Okeeyy Suxxorzzz.. here is what you have been waiting for :)

[quote=“farhan_ds, post:16, topic:20660”]

PPS: Thankyou for your decent congratulations.. Finally :)

[/quote]

That was the decent congratulation you silly cow :P

Making vids of your rig is so pre 2010... :D

But the bottom line is I am happy for ma bro to finally get a chance to spend some money on the things he wants... game on brov !!! :)

[quote=“gull_s_777, post:20, topic:20660”]

what kind of problems with big hard drives in windows 7???

[/quote]

3TB and above are not recognized by default in windows 7.. you must have a modern mobo with UEFI bios and windows 7 support for larger drives.. otherwise they only show 2tb available space..or may not show up at all in rare cases..

@faisal..

if you do see the video, you will be taking all your words back... :D its not just a rig..its not just a room... its a better than cinema experience.. B) B)

did you get computer parts locally or imported from USA?

how much it costs to built that super computer?

[quote=“farhan_ds, post:22, topic:20660”]

3TB and above are not recognized by default in windows 7.. you must have a modern mobo with UEFI bios and windows 7 support for larger drives.. otherwise they only show 2tb available space..or may not show up at all in rare cases..

[/quote]

thanks for the heads up

i am using a pair of WD Green 2TB drives in "Orico 8628US3" dock for back up and was thinking to grab a new Green 4TB in near future.

Now will do my research before that. :)

What about non-UEFI motherboard + windows 8.1 combo??? would this work with 4TB drive smoothly???

^ AFAIK, UEFI is required for support of larger disks.. Motherboard is the hardware part, Windows is the software part of detecting drives.. some manufactures do provide bios bootable drivers for large disks,, and WD and seagate have developed downloadable tools for help..

as long as your mobo is made in the past 3 years, you have a good chance your drive will be detected.. even in windows 7.. check your mobo manufacturers website and bios updates for details

@ Mayor..

i always custom build and assemble all my PCs, and electrical systems.. this is all self made.. upgrades made step by step sequentially and periodically.... this was a major jump cz upgrade was pending for almost 5 years... mobo went dead and i had no choice :(

[quote=“jDk, post:17, topic:20660”]

Just so you know :)

13632141234v2TkTbPdM_5_7.jpg

How much did you pay for that 7870 ?

[/quote]

Seeing as even in your own posted benchie, the test results are wrong or problematic,. as the 660ti dips to minimum of 17 fps.. which is horrible performance for such a powerful card.. thus giving that test a big ?? on these specific results..

Apparently... the true tombraider GFX benchmark test story says otherwise..

.and at ultra quality...

the 660 which is a direct competitor to 7870 falls to 7870... the 660Ti, is a much more expensive card and not a competitor to this, but the 7950.. and yet, 7870 beats everything clearly with a margin.. and i only play at 1080p due to my lcd resolution..

[quote=", post:, topic:"]
At 1920x1200, reaching an average of 60fps is a lot more challenging and requires a GTX 660 or HD 7850, both of which averaged over 60fps and had minimum frame rates of just over 50fpsAt 1920x1200, reaching an average of 60fps is a lot more challenging and requires a GTX 660 or HD 7850, both of which averaged over 60fps and had minimum frame rates of just over

Moving from high to ultra has a huge impact on performance so we dropped several cards from testing as they couldn't handle this quality.

For an average of 60fps, you'll want the HD 7870 or GTX 680. We're not sure if we've ever seen those two cards sitting next to each other, so it seems like there's something that is really hurting Nvidia's cards (note that TressFX is off).

In another first, the HD 7970 GHz Edition tangoed with the GTX Titan, slipping behind a few frames in the average results but doing much better on the minimum fps.

