| Forum Index > Tech Support |
When using this resource, please read the opening post. The Tech Support forum regulars have helped create countless of desktop systems without any compensation. The least you can do is provide all of the information required for them to help you properly. | ||
|
Ropid
Germany3557 Posts
You have a HD 6970 currently? It should still be a pretty good card for nearly everything? I'm wondering what's best if that's the case. I'm also worried that a change to GTX 760 might not be impressive enough to make you feel good about spending your money. I don't think anyone can currently guess what the 800 series cards will be like when they come out later this year. It's perhaps worth it to wait for those before replacing your 6970. | ||
|
Thalandros
Netherlands1151 Posts
On May 02 2014 09:50 Cyro wrote: I don't like paying so much extra from one midrange card to another It's a tough time to be buying in general atm for gpu's Hmm, so I should wait until it's a better period for buying in that case, or just go ahead and get the 760 and be done with it? | ||
|
Thalandros
Netherlands1151 Posts
On May 02 2014 09:56 Ropid wrote: @Thalandros: You have a HD 6970 currently? It should still be a pretty good card for nearly everything? I'm wondering what's best if that's the case. I'm also worried that a change to GTX 760 might not be impressive enough to make you feel good about spending your money. I don't think anyone can currently guess what the 800 series cards will be like when they come out later this year. It's perhaps worth it to wait for those before replacing your 6970. I have a 6950, but that's roughly the same, yeah. I guess I might wait it out then. It's not necessarily that I'm so unsatisfied with my current card, it's great (still is after a good 3 years!) but the difference between my CPU and GPU (The CPU needed a BIG upgrade, it was really bad compared to my HD 6950) is now so big that I can put CPU settings at ultra, but the textures for some games at medium or low.  | ||
|
wptlzkwjd
Canada1240 Posts
| ||
|
Disregard
China10252 Posts
| ||
|
Cyro
United Kingdom20326 Posts
On May 02 2014 12:12 wptlzkwjd wrote: Could you maybe pick up a used 760? And then re-sell it after the 800 series comes out? Or buy a new 760 now and sell it later. Prices drop pretty fast, my 770 cost £329 11 months ago and i've seen them go £160 used already - and we don't even have any real details of 800 series cards yet | ||
|
nosliw
United States2716 Posts
| ||
|
skyR
Canada13817 Posts
| ||
|
Thalandros
Netherlands1151 Posts
| ||
|
Incognoto
France10239 Posts
Maxwell should be great to have if only super power-efficient cards. I think you'll see some good performance improvement but dazzling performance for power. So the idea is that you can get a GTX 760 for a very good price? Same for GTX 770? Both are upgrades over a 6950 I guess. Arguably though you get all the good stuff that Nvidia has with this upgrade: the CPU-friendly drivers, Shadowplay and even G-sync if you would be willing to get a monitor to go with that. Cyro already posted his thoughts on 770 vs 760 and how you're paying more extra cash than you're getting extra performance. Regardless of that, you're still paying less than €300 (is that it?) for a GPU that can almost max most games at 1080p (gtx 770). However less than €200 for a GPU that can play most games at high-ultra settings for less than €200 is pretty much a better deal (gtx 760). It's not a huge jump in power over a 6950 but it's still better and you get all the Nvidia goodies mentioned earlier to go with that. Overall sounds solid but if you're getting a GTX 760 just to jump up to a 800 series after that (launched this autumn?), then maybe you should wait? Keep the extra money for getting a great new monitor instead, or something. | ||
|
WindWolf
Sweden11767 Posts
| ||
|
Incognoto
France10239 Posts
On May 03 2014 17:11 WindWolf wrote: Speaking of the 800 series, do you think they'll launch with a card that can run most games at at least high in 60FPS@1440p? Pretty sure the GTX 780 Ti already does that. R9 290 and the GTX 780 are about 15% under that I would say. So the 800 series should do really well at 1440p. | ||
|
Emerson_H
United States460 Posts
http://pcpartpicker.com/user/ratzp0li/saved/4yBg Build questions include: Is getting the i7 worth the extra $100 for the hyperthreading (non-gaming tasks)? Is the Pro Series Samsung SSD worth the upgrade from the EVO series? Is the 780 overkill for 1080p gaming? And is it worth overclocking my system (I know the cooler is overkill if I don't, but it looks cooler than the stock heatsink regardless) Thanks in advance. | ||
