GPU Comparision

GarIT

Do sites like passmark give accurate real word comparisons?

I'm looking at building my first custom pc and trying to see if it is worthwhile. Right now I've a laptop with a 635m GT card and it can play pretty much anything on low settings. On passmark its given a score of approx 800, where the 970 is given a score of 8800 which is 11 times better, the AMD 280X is rated about 6600 which is about 8 times better, will that actually show in games and is it worth the money. For it to be worthwhile shelling out 1k on a computer(including monitor/windows) I'd be wanting max settings on all games at 1080p and 60 fps, would the 280x do that or if I had to the 970?.

Am I being realistic or expecