#4847559

-Tj-

2014-06-19 16:38

Yeah that WD difference is only because of base 954mhz vs 863mhz. My with 941mhz (boost 1084mhz) acts the same as this MSI and comparable to Titan (2688cores) performance out of the box. Imo there won't be any vram usage difference, HH used High Textures there if Im not mistaken

#4847609

Solfaur

2014-06-19 17:16

Nice card, but too late in the game for me... no point in getting this when 880/AMD equivalent will come out in 6 months tops and will most likely also have a big vram capacity and of course a performance bump (remains to be seen how big that will be).

#4847612

ruiner13

2014-06-19 17:18

I was somewhat expecting a test of WD at ultra resolution at least to see how the extra VRAM helps. Why only high setting that is meant for VRAM <= 2GB? Or at least do some 4K tests... 1440p is nice but 6GB is meant for 4K with current games.

#4847871

bigfutus

2014-06-19 20:36

I pity the fool who buy this now. But hey, its not my money.

#4848350

Reddoguk

2014-06-20 02:38

I was thinking the other day actually, why no 6gb Ti. Well now i know but it's stupid if you ask me, think Nvidia made some big mistakes with the 7xx series and vram sizes.

#4901778

fantaskarsef

2014-08-29 06:57

very impressive FLIR results, i may get this, i'd love another msi card, would give me an excuse to use afterburner again. and the borderlands pre-sequel coupon would give my dedicated PhysX card something to do.

Would you be going with one of those, or two of the 780s + dedicated physix?