Just got a GTX 960 to upgrade muh rig, finally time to play other games than cs 1.6.
Any newer but somewhat cheap games to try out? Looking for a fun and beautiful experience.
> It's like $180 for the 960 and $200+ for the 380x
Well yes because the 380x has no direct equivalent from Nvidia. The 380 is the 960 competitor. Even in bongland the 960 is stupid because it is around 380 money and slower.
I got my 960 for £155 with MGS V which I was going to buy anyway, so it was basically £125.
It's hard to go AMD considering the power consumption, fan noise and worse optimisation. Hopefully they can close that gap that's been around since Kepler soon.
>It's hard to go AMD considering the power consumption, fan noise and worse optimisation. Hopefully they can close that gap that's been around since Kepler soon.
Not only is the 380 faster it uses similar levels of power. As for the kepler gap? lel you need to check yourself - these days a 290x is competing close to a 980 when it was originally launched to best the 780.
In practice, people are talking of needing fans on high RPM to maintain decent temps, and driver issues. Raw performance wise they're great, but I'm getting older and starting to value other factors.
Said it in the other thread: a small 960 at 123 bucks was the best bang on the buck in the world, I literally couldn't do wrong if I tried. I could understand if you could find a 280 for that much money, but then the relatively small advantage is taken back by heat and noise.
>He fell for the Nvidia power draw meme
i got a 950 and i love it
>paying $300~ for a graphics card
>being too poor to afford a GTX 980 Ti and run multiple monitors and games at the same on max settings at 100+ fps per game
I can only imagine how much it sucks to be poor and not have the latest and greatest. I couldn't live without this, that's for sure.
If you ever played a new game with every setting max, and it running smoother then a young mail order brides ass then you would understand why having the best graphics card matters.
>get AMD MSI 390
>fans aren't overly loud unless at 100% (which never happens unless I set it at that on purpose)
>temps never exceed 50C
>it runs most games at 1440p, 60fps at high settings
>never have any driver issues
it just werks
You fucked up, OP.
Dunno, Tomb Raider can be ultraed at near perfect 60fps, and Zestiria runs at 4x res without a hiccup. It's clearly not made for anything higher than that, but for 1080p it's fine.
i enjoy games. i also enjoy other things that don't involve sitting in front of a computer all day. i'll take some quality times out with my mates over some more texels and tris any day
GTA V benchmark is not a really good way of compaing performance, I had a lot of stuttering with my old 7870 while actually playing the game but everything was perfect when I loaded the benchmark
To be fair 1) this is a 290x and 2) custom cooling.
Point is though it can be done.
>960 is the same speed as a rebrand of a 4 year old card
I have money, but in fact I don't think I need that much of an upgrade.
I miss newer titles, that I can't play them, but to be honest I just want to try them out and I bet I wouldn't get into even half of them.
The way its meant to be played. Consider the 7970 though - that card has bested the following:
and these days it rivals a 780 at times, an impossibility when the 780 launched.
The 7970 really is the greatest card ever built.
Its overclocked vs a 390 (which has base clocks of 1ghz).
>I miss newer titles, that I can't play them, but to be honest I just want to try them out and I bet I wouldn't get into even half of them.
Get a used 770/280x/290 and wait for the new gen, maybe? You'll save a lot of money
As it is fairly rare.
That is because there is technically 8gb of vram in the system (its why the 295x2 is marketed as an 8gb card and why the loltastic titan z is a 12gb card).
Best 1080p card right now. PRO TIP: when it turns up go into your overclocking software of choice and up the power limit to +50%.
You can thank me later.
>The 7970 really is the greatest card ever built.
And it lives in the form of the 280X
It's a fantastic card but nowadays I'd pick a 380X over it because of power consumption and heat, and it's not THAT much worse
>That is because there is technically 8gb of vram in the system
It's still a very big issue using c-u-c-k-e-d ram even if it's combined 8gb. The CPU and mobo doesn't know it has 1gb of c-u-c-k ram. You will run into a shitload of problems when it access that bad ram. You should never sli a 970 because of this.
>nvidiot can't get over the fact that AMD is superior at certain prices
The 960 is a shitty card for the money and the 380 is simply superior, no matter how hard you try to convince yourself otherwise.
