I have in mind to get a EVGA GTX 970, that's the card I want since it came out.
What Intel processor do you guys think I should get?
I was thinking in the i5-4670, is that a good one?
Also if you can help me with the motherboard, I would appreciate it.
I have a Corsair TX750 for the power and some Corsair Vengeance (1600MHz) that I think will we fine for this.
>buying the cucked 3.5 Gtx 970 when 1070 / 1080 is just 5 months away
If you already know what you want to get, why do you come here for validation? People are going to call you a retard because your choices are retarded. Why did you expect anything else?
If you're going to come in here asking for advice, but you already made up your mind, you're just wasting our time and yours. Your choices suck dick, because you have no idea what you are doing.
What I mean is, fuck off and buy whatever you want if you're not willing to take criticism and already have set your mind to it.
Are you stupid? This thread is for help me make a decision, and there's like 3 or 4 guys here that helped me a lot.
The only thing I am sure about is that I'm gonna buy a GTX970, nothing else.
If you are not going yo make a suggestion or help with the thread then YOU can fuck off.
Nigger, you have a 750W PSU for a PC that won't even use 400W or 450W..
You want to buy a gimped card, that's been known to be shit and a bad deal for a long ass time, while ignoring all other alternatives (390) or buying the non-gimped cards of the next tier (980 or ti) when you clearly have the money to do so, since you have fucking FIVE HUNDRED DOLLARS for a motherboard+CPU combo, which shouldn't cost you more than 250 or 300.
Especially when the next generation of cards is due to release in less than half a year.
You don't even know the difference between the lower end and higher end i5s is negligible, and that the only realistic difference between them is being able to overclock or not, which you claim you don't want to, hence making this thread absolutely pointless, since it narrows down your choice to like 2 chips.
You're fucking dumb as a kite, know nothing about this, and didn't even bother researching before making up your mind or asking for advice.
Deal with it kid.
All memes aside it really doesn't matter apart from /g/ speccy threads or using 1440p.
But if you're going for 1440p or maybe even 4k you should consider spending more money for a GPU anyway if you want everything to run on max.
On full HD there's barely any difference between r9 390 and 970.
Well NOW you are helping me, see it you cunt?
I just wanted to know if what I was doing was a viable thing.
Now that I now that it's NOT viable and I don't know anything about this shit I can ask for another kind of advice like "please can you build a PC for me? $700 top".
Thank you angry fucking anon
Why wouldn't you want one that can overclock? I ended up buying a 3570k and sat on stock speeds for about to years, than eventually gave it a over clock to catch it up to the newer generation. 20%+ performance boost available at your need, plus it's pretty easy to OC.
Also to add, don't buy a 970, the 3.5gb limit can be reached now, and the 390 and 970 are on par with each other in 1080p depending on the game. The 390 beats out the 970 in 1440p+, and the 390 is only going to get better as the 970 stays the same, or gets worse after DX 12 titles.
They're really not. That's a meme. There are some issues, but they get fixed over time.
Nvidia also has driver issues, contrary to popular belief. They just sweep it under the rug.
Here at home, I have 2 PCs with Nvidia and 1 with AMD. The 2 with Nvidia constantly get driver crashes. The AMD one is just fine.
Consumption wise, it is a bit higher, but with a 750W PSU, you have nothing to worry about. You can even Crossfire 2 390s in that.
That's nice to hear (read). Thank you, I might decide for the 390 instead.
Is that really true? I want to play in 1080p, may be 2 monitors in the future but no 1440p, I can't finde 1440 monitors in my country, impossible.
Power consumption isn't really that bad, if you live in a hot place you might want to think about it, probably puts out about 20-33% more heat output than the alternative. Driver wise, both companies are releasing equally bad drivers.
>I BUY INTEL AND NVIDIA PRODUCTS FOR MY WIFE'S SON
>I WANT TO PAY FULL PRICE FOR A THREE POINT FIVE GIGABYTE GDDR5 CARD
i5 performance changes little from the lower end i5 to the top end. All it changes it the stock frequency, that's it. Performance wise, it's barely noticeable, especially in games.
Even with 2 monitors, your GPU will be the one doing the extra work, not the CPU.
A lower end i5 is more than fine. Hell, even going with Haswell at this point is more than what you'll need. Skylake is botnet without any real improvement over Haswell besides muh efficiency
And yet the 8350 or 6300 still offers more value for your money despite all the bullshit because only intel shills care about single threaded performance on a desktop platform
just like only android shills care about multithreaded performance on a fucking phone where only one core matters 99% of the time.
you guys have it flipped. it's all topsy turvy on y'all mothafuckas
I will always buy Intel™ because I only play games with Intel Inside™. Intel also pioneers innovative new technologies like Hyper Threading Technology™, Intel Rapid Start Technology™ and the highest quality chipsets to ever grace motherboards.