|
WindWolf
Sweden11767 Posts
On May 03 2014 17:25 Incognoto wrote: Pretty sure the GTX 780 Ti already does that. R9 290 and the GTX 780 are about 15% under that I would say. So the 800 series should do really well at 1440p. Yes, after looking into benchmarks and such, the 780 Ti can handle 1440p@60FPS really well. But what I'm wondering if it's worth waiting for the 800 series to launch or buy a high-end 700-series now. I will by my computer in late August anyway, so Haswell refresh should be launched by then, and maybe we get to know the stats about the launch 800-cards before then as well (Still doing research before posting more here though) | ||
|
Incognoto
France10239 Posts
+ Show Spoiler + i7 vs i5 is a pretty big misconception people tend to have so I'm just going to throw this out there, as a person who respects the i7 but feels it doesn't deserve to cast the shadow it does on the i5. I'm going to talk about the i5 4670k vs the i7 4770k. There are only three differences between the two processors. Hyperthreading. Cache. Price. What is cache? A quick copy/paste from wikipedia: "When the processor needs to read from or write to a location in main memory, it first checks whether a copy of that data is in the cache. If so, the processor immediately reads from or writes to the cache, which is much faster than reading from or writing to main memory." Cache basically makes your system a bit snappier, but it's hardly noticeable and the difference in cache between the i7 and i5 should hardly, if at all, be used as a way to compare the two CPUs. Hyperthreading. What hyperthreading basically does is take a physical CPU core (i7s and i5s are both quad-core processors) and makes it into two virtual cores, virtually making it an octo-core. Sounds fancy doesn't it? It's definitely cool but there are still some limitations to it. For starters, hyperthreading only helps when you're doing certain tasks which do well with "parallel" workloads (doing a LOT of the exact same task). So when you're doing things like video encoding, programming, encoding, streaming or similar things like that, hyperthreading gets you some pretty good performance gains. However, if you're doing "linear" workloads (doing a string of different tasks), such as gaming or running lots of different programs at once, then hyperthreading doesn't garner you any gains whatsoever. Most games in general don't use more than 2 CPU cores at once (not sure about Clod actually) and only two (off the top of my head) take advantage of hyperthreading, those being Crysis 3 and BF4. As for running lots of programs at once, what's good to have is actual physical cores. When doing "linear" workloads, what gets you performance is clockspeed. The faster the processor goes, the quicker it'll finish it's string of tasks. That's why for gaming, overclocking an Intel Haswell quad-core, namely the i5 4670k, is the go-to. Intel's processors excel at single-threaded tasks, such as gaming. It's why almost everyone on this board has an overclocked intel something. Noteworthy is that when Hyperthreading is enabled and working on i7s, the processor will produce more heat. So if you will hit a thermal ceiling sooner overclocking an i7 with hyperthreading than you will overcloking an i5 (ie you'll peak at 75°C at a lower clockrate with the i7 than the i5). Also, assuming overclocking, stock speeds are irrelevant in this comparaison. Read more if you're interested: http://www.overclock.net/a/hyperthreading-explained Finally, price. As we saw before, the difference between an i7 and an i5 is basically a little extra cache and hyperthreading. Hyperthreading is useful for a few niche applications. How much is it worth? A quick search on amazon.fr shows the difference: 4670k 4770k €82! Hyperthreading is great and it's interesting technology, the performance gains are there when you're working with well-threaded applications. However, for a gaming PC it's simply not worth it. Even if you're streaming at a 1080p, it remains very difficult to justify getting a 4770k, given the efficiency of using software like OBS, which encode using x264 (which is damn efficient). This is why most people are better off with a 4670K. It's better to spend that extra money on other parts such as heatsinks, graphics cards or even monitors! The PRO SSDs are not worth it over the EVO series. PRO is for