Source:

http://www.techspot.com/review/645-tomb-raider-performance/page3.html

[/quote]

and the dream land 2560x resolution at ultra quality

as for my own testing my card..

this is my test result... which is at every thing set to ultra.. tressfx.. 16x AA, 8xMSAA.. HBAO+, depth of field to full, and 1080p resolution.. there isnt any setting higher available left to enhance..furtehrmore, amd catalyst was set to enhance application settings with further AA and AF and all gamm AA and Ambient occulusion and samplig all set to max quality to further stress the already ultra game settings..

my PC Benchmark reults.. which i have an average processor at Core i5 only...

trBENCH_zps4f6d8c40.jpg

there, even the lowest level fps is 39 fps.. and top 57 is due to tressfx... disabling it leads to 60fps, as there is a screen cap limit of 60 fps in game.. otherwise it would go even higher... and these results are with overstressing from the catalyst, not the standard optimised driver results as used in benchmarks for maintaining standards... mine was waaayyy too quality enhanced in driver settings....standard default settings would yield a much higher results.. probably over 75fps for sure..just a guess..

.

as per 7870, COD ghosts even with the patch and dynamic hair and texture enhancement ran too fast for my own liking.. no amount of explosions slowed it down so i had to be very quick .. i am not a very pro player of FPS.. :(

for the overall best performance to price cards go,, the GTX 670 is a clear winner with the 7950 a close second... for my price bracket, 7870 beats everything for its price range.. and for what i paid for it, it was almost the price of a 650. ;).

First, that benchmark pic you posted, the hair quality is on "Normal", not tressFX :rolleyes: (I can clearly see the hair is not using TressFX, nor is it running on 4x SSA, or 8x SSAA in your case ;)

Second, I pre-ordered & own the Tomb Raider game with latest patch and improvements to the engine, and AFAIK, there's no "8X MSAA" setting that you spoke of whatsoever. It only has FXAA, 2x SSAA & 4x SSAA.

Third, the benchmarks you posted "explicitly" mention that TressFX is disabled. It's also running the version the game shipped with, after that it has received atleast half a dozen patches, at least on my steam account.

My friend, to whom I sold the 7950 at the same price you paid for your 7870, showed me a totally different scenario. It's more in line with what I showed you earlier.

Even though the site I posted the bench pic of earlier is running a more recent version than the one on TechSpot, its still not the latest.

http://www.hardocp.com/article/2013/03/20/tomb_raider_video_card_performance_iq_review/4#.UtP6mfQW1yQ

Just for your info, this site is Pro-AMD and bashes NVIDIA pretty badly. And its running on the Ultimate preset, unlike the Ultra.

Apparently, I'm also not the only one who also found those TechSpot benchmarks sketchy

http://www.pakgamers.com/forums/f4/tomb-raider-2013-lotl-survivor-159937/index100.html

Maybe, you didn't know, but there's a preset even higher than Ultra, the ULTIMATE preset. Let's see how your mighty 7870 does on that preset shall we :lol: ?

Kindly post a pic of the benchmark with all options enabled at Ultimate: 4x SSAA, 16xAF, TressFX, everything else at Ultra, VSync Off. And when you capture the screenshot, be sure it shows the actual TressFX hair in motion, not the "normal" one :P

EDIT: It would be wise to keep the driver settings completely at stock, so as to give you a more precise picture. Forcing AA/AF via drivers won't work in Tomb Raider.

EDIT 2: I took these when I still had my GTX 570. I expect yours to be atleast slightly, if not a whole lot better than this :P

http://steamcommunity.com/id/jaidi/screenshots/?appid=203160&sort=newestfirst&browsefilter=myfiles&view=imagewall

As always, the nvidia fan boy speaketh..

1 - that AA setting was a typo, My mistake. playing 3-4 games at once so settings got mixed to remember. it was set at 4xSSAA

2 - in most benchmarks they disable tressfx cz nvidia cards cant handle tressFX.. so they disable it for giving them a chance, standardized playing field for both :D .Nvidia had to apologise for their problems with Directcompute issues..

http://forums.steampowered.com/forums/showthread.php?t=3088402

http://www.tbreak.ae/features/tomb-raiders-tressfx-performance-amd-vs-nvidia

https://forums.geforce.com/default/topic/532853/nvidia-driver-support-for-tressfx-realistic-hair-in-tomb-raider-2013-/

http://www.pcgamer.com/2013/03/11/tomb-raider-patch-provides-hair-care-for-nvidia-users/

3 - if my benchies are from the original game version WITHOUT the performance improvement patches that came afterwards, then great..!! downloading the latest and will post screens

4 -i have no idea what your friends` 7950 is doing, so i will not comment on what i donot know or have not seen...

5 - i am sure you dont know what price i paid for the 7870... so your price comparison with your sale is irrelevant.. also , even at retail prices, it is not the same price bracket..

6 - this is csutom setting, ultimate holds back on shadows and high resolution of shadows.. my test results include high res shadows as well.. if i go back to preset ultimate, fps would be even higher, atleast they still dont dip as low as the 17 fps as your benchmark showed.. :P

7 - as for the ULTIMATE quality tests, and even better, here are 2 of the highly reputed sites reviews of the TR bench.

\

http://kotaku.com/5990848/tomb-raider-performance-test-graphics-and-cpus

http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/geforce_gtx_760_review,10.html

http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/radeon_r7_260x_r9_270x_280x_review_benchmarks,15.html

just 3 different reviews providing results in various quality settings at most demanding resolutions....in all of them, 7870 beats 660,, and is equal to 660Ti, and all with tressFX disabled cz nvidia cards would loose 10-20fps with it... as mentioned in the links above..

8 - Will post my results as soon as the patch downloads..

9 - i dont know how a screen cap can provide game performance fps comparison.. as per image quality, the image can only go as high as the game developers made it,, which can be achieved using the settings.. it canot be improved beyond what the developers made.. the only setting i canot achieve is the 2560x resolution..other than that, i donot know what your point is in getting something higher than what the developer made unless you started coding your own tomb raider 2014 game.

how much you paid for graphics card seriously

Here ya go.. my tests at ULTIMATE... WITH TRESSFX, and high res shadows and ultra shadows..4xSSAA and everything else at highest.,....

trsettings_zpsb6f3af56.jpg

TRultimate_zps4295eaf0.png

barely a 1-2 FPS hit even with TressFX and ultimate settings.. :P

You're sadly mistaken, if you think that I'm trying to defend Nvidia here. This is first & foremost an AMD title. I have no problems with that. What I do have a problem with is you claiming performance levels which not even xfire'd 7970 could deliver. Enabling TressFX alone brought 40% performance penalty. Couple it with 4xSSAA (it is completely different from MSAA), and you can bring it down to 80% combined.

[quote=", post:, topic:"]

1 - that AA setting was a typo, My mistake. playing 3-4 games at once so settings got mixed to remember. it was set at 4xSSAA
[/quote]

What I asked:

[quote=", post:, topic:"]

First, that benchmark pic you posted, the hair quality is on "Normal", not tressFX :rolleyes: (I can clearly see the hair is not using TressFX, nor is it running on 4x SSA, or 8x SSAA in your case ;)
[/quote]

[quote=", post:, topic:"]
2 - in most benchmarks they disable tressfx cz nvidia cards cant handle tressFX.. so they disable it for giving them a chance, standardized playing field for both :D .Nvidia had to apologise for their problems with Directcompute issues..

[/quote]

You're calling me a fanboy, yet you're oblivious to the fact that all those threads posted were in March. Did you even open the PG thread I posted the link to earlier :wacko:

http://www.pakgamers.com/forums/f4/tomb-raider-2013-lotl-survivor-159937/index100.html

[quote=", post:, topic:"]

4 -i have no idea what your friends` 7950 is doing, so i will not comment on what i donot know or have not seen...
[/quote]

Don't worry, you'll have complete evidence tonight. I can assure you of that ;)

[quote=", post:, topic:"]

5 - i am sure you dont know what price i paid for the 7870... so your price comparison with your sale is irrelevant.. also , even at retail prices, it is not the same price bracket..
[/quote]

No I don't, but you also don't know what price I paid for the 7950, 760 either. But for your comparison, the 7950 new is at average 30k, 760 @ 36, and 7870 around 24-26k bracket.

