Whichever you can find for a good price, preferably EVGA (good overclock and cooling).

But don't forget that for this dipshit game, you need that i7 as well.

don't want a EVGA if you don't have a lame gaming full tower case, you will probably buy an old stock that bursts into flames

the next best is the palit jetstream

I thought about a simple SC version.

I had an evga 750ti-oc, sent it back because the fan whine was horrific :-/

SC, lots of dust )), but nice & quiet here for 1,5 years now.

there are new case fan filters in the world

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/1-PCS-Cuttable-Blac...SwARZXnUhC

i have brought some, i will find out if they work real soon, my PC only takes a week in the center of the city to be filled with pollution dust

i have some of these already

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/SilverStone-SST-FF1...SwTY9ZZ1DE

they suck, only actually filter 1/3 of shit that gets inside of your case, your fans still get covered

I have a really nice case (Aerocool Aero-1000, with many dust filters).

The problem with it is that I have it for more than 1,5 year now, but it just stands in its box as I'm still lazy as fuck to put my rig into it.

Now I think you have a bit more insight in my dust 'problem'. : D

I have a 1070 and quake does not run well for me, the netcode or whatever it is, frequently makes me rage. It makes the game feel bad even if maintain frames. Its worse on newer maps like tempest shrine.

If I was you I would drop the game down to 1280/1366, and just make do until things get better.

I got a 1070 a few months ago for 330 new, no regrets.

Buy new, you never know if its been hammered.

Also look into ATI 480, 8GB, a LOT of card for the money and should run QC, and allow you to sell it on and not lose much and not spend much.

Look at GPU charts in google, but I repeat, even with the you card you want, I play way less than I want due to being annoyed at how its running.

P.S.

If you spent 1400 Euros two years ago and only got a 750ti from it, you got screwed.

he wants a new GPU not one thats over a year old

If you want a video card primary for quake champions: vega 56 - 400 euro, 2% slower when flashed with vega 64 bios(and it's fool proof, got two bios). The board is with good build quality, qc runs better on amd cards and vulkan support is coming up (in doom that brings +40-50% more fps on radeon cards, 2-5% on nvidia's). 1080 is a lot faster than 1070 otherwise. I would pick stock 1080 vs custom 1070 (if the noise is not top priority). Both are solid choice for QC. What's the other parts in the PC if it's not a secret? :)

Procesor: Intel Core i5-6400 - I can overclock this to 4ghz but then I need new mainboard aswell
GFX: GeForce 750 TI - its overclocked a lot and it works the same as 970. Manage to get 30-40 fps more.
Disk: SSD Kingston HyperX Savage 240 GB
RAM: Kingston HyperX 16GB
Monitor Im playing with is Asus VG248Q3 144hz

I would love to play if I had cap fps 120 without drops on lower res possible, but If I cap fps it will always drop. For an example on low res possible it runs on 180 fps most of the time but then I notice drops below 120 fps. If I cap to 100 fps it drops to 90. If I cap to 60 fps it drops to 50. So fucking weird... I dont know what to do than to buy new GFX or just be patient and wait.. I really want to enjoy QC, but I cant :/ Everyday Im trying some new shit to run it more smoothly but im unsuccessful with all this shit

Keep in mind that QC loves CPU too, tho the i5 should be enough. As for the video card: what resolution you are planning to play the game?

My results with r9 390 (oc to a little over the stock 390x card results) are really great, but I game on 2233rz(1680x1050). Ultra settings gave me in FFA 100-130 average depending of the map and never dropped below 85. Duel is a solid 130-150 average, there I rarely drop below 120fps in any situation. Vulkan will most likely bump that quite a lot.

Vega56 is a really good investment as a video card right now. The price is 400 euro(similar to 1070) if you can find it that is - low supply, recently revealed as the best miner you can buy. The dirvers will mature = speed bumps, AMD rushed the card and the drivers are bad, the power draw can be adjusted (they overvolt the card for the stock clocks by a lot), you can flash the vega64 bios and: 2% difference and a lot of OC headroom... bam 400 euro for 1080 performance that will grow in time while 1080 is fast as it will get + video card performing really good at vulkan and has a lot of future tech that can come in play in new games.

All in all, if I were to buy high end video card right now = vega56. Excluding the 1080ti - that is the card to get if you have the money. :)

I'd recommend you find any of the cards you mention and test performance before you buy. I got a GTX 950 and i7-6700K OCed to 4500 and my FPS never drops below 220 while on empty map it's often 310+. So the CPU seems to be more important.

http://www.pcgamer.com/doom-benchmarks-return-vulkan-vs-opengl/2/

at 1080p ultra
R9 Fury X gained 33.95%, from 119.0 -> 159.4 fps max
R9 Fury 31.78%, from 111.4 -> 146.8

1080 gained 18.88%, from 162.6 -> 193.3
1070 gained 9.33%, from 146.9 -> 160.6

God knows what went wrong with the 1060, it went down in their test, I have a 1060, it's better under vulkan here, but on that one yes I've seen some reports that the gain is only about 5%.

So sure in that case the AMD part had a higher percentage gain, but the 1080 gain was FAR from a mere 5% and it's top end was still better than the fastest AMD part at the time these tests were done. Vulkan's generally just real good for everyone.

Still wondering what's happening with id's async support for DOOM on nvidia as well.

Search more than one source, I had found quite a lot that claims more gains + currently I am with amd r9 390 and I played doom 2016. The gain is more than 30%, more like around 40% in my case. w/e, I gave the numbers as general direction. Also it varies quite a lot depending on resolution. Over the 1080p resolution the gain of the 1080 is, indeed, 5-6% (as claimed in a lot of sources), including this one that claims 19% in 1080p:

http://www.gamersnexus.net/game-bench/2510-do...0-gtx-1080

On 1440p the 480 keeps it's 30% gain while the 1080 is on 5%. On 4k the 1080 is below 2% and the rx480 is... still close to 30%. So, while I could had explain in more details that I speak generally and not for exact resolution... no point to state the 1080 vulkan results to be good as they are not. Also let's see more games running on vulkan before any conclusions can be made... but as quake champs is id game as is doom, I can speculate with great success that the vega will pull a lot more framerates than the 1080 + better 1% min and smoother gameplay on that exact game.

/no hate or bad feeling

Edit:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d16FlJxp-sw

first video I checked. Read the first comment from the uploader: notable gains on 1080p, no gains on higher resolutions. I can argue that one will buy 1080 for fullhd monitor, but each on it's own with that.

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoun...ance-gains

furyx shown here as 40% increase, the 1080 is 11%. My point is - a lot of sources, tests in different game areas and so on. The radeons scales a lot better and while for me vega is a fail overall (the 64 that is - price, same perf vs over a year old competitors video card, power hungry without tweaking and so on), the 56(vega64 bios works on it and literally it's 2% difference after the flash + oc nicely) will rape the 1080 on vulkan in quake champs, bonus that amd in time will fix the rushed drivers/card vs the matured 1080.

mainly down to the VRAM being alot faster then the 1080 and idtech5 using a virtual texture pagefile cache in physical RAM which can use 22+ GB/S texture bandwidth for each new frame where textures are not already rendered and stored in VRAM

if your RAM read speed is slower then the VRAM write speed you get bottle necks, which you can benchmark with

https://www.3delite.hu/Object%20Pascal%20Deve...hmark.html

10x for the tech tips, tho I didn't dig that deep into the reasons why amd performs a lot better, 1070/1080 poorly and 9xx are same/even worse. I check the facts and the results in the last id game. It's true the new one has different engine merged into the id tech, but it's the closest guest one can make.

Personally I will be happy with the vulkan as even now my oc 390 is running the game @1680x1050 120Hz monitor on ultra with 100-130fps avarage frames in FFA(depending on the map, the minimum was 85, rarely reaching it even in fights with a lot of players) and 130-150 in duel. With vulkan I most likely will reach around the 120fps mark in FFA on the heaviest maps and bump the minimums around 100, tho I don't really care about that mode. :)

nor do i, but they use different types of VRAM with different bit sizes, and the bigger bit sizes means it does the same job in less time taking bigger chunks of data at the same latency rate

I tried a test. heres what I got.

peak write GFX Ram - 13.89 GB/s
Peak read GFX Ram- 148.50mb/s
peak write Sys Ram - 6.58GB/s
peak read Sys Ram - 11.63 GB/s

Decent, or do i fall under the catagory of too bottlenecked?

would'nt know, i just use it to find out VRAM speed,

it would depend on if you have PCI-E 3.0 or 2.0 which drops to 1.0 and have different bit rates

AIDA64 will give you the CPU read/write speed of your RAM which will be up above 22 GB/S

nobody else has used the benchmark, to check if the write/read sys ram is going to VRAM or not

I could be wrong of course, I just suspect that despite the heavy AMD endorsement of QC it will be closer than you think so long as things aren't artificially crippled on Nvidia, especially if any unreleased work on DOOM async for Nvidia is shared with the team working on QC.

There was no hate or bad feeling on my part either, I just similarly had wanted more sources to be be taken into account :D

I think the best course of action for anyone looking to buy for QC, is to wait until QC itself has a Vulkan release, and in general is either much closer to release or actually out before using it as the main reason to determine which card you go with rather than working on theory.
I'd also want to wait until there is some demo support so actual valid benchmarks can be done.

Yeah, no hard feeling from me either, I really know you as a genuine good guy who likes to help/has knowledge on a lot of topics. :)

Pascal do not have proper hardware Async

I have a GTX 1060 6GB, game runs perfectly for me with no fps drop, i get between 150 and 190 fps.

But i don't get how people with 1070 and 1080 get low fps and fps drops, maybe it is related to CPU as well.

maybe or its server related or something.

Thinking about getting this card, which processor do you have?

I got a An i7-6700 up to 4ghz with a 1060 GTX 6GB and 8 RAM

Am honestly really happy with this purchase, it was totally worth it, everything is running smoothly and playing QC with no problem what-so-ever ( except lags related to my internet lol )

Ah nice man. I'm not sure if the 1060 GTX is going to achieve what I want, since my CPU is a lot older than yours (i5-4460 @ 3.20 ghz)... if I want to upgrade I need to get a new motherboard and ram as well, going to be expensive.

You won't need to upgrade your mobo and ram to get a better cpu, you can still get a boss ass i7 for your rig.

Like which? My mobo still has 1150 socket.

Intel Core i7 4790K S runs at 4.1 ghz standard.

Because it's the K model it makes it easier to OC - If you drop a watercooling kit on to it, you can get it to 5.2ghz Easy.

You won't need the OC tbh.

Thanks. Slightly more expensive than a I7-7700K though.

Do you think it'll give much improvement in QC to upgrade to the 4790K? I'm getting around 90-140 fps now on 1080p on low settings, looking to make it solid 144 fps

It won't harm if you go to a i7 7700K but obviously that'll mean changing your motherboard and you'd want to spend at least £200 on a decent enough mobo.

So the upgrade will be expensive but from a long term point of view it'll be good, especially if you're gonna branch off in to different games in the future.

4790K is a beast of a cpu even if it's seen as an older generation cpu.

You could always save up and get an i9 upgrade kit but the one I was looking at was about £900 here.

€350 is max I want to be spending for an upgrade right now.

I could either upgrade CPU to your recommendation or upgrade GPU from 960 GTX to 1060 Gtx (6gb). I have no idea which will be better to achieve stable 144 fps in QC... I've heared that CPU is more important to get stable high framerate, so I guess CPU then?

I don't know all too much about how QC runs enough to give you solid information regarding CPU and GPU, but an i7 CPU and a decent GPU from say 1060/70 onwards will be more than enough.

Look for a used i7 with highest clock and preferably -K

Would need a nrw mobo and ddr 4 ram then :(

DDR4 is still shitty compared to DDR3

DDR4 is only needed if you're going for the new CPU's but then in turn that means you might as well build a whole new rig from scratch, so new motheboard, ram, cpu etc.

If you're rocking DDR 3 1600 that's still mad quick, I'd give DDR4 another year before it actually becomes viable in the industry.

My 4790k and a 1060 6gb do 122-160's fps depending where i am on the map. I am severely hoping that this is better by access end :)

In team modes as well? That's not too bad. On which resolution?

Mostly Deathmatch and Ffa. 1920x1080p

At the moment quad damage and Everyone around at same time can be choppy,but, i am hoping its resolved out of early access.

I used to get 80-160fps in earliest beta, so, i feel as if it is improving. More stable.

Every QC HW thread shows the same - CPU is more important for FPS, especially on low settings. See http://www.esreality.com/post/2896222/n-a/#pid2896222 and of course this http://www.esreality.com/post/2879608/a-stand...rformance/

If you're buying because of QC I'd say don't spend more than you want to. The game is somehow poorly optimised and stutters even with gtx 1080+8 core i7 with 32gb ram

Edit: also btw, gigabyte g1 gaming cards are quite loud when you OC and turn up the fans. I'd recommend MSI gaming X or water cooled/hybrid cards

That's just depressing

I've just been in to scan here in the UK and Corsairs 1080 is so silent it's unreal.

