Which graphics card?

Zulu

I'm upgrading my old system, and on the look out for a top spec graphics card.
Unfortunately I'm not at the system just now so all I can tell you is that the mother board is the nforce 680i, and that I recently upgraded the RAM to 8GB.

I don't want to buy a whole new rig, and I'm hoping to be able to play the latest games at the best quality (if it's possible) I have a budget of up to a €1000, but would prefer not to exceed €500.

Is it possible to determine the best graphics card with the detail given above?
Is it possible to get the best graphics for new games with that??
And finally, can anyone advise me of which card would best suit my needs???

Many thanks in advance.

ED E

Its socket 775, so you likely have a Core2Duo or Core2Quad. If you've one of the top quads then then changing the graphics card will make a big difference, if not you'll be CPU limited.

Wait till you get to the machine and run Speccy and post the result here. Also list the PSU manually.

With the right CPU an R9 280X would chew through games. The ASUS triple cooler one is nice and should be around €375 I think.

TerrorFirmer

For that budget, easily afford a 4670k, a decent mobo, and a solid card, you can get the 280x for as little as 270-ish if you're budget minded. When you've a budget that big, really no point dropping a massive amount on a card and sticking with a s775 platform.

I know you said you didn't want to but it really would be so much easier to sell that old machine and build a new one....when you've a budget that good, not to mention the sale price of the old machine, it doesn't make much sense to stick with such an outdated platform.

Zulu

So speccy is telling me:

CPU
Intel Core 2 Quad Q6700 @ 2.66GHz
Kentsfield 65nm Technology
RAM
8.00GB Dual-Channel DDR2 @ 333MHz (5-5-5-15)
Motherboard
EVGA 122-CK-NF68 (Socket 775)
Graphics
SyncMaster (1680x1050@60Hz)
768MB NVIDIA GeForce 8800 GTX (XFX Pine Group)

I'll work out the power now when I shut down...

ED E

It'd likely OC really well if thats what you wanted to do, but for best results you could afford to gut it and rebuild.

Zulu

... And the power is a corsair vx 550w

Zulu

ED E wrote: »

It'd likely OC really well if thats what you wanted to do, but for best results you could afford to gut it and rebuild.

Tbh I'm clueless when it comes to over clocking. I'm just looking for the cheapest, simplest, easiest way to get my machine running the latest games at quality level. I was assuming that graphics card upgrade was the easiest way.

What do you think?

ED E

That CPU stock will limit you quite significantly on BF4 today. And over time thatll just get worse.

Overclocking isnt hard, especially if you have a decent cooler. It'd still be good to look at a new 3rd or 4th gen i5 and mobo + the new GPU. If you wanted to you could get a 280X/similar now and do the socket upgrade later.

Zulu

ED E wrote: »

That CPU stock will limit you quite significantly on BF4 today. And over time thatll just get worse.

Overclocking isnt hard, especially if you have a decent cooler. It'd still be good to look at a new 3rd or 4th gen i5 and mobo + the new GPU. If you wanted to you could get a 280X/similar now and do the socket upgrade later.

Really I'm trying to avoid buying a new mobo and processor.... Cause I know it'll lead to ram, and every thing else.

I was hoping to get away with a graphics card upgrade now, then in a year or two doing a complete new rig. Is it doable? ... Or I guess what I'm asking is what's the best I can currently do without replacing cpu and mobo?

Thanks for all the advice so far.
with regard to over clocking, is it just a case of googling it?

TerrorFirmer

Is that an Alienware/Dell?

Zulu

no it's a rig I put together about 5 years ago. (There or there abouts)

Zulu

Is this the Asus you were talking about? Asus AMD Radeon R9 280X 1070MHz 3GB PCI-Express 3.0 HDMI DirectCU II TOP OC

I understand getting it, i will be throttled by my CPU, but I'm guessing it will offer me the best I can get, and it'll be reusable when/if I build a new rig in a years time, no?

