my next step?

>>57117453
Replace the GPU, add an SSD, upgrade to Windows 10.

Optional: get a better monitor.

Everything else can stay.

>>57117489

Any reccommendations on GPUs?

I prefer AMD but I don't believe they have released the new card right?

>>57117637
RX480

>>57117809

Looks like a good card. When is AMD releasing their new wave of cards though?

File: 71552a18bcb1a7169321b7fb03e24e79.png (26KB, 563x453px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 563x453px

>>57117453
Personally it all depends on how much your dumping into your upgrades. Look at whats bottlenecking if your looking for performance.

Currently your R9 200 is pretty far gone in terms of 60 fps gaming. I would say you should upgrade up to a GTX 970 (if you have more money i would spring for a GTX 980 or 1070/1080)

However if your budget is tight go for a GTX 970 to a 120GB SSD for your OS and since your CPU is 1150 chipset you may want to go to a i7 4790K.

Don't listen to the AMD cucks here, I've personally had a 295x2 and turned that shit in to get my SLI 980's. Best thing they can offer is the nano

>>57119495
they havent announced anything but there are rumors of 475 and 465

>>57119630
why would he spring for a 980 when a 1060 is stronger(or at worst even) and cheaper

>>57119630

hmm decisions. Honestly, I was only looking to update the GPU. I just don't want to buy a upgrade when apparently new cards may be right around the corner. possibly.

How does the RX480 compare to some of the equivalent nvidia cards?

>>57117453
instal gentoo

>>57119765
it's slightly weaker than the 1060 3gb which has less streaming processors and cuda cores than the 1060 6gb.

The 1060 is really strong overall and should get 60+ in i think everything at 1080p with highest settings

>>57119914

Jesus, I have to try and educate myself on GPu's more. I kind of lost you there. Not familiar with streaming processors. The card I was looking at was this one

https://www.amazon.com/Sapphire-Radeon-backplate-Graphics-11260-01-20G/dp/B01J1M4CZG/ref=sr_1_2?s=pc&ie=UTF8&qid=1476737996&sr=1-2&keywords=rx480

>>57119979
it's good for 1080p but I think the 1060 6gb is stronger and cheaper.

You should check some benchmarks, but the streaming processor and cuda core deficit basically means the card is weaker even if it has the same clock speed as a 1060 6gb

File: nvidia-geforce-gtx-1060-1920x1080-performance.png (93KB, 650x852px) Image search: [Google]

93KB, 650x852px

>>57119689
Do you enjoy talking out of your ass?

>>57117453
For better graphics performance, you should consider 8-16gb of ddr4 along with a ddr4->ddr3 adapter.

>>57120025
there is no game in which the 1060 is weaker than a 980 except blops 3 and the witcher 3 and those are within margin of error.

As someone who is newer to GPU's

generally speaking what are the pros and cons of nvidia and what are the pros and cons of AMD?

I know next to nothing about either company. I have taken a look at both of their sites and they both make their cards sound pretty good but if you are a consumer, how would you ever decide?

>>57120176
i'll tell you from my personal point of view:

>nvidia

pros-
>cheaper
>better driver support
>better software in general (shadowplay, gamestream etc)
>generally better performance in 9/10 games
>get sent free beta codes every month

cons-
can't really think of any that i've encountered in the 8 months i've had my nvidia gpu. literally haven't had a single problem. maybe the lack of full dx12/vulkan support might be an argument but it hasn't affected me because i pretty much play older games anyway (dx11, dx9).

>amd

pros-
>better dx12/vulkan support
that's pretty much the only pro i've seen from browsing here

cons
i don't know about all cons but i'll tell you some experiences me and my room mate had with his msi 390

>doesn't work with autodesk and causes glitches in adobe programs
>drivers are very slow to release (friend couldn't play gta 5 and ff ix for a full 6 months because the driver was bugged on all 3xx cards)
>runs generally hotter and uses more power than nvidia equivalents but it's really a non issue unless you live in a shithole
>worse performance in older games (dx11, dx9) and when running emulators (pcxs2 ogl)

>>57120321
isnt nvidia generally more expensive?

>>57120176

>Windows 7 / 8 / whatever
You get Nvidia 100% of the time. This is for if you, like myself, will not use W10 because Nvidia outperforms AMD pretty much undeniably

>Windows 10
This is where it splits. AMD has much better DX12 performance which is W10 only and the drivers will only get better over time. However in most games right now Nvidia has the superior cards. If you arent going to replace you cards for 4 or so years then you go AMD for sure. Nvidia has allegations of gimping their old cards while AMDs get better but I personally dont think thats true.

If you are going higher than 1080p resolution you need either a GTX 1070 or 1080.

For 1080p you have a few tiers.
>Ok tier
You either get an RX470 or you wait for the GTX 1050 which comes later this month. DO NOT BUY any GTX/AMD that isnt a 1xxx/4xx model. Just dont.

>Good tier
You get an RX 480 4gb or GTX 1060 3gb. Out of these the 480 is probably superior

>Best 1080p performance with little cost waste
You get a RX 480 8gb or a GTX 1060 6gb. In my opinion I would get the 1060.

The price points and details are things you have to research.

>>57120360
not where i live. for example the reference 480 is more expensive than a 1060 (6gb) here. i know americans have a $50 price difference between the two products but i'm still waiting for that to come into affect over here but i have a feeling it never will.

>>57120421
for me they're about the same but the 1060 can get really expensive depending on the manufacturer

>>57120459
>can get really expensive depending on the manufacturer

as is the case with anything i guess. at baseline prices, and if i was looking to buy the cheapest product out of the two, the nvidia card will always have the cheaper baseline price. i understand what you mean though.