1070 if your only playing at 1080p.. if you want to play at 4k or just want to spend money buy a 1080 or the ti. I have a 1070 and i run everything on low and my gpu runs at 33%..neither gpu will bottleneck this game..i think its the servers that cause the stutter tbh...it varies so much from game to game...

just wait until they fix this POS saber engine

https://www.overclock3d.net/reviews/software/...e_review/8

https://www.techspot.com/review/1476-amd-rade...page7.html

But wait for vulkan support, don't buy 500-700euro vga for a game still no optimized

I have a GTX 1070(mobile) and i experience no FPS drops at all. The game is very smooth for me.

You must be exclusively doing nothing but dueling

I have gtx970 and never drop below 160fps. Is this not enough for you?

My GTX 1080 wrecks 1440p, most around 200-ish but I found that I need v-sync to get rid of stuttering, luckily vsync is pretty reactive until they sort out whatever the stuttering is.

The Vega 56 seems to be a really good card, as stated before it can be overclocked and perform very similair to the Vega 64. I would wait for the partner cards though since the AMD cards have a tendancy of running hot! Price should be around 400 euro.

I suggest buying the topped clock card in the series whatever you do, as an example for 50 euros more my core speeds are 300+ MHz higher than the average card

That way you don't have to worry about silicon lottery and often get a good 15-20% more performance than other cards for a modest price.

And how exactly do u find toped clock cards?

They advertise the clock speed on each card, look for the highest, average 1080 is 1750mhz, my 1080 is advertised as 1940mhz but runs out the box at 2050mhz. You have a much better chance winning the silicon lottery with a higher model

I got 1070 and I like it. But if I could do it again I'd wait for a deal to come. Get whatever card that has the beef for a good price.

does'nt matter if you don't have any court junctions on your name and you can get finance

cost a massive £20 a month for 2 years

https://www.scan.co.uk/products/palit-geforce...gJ1PPD_BwE

https://www.overclockers.co.uk/pc-components/...rds/nvidia

do the best finance, you can have a part time job and everything

both use V12 finance, i got a palit off of scan with a real shittie credit rating around 400, so i took the piss and went for 3 years

probably forgotton to process the order though

pay it all off at the begining of next year probably, if i don't built a ryzen

Ok thanks guys. Where are the cheapest computer parts to buy in Europe? I heard Germany have cheapest, but then I checked few stores and they had pretty much the same pricing like us, or even higher.

newegg.

well, for 700€ u almost get a 1080ti in germany. just got one for myself to play qc with good fps.
we could arrange sth if u r interested. we can talk in discord if u want to

keep saving. gtx 2080 will be out soon.
buy a 2070. prolly a $100 more than the 1080.
More power.

Depends what you mean by soon, its got to be at least 6 months away (NVidia said its not coming out until next year, anyway).

Probably Vega 56 is the best value for QC atm, but have to wait for the non-reference ones to come out. Personally I wouldn't go lower than a Vega 56 or 1070 for QC, more FPS the better :D

Guys another question.

Should I go with Intel procesor i7-7700 BOX, Kaby Lake instead? 350€.

If you are saudi, for sure.

Edit: Ah, you mean instead of VGA? Then no. Go for both for optimal experience (will still suck, but way less than otherwise).

Or 7600k and overclock, depends by your budget and motherboard compatibility (your old one is still ok for these cpus right?)

Using an i5 6600K and a GTX 1080, getting 180+ FPS on the steam version, everything on low though. A 1070 would probably do just fine if you only need higher than 144fps.

Did you overclocked ur 6600k?

Stock clock speeds, so 3.9 GHz (I can use the turbo feature since I have multicore optimisation enabled in my BIOS). I was surprised by how good the CPU is performance-wise when I installed it.

i5 6600K at stock (indeed up to 3.9 with the boost) and a 1070, all low at 1080p : drops below 144 frequently whenever there's some action, all around stuttery. Duel seems to be smooth-ish even in fights.

I did notice a slight improvement when using my motherboard's auto-OC to 4.1 on all cores, haven't tried this since the low settings effectively got lower a bit before quakecon.