I'd pick the 380x too, simply because it supports freesync for vidya (280x only does for video playback) and a few other things.
However a cheap used 280x could be the steal of the century. Those cheap 290's that were floating around a few months back where staggering deals, 970 tier performance for what is now high end 960 money.
The 970 is housefires next to the 390.
I know they're better, I strongly recommend them. But holy shit it's fucking constant obnoxious fanboy bullshit and meme spouting, the brand loyalty is insane. I miss chill pc threads where people just suggested cases and upgrades and explained stuff to new builders without punctuating all their sentences with cück.
The msi 390x (not the 390 though) is a thingy of beauty to behold as it shows what happens when you give zero fucks and just clock that shit up and sell it.
The msi 390x runs at a staggering 1100mhz and a voltage capable of feeding that yet remains fairly cool.
Just got this in the mail this morning
Word on the street is Polaris will release first.
I chose the 960 because Nvidia has more support and I'm familiar with them
GCN's sweet spot is around 850mhz for temps vs power draw. 1100mhz out of the box is no joke.
However speaking of (core) clocks, fucking bring it motherfucker.
>arguing about this shit a year after the fact
what have you people been doing
Bought a 960 soon after it came out, pretty happy with it, although I'd get an r9 380/380x if I was buying now.
I think most people criticizing it fail to take into account that it's very light on power and can run on a weak PSU and has tons of room for OC, both features that the current AMD series lack.
How fucked is noVidia?
What card should I get if I want to max Witcher 3 at 1080p 60? Hair works excluded of course. I tried playing it on my PS4 since my current card sucks, but it fucking hurt my eye playing it.
Obviously I'll be playing other games it's just I really want to play the witcher right now.
Given how AMD has been failing to keep up with Nvidia flagship cards not likely. Although we won't know until these cards are released and we can get some unbiased benchmarks.
not much, considering nvidia will have HBM and reduced manufacturing process next gen as well.
Get max payne 3. Its awesome with this bad boy.
>Too bad they run hot as fuck.
Its weird. All my games ran fine until I played FEAR. Fear wouldn't run properly because it was overheating...a 10 year old game. I ended up buying a water cooler and now its fine but wtf technology.
Draw distance, reflections, some effects like DoF, physics objects like vegetation and shit.
>got mod to increase the grass rendering distance because of the shitty lod in witcher 2
>went from 60 to 15 fps in the kaedweni camp
this is my build
>inb4 medium range card and high end CPU and needlessly high RAM memory
i must say i am satisfied. i will updrage some day, but for now i'm ok. i built this as basically a MGS V machine, on september 1st. it runs it maxed out at 60fps 1080i.
surprisingly enough, same goes for fallout 4. i just have to lower god beams a little, and i get 55-60 fps pretty much everywhere
Seriously are AMD drivers just fucked? I keep try to lock Just Cause 3 at 30 fps, but I can shit in the drivers it doesn't do anything in game. This includes stuff like trying to force AA, AF, or vsync in other games too.
>medium range card and high end CPU
Was this a pre-built?
Now be honest, it's okay if you haven't built anything before.
Kind of rustles my jimmies when I see pre-builts advertised as "super future-proof monsters" with skylake i7's and fucking 750ti's in them.
wanna rage a bit?
i'm kind of impaired with this shit, didn't want to mess things up.
so i gave a guy i know who build PC's 1000 bucks (900 euros) and that's what i have now.
well its not THAAAAT BAAAD.
if your gpu is too slow you can always lower the settings. but most of the time if cpu is bottlenecking youre fucked anyway. also some games like source and source2 based games are cpu heavy, not gpu.
but yea.. i7.. thats fucking useless
I was literally about to buy a GTX 960 but judging by the tone of this thread should I get something like a 280x instead? Or maybe even a 750ti until better cards come down in price?
But I have a pc that I spent 600 euro on just to play cs go and league every other games just feel as if it was made to play on a console. Maybe one day you will have the disposable income I have.
>also some games like source and source2 based games are cpu heavy, not gpu.