Zulu

Well, Wanda reckon lads?

weisses

With your budget

http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=GX-065-HS

http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=BU-157-OE&groupid=43&catid=2479

comes to just over 700 euro

But you can get it cheaper probably because i was lazy and picked a bundle

I would not spend more money on your current setup if you want to play the latest games

But that's my opinion

Stuart085

weisses wrote: »

With your budget

http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=GX-065-HS

http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=BU-157-OE&groupid=43&catid=2479

comes to just over 700 euro

But you can get it cheaper probably because i was lazy and picked a bundle

I would not spend more money on your current setup if you want to play the latest games

But that's my opinion

This. You have a severe bottleneck with that CPU and RAM. You can easily build a 4th gen i5 machine with 8gb DDR3 memory and at least a 3gb HD7950 for €800

SterlingArcher

I get it you want the quick fix and who could blame you. But you are only delaying the inevitably.

Pick up the r9 280. Your PSU can handle it has the right connections.

You will see an improvement. And can use it in a future build when you're ready to fully commit to buying a whole new rig. Sorted.

Zulu

weisses wrote: »

With your budget

http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=GX-065-HS

http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=BU-157-OE&groupid=43&catid=2479

comes to just over 700 euro

But you can get it cheaper probably because i was lazy and picked a bundle

I would not spend more money on your current setup if you want to play the latest games

But that's my opinion

Thanks a million for that. Appreciate it.

SterlingArcher wrote: »

I get it you want the quick fix and who could blame you. But you are only delaying the inevitably.

Pick up the r9 280. Your PSU can handle it has the right connections.

You will see an improvement. And can use it in a future build when you're ready to fully commit to buying a whole new rig. Sorted.

I guess I'm looking for the quickest, cheapest fix. And I get that it's probably the dirtiest.

Argh. Thanks a million for the advice lads.

SterlingArcher

You were gonna have to get a new Gpu anyway, sure at least this way you still play and put some money away when you have it.

Come back and Let us know how it running games. Pm me . I'm interested to know myself.

Zulu

OK folks I haven't pulled the trigger on that card JUST yet,but I've been thinking.

If I got that card,then in a year or so opted to upgrade the mobo, CPU and ram to top of class options, would a second of the same card in SLI configuration get me up to speed?

(I know I'm asking an impossible question by asking you to predict the future, but I'd hate to think that that card would be a waste in a future machine)

I reckon I'll get that card tonight if the above checks out.

Thanks a million for all the help so far...

ED E

People always plan that, Ive done it myself, but the vast majority of the time its better to sell the old card and get a better high end newer single card later on. That said, SLI/Crossfire are due to get better now that reviewers are checking frame times.

If you get a nice card now though you wont need a GPU upgrade for a while anyways.

Zulu

ED E wrote: »

People always plan that, Ive done it myself, but the vast majority of the time its better to sell the old card and get a better high end newer single card later on. That said, SLI/Crossfire are due to get better now that reviewers are checking frame times.

If you get a nice card now though you wont need a GPU upgrade for a while anyways.

so that r9 a nice card that'll save me a GPU upgrade for a while?

jadun

I would recommend this setup if you are planning a 500 upgrade. I'm not sure if you need new Ram

Item|Price
AMD FX-6300 Prozessor, Boxed, Sockel AM3+|€97.80
ASRock 990FX Extreme3, AM3+, ATX|€87.63
8GB G.Skill PC3-12800U CL11-11-11-28|€66.74
Shipping|€18.99
Total|€271.16

7950 3GB

Motherboard has SLI/Crossfire capability. No point getting a new GPU if your processor is going to bottleneck it.

Zulu

jadun wrote: »

I would recommend this setup if you are planning a 500 upgrade.

Item|Price
AMD FX-6300 Prozessor, Boxed, Sockel AM3+|€97.80
ASRock 990FX Extreme3, AM3+, ATX|€87.63
8GB G.Skill PC3-12800U CL11-11-11-28|€66.74
Shipping|€18.99
Total|€271.16

7950 3GB

Motherboard has SLI/Crossfire capability.

and that would be better than my current setup with an r9?

jadun

Zulu wrote: »

and that would be better than my current setup with an r9?

Is your current setup with the quad?

Yes your CPU is going to bottleneck you big time in games. It will barely run battlefield 4. If you look through other threads here the FX6300 is recommend loads. The 7950 will max out any game the 6300 will not bottleneck games for a long long time.

Zulu

jadun wrote: »

Is your current setup with the quad?