Capping at 144 because of my ADSL.

i7 6700 @ 4 ghz
32 GB DDR4
Amd radeon rx460
Samsung SSD Evo 850 1 TB

FPS always above 110-120, no significant frame drops, extremely playable. Game lags because of servers and 18th century netcode not because of my pc. With Vulkan support, Ill get even more FPS, so cant wait for the update of the engine. :)

i went for a i5 6600 and a 1070, because i have a 1440p screen ... i am not happy atm, the game did standard FPS drop after 3-4 games, but i could also stream at a nice 960/60fps resolution before. Now, that i have syncorss launcher and a 125 FPS cap, the game is running smoothly and i don't have to reset after 4 games, but the ingame settings somehow made my bloom shine like having full moon in my goddamn face + now with fps cap my stream takes away 20fps from the fps cap, which is odd considering i was doing 140fps before the cap, so i have a lot of fiddling around with settigns to get QC running correctly with streaming.

At my freinds house he has a i7 and a 1070 and his games runs smoothly AF at mostly ~240fps, motherfucker.

TLDR: i must buy an i7, i guess.

Yeah, if you're running an i5 you're gonna be bottle necking the system if you've got anything from a 1050 onwards.

I'm still running an i5 and I've ordered an i7 cpu to complement my new GPU, other than that, everything runs boss yo.

I have an i5 6600K and a GTX 1080. I don't experience any noticeable performance issues, but would you still say upgrading to a 7700K would be worthwhile for me? I get a playable framerate, but I'd like it to be even better, if possible.

Not true, i have an i5 4690k @4.2GHz. the i7 4790k has a larger L3 cache but other than that is no improvement over the i5. Hyperthreading is worthless in QC.

i5 4690k and 980ti (or 1070) = perfect match.

I'm still running an i5 and I've ordered an i7 cpu to complement my new GPU, other than that, everything runs boss yo.

Other games I can feel a slight bottleneck with gaming and streaming due to the CPU, if you're not going to stream or play any other high end games then an i5 and a 1070/80 will be fine.

Hyperthreading might come into place when QC get Vulkan support though, or am I totally missing something? Wouldn't be the first time :)

Your 6600 is not a 6600K?

yes nonK version, i went for the cheaper version, with intent to upgrade when i7 wont be 400€

Hi. Does the 125 cap make for a more stable experience than 144?

does'nt matter, 125 is for windows 10 and USB ports not overclocked to 1ms polling rate which is 1000mhz, which drivers for some mice will do without overclocking

I have windows 7 64-bit.

Still same idea?

1 click of your mouse per single frame refresh in some fantasy universe

the default polling rate on windows is 125hz which is 8ms, with the average monitor having 60hz which is 60 frames per second and a response time of 4ms

without any math, your mouse will only work every 2->4 frames

I bought a 1070 and didn't notice all too much of a difference from my previous card, took it back and decided to pay the extra £130 for just a standard 1080 not the ti edition and the difference imho is like night and day.

The one I got was the EVGA GeForce GTX 1080 SC GAMING.

Looks like computer hardware has hit a certain point where CPU and MOBO/RAM is pretty solid and lasts long if you get something decent ie i7.

GPU's are the things that need upgrading, I'd rather spend a bigger portion on a GPU to know that it'll cover a good few years, bare in mind the previous GPU I had was a 770gtx twinfrozr 2GB and the jump is MASSIVE.

So if I were in your shoes, I'd rather pay a massive chunk towards a GPU that's gonna last you 5+ years.

You know the ol' sayin' - You get what you pay for and you don't want to put a barrier on your graphics card pick for the sake of 100euro difference.

I really do think hardware is important for this game. But to run it smooth with 'good' graphics a GTX 1060 6GB is enough. Full HD with everything low.

But at this moment for the really smooth sensation the quality of the ISP is even more important. For example, lots of people complain about stutters/hickups/hitreg i personally do not experience this at all (with my 1070) and i think thats because i have a very good connection. I ping the Amsterdam and Frankfurt DC's with a ping under 15.

So if you know for sure you have a clean Windows Installation with a stable baseline regarding the load on hardware resources and a 1060 6GB with 8GB ram and an descent CPU this game should generate enough FPS to play competitive.

I'm running an i5 and a 1080 with 16gb of ram, fresh install of windows on a new SSD, with a 300mb line at home and I get between 10-15 ping and I get the occasional stutter but, so it depends on the hardware as well.