Only if you have a really terrible CPU, I could run any source game with a phenom x4 with no problems
If you want 0 problems, plan to OC and your PSU is on the weak side - get a 960
If you can deal with some games running badly on day one, can accept the speeds you get out of the box and just want good price/performance - get R9 380
If you want your gfx card to have a heat stroke 7 months down the line go ahead get an r9 series card. After you can sit on the phone with the horrid customer service while he tells you to just uninstall and reinstall the drivers.
depends where you aim at.
Like I have [email protected] but I cant run TF2 at 144fps+ sometimes it just drops and my GPU usage is nowhere close full. I only get great frames with a config that removes eyes from chars and whatnot. Dota 2 is also impossible to keep in such numbers. Drops below 80 in fights. And all Borderlands games get bottlenecked by it. Many console ports struggle to run high fps too.
Is that Melonpan? I would've thought a guy who owns that amount of anime merchandise and actually hires prostitutes to hang around with him at children's paddling pools would be able to afford more than a 960.
>tfw trying to run GTAV on a R9 270X
>tfw all the microstutter from the fps dipping and rising all the time
>tfw not enough VRAM for all the pretty graphics at good fps
Problem with charts like that - while they hold some basis in truth - is that DX in general is setup to cache as much memory as it can get its hands on. Some games are particularly bad for flushing their cache leading to insane vram usage.
STALKER trilogy. A true must-have for PC owners.
Consult this Starting Guide,
then see the /vg/'s huge Stalker General for more tips and links: >>>/vg/stalker
Play in the release order. Start with no mods - only latest patch, OR get the full "Starter Pack" first; these contain bug-fixers and light visual mods that can help performance as well.
Leave big overhauls for later playthrougs. Avoid the "Complete" -mods. Always play on MASTER difficulty for best realism and atmosphere, and disable crosshair.
Don't give up in the beginning! The starting gear sucks ass and first area is quite boring.
wrong on all the others except cheap. TW2 is the worst in its series.
I tried Stalker once and I'm sure I would have dumped a million hours into it if my old toaster didn't struggle to run it at acceptable framerates
I'm getting a decent PC soon and Stalker is on my "games to get immediately after installing and setting up everything" list
Reminder that if you have a mid or lower end processor like i3 or i5, AMDs drivers will kill it.
Must've been one helluva toaster, since at least on the DX8 mode (static lighting), my 2012 craptop with i3 @ 2.1ghz + HD 3000 + 6GB DDR3 gets around 70fps average, with Vsync off, med-high settings, native 1366x768 res, using Starter Pack's mods. My desktop with i5 2500+GTX 560ti+8GB does the same on all high and DX9 FDL.
That being said, STALKER's relatively calm and slow tempo makes it very playable even at lower framerates, IMO.
>tfw haven't upgraded in forever but constantly tell myself "i'll just wait for the new cards"
i feel like now its too late and i might as well wait but i've been telling myself this for awhile now.
Are you fucking kidding me, I have an i5 3470 and R9 270X Sapphire, and I get good FPS in Fallout 4 and decent in GTAV, unfortunately any Sweet FX or Reshade preset drops fps by 10 or more.
Denial is not just a river in Africa, Nvidicuck.
Also by good FPS I mean 60-50, with dips as low as 48 in some areas.
SweetFX doubles the dip amount to unbearable mid 30's at times and so does any kind of MSAA otherwise the fps hovers around the 50s but the texture loading fps dip is far more noticeable when it dips to 40s.
Why the fuck would anyone play on any res beyond 1080 when its already difficult to get stable 60FPS on ultra with MSAA in modern games?
I tried Virtual Super Resolution in GTAV and the performance impact was worse than having MSAA 2x on.
48fps is not the fucking standard we should be going for here.
>I tried Virtual Super Resolution in GTAV and the performance impact was worse than having MSAA 2x on.
No shit anon, it's basically downsampling, of course it's more demanding.
That said, I can pull off a near constant 60 FPS at 1440p in GTA V on an R9 280x.
Its the king of 1080p, nuff said.
well this generation's *60 card is cheaper than the class equivalent in AMD (r9 380) for about the same performance difference. only problem with the 960 is that the 950 has better price per performance on stock clocks.
and its not only raw hardware that you pay for, nvidia are more on their toes when it comes to drivers support.
have the 380 (internet shilled it to me)
drivers keep crashing
it drains power like society drains my soul