File: b1_1920_12.jpg (139KB, 548x629px)

139KB, 548x629px

>>57117453
Basically you're fine, but I'd get an RX 470/480 (you can stay with your 280x if you want). Also a cheap 240GB SSD.

>>57119630
>upgrade up to a GTX 970
Fuck no retard, 3GB 1060 beats a 970

>a 120GB SSD
Again, fuck no. 120GB is cramped, and a 240GB is $20 more.

>>57119630
>I've personally had a 295x2 and turned that shit in to get my SLI 980's
Either purchase disqualifies you from ever giving build/upgrade advice

>>57119765
>RX480 compare to some of the equivalent nvidia cards
Depends on what you're playing. RX480 can max something like Overwatch at 60FPS. New games the 480 outperforms the 1060.

>>57119914
>it's slightly weaker than the 1060 3gb
You're fucking retard, pic related

>>57120025
Do you even know what you posted, stupid tripfag? Your pic shows that the 6GB 1060 is better than the 4GB 980

Both of these posters are retarded. The correct answers will be in the next post.

>>57120321
>nvidia pros
>cheaper
No
>better driver support
No, or only slightly. Used to be true but not anymore
>better software in general (shadowplay, gamestream etc)
Yes
>generally better performance in 9/10 games
No / depends on what you're playing

>amd cons
>the driver was bugged on all 3xx cards
No
>runs generally hotter and uses more power than nvidia equivalents
Yes, but on the new gen 14nm cards it doesn't matter

>>57120384
>Windows 7 / 8 / whatever
>You get Nvidia 100% of the time
All sites agree that the 4GB 380 has better performance than the 4GB 960. Both are midrange DX11/Win7,8 cards

>AMD has much better DX12 performance which is W10 only and the drivers will only get better over time. However in most games right now Nvidia has the superior cards.
Paritally correct, but all new AMD cards (except 460) can max old games, so it doesn't matter if the RX 480 gets 100FPS while the 1060 gets 120FPS because your monitor is probably 60Hz. Both cards display a locked 60FPS.

Your tiers are all kinds of fucked up.

>>57120978
Pointless graph because it doesn't take into account the driver overhead of the AMD card. The OP isn't running an 8 core, 16 thread CPU and as such isn't going to pull anywhere near the same FPS using an RX 480.

>>57120176
This applies only to the new gen of cards.

Nvidia 3GB 1060, 6GB 1060, 1070, 1080
AMD 460, 470, 480

Nvidia pros
>recording software
>tessellation performance
>power efficient
>good DX11 performance
>when the 1050Ti releases AMD will have no competing card
>has only good high end card (1070)

Nvidia cons
>Poor price/perf (beaten by 470/480) at mid range
>Poor performance outlook on new games

AMD pros
>cheaper for performance tier
>more RAM at mid range (exception is 6GB 1060)
>better price/perf (not the same as cheaper)
>good performance outlook
>games are developed for AMD powered consoles first
>DX12 is a huge benefit to GCN architecture

AMD cons
>less power efficient
>slightly worse driver support and worse software in general
>no new high end card yet

>>57121144
>Pointless graph because it doesn't take into account the driver overhead of the AMD card.
It's on DX12 retard. Virtually no driver overhead.

>>57120384
Correct 1080p teirs

Medium Settings or 30FPS or both
>1050 (unreleased) / 460
>1050Ti (unreleased)

High Settings 60FPS
>470 beats 3GB 1060
>480 beats 6GB 1060

144Hz monitor
>1070

OP here. using the specs in my OP picture, would I have to worry about bottle necking? I have heard of the term before but I never really understood it and what causes it. I wonder about bottle necking if I were to get a RX480.

>>57119630
>Upgrade to a 970
>Upgrade
>970

Don't listen to this retard

>>57121107
https://steamcommunity.com/app/271590/discussions/0/483367798510496674/

it took them 6 months to fix this. he could only play in dx10 mode for the whole 6 months.

>>57119630
>buying dual gpu cards
>shilling for free
dumbass

>>57121144
driver overhead is meme unless you have a shit slow cpu

File: c3w_1920vh.png (16KB, 582x368px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 582x368px

>>57122145

'no'

>>57117453

Just get an SSD and a gfx.

120gigs minimum but if you want some games for them loadtimes on your SSD then go bigger.

Graphics card depends so much on the budget. Wouldnt go under 1060 or 480 since this is an upgrade. Also dont worry about bottlenecking meme.

>>57120176
the shills here will shill Nvidia for days but if your only gaming at 1080p and 1 monitor then you don't need more than a GTX1060 or RX470 get whatever is cheaper where you live

>>57119765
its better dont listen to the shills

File: hqdefault.jpg (18KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 480x360px

>>57122159
>slavbenchmarks from literally who?
Nice try (((nvidia))) merchant

File: proz intel.jpg (110KB, 626x832px)

110KB, 626x832px

>>57122159
>cherrypicking
You're posting a game that's over four years old, fuck off. Crysis 3 can't even use hyperthreading

The only games that have problems in DX11 with driver overhead are GTAV and the shitshow that is FO4.

>>57124789
and they both have gameworks
gee what a coincidence

get a Nvidia before your house burns down

File: rx temps.png (130KB, 1000x489px) Image search: [Google]

130KB, 1000x489px

>>57126265
My RX 470 literally idles at 30 degrees, that's lower than most Nvidia cards shill