the professional guys who benchmark a lot, write a lot on their SSDs. I think PRO SSDs also have a better warranty. For most general consumers the EVO series is perfectly fine. A good alternative is Crucial's M500, which tends to be slightly cheaper than Samsung's EVO. 780 is indeed overkill for 1080p gaming but it's not like it's a bad buy (depending on what you're looking for that is). If we compare the 780 against the GTX 770 or an R9 280X, You're looking at roughly 20-30% performance increase in the face of a 50% cost increase. If you're willing to make that trade-off, then there you have it. An interesting alternative would be to look at a getting a GTX 770 (which costs $339 against the $309 price tag of an R9 280X) and a 144 Hz, 1080p monitor*. That will probably look/feel better overall than a GTX 780 on a lesser monitor, for a comparable overall cost. *Ask cyro who has this set-up. I don't know how I feel about the cooler, but yes, you do want to overclock this rig of yours. At this price range and with the parts you're getting it'd be silly not to. Thermalright Hr-02 Macho is a good cooler to get btw. The Rosewill Hive isn't as good to get as say a Rosewill Capstone (modular or not) or a Cooler Master VSM 550 ( http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817171092 ). 750W is also overkill (unless you want to SLI in the future), if you're overclocking a 4670k as well as a GTX 770/780 then 450W is insufficient, a good quality 550W PSU should do however. E: WindWolf, if it worth waiting up until then is a tough question until Nvidia releases more precise details. I guess it's a question to be asked in August, when we hopefully get more details on performance and especially pricing. | ||
|
Thalandros
Netherlands1151 Posts
On May 03 2014 16:21 Incognoto wrote: What resolution are you at? You have a 6950 atm? Are you currently limited in the games you're playing right now? Maxwell should be great to have if only super power-efficient cards. I think you'll see some good performance improvement but dazzling performance for power. So the idea is that you can get a GTX 760 for a very good price? Same for GTX 770? Both are upgrades over a 6950 I guess. Arguably though you get all the good stuff that Nvidia has with this upgrade: the CPU-friendly drivers, Shadowplay and even G-sync if you would be willing to get a monitor to go with that. Cyro already posted his thoughts on 770 vs 760 and how you're paying more extra cash than you're getting extra performance. Regardless of that, you're still paying less than €300 (is that it?) for a GPU that can almost max most games at 1080p (gtx 770). However less than €200 for a GPU that can play most games at high-ultra settings for less than €200 is pretty much a better deal (gtx 760). It's not a huge jump in power over a 6950 but it's still better and you get all the Nvidia goodies mentioned earlier to go with that. Overall sounds solid but if you're getting a GTX 760 just to jump up to a 800 series after that (launched this autumn?), then maybe you should wait? Keep the extra money for getting a great new monitor instead, or something. I game at 1920x1080, but I have a 2nd 1280x1024 screen for TL, Reddit, music, and Skype Doesn't really matter then. The things you're summing up is exactly what I'm debating. If I'm going to buy right now, I'd rather get the 760 because the price is just amazing. That'd mean I probably won't go for another card in years though, and if the 800 series is right around the corner, that's just stupid (prices for those cards won't be stupidly high, right?) I've also been thinking about getting a 120hz/1440p monitor but they're just so expensive right now, and my current card can't support it. I've been wanting to get one of these monitors once I've upgraded my GPU so I can fully support them. The thing I'm weighing down is: Is it worth waiting for a better GPU (In the 800 series) or get a 760/770 right now while I can for a pretty cheap price, compared to normal retail when the 800 comes out (Can't use Amazon then, so. ) Right now a GTX 760 comes with Watch_Dogs which is awesome, it's one of the games I really want to play, but on the other hand, if waiting is much more valuable for my wallet compared to the power I get, I'd rather wait! | ||
|
Incognoto
France10239 Posts
You might as well then use the 760 until high-end monitors and 800 series cards are better priced and come into your budget, which imo won't be for a while. yeh in your position I might get it. remember that nvidia drivers atm are better than amd's and also the gtx 760 has all the extra features that the 6950 doesn't (ie g-sync and shadowplay). | ||
