is really if the Zotac will fit in my case.I also had to return a faulty Sapphire RX480 last week which was my first experience of an AMD graphics card.If the Zotac 1070 drops below £400 i will be hitting the buy button.

Well the Netherlands is a lot closer and cheaper to post to than Hong kong which is 6000 miles away that's for sure, im a online retailer and have posted all over the world but Asia is one area i don't sell to as the shipping costs are unacceptable to my customers.

I have mailed medium sized packages to the western Europe for as little as £!2 so it's a lot more cost effective to deal with European RMA bases.
As to Palit i have lived in hong kong ,Macau and Shenzhen CN for over 7 years now and Palit are normally at the bottom of the list for people's hardware list whether there western or Chinese.

If you have ever been to the golden computer Arcade (lived 10 minutes away for 3 months ) in Sham Shui Po which is the largest Computer center in HK or the wan chai computer center (lived 5 minues away in Causeway bay) on HK island (2nd largest) or even the the Huaqiangbei Commercial Street in Shenzhen which is probably the biggest Electronic retail area (lived 40mins away in Longgang) in the world you will see very few Palit cards on display as they sell a lot less than the main brands because of there reputation for having poorer warranties even in Asia.

Personally i would much rather have 3- 5 years than 2 years of questionable guaranty depending on how good or bad the retailer you bought it off.
I used to buy powercolor here and while i was living in hong kong as they used to be normally £30 cheaper at the time than the main manufacturers but there warranty was so bad so they turned out to be a false economy as all three died in less than 2 years, so that's another company to stay clear of.
http://www.powercolor.com/us/support_warranty.asp
Try looking up any other country for the warranty page and it will appear blank.

EVGA have recently opened a RMA centre in UK

Zotac Rma Base is Hk year 3 to 5 of their warranty, year 1 and 2 is UK based. Got this info from zotac direct.

MSI is not UK based, it's based in Netherlands

That's the thing. It's nearly 20-30% better. Which makes it hit the 120-144hz refresh rates at 1440p. So yes, it is actually worth the difference... If you want a premium gaming experience ahead of the curve, you are going to pay for it.

Averaging less than 100fps is not ideal for me. I have a 144hz monitor because I thought I could hit or come close to the high refresh rate. G-Sync helps for removing the tears but that's all it does. To be fair I guess both those games haven't been optimized well enough. GTA5 hits low 100+ often. I think the 1070 is perfect for 1080p maxed out and on a high refresh rate monitor. 1440p is good but not great for 1070. 1080 isn't worth the extra £200 for better slightly better FPS. If they do a 1080ti, I'm sure it'll be the best choice for 1440p at maxed out settings.

I have to admit that I like the look of one of those curved monitors for my next one.

I got a asus pg279q (got lucky with one that didn't have issues) and my its a joy to play on. Likely will upgrade to 3440x1440 when the 120/144 variants come out along with a 1080ti.

I'm sure that's true. My next monitor will probably be a 120 or 144hz model but I'm happy with 60hz for now I think.

Once you experience smooth turning with 144hz, you realize what you are missing, even in games like WOW.

Blurry transitions hide the poor turning performance with most 60hz monitors, but once you try higher rate monitor with motion blur reduction (or strobelight technology to make it more like a CRT) it's hard to want to go back.

Trust me when I say you don't need to be a pro to enjoy the 120/144hz gaming experience.

It's not the same as going from 30->60 fps, but it's somewhat comparable.

I totally agree with that however most of those games where 120hz/144hz come into play have lower system requirements to make up for it e.g. DOTA 2 or CSGO.

Battlefield One could be another exception but only if you're planning on entering the pro competition circuit really.

Mostly agreed. At 1080p 60hz monitor, a 1060 is likely all you will need for a year or two.

However, if you want 120 or 144hz at 1080p, you will need a 1070 and maybe a 1080 depending on the game.

Personally i would not touch Palit with a virtual barge poll as the RMA base is in Hong Kong and i can assure you if it does fail it will cost over £30 just to mail it back there.There's a reason why Palit ,Sapphire,XFX and all the other lowest priced card manufacturers are the cheapest and that is because there warranties are more ropey and most don't have RMA bases in Europe where the infrastructure will cost them more to maintain.

You should also factor in the extra time you will be without your card for at least a month or more from a lot of people's experience if it fails and the retailer tells you to deal with the manufacture directly.
I myself got screwed over by ASUS and Ebuyer as i bought 2 Nexus 7 and they both suffered screen lifting so i tried to return them and ebuyer told me i had to deal with ASUS Instead even though i had them both less than a week.

