I got my 1070 yesterday and slapped it in the ole' PC. It's almost as fast in 3dmark as my 390x CF 290 was , about 15000 points in firestrike compared to the 17200 I got with that other combo. But with the 290 toasted , I was left with the 390x by itself which only got about 10000 points.
How does it preform in my games ? Well this is the first Nvidia card I've purchased since the 8800 GT so I decided to try out Arkham city and with PhysX turned on the game crashes almost instantly. With it off it runs at 59.97 fps (vsync on) with zero issues. It was a stuttery mess on the previous set up. Tomb Raider, maxed out at 1080p (using the nvidia experience thing to lock in settings) did a 59.97 average in the benchmark with somewhere around 80 as high mark. The thing that really impressed me is how much better this card is at frame pacing though. I never once saw Rise of the Tomb Raider run so damn smooth, it was like butter, not so much as a single hitch anywhere. Very impressed there.
Witcher 3 , 1080p in Ultra (complete with the silly fur shaders cranked up) also ran super great. I didn't benchmark the framerate exactly but on the 390x I had to turn some settings down to high from ultra to keep the game from getting jerky which again- might be a frame pacing issue that the 1070 (and by extension Nvidias driver) doesn't have.
For shits and giggles I ran the ultra SF4 benchmark which some of you may or may not know , maxes out at 300 fps - it rendered the entire benchmark so fast that I didn't even get to see it, just heard a smattering of noise and a couple of frames of animation and the stat page came up. I might want to try doing some super sampling there because there's clearly a ton of room for it. I mean it is a game from 2008 afterall.
Saints row 3 also ran smooth as butter and the Nvidia experience app defaulted it to 4K super sampling. There was the odd flickery texture thing going on that the 390X didn't produce but a running theme here is that the 390x whether crossfire'd or not , caused frame pacing problems everywhere that this 1070 card doesn't reproduce and SR3 was no exception.
Dragon Age Inquisition , I had run the benchmark while the CF setup still worked and got well north of 100 FPS but in game - again, frame pacing issues made it look janky as hell at points , it was probably running at 60 fps but didn't feel like it. On the 1070 ? scored roughly 100 fps in the benchmark and in game it actually felt and ran like it was at 60 without any stuttering.
That's about all the noteworthy stuff I tried , I mean I loaded up Dark souls 3 as well but I haven't played it since before the 290 blew up on me so it ran just as smooth as my last memory of the game.
All in all, thanks to the exchange rate , the 1070 was 50% less money then a 1080 when comparing founders edition prices. Even if I compare the cheapest 1080 I've seen , it was still 33% cheaper. From reading this thread it sounds like prices on the non reference cards for the 1070 are pretty much the same if not more money than the FE so I don't know guys I'm happy with my purchase.
Only thing that sucks is that I spent way to much money on the 390X only a few months ago to play games on this PC , I suppose it could be worse - I contemplated buying a 970 that was 740$ and opted for the 550$ 390X instead. But based on recent benchmarks it's looking like the 480 line coming in a couple weeks is about as good as a 390X for 25% less money ... meaning if I resell that 390X I can't see myself getting even half of what I paid for it
erformance. All we've really seen is synthetic benches at this point though.