When I boot up with a brand new Intel™ i7™ with the latest Z chipset, I can enjoy the games the way they where meant to be with Intel Inside™. Intel™ also delivers a far more silkysmooth experience with its Hyper Threading Technology™.
Intel i5™ is also very power efficient. A processor is the most power hungry device in your house. Air conditioners, water heaters, lights, etc all use less power than a processor. Which is why Intel™ puts gamers first by ensuring that their gaming experience is of the highest quality while looking out for gamers by giving them the most value in their electrical bill.
At this point in time, there's really no reasons to consider an AMD processor at all. I tried once, it caused so much heat that it exploded and nearly burnt down my house. It also consumed so much power that it produced an EMP and destroyed not only the rest of my computer but my entire neighborhood.
Intel™ also pioneered how useless MORE CORES is with the i™ series processors. Years ago, everyone thought MORE CORES were the future. Now, Intel™ has debunked that myth entirely and increased efficiency. Now you can save thousands a year in electricity thanks to Intel™ with its powerful IPC. MORE CORES will never be part of Intel's™ line up.
It's quite clear that OPs an AMD shill trying to convince you to settle on something less than the optimal experience with Intel Inside™. Intel™ is the only real way to play games. We have seen recently that they offer incredible libraries for software developers like Intel C++ Compiler. He is probably too poor to afford the Intel Inside™ experience and can not afford to play any games.
Don't be a poor gamer with bad chipsets and a huge power bills. Play games with Intel Inside™
I will always buy AMD™ because the future is fusion™. AMD also pioneers new innovative technologies like Cool N' Quiet™, CMT™, and the hottest quality processors to ever grace motherboards.
When I boot up with a brand new AMD™ FX™ with the latest hot Radeon™ graphics, I can enjoy the games the way they where meant to be with AMD Inside™. AMD™ also delivers a far more exciting experience by keeping you on your toes with its drivers and software. There is never a dull moment with AMD™.
AMD FX™ is also very eco friendly. A processor is the most power hungry device in your house. Air conditioners, water heaters, lights, etc all use less power than a processor. Which is why AMD™ puts gamers first by ensuring that their gaming experience is of the highest quality while looking out for gamers by giving them the most value in their electrical bill. During cold winter months your AMD FX™ processor can also act as a space heater enabling you to safe money by turning off your house heater. Still cold? Add a Radeon™ graphics to make yourself extra cozy.
AMD™ also pioneered how useless LESS CORES is with the i™ series processors. Years ago, everyone thought MORE CORES were a joke. Now, AMD™ has debunked that myth entirely and increased efficiency. Now you can save thousands a year in electricity thanks to AMD by acting as a space heater as well™ with its MORE CORES. LESS CORES will never be part of Intel's™ line up.
It's quite clear that OPs an Intel shill™ trying to convince you to settle on something less than the optimal experience with AMD™. AMD™is the only real way to play games. We have seen recently that they offer incredible libraries for software developers like TressFX. He is probably too poor to afford the AMD™ experience and to cold to play any games.
Don't be a poor gamer with bad chipsets and a huge power bills. The future is fusion™
you talk to about.... 95% of owners and they will all tell you this same exact thing, at 1080p, 3.5gb meme is simply a meme. its not real.
when talking to the other 5%, who have 1440p, 98% of them will simply tell you its the gpu that craps out first, not vram issue.
early on yes there was issues, but nvidia released a lot of drivers after which, which easily "corrected" the problem.
yeah it sucks its really a 3.5gb card with super slow ass 512mb second partition, but the card itself nevertheless is great. the vram issue doesn't hurt it.
>On GTX 980, Shadows of Mordor drops about 24% on GTX 980 and 25% on GTX 970, a 1% difference. On Battlefield 4, the drop is 47% on GTX 980 and 50% on GTX 970, a 3% difference. On CoD: AW, the drop is 41% on GTX 980 and 44% on GTX 970, a 3% difference. As you can see, there is very little change in the performance of the GTX 970 relative to GTX 980 on these games when it is using the 0.5GB segment.”
I have one paired with an i5 4440, before had a FX8350.
Get a cheap board with a i5 4400 and you will be fine at stock clocks and stock cooler.
Get a FX8350 and a aftermarket cooler with a good motherboard and push it to 4.6Ghz to compete with the i5 4440.
Take your pick.