The question you want to ask yourself is are you that desperate to save £30+ for the sake a good warranty on a item that normally costs £390+
You can pickup a MSI armour for £390 from amazon and MSI have a uk RMA base as well ...
https://www.amazon.co.uk/MSI-GeForce-GTX-1070-ARMOR/dp/B01GVHNW3W/ref=sr_1_69?s=computers&ie=UTF8&

OR a zotac for £400 which comes with a 5 year warranty compared to the Palit's 2 years.

I don't say the 1070 couldn't run at a locked 60fps. I said the 1070 is not overkill for 1080p if you want a locked 60fps. Coming from a 980 I know there were quite a few that dipped below 60fps and with V-sync on that meant I would drop back to 30fps. eg Crysis 3, GTA5, GTA 4 (crap port), Arkum knight. I would actually consider the 1070 to be the ideal card for a locked 60 at 1080p.

This thread is hilarious.

I'll buy a 1080 as soon as it's reasonable.
I'm gonna buy a PS4 Neo in time for Persona 5, if the price is right. By that time Uncharted 4 will be cheap. It'll be a nice 4k media player too.
If a game comes out on both PC and Console, I'll 100% buy on PC unless in the rare (RARE) instance that the Console version is substantially better than the PC version.

*mic drop*

I hated the Xbox One version of Titanfall. I'm actually really annoyed that they are skipping the PC on this weekend's Titanfall 2 beta.

Funny you should mention titanfall as thats the very game I bought a PC for having bought an Xb1 for it. Sub full HD, tearing, single digit fps at time, I thought nar, I enjoy games too much for this. Now im rocking a 980ti with 1440p 165hz gsync monitor and can play titanfall at above 100fps at all times, really is night and day.

Thats fair enough. I watch all my movies in 1080p and perfectly happy. I think vulcanproject concluded this argument well.

Yep. And why Fallout 4 runs like a sack of brown stuff and the Xbox One version of Titanfall was pretty much unplayable (IMHO).

And your missing my point, no one is claiming high res makes a bad game good. But the same game (bear in mind 95% of games are not exclusive) at higher res and frame rate is just objectively better.

Yer mate they can squeeze everything out, that's why just cause 3 runs at 15fps during explosions......

As someone who doesnt trade in games I can run a PC and save £20 on a new release and use those savings to maintain a top tier GPU every 18 months or so. So other than the intial outlay, my ongoing costs are roughly the same as they were on console, but im playing on a system which absolutely smashes the consoles to bits.

I paid 408 delivered for the Gamerock Premium from box.co.uk and it is absolutely brilliant.

Really? That would be why they're both releasing new consoles next year then I suppose?

What Apple do to their outdated tech is slowly kill it with software updates until it reaches a point where it is barely usable and your only option is either to upgrade or switch to a different platform. As a former owner of an iPad1 and iPhone 3G and a 3GS I found that one out the hard way.

But developers can utilize the every ounce of performance out of it. Similar to what Apple do to their outdated tech.

The 250-300 is fair starting point, but it's been as low as sub 200, even touching 150 at one point.

It's all relative. However, for the folks wanting the top 10% - they pay a huge premium for not much headway - this surely falls into that category.

I'm pleased to get out of that mindset, it's not good for the bank balance. Still managing on my 5-6 year old PC with the 2500k and GTX 570 here. Which cost me about 160 at the time as I got that on AVForums. ha.

Can't argue with any of that. I actually really dislike the current console generation. After predominately being a PC gamer in the Xbox/PS2 era, the 360 converted me almost completely to the console space. The PS4 and Xbox One have just sent me straight back to the PC again though.

Don't get why people bang on about consoles in threads like this.

To people who like cars then comparing a £20k Vauxhall Astra to a £100k Porsche 911 is ridiculous to the person with the 911. They would justifiably laugh.

If it doesn't bother you that much then you might claim the Vauxhall is as good as the Porsche, 'it does the same thing....'

Yes, it sort of does. But on the other hand, it totally doesn't. I'm happy for people to be satisfied with their Astra, just don't taunt the person with the Porsche as if you have gotten a better deal and think you're scoring points.

Because honestly it's just beyond dumb, albeit amusing.

A PS4 is a modified ATI 7870 with a locked OS and overpriced games. Would take a real dick to try and argue it as a viable alternative to a state of the art 2nd tier GPU....just saying.