[quote=", post:, topic:"]

6 - this is csutom setting, ultimate holds back on shadows and high resolution of shadows.. my test results include high res shadows as well.. if i go back to preset ultimate, fps would be even higher, atleast they still dont dip as low as the 17 fps as your benchmark showed.. :P
[/quote]

The hardocp article didn't run the benchmark, but an actual part of the game which is considered the heaviest. Unlike the techspot & other articles. Remember, companies can optimize for a particular synthetic benchmark as it doesn't show any variance whatsoever, but in terms of actual gameplay, its very difficult to do that. There are only a handful of websites who do that type of apples to apples comparison (techreport, hardocp, anandtech), most just run benchmarks and be done with it, they don't provide actual gameplay performance analysis.

[quote=", post:, topic:"]

7 - as for the ULTIMATE quality tests, and even better, here are 2 of the highly reputed sites reviews of the TR bench.
[/quote]

Kotaku uses the same benches of TechSpot, which is totally void. As for Guru3D:

[quote=", post:, topic:"]

This particular test has the following enabled:

  • DX11
  • Ultra Quality mode
  • FX AA enabled
  • 16x AF enabled
  • Hair Quality Normal (TressFX disabled)
  • Tessellation On
  • SSAO Ultra
[/quote]

I"m not sure why did you even bother bringing that article up. I am neither defending nor saying Nvidia is better than AMD. Just saying that you're posting contradicting results which don't match up with what others posted even with latest patches installed.

[quote=", post:, topic:"]
9 - i dont know how a screen cap can provide game performance fps comparison.. as per image quality, the image can only go as high as the game developers made it,, which can be achieved using the settings.. it canot be improved beyond what the developers made.. the only setting i canot achieve is the 2560x resolution..other than that, i donot know what your point is in getting something higher than what the developer made unless you started coding your own tomb raider 2014 game.

[/quote]
Not it cannot. A benchmark is just that, a benchmark. The actual-in game performance differs quite a lot from what the benchmark shows.
Kindly, post the benchmark again, with SSAA enabled. Your FXAA benchmark score is pretty good. But since you brought that up, so is mine ;)
With TressFX/ FXAA:
With TressFX+2xSSAA:

I've finally received the image batch from the 7950. Here are the results just for your information. This is to make perfectly clear that what you're claiming is not possible.

1. Settings:

2. 1st RUN (Ultimate+FXAA+TRESSFX):

3. 2xSSAA

4. 4xSSAA:

as for your one clarification, kotaku is much more reliable than most sites.. and techspot simply copied it.. so in essence, a kotaku and guru3d reference is more solid reasoning than others.. hardocp is also an nvidia fan site.. as there rae many other ati fans sites as well.. so just a reliable few were referenced..

2ndly, i donot compare my results to your card.. 760 is a very very powerful card and something of an excellence nvidia achieved after their average 6xx series.. 760 is powerful and canot be compared to anything else in ati except a 7970 and above card..

as for your friends results, i still have no idea whats up with his system, his results should be higher, maybe a driver or hardware issue, or something else.. if my result and almost every website result is on the higher end why is his result not on par with the rest...you sould help him investigate..

as for you doubting my results, i can do nothing to help you... i posted my results in every scenario you asked for.. my system is recent, well configured, and has good specs...my card is a pre OC factory default and while your price quotes for most cards are very low, you are referencing international US rates, our rates in PK are 4-6k higher for each card.. a 7870 GHZ edition retails near 28-29k..XT cards are higher than 30k.. in any case, there is over a 12+k difference between new 7870 and 760 vanilla..yet any game i run on my card canot be further maxxed out than possible yet gives me excellent performance..hopefully for ayear or 2 to come as well.. your card will probably last even longer..

and again i stress.. i didnot buy this for gaming, i needed it for its exceelent and actually superior features in 2D.. which i was unable to find in nvidia.. i am not any company fan boy.. i have had almost cards from both company every 2nd generation skipped.. i still have my GTX 460 and i love that card, it has one of the best performance /price ratio of any nvidia card since the ti4200.. just that i got my card for very very low price and it has performance comparable to much higher price cards means that i have just been lucky... and that is why i am happy with my card for its brilliant price/performance, and 2D ..