A lot of people think they can throw random components together and it'll work, that's where all the noobs are incorrect.

So yeah, hardware is super important but like I said, today's standards, a decent i7 setup and a moderate GPU is more than enough to run most games on stupid high settings. It's the fact that a lot of games are early access that are not really optimized well enough yet.

I went from an I5 7400 12 gb ram with a 1050 (non ti) to a 6gb evga 1060 (price was right) , the difference in QC is like night and day. Of course the game itself is its own worst enemy but I cannot blame the stuttering and models appearing from nowhere or inside other models on fps problems anymore.

You spent 1400 euros on a beast pc just two years ago, and you're struggling running games?! And then they claim pc master race... shit, makes one to feel safer buying consoles.

'beast pc'

he got a 750ti.

I have 7970 hd from like 4 years ago, paid it 200 € and the game runs almost smoothly.

You need to be master race too to not get robbed!

in todays world its more PC sissy bitches that always get robbed

i5 i7 means nothing, what is important is the frequency at which you are running ur CPU.

i5/i7 6600k/6700k/7600k/7700k/7740k are all EXACTLY the same CPU and have the same result for gaming. Unless the game heavily uses the 4 extra virtual threads... which never happen.

http://www.hardware.fr/articles/965-3/performances-jeux-3d.html

If u want more FPS the only thing you can do is buy a more powerful GPU, that is, unless QC specificaly uses more than 4 cores at 100% which it does not.

http://gamegpu.com/mmorpg-/-%D0%BE%D0%BD%D0%B...a-test-gpu

There is two options for people who wants a new graphic card, either buy a GTX 1080 Ti which is incredibly expensive (for me at least) or wait 6/9 month and buy a cheaper NVIDIA card of the new generation, will be as powerful as 1080 Ti and less expensive.

There are several reasons not to buy GPU right now :
- AMD just released their last GPU and they are nowhere near NDIVI in terms of performances, results : nvidia has no reason to drop prices.
- Mining from GPU is eating 35+% of the GPU market right now, making the prices of GPU go higher.
- AMD has released only a very small amount of last gen cards as of now.
- custom AMD cards are not yet out, this gen is too young. Have to wait few weeks.
- Mining is mainly buying AMD cards but due to small amounf of cards, they also buy NVIDIA up to GTX 1080.

GPU prices of current NVIDIA gen has raisen the last few months due to all that, and there is absolutly 0 reasons they would drop prices of GTX 1080 Ti, the only thing to do is wait. I think i never witnessed such a bad GPU market.

I will personnaly wait till march of next year to see nvidia and AMD announcments. Nvidia next gen will probably be out between march and september of 2018, with a refresh or a Ti launch 6 months after this date. Hopefuly the cryptocoins stupidity will also be something of the past at this time.

Crypto currency is mainly mined with ASIC devices now (If you're serious about it that is.) You'd be stupid to go back to GPU powered rigs.

People are just mad that cryptocurrency is this future.

Lay off with the AMD hate mate, first time in years AMD deliver cards that can actually compete with nVidia, not in the top segment but still. The Vega 56 even performs a bit better than the 1070 and that's without it even being overclocked. You're right in advising ppl to wait for the partner cards though since the reference cards seems to be plagued with really bad cooling. I've never even owned an AMD card :-D

Paying more than 250$ for a gpu is madness.

seems more than $300 these days

MSI GeForce GTX 1070
Intel Core i7-6700K / 4 GHz - 8 MB
Samsung 750 EVO 500GB SSD
16gb DDR4 - 2133 MHz RAM
Screen: ASUS PG278Q 144Hz (1440p)

Games I’ve played so far with this system all ran smooth with maxed out settings (Fallout 4, Witcher 3, DOOM and the likes).

QuakeChampions also runs smooth here, even with max settings. If it doesn’t, then it has to be an internet/server related issue.

Playing QC at 1080p using a GTX 1070 is pretty much overkill already, not to mention GTX 1080 or even 1080ti.

If playing QC on a 1080p screen would require a 1070 GTX GPU or more to run smooth at e.g. 144Hz, the game wouldn’t have much of a future. It’s not like everyone out there can afford hardware like this. Recommended system requirements say that a GTX 970 or AMD R9 390X should be able to do the job for this game. Besides, some polishing of the game itself in the near future is very likely to happen.