How do you figure that? A PS4 still costs £250-£300 and at this point the tech in inside it is roughly 5-6 years old at minimum.

Spectrum ZX only...

For price? No it isn't.

For a start, the PS4 tech is 3 years old. The price has come down substantially.

Factor in the graphics card (+150) - then the RAM/SSD/MOBO/Tower/CPU.... I'm just pointing out the flaw about the power/price here. Disregarding everything else.

Yes it's more powerful, but I'd like a bet on the price/performance - the PS4 wins.

No because consoles use an APU and shared video memory (that's why the PS4 has 8GB DDR5) so the comparison is perfectly valid.

You have a good point. You could probably watch Suicide Squad in 4k tomorrow but you will be waiting for a long time for a 4k print of Apocalypse Now. Does that make Suicide Squad the better film and the superior cinematic experience though? Not even kind of close. I would take a 1080p copy of Alien, Blade Runner or The Godfather over some ****-poor 4k Marvel crap any day of the week.

Let's compare a full system, to a part - in the interest of fairness...

You could probably say the same about a 970 or a 1060 though to be fair.

Quantum Break is a game that I haven't tried on the PC. After looking forward to it for a long time, I played the XB1 version for roughly 4 hours at launch. When I went back the next day a bug had completely wiped my save file. At that point I decided I was done with it and haven't been back on it since then.

Not a bad deal!!

Again someone else who doesn't get it.

The original comment that I replied to was someone criticising someone else because they, rightly, pointed out that the user could buy an XBONE and a PS4 (together) for only a small amount more than what the graphics card costs. They used the output resolution of the consoles as their main basis for their criticism.

I'm merely pointing out that resolution is not everything and that it's the content that matters more. A decent game or film is always going to be decent regardless of how crisp the picture is.

Quantum Break without scaling, but the game is a total turd. GTA5 does reach some conditions where it is extremely demanding even in 1080p. Typically sunset and in the countryside. Most of the time though GTX1070 pummels everything at 1080p and is a card suited currently for 2560 x 1440.

Still, if you play at 1080p it'll just mean that a GTX1070 will likely be good enough for many years. I wouldn't consider it overkill.

Whilst this is a good card, anything over £300 IMO is a diminishing return.

Yes why buy premium anything. Anyone who buys a decent car, bike, camera, fridge, take your pick is clearly wrong because you can buy a cheaper alternative that has most of the functionality.

Is it really so hard to understand that someone wants a more premium experience than you do? Or have you never payed £20 for a steak since you can get a double cheeseburger from maccy's for £1.50 and hey its still beef right?

You're missing the point. I have 4K content that I have watched on the TV and, yes, it looks really nice, but I also watch a lot of other content on the same TV which, whilst not quite as aesthetically pleasing to the eyes, still looks good and in no way detracts from the movie that I'm watching on it.

The Martian was one of the first UHD BD movies available on the market and it looks great, but does that mean the film is any better for it than The Good, The Bad & The Ugly, which still remains one of the best rated films ever?

You don't need the best of the best to be able to enjoy content - you just need good content. And before you say why have a 4K TV then - it's because when I bought it I was in the market for a new TV and it was the same price as a 1080P model, which made the purchase a no-brainer.

GTA 5 is the only game that I haven't been able to 100% max out at 1440p on the 1070. The only other exception is that I had to disable Hairworks in The Witcher 3 but everything else was maxed on that game including AA/MSAA and Hairworks and PhysX are both ridiculously poorly optimised anyway.

Everything else that I have tried runs at a solid 60 frames or above maxed at 1440p and that includes the likes of Fallout 4, BF4, Battlefront, Dying Light, No Man's Sky etc.

Doom is absolutely incredible on it. Even 100% maxed at 1440p the 1070 is pushing well above a solid 100 fps in Vulkan mode.

Playing a 720p on a 4K completely defeat the purpose of owning a 4K TV. I bought a 4K TV and realised I cannot use it to its full potential with a GTX 680 so i bought a GTX 1080. Its like buying a Lamborghini with Ford Mondeo engine. This is nothing to do with game play but aesthetics.

Running GTA at 1440, would like to push for 4k but don't think even the 1070 will manage that.

What games can this card not run at 1080p60? I have a 1070 now and the only game that can't be ran completely maxed out at a solid 60fps is GTA V and I run a 1440p setup.

It really depends if your looking at average frame rates or minimum frame rates. It you like everything locked at 60fps with v-sync enabled (as I do), there is definitely a benefit. Although I agree its not really value for money.