|
Cyro
United Kingdom20326 Posts
If we compare the 780 against the GTX 770 or an R9 280X, You're looking at roughly 20-30% performance increase in the face of a 50% cost increase. If you're willing to make that trade-off, then there you have it. Well, this is because 780 is clocked low at stock. 760/770 basically laughs to 1300 or so and sits at 60 degrees (often 1254 out of the box) while aftermarket 780's can be ~1100 out of the box. If you're a somewhat advanced tweaker, you can realistically approach 1.5x the performance of a 770. If you're not, it's not a great value buy. 760 = 6smx, 256 bit memory bus 770 = 8 smx, 256 bit memory bus 780 = 12 smx, 384 bit memory bus 780ti = 15 smx, 384 bit memory bus ^with that, a 780 is preferable to two 760's and a 780ti is preferable to two 770's in most cases - because memory resources are not doubled when you use SLI, each card has to use it's own, and there are still scaling penalties. The stock clock difference pushes 760/770 up some against 780 - but it's exactly that, stock clocks I've also been thinking about getting a 120hz/1440p monitor but they're just so expensive right now, and my current card can't support it. I've been wanting to get one of these monitors once I've upgraded my GPU so I can fully support them. The thing I'm weighing down is: Is it worth waiting for a better GPU (In the 800 series) or get a 760/770 right now while I can for a pretty cheap price Depends what you want to do, i'd not take 1080p120 without a 780 tier card unless you want to have it to run games like Osu, League and Counterstrike (which all do amazingly with far less horsepower) or a 1440p~100hz+ without a pair of cards of that tier. Assuming you have the VRAM (i wouldn't take 2gb here, but i'd imagine 3 to be ok) then two cards on 1440p will run with basically the same framerate as one of the same cards would on 1080p 750W is also overkill (unless you want to SLI in the future), if you're overclocking a 4670k as well as a GTX 770/780 then 450W is insufficient, a good quality 550W PSU should do however. 450w is fine for 770, just becomes blurrier line with 780 (which adds like 100 watts of power if you push both cards) If you want to make a big purchase, i would wait, but it could be a while | ||
|
Thalandros
Netherlands1151 Posts
On May 03 2014 19:55 Incognoto wrote: Well if it's well priced in the first place and it comes with a €60 game that you actually want then you might as well go with it. It's not exactly a waste of money, especially if you then sell off the 6950. You might as well then use the 760 until high-end monitors and 800 series cards are better priced and come into your budget, which imo won't be for a while. yeh in your position I might get it. remember that nvidia drivers atm are better than amd's and also the gtx 760 has all the extra features that the 6950 doesn't (ie g-sync and shadowplay). Historically, will newer generations cost a lot more than they do after a couple of months, like the GTX 760/770/780 right now? If so, then I might go with the 760. Otherwise I could wait and save up a bit more for a new card once the 800 generation gets released. The Watch_Dogs deal added to the €50,- cheaper fact make it really hard to pass deal. | ||
|
skyR
Canada13817 Posts
On May 03 2014 23:20 Thalandros wrote: Historically, will newer generations cost a lot more than they do after a couple of months, like the GTX 760/770/780 right now? If so, then I might go with the 760. Otherwise I could wait and save up a bit more for a new card once the 800 generation gets released. The Watch_Dogs deal added to the €50,- cheaper fact make it really hard to pass deal. Not sure what you mean by "after a couple months." Newer generations generally have the same MSRP but retailers will often put premiums on them while at the same time discounting the older generation product. fyi, GTX 750 Ti came out at ~$160 but can now be found for ~$140 If you don't plan on buying the 800 series until after a couple months than you're going to be waiting until Q1 to Q2 of 2015 because there's rumors that 800 series won't launch until December 2014 or January 2015 and will still be on 28nm. | ||
| ||
|
|
uThermal 2v2 Circuit
BSL
Afreeca Starleague
Wardi Open
Replay Cast
Sparkling Tuna Cup
Kung Fu Cup
The PondCast
Replay Cast
Replay Cast
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