[quote=", post:, topic:"]

i donot compare my results to your card.. 760 is a very very powerful card and something of an excellence nvidia achieved after their average 6xx series.. 760 is powerful and canot be compared to anything else in ati except a 7970 and above card..
[/quote]

I can't believe you're saying this :blink:. Wasn't it long ago that you said it was an average card at best. What caused the change of heart :P ???

[quote=", post:, topic:"]

as for you doubting my results, i can do nothing to help you... i posted my results in every scenario you asked for.. my system is recent, well configured, and has good specs...my card is a pre OC factory default and while your price quotes for most cards are very low, you are referencing international US rates, our rates in PK are 4-6k higher for each card
[/quote]

Yaar why so damn serious :unsure: ?? The reason why I'm still skeptical is that SSAA is extremely brutal even on high-end GPUs. Note how the minimum fps tanks more than 10 fps just by enabling at 2x. At 4x, it becomes even more severe, rendering the game unplayable. FXAA is the way to go to as it offers comparable AA quality to 4xAA and while at the same time offering superb performance (You can thank Nvidia for that too :lol: )

[quote=", post:, topic:"]

a 7870 GHZ edition retails near 28-29k..XT cards are higher than 30k.. in any case, there is over a 12+k difference between new 7870 and 760 vanilla
[/quote]

Sir, I have a vanilla 760 and it costs nowhere near what you're claiming. In PAK, it currently costs 33k (Gigabyte version), and the reference version costs even lower (in the international market, around 250-260$). 7870 is even lower. But given how close both 7950 & 760 are in performance, 7950 is a better choice overall in my books.

[quote=“farhan_ds, post:25, topic:20660”]

^ AFAIK, UEFI is required for support of larger disks.. Motherboard is the hardware part, Windows is the software part of detecting drives.. some manufactures do provide bios bootable drivers for large disks,, and WD and seagate have developed downloadable tools for help..

as long as your mobo is made in the past 3 years, you have a good chance your drive will be detected.. even in windows 7.. check your mobo manufacturers website and bios updates for details

[/quote]

So after a bit of reading, what i have found is that you need to have "windows 8+ UEFI" setup only if you plan to BOOT from a hard drive bigger than 2TB(GPT).

But in your case, you are booting from SSD and using hard drives for storage purpose only, you don't need to be afraid of getting 2TB+ size hard drive.

Just initialize 4TB drive as GPT and your windows 7 will access it just fine. :)

So don't limit yourself to 2TB drives and if you are getting a good deal on bigger drive, go for it.

i am not getting any deal on big HDD.. i have a 1TB Wd which mus be sold off before i go for something bigger...as i have no more space to put in any more disks in casing..

also 4tb is 2x the price of 3tb, and makes no sense.. i would rather buy a seagate 3TB..

and i already have a UEFI board, and i can also boot 7 from any sized HDD on my current system, and SSD is for games and windows only, and one drive for mobile apps and backup.

[quote=", post:, topic:"]

I can't believe you're saying this :blink:. Wasn't it long ago that you said it was an average card at best. What caused the change of heart :P ???
[/quote]

760 is just a mid range card of its own series.. there are ti`s, 770, 780s, titans etc above it, and in many flavours.. i was comparing 760 to 7870 and in that comparison, 760 is indeed more powerful....and when i said that , its price was also higher and has since dropped..