£80 more than I paid for my 1060. I'm having a little bit of buyers remorse.

I massively disagreed with that opinion until this year. 10 years ago you could have invested your money in a PS3 or a 360 and bought yourself almost a decade's worth of almost worry-free gaming. Ergo, those consoles were a solid investment.

Now that Microsoft and Sony are looking to adopt an utterly ridiculous and completely inappropriate iPhone-inspired replacement cycle, the same can't be said for the PS4 and the Xbox One. I just don't believe their garbage that playing the newest games in 2 years time on a 'classic' Xbox One rather than a Scorpio is going to provide the same experience.

Just returned my Palit GeForce GTX 1070 GameRock Premier Edition due to booting errors, swapped out for a MSI 1070 and no issues.

It's good to see prices drop to where they're supposed to be, but in the end I thought it was worth the extra £40 to get a Zotac with their 5-year warranty. I expect to keep the card for a long time, based on the fact that I got nearly 4 years out of a meagre 660GTX.

Incase anyone is considering 1070. My PALIT 1070 Gamerock is hitting around 87fps at 1440p and Arkham Knight is hitting 60fps all settings maxed out and the card has a small OC at 200+ GPU and about 500+ memory overclock. GPU temp is 60ish.

1xxx series is OK, but I'd recommend waiting for 1080ti or a new AMD GPU.

I really don't think people will need this much power but nonetheless a decent deal!

Wouldn't fancy a 480 at 1440p tbh. I have a 980ti and to keep games like rise of the tomb raider above 60fps at 1440p you do have to drop a few settings and use fxaa, which isnt the best. If you're happy with sub 60fps then maybe? But if you're investing/invested in a 1440p monitor go that little bit extra and get something like this.

Yes but the same game at higher resolution and frame rate is just better. With regards to your super metroid analogy, why do you think retro enthusiasts spend £300 on upscalers?

If we assume that AMD Vega comes out early 2017, we can assume there'll be a GTX 1080 Ti at the same time or a touch earlier and that's when GTX 1080 will get a price cut.

I was planning to get a 1080 in november around £400
Is that likely?

Was really interested in the rx 480 AIB but they're around £260 (xfx black edition) and not out until another month. I wanted to end up keeping the thing for as long as I could, 4-5 years ideally. Would anyone recommend splurging an extra 100 ish for a 1070 or just go with the rx 480?

Given the lack of quality games currently, you're not wrong. (and I play all formats)

I have a GTX570 in my system for the last 4-5 years and that thing is still going. Depends on what you want out of life! Are you the kind of person who has to have the most 'up-to-date' tech so willing to spend whatever, or more savvy and on a budget. If it was me I would buy a GTX 970 as they are selling for under £200 now. Yes it is not as powerful as the 1070 but I am thinking budget wise.

just wait it out

The 970 had a lot more cost savings in it than the 1070 does from the 1080, plus we have had a couple of years of inflation and the pound taking a tanking so it was NEVER going to come up at the same price level. The only way that was going to happen was if AMD came out with some HBM2 powered monster at the 400 price range forcing them to undercut it.

Also cheapest 1080 from Palit?

https://www.scan.co.uk/products/palit-geforce-gtx-1080-jetstream-8gb-gddr5x-vr-ready-graphics-card-2560-core-1607mhz-gpu-1733mhz-boo

https://www.scan.co.uk/products/palit-geforce-gtx-1080-gamerock-8gb-gddr5x-vr-ready-graphics-card-2560-core-1645mhz-gpu-1784mhz-boos

Even before the most recent slump the pound was only about 1.45 to the dollar, which is quite a bit less than it was 2 years ago, and it was only stocks of the reference edition that arrived before the £ started dropping. New stocks of the OC versions are coming in at lower exchange rates.

7 games for £400?

I agree steam is good value, but your games have no resale value so its hard to compare costs.

I have a decent PC and all the consoles, there is a place for every one of them in the market, all have there own pros and cons.

And most people won't tell the difference in graphics comparisons. Yeh sure, highest settings are glorious on some of the Pc games, but does it improve gameplay? No.

People forget the US prices never include tax and get themselves all worked up

I got msi 980 ti gaming 6g OC edition. Probably not worth me upgrading. If anything I'll move from amd 8350 to i7 processor

Even then it probably won't be pixel by pixel 720p. Alot are up scaled.

Throw in another what, 50 quids? and I can buy an Xbox one AND a PS4

Cheers man.

This is just full of half guesses.