Yup.

Yes your CPU is going to bottleneck you big time in games. It will barely run battlefield 4. If you look through other threads here the FX6300 is recommend loads. The 7950 will max out any game the 6300 will not bottleneck games for a long long time.

Ok. I think you've talked me into biting the bullet and just upgrading the whole kit and caboodle. feic ye

...so bearing that in mind, with a MAX budget of €1500 (trying to keep it to €1000), and wanting to put an 250GB SSD (thinking this one: SSD), would you still go with that mobo & Gfx card bundle?

I'm guessing perhaps not. So what would you recommend?

[cheers lads, I know I'm chopping and changing which is frustrating, but I really appropriate all the help you're giving]

Zulu

So I'm thinking the Asus Z87-C S1150 Intel Z87 DDR3 ATX with an i5, but I cant decide between this or this. Is the "unlocked" worth the extra (I'm not going to overclock I reckon. really). With the SSD drive, I'm up to about €460.

So what GFX do you reckon. Is this R9 280x worth the extra? Or should I just go with the GTX 660?

Is this set up worth it overall, or do you guys think I'm making a big mistake (or a few small mistakes).

Thanks lads.

marco_polo

Zulu wrote: »

So I'm thinking the Asus Z87-C S1150 Intel Z87 DDR3 ATX with an i5, but I cant decide between this or this. Is the "unlocked" worth the extra (I'm not going to overclock I reckon. really). With the SSD drive, I'm up to about €460.

So what GFX do you reckon. Is this R9 280x worth the extra? Or should I just go with the GTX 660?

Is this set up worth it overall, or do you guys think I'm making a big mistake (or a few small mistakes).

Thanks lads.

The GTX660 is very overpriced, I wouldn't be paying more than €140-150 for one, its firmly in the a HD7850/7870 midrange bracket of cards

If you aren't overclocking get a cheaper H87 board and a non 'K' version as the overclocking ability is all that you are paying extra for.

Zulu

marco_polo wrote: »

The GTX660 is very overpriced, I wouldn't be paying more than €140-150 for one, its firmly in the a HD7850/7870 midrange bracket of cards

If you aren't overclocking get a cheaper H87 board and a non 'K' version as the overclocking ability is all that you are paying extra for.

Cheers. Other than that, will that give me max settings graphics on the latest games?
Is it an alright setup?

Zulu

marco_polo wrote: »

If you aren't overclocking get a cheaper H87 board and a non 'K' version as the overclocking ability is all that you are paying extra for.

Like this boy?

marco_polo

Zulu wrote: »

Like this boy?

I wopuld have even said this, a decent board unless you could see yourself going Dual GPU in the future.

Not mad on the GPU prices on Dabs4work (unless you can get it without VAT),
but for near max Gaming @1080p I'd be looking at the likes of the GTX760/HD7950 as my minimum entry point, (or GTX770/R280/R280x if you have a little bit more to spend).

Zulu

marco_polo wrote: »

Not mad on the GPU prices on Dabs4work (unless you can get it without VAT),
but for near max Gaming @1080p I'd be looking at the likes of the GTX760/HD7950 as my minimum entry point, (or GTX770/R280/R280x if you have a little bit more to spend).

I can get it without VAT, but once I tie down what I'm getting I'll shop around.
So you mean the 770 or the r9 280x. Which is better? The Radeon is cheaper, but 3GB 1070MHz...???

marco_polo

Zulu wrote: »

I can get it without VAT, but once I tie down what I'm getting I'll shop around.
So you mean the 770 or the r9 280x. Which is better? The Radeon is cheaper, but 3GB 1070MHz...???

There relatively little between the two cards nothing worth losing sleep over anyway. If you can stretch to a card in that price range then either would be a fine choice IMO.

Stuart085

Zulu wrote: »

I can get it without VAT, but once I tie down what I'm getting I'll shop around.
So you mean the 770 or the r9 280x. Which is better? The Radeon is cheaper, but 3GB 1070MHz...???

The 770 benchmarks considerably higher.

marco_polo

Stuart085 wrote: »

The 770 benchmarks considerably higher.

Any reviews I have seen (and I have literally a half a dozen open right now just to be sure) have a couple of FPS in the difference depending on the game?