[quote=", post:, topic:"]

Yaar why so damn serious :unsure: ?? The reason why I'm still skeptical is that SSAA is extremely brutal even on high-end GPUs. Note how the minimum fps tanks more than 10 fps just by enabling at 2x. At 4x, it becomes even more severe, rendering the game unplayable. FXAA is the way to go to as it offers comparable AA quality to 4xAA and while at the same time offering superb performance (You can thank Nvidia for that too :lol: )

[/quote]

yes 2x is the only acceptable solution, as 4x indeed turns frames down on all nvidia cards... its just ATI have always been better at AA since their original radeon 9800..that is why their cards absorb the hit of higher AA much more than any nvidia card.. they canot do physix, they canot do Cuda... but what they do well, they do it very well..

luckily i didnot see a single bit of image improvement going from 2xSSAA to 4x so i stuck to 2x and had no single choppy moment in any of the cut scenes.. game runs excellent even in 4xSSAA

[quote=", post:, topic:"]

Sir, I have a vanilla 760 and it costs nowhere near what you're claiming. In PAK, it currently costs 33k (Gigabyte version), and the reference version costs even lower (in the international market, around 250-260$). 7870 is even lower. But given how close both 7950 & 760 are in performance, 7950 is a better choice overall in my books.
[/quote]

i believe this is what you were refering to, Gigabyte 760

http://www.galaxy.com.pk/gigabyte-GTX760-2GB-256Bit-DDR5.html

and i have seen its price come down from 41k recently..

the nearest 7870 i could find was this HIGHLY OC even more than the ghz edition one

http://www.czone.com.pk/graphic-cards-amd-radeon-gigabyte-radeon-hd-7870-2gb-graphic-card-pakistan-p.1129.aspx

and this has tripple fan and a more massive cooler.. HIS card sells for 2-3k less than this.. making the difference between the 7870 and 760 almost 10k..

and the 7950

http://www.galaxy.com.pk/his-7950-3gb.html

is almost same price as 760, and gives no benefit since its price has not yet fallen much.. for someone buying the 7950 now would be much wise to either go for the 760 or the RX280 simple or RX270X instead..

as for you getting your cards from abroad at cheaper price makes you previliged, and also less than 0.000001% of our population , . in practicality the majority dictates economy and quantification..also our retails outlets are the primary source of consumption so the open market price regulation determines price/performance,.. and also the consumer utility since none of these items are giffen goods.

[quote=“farhan_ds, post:36, topic:20660”]

i am not getting any deal on big HDD.. i have a 1TB Wd which mus be sold off before i go for something bigger...as i have no more space to put in any more disks in casing..

also 4tb is 2x the price of 3tb, and makes no sense.. i would rather buy a seagate 3TB..

[/quote]

Hmm that's expensive. Are you talking about 7200RPM ones???

on czone, i can see WD Green 2TB for 10K, 3TB for 15K and 4TB for 20K. And they serve the storage purpose just fine :)

[quote=", post:, topic:"]

i believe this is what you were refering to, Gigabyte 760

http://www.galaxy.co...56Bit-DDR5.html

[/quote]

Nope. Galaxy is a thief, I rarely buy my components from them. The source that's selling at 33k is located at karachi.

[quote=", post:, topic:"]

and i have seen its price come down from 41k recently..
[/quote]

That was a 4GB version, not 2GB. Also, there are no Ti version to speak of. There's 760, 770, 780, 780 Ti & Titan. Below the 760 is 650Ti, 650 and so on.

[quote=", post:, topic:"]

the nearest 7870 i could find was this HIGHLY OC even more than the ghz edition one

http://www.czone.com...tan-p.1129.aspx

and this has tripple fan and a more massive cooler.. HIS card sells for 2-3k less than this.. making the difference between the 7870 and 760 almost 10k..

[/quote]

You can thank the Pakistani retailers for ripping people off. The 7870's original MSRP is 210$ (for an overclocked version, reference based cards are lower than 200$). Same is the case with 760, its priced at 250$, yet being sold at 30+ here.