How do you know it costs the same as the 970 to make?

The 1070 was created as a replacement to the 980, and it happens to also beat the 980ti.

http://cdn.techfrag.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/Inno3D_Nvidia-Pascal-GTX-1060.jpg

So you should really be comparing the 1060 to the 970 as they have done away with the 'ti' card.

At no point, where, on that webpage suggests the card will be a "budget" card or "cheap".

I mean, did you read the page?

It literally says the card prices with the AIB 1070s to start at $370 (pre-tax) dollars and the AIB 1080s to start at $599 (pre-tax) dollars.

370*exchange rate (1/1.35) * tax rate (1.2) = 328.8 pounds. We see an AIB above for a bit more at 359.99 but hey, it isn't crazy different.

The 1070 replaces the 970 so it should be the same price as 970 release you dont add 100 quid for each new gen... the 1170 will be 400+ if youre happy with that then be quiet, things wont change if you dont complain.

Edit.

To the guy who said it beats the 980ti and the 979 didnt beat the 780ti... it did actually but even if it didnt that doesnt matter. Its a new type of card with different memory and a bigger technology advance than the 970 to the 780ti it still doesnt cost them anymore to make than the 970 would of.

The recent slump in the pound was after the 1070 launched.

It might be a good price compared to all the other 1070s but it's still no deal in my eyes. Maybe at near £300 I'd buy one.
Giving these prices heat is like giving nvidia a licence to print money.

The 970 is not better than the 780ti, the 1070 Is better than the 980ti it's better than the Titan X, that's stock and assuming you are hitting the GPU boost 3.0 throttling. Prices have fluctuated throughout the years up and down, its more expensive than the previous gen xx70 but cheaper than they have been in the past.

Nvidia isn't asking over 300 the msrp is ~£288, tax and the market is is dictating IRS price, throughout the world.

I have been lurking on hukd for ages. Signed up just so that I could like this comment !! If this were reddit I would've gilded you mate!

At current exchange rates, $379 is £288.23. Shipping from the US, let's add £20. £308.23. Add VAT - £369.87. So you're not far off!

To be honest I watch films in 720p all the time on my 4K TV and, you know what, they're still great films. Sure ramping up the quality might superficially make it look a bit better, but the content is the same. The same goes for gaming - a good game is still a good game, regardless of its resolution or what platform it is available on. Super Metroid looks like dog crap nowadays in all its pixelated glory but does that mean the game is any less brilliant? Far from it!

Surely worthy of a punt...£30-40 less than other 1070 GTX cards (albeit with better coolers & overclocked). These cards could be overclocked to a degree - if not quite as high as those with better coolers? Really tempted after waiting a bit since release...

Probably because they did that last time round...

When the GTX 970 was released, it was around £270, and had the performance similar to the GTX 780 Ti (the previous gen flagship).

For Nvidia to ask for over £300 for the 1070 (which is more or less on par with the last gen 980 Ti) is too much in my opinion.

Did expect the prices to drop a little this month, most of them are about £20-£30 cheaper than a month ago.

Good cards and they overclock well but I still wouldn't be keen on a Palit, short warranties. I went for the Zotac Extreme and very happy with it. Breezes through most anything 2560 x 1440 or less.

What do you mean the market set the price, not them?! You saying nvidia have no control over their own RRP?! And it is extortionate, nvidia have spent less developing this architecture than maxwell, so it isn't as if they could claim higher costs.

I'm wanting a gtx 1060 evga sc but I'm not sure what a gd price is, they really are all over the place with pricing.

I usually buy amd but not this time not with this overpriced rubbish, hot, and have to turn the slider up to get the advertised perf boosting your wattage upto 220W+, pass.

I paid £400 for my founders edition not long ago. I couldn't tell you the difference between the founders edition and the regular branded, but it was by the far the cheapest. I saw most going for 400-430 at the time, which was about 6 weeks ago now.
Seems powerful enough, but I quickly found out that if the developers haven't optimised the game for PCs then it really isn't worth having a high end gpu. Hitman for example, has terrible frame rate issues and has crashed a couple of times

If these launched around the £350 mark (like they should have done) Nvidia would have made waves in the EU/UK

Was that the link you intended? Or is there some confusion over the use of the word "budget"?

The problem is that these cards are priced and purchased in US dollars. The 970 was launched in Sept 2014 when the exchange rate was about $1.60 to the pound. If it was current rates, about $1.30 to the £, then you would have had to pay £320 instead of £260. Add in the extra RAM and £360 doesn't look bad at the current exchange rate. It's only about 10% more in $ prices.