SterlingArcher

Zulu wrote: »

I can get it without VAT, but once I tie down what I'm getting I'll shop around.
So you mean the 770 or the r9 280x. Which is better? The Radeon is cheaper, but 3GB 1070MHz...???

AMD is probably the way to go. It is cheaper. Has more vram. And with amds mantel soon to be released would seem the more sound investment.

But that said the 770 is slightly more powerful. Both will run games at very high. So you will have no worries there.

BloodBath

That's still a pretty low clock speed on that r280x. You could most likely push that to the 1200-1250 range.

That Asus cooler is a beast. I'd go for the 280x all day.

SterlingArcher

marco_polo wrote: »

Any reviews I have seen (and I have literally a half a dozen open right now just to be sure) have a couple of FPS in the difference depending on the game?

In the actual texel and pixel rates the 770 has a couple of thousands more on both.

But what you said is also true. Gaming wise it just depends some favor AMD cards others nvidia. Either way is no bigg

SterlingArcher

BloodBath wrote: »

That's still a pretty low clock speed on that r280x. You could most likely push that to the 1200-1250 range.

That Asus cooler is a beast. I'd go for the 280x all day.

Agreed Asus cooler is nice ,quiet and well built card all round.

marco_polo

SterlingArcher wrote: »

In the actual texel and pixel rates the 770 has a couple of thousands more on both.

But what you said is also true. Gaming wise it just depends some favor AMD cards others nvidia. Either way is no bigg

Overall the GTX is a shade faster, its simply the word considerably I'd had issue with. All I was saying is that if you're sitting there with a good model one of either one and a nice fat overclock on it, and you're never wishing you had got the other one instead

Stuart085

I've always been an AMD fan, and I would personally buy the 280x if I was given the choice of the two, but the 770 is the faster of the two without Mantle. Whether Mantle changes that is to be seen. http://videocardbenchmark.net/high_end_gpus.html is a handy site for seeing where every single graphics card in existence fairs, bearing in mind that the later AMD cards are not benchmarked with Mantle.

I'll personally be replacing my HD6990 with a 290x.

SterlingArcher

Haha chill Marco or you be getting the AMD fanboi badge ;D

But Yeah I have seen the 770 considerably more powerful on the benchmark using games such as fiction 2 , slight exaggeration , and make believe assault.

marco_polo

Stuart085 wrote: »

I've always been an AMD fan, and I would personally buy the 280x if I was given the choice of the two, but the 770 is the faster of the two without Mantle. Whether Mantle changes that is to be seen. http://videocardbenchmark.net/high_end_gpus.html is a handy site for seeing where every single graphics card in existence fairs, bearing in mind that the later AMD cards are not benchmarked with Mantle.

I'll personally be replacing my HD6990 with a 290x.

Passmark is fine for a rough idea of relative rankings, but the gaming FPS numbers are nothing like thedifference that it is showing there. I have no doubt that the GTX770 is 23% better at whatever the passmark is measuring (probably some sort raw GPU computing I'd imagine), but it doesn't appear to reflect a typical gaming workload.

SterlingArcher wrote: »

Haha chill Marco or you be getting the AMD fanboi badge ;D

But Yeah I have seen the 770 considerably more powerful on the benchmark using games such as fiction 2 , slight exaggeration , and make believe assault.

I am chilled , I told the OP to get whichever so I'd be pretty crap fanboy. :pac:

Zulu

Thanks lads, I really do appreciate it.

Anyone care to recommend RAM for me. Thinking of 16GB. Also, I take it the rest of that package is fine (seeing as no one slated/commented on it)

Also on a final note, I'm thinking this mobo: Asus. I've never heard of ASRock, so I'm a bit sketchy on committing to it.

SterlingArcher

Zulu wrote: »

Thanks lads, I really do appreciate it.

Anyone care to recommend RAM for me. Thinking of 16GB. Also, I take it the rest of that package is fine (seeing as no one slated/commented on it)

Also on a final note, I'm thinking this mobo: Asus. I've never heard of ASRock, so I'm a bit sketchy on committing to it.

Nothing wrong with the Asrock brand. Just a cheaper option. List me there all the parts you're getting so can see them together.