So, choice for GPU strongly depends on what screen you use, e.g. 1080p, 1440p or 4k, and the type of games you want to play.

I wouldn’t recommend waiting for newer GPU’s myself, as some have suggested above. Waiting for better stuff is not an option if you want to play right now (as you stated in your post). So I’d say, do yourself a favour and grab that what you can afford.

I happen to think like this: if you choose GTX1060 e.g. you’ll be set for the next 18 months or so. If 1070, 24 months, if 1080 30 months and if 1080ti 34 months (that is, if you play other games besides QC). Combine this with your plans for updating your screen, for example if you just bought a 1440p 144hz screen like I did, and plan to use it for the next 3 years, you wouldn’t want to buy 1080(ti). But if you plan to go 4k within the next year, then you know what to do.

I was planing this comp will be good for next 3 years as I spent 1400$, but it seems it gets stuck at Quake Champions. I will buy new GFX was already looking into 1070, but I will try to be patient as Im waiting next patch and see. However, I have somehow manage to decrease frames drop but still sometimes is unplayable especially with use of OBS (streaming) which requiers better GPU or even CPU. Thanks for advice, really appreciated!

if your use windows 10, just use my network settings and frame drops should be fixed

http://www.esreality.com/post/2890743/some-be...gs-to-try/

the default settings crap out every few minutes, and can't handle youtube video audio in different browser tabs

I also have a GTX 1070 (ASUS STRIX OC), but with a Xeon x5670 (6 core @ 3Ghz) I'm struggling to maintain stable 144 FPS at low settings.

Will look into upgrading my CPU. Maybe the new 6 core i7-8700K: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coffee_Lake

Someone abive said hyperthreading useless in qchamps. Does that mean highest clock speed best over extra corez?

not if id have vulkan working, and just not ready for the public

I think like most games today it's much more important to have high clock speed then having a lot of cores.

COOL. so 4790k at 4.4ghz good.

Forget 6+ cores, all you need is...

i5/7K, oc'd on decent aftermarket air cooler (AIO is noisy and inefficient)

1070 or better

stream with nvenc not x264

izi

x264 got better quality tbh, but for better preformance with decent GFX is better nvenc. Was hoping for update today and see, but there was none.

nvenc is good because your GPU does all the processing power but when you max out your bitrate to 3500 the stream quality still looks like dogshit.

so i7 will be better if you don't have the £$£$£ to build a streaming pc - Cores is where it's at when it comes to that shit. (streaming)

If you're just jamming the game and not bothered about the above section. i5 will be perfect.

What do you mean max out at 3500? nvenc at 6000 is fine and used by most streams.

Most streams that are partnered yes. You can go up to 5000 as a non partner but then you're gonna be stopping people from being able to watch your stream if their internet is shitty because there is no auto option.

2800-3500 is the best to avoid things like buffering etc.

twitch has a new player with auto and some kind of buffer, sometime over the past year when i last bothered with twitch

But Auto only works if A.) You're Partnered or B.) You're the only person playing that game and have 50+ viewers.

the player selects the transcoding bitrate to use like youtube, if your connection is'nt fast enough

you can use 55,000 bitrate on the streamers encoder, and a remote viewer will still be able to play on a mobile phone in 144p with 600 bitrate transcode

[img1]

Again, you as a streamer can set whatever bitrate you want to stream at, 5k is the limit otherwise you will get warned by twitch, if you're not partnered.

The viewer then has the option to leave it on auto however, it doesn't matter because the guy only has the option to stream at the current res and bitrate, it doesn't auto limit or drop down unfortunately.

Anyone can apply for Twitch Affilate and transcoders become enabled for them
also 6000 is the current recommended limit for everyone (it was raised from 3500 a few months ago)

Get a 2nd hand one imo.

Old i7-3820 here, GTX 660ti and 16GB of DDR3-1600

1920x1080 and 66% scaling
MEDIUM on all 4 video quality settings
MEDIUM on all 4 rendering settings

Looks and runs AMAZEBALLS !?
Zero stutter or sluggishness aim feeling, something like 100fps min.. its crisp and fast, flicking aim around in crazy DM battles is no problem, shit exploding everywhere etc.. kinda crazy how good it runs and looks

idk man.. ez

<3 id

I have had the same setup since 2013 and spent the same amount of money as you, I can run QC fine... maybe its just extra buggy for you

I have: GTX 760's in SLI