Well... first of all, welcome to the world of PC hardware!

Now, just to explain a little bit... just because the name ends in "70" doesn't mean that the card will have an identical price to the last "70" card. In fact, it's quite normal for "70" cards to have a different price to its predecessor! The 670 and 770 both launched at $400, with the 570 launching at $350 and the 970 sticking out somewhat at a very cheap $300. So you can see that there's a large range of prices for previous xx70 cards - and that the $380 GTX 1070 fits perfectly well into the previously-established xx70 price range (although to be fair, I can't see a 1070 below $386 right now!).

If you take a few seconds to think about it, with variable research costs, supply costs, material costs and currency values, it would be almost impossible for a tech company to set a price for a pre-development GPU. They won't know how best to price it until near the end of development - although market forces will play a part too, of course!

And, naturally, this applies equally to AMD as well - just look at the price differences between the 280/380/480, for example.

Why be butthurt over getting ripped off :P

720p isn't that bad, it's not ideal but if you're actually playing games and not getting spitroasted by Nvidia to waste money just to gloat at a minor difference then you shouldn't really care too much about graphics. Please tell me you're not the kind of person that plays all the latest big hits from ubisoft, EA, ActiBlizz and other companies just for gfx whoring. I can max all the games out at the moment on my rig at the moment too but my brother has a radeon 270 and doesn't even need more since it runs most games he plays (league of legends, overwatch, path of exile etc.) perfectly fine and there's not really that many great games out recently that require beast cards or play that much better anyway. You can look at side by sides of metal gear solid V and see how few differences the extra few thousand spent on a master rig does for you. Mods for stuff like skyrim always help though.

Price should always be relative (or at least somewhat) to the better experience you get but sadly the prices of PC components are outstripping the benefits considering most games are basically console ports with a few effects just tacked on top or even just a resolution improvement. You end up with people paying thousands to get the same textures and character models basically rendered with an effect or two and a few more polygons acting like it's what makes the game. PC gaming is still best of course but truth be told, it's past the point where it's worth bragging about the minor differences and widening gap in cost to achieve it.

How is it extortionate when the market has set the price not them and the 1070 is better than £800 to 1000 card from the previous generation?

Nvidia don't need to worry about competition, even the newer AMD cards seem to be having problems. Self Build gamers are often willing to spend whatever to build a FUTURE PROOF PC which is outdated and not as powerful 12 months later. I am thinking about upgrading my Commodore 64 to an Amiga!

360 for a 1070.... should be 300 max, wtf nvidia doing to us?

I blame twitch, all them streamers buying quad sli and dont even enable it hahahaha...

Last gen prices maybe? 970 was £260 at launch, in fact I got an EVGA SC 970 with Far Cry 4 for £260. I'd expect a small bump in prices for the extra ram, but most of this price difference is because nvidia have no competition.

Just had a quick look and the prices seem to be coming down slightly for the 1070's which is good, since we are getting absolutely shafted

Erm... here: https://blogs.nvidia.com/blog/2016/05/06/geforce-gtx-1080/

These cards over clock differently due to GPU boost, they are simpler in a way to do a basic 'overclock'. You should look for a specific reviews of the card/s you are looking at that include how well the cards over clock.

These were announced to be a game changer, faster and cheaper than anything on the market... near £400 isn't cheap

Is it worth paying more for one with a higher preset clock speed (this one is 1506Mhz vs - for example the £389 Palit Super JetStream at 1632Mhz (OverClockers )?

Or would it be better to go for the cheaper one and just overclock it yourself (I'm a complete N00b regarding overclocking...)

>paying for p2p networking.

OOOOOHHHHHHH.....I can feel my resolve to wait a while craaaackkkkinnngggg.....
But, what is this, VAT thing, £60 I ask you.... A VAT????? I'm going to use a case!!!
Hot anyway, even if it comes with a vat.

Will this work in my Commodore 64?

Same price on Overclockers site.

https://www.overclockers.co.uk/palit-geforce-gtx-1070-dual-8192mb-gddr5-pci-express-graphics-card-gx-03n-pl.html

Good price for sure, I paid £388 for the gamerock a month ago. I dont know why they have put the base and boost so low though.

Post from a few weeks back if anyone is interested:

http://www.hotukdeals.com/deals/palit-geforce-gtx-1070-dual-8192mb-gddr5-pci-express-graphics-card-359-99-overclockers-2486364

nice price