8 gigs is plenty. Hell 4 gigs is all that is needed for gaming 8 is just for the extra. So 16 gigs be money better spent elsewhere. That

would be used for serious computer work.will have no real use gaming wise. And cost a hell of a lot. ram prices are sky high as it is. So even if.you wanted 16 be best to wait till prices come down and pick up the extra 8 later.

Maybe you have said you need the computer for something other than gaming.

Stuart085

SterlingArcher wrote: »

Nothing wrong with the Asrock brand. Just a cheaper option. List me there all the parts you're getting so can see them together.

8 gigs is plenty. Hell 4 gigs is all that is needed for gaming 8 is just for the extra. So 16 gigs be money better spent elsewhere. That

would be used for serious computer work.will have no real use gaming wise. And cost a hell of a lot. ram prices are sky high as it is. So even if.you wanted 16 be best to wait till prices come down and pick up the extra 8 later.

Maybe you have said you need the computer for something other than gaming.

This is not strictly the case. 4gb is not sufficient for high end gaming any more. Battlefield 4, for example recommends 8gb of RAM and there are plenty of newer games that are made to utalise as much available memory as they need.
16gb is the logical amount for future proofing a computer.

Zulu

Sure.
CPU: Intel Core i5-4570 S1150 3.2GHz 6MB Haswell Quad Core Processor.
Mobo: Asus H87M-PRO S1150 Intel H87 DDR3 mATX leaning towards Asus Z87-C S1150 Intel Z87 DDR3 ATX. (It's only a little more expensive, and perhaps I might try overclocking)
GFX: Asus AMD Radeon R9 280X 1070MHz 3GB PCI-Express 3.0 HDMI DirectCU II TOP OC leaning towards Asus GeForce GTX 770 1058MHz 2GB PCI-Express 3.0 HDMI DirectCU II (only because I've always had nvidea).
HD: Samsung 256GB 840 Pro Series SATA 6Gb/s 2.5" Solid State Drive

I'll probably start with 8GB of RAM with a view to moving to 16 in the future.

marco_polo

Stuart085 wrote: »

This is not strictly the case. 4gb is not sufficient for high end gaming any more. Battlefield 4, for example recommends 8gb of RAM and there are plenty of newer games that are made to utalise as much available memory as they need.
16gb is the logical amount for future proofing a computer.

The only thing is that RAM is very expensive at the moment so you are paying a fairly hefty premium for an extra 8GB that you are unlikely to need for a good few years, presuming that the machine that is purely used for gaming.

SterlingArcher

Stuart085 wrote: »

This is not strictly the case. 4gb is not sufficient for high end gaming any more. Battlefield 4, for example recommends 8gb of RAM and there are plenty of newer games that are made to utalise as much available memory as they need.
16gb is the logical amount for future proofing a computer.

yep all very true, but as of price to added performance as of now not really worth it. Ram prices at the moment being the deciding factor.

SterlingArcher

Stuart085 wrote: »

This is not strictly the case. 4gb is not sufficient for high end gaming any more. Battlefield 4, for example recommends 8gb of RAM and there are plenty of newer games that are made to utalise as much available memory as they need.
16gb is the logical amount for future proofing a computer.

yep all very true, but as of price to added performance as of now not really worth it. Ram prices at the moment being the deciding factor.

SterlingArcher

Stuart085 wrote: »

This is not strictly the case. 4gb is not sufficient for high end gaming any more. Battlefield 4, for example recommends 8gb of RAM and there are plenty of newer games that are made to utalise as much available memory as they need.
16gb is the logical amount for future proofing a computer.

as of price to added performance as of now not really worth it. Ram prices at the moment being the deciding factor.

I can run arma 3 on 4 gigs of ram on one pc and 8 on the other no real mind blowing difference.

Stuart085

marco_polo wrote: »

The only thing is that RAM is very expensive at the moment so you are paying a fairly hefty premium for an extra 8GB that you are unlikely to need for a good few years, presuming that the machine that is purely used for gaming.

8gb will be fine for most people. Make sure you get it as a single chip though so you're leaving yourself open to upgrades.

I personally had to upgrade from 8gb to 16gb because I found that it wasn't enough for when I'm gaming with other applications running. I have multiple screens, you see.