>no async compute
>performs worse, has less than half the VRAM and worse DX12 support than its only competitor, the R9 390
Are you seriously retarded?
>95% of owners and they will all tell you this same exact thing, at 1080p, 3.5gb meme is simply a meme. its not real.
What happens in the next few years as new games start consistently using more than 3 GB of VRAM at 1080p, you fucking retard?
We know it appears to be fine for now, but VRAM requirements increase over time and it's a matter of time until you have a very handicapped card you your hands while people who bought 290s, 290Xs and 980s don't, let alone 390s and 390Xs.
Also, about your quote from PCGamer, the issue is not framerate dropping, you clueless idiot. The average framerate barely changes. But when accessing the last 0.5 GB frametimes dramatically increase, so while measured average FPS is almost the same, you still feel the stutterfest.
R9-390 is significantly more powerfull for the same money even in DX11
You set tesselation limiter to x16 and its almost as fast as a fucking gtx 980 in the Witcher WITH the gameworks shit turned to maximum settings (looks identical but now the AMD card takes no penalty while the 980 slows by 17-24%)
on top of that next DX12 games will be firmly in AMD's camp until nvidia puts ACE's on its GPUs so the 390 is future proofed
gtx 970 is a terrible fucking buy it is objectivly worse in every single category except power draw and the difference between the cards doesnt matter unless you live in a socialist shithole that charges a dollar or more per KwH of electricy use.
for the ammount you spent on that 980 you could have bought a Fury which is much faster and more future proof OR a Fury Nano which is about the same speed but more power efficient and so small you can stick it in a pc the size of a shoebox
before the price drops you might have had something but the gtx 980 is officially nigger-tier now
>my 3.5gb meme
I'm sorry that when I updated my pc, my current PSU had enough power to run a 970 but not a 390, I'm sorry that thanks to employee discounts and sponsorship deals with nvidia and my work, I could get my 970 a lot cheaper then a 390
Also the 390 and the 970 trade blows on benchmarks. And most games are optimized for nvidia gameworks
over AMD's alternative.
Also by the time you need more then 3.5gb on 1080 the 970 or 390 won't be enough anyway...
I was in this position. I bought a Sapphire Fury. It's been great, it can handle the Witcher 3 at 1440p no problem and is nice and quiet, too. I'd look for up-to-date benchmarks as the reviewers all wrote their stuff when the card wasn't out yet/just coming out, and the drivers are a ton better now, the new Fury nitro reviews could be good for this.
I bought a freesync monitor for my Fury to replace my ancient monitor, which has been fun. Really struggle to tell the difference between 45fps freesync and normal 60fps, which gives it more room to age.
980 will probably overclock better, my Fury can't go above 15% OC, ie, 1150MHz. So if you're a heavy overclocker and get lucky with the silicon lottery, you might well eek out more performance in DX11 on the 980.
Another down side with the Fury is gamesworks stuff cripple it, turning hairworks will take you from 60 fps to 40 fps.
A factor for me was that I run my games in a virtual machine with a PCI passthrough. The 980's drivers self destruct when they detect this setup to get you to buy a quadro. Fury doesn't give a fuck and happily initializes for the VM in seconds.
So I went for the Fury, more raw power and so probably will age better, like the 290 has aged much better than a 770 and 780 and even matches the 780-ti/970 if flashed to 390 or simply OCed a little.
I should note that if you're reading about people flashing their Furys to Fury-Xs, that was only possible for a handful of early cards and only a few of them were stable in the fully unlocked config, so don't bank on that.
If you want any more info about the Fury let me know.
Thanks you for the actual unbiased answer instead of the usual circle-jerk fanboy shit.
I've always used nvidia without question, but am now looking at getting similar performance for less of a price. I'm not one for OCing really.
My previous card a 680 I think, just packed up on me. If I plug it into either PCI-E slot the PC just doesn't start at all, so now running WoW (don't judge, temporarily gave up proper PC gaming when card died) at around 24-29 fps which is both fucking shocking and nauseating.
I'll check out some up to date bench marks of the Fury. Hopefully it'll drop down in price even more when the new range launches. I don't particularly care for having the latest and greatest, I'm not a faggy autist. Thanks again.
Yeah same, Fury was my first AMD (not including ATI) card, I had a 680 at one point too. If you're not one for OCing then the Fury is probably a better bet, as there's a much smaller difference between stock Fury and OCed Fury than there is between stock 980 and OCed 980.
I wouldn't count on a price drop soon though, AMD aren't expected to launch their top shelf 14nm cards until late in the year so you'll be waiting nearly a year for that.