[quote=", post:, topic:"]

and the 7950

http://www.galaxy.co...s-7950-3gb.html

is almost same price as 760, and gives no benefit since its price has not yet fallen much.. for someone buying the 7950 now would be much wise to either go for the 760 or the RX280 simple or RX270X instead..

[/quote]

For more than a year, the new 7950 is available at around 29,500/- from pretty much everywhere. Why do you keep quoting galaxy prices, when its quite clear they charge exorbitant prices for the GPUs.

[quote=", post:, topic:"]

as for you getting your cards from abroad at cheaper price makes you previliged, and also less than 0.000001% of our population , . in practicality the majority dictates economy and quantification..also our retails outlets are the primary source of consumption so the open market price regulation determines price/performance,.. and also the consumer utility since none of these items are giffen goods.
[/quote]

The same lame excuse. I couldn't care less whether the population can buy a GPU at its intended price or is starving in cold. Most of our population are bunch of lazy swine who completely waste their time and try to free-load any chance they can get. I work my ass off to earn my hard earned money and spend it in the most appropriate manner. Its neither my intention to meddle with anyone's business nor do I allow anyone meddling in mine. If people have to worry about making their ends meet, then they shouldn't even be here in the first place.

[quote=", post:, topic:"]

yes 2x is the only acceptable solution, as 4x indeed turns frames down on all nvidia cards... its just ATI have always been better at AA since their original radeon 9800..that is why their cards absorb the hit of higher AA much more than any nvidia card.. they canot do physix, they canot do Cuda... but what they do well, they do it very well..
[/quote]

How about I come visit you at your place at your convenient time and then settle this once and for all ? I'll bring my system as well :lol:

We can both learn at the same time about each other's practices while at the same time, settle our difference ;)

Well said and nicely answered. I import all my parts from the U.S. and sometime sell them too. My current PC specs are

Asus Maximus V Formula

Corsair Vengeance 16 Gb @ 1600 Mhz

3.5 TB HDD

Cooler Master GX 750 Bronze

Asus GTX 770 OC Edition. Bought this for $339. Here they are selling at a horrible price rate.

CPU Casing: Cooler Master HAF 932 with Additional Fan Mods and Xigmatec LED Fan Mods.

5.1 Surround Sound System

21'' LED

A month ago, i was using GTX 760 EVGA SC Editions in SLI. Now i have bought One 770 and upgrading to another for SLI. But the PSU needs to go to 1,000 W as well. I'm impressed by your educated responses; they all go well beyond the box.

[quote="jDk, post:39, topic:20660"]

Nope. Galaxy is a thief, I rarely buy my components from them. The source that's selling at 33k is located at karachi.

That was a 4GB version, not 2GB. Also, there are no Ti version to speak of. There's 760, 770, 780, 780 Ti & Titan. Below the 760 is 650Ti, 650 and so on.

You can thank the Pakistani retailers for ripping people off. The 7870's original MSRP is 210$ (for an overclocked version, reference based cards are lower than 200$). Same is the case with 760, its priced at 250$, yet being sold at 30+ here.

For more than a year, the new 7950 is available at around 29,500/- from pretty much everywhere. Why do you keep quoting galaxy prices, when its quite clear they charge exorbitant prices for the GPUs.

The same lame excuse. I couldn't care less whether the population can buy a GPU at its intended price or is starving in cold. Most of our population are bunch of lazy swine who completely waste their time and try to free-load any chance they can get. I work my ass off to earn my hard earned money and spend it in the most appropriate manner. Its neither my intention to meddle with anyone's business nor do I allow anyone meddling in mine. If people have to worry about making their ends meet, then they shouldn't even be here in the first place.

How about I come visit you at your place at your convenient time and then settle this once and for all ? I'll bring my system as well :lol:

We can both learn at the same time about each other's practices while at the same time, settle our difference ;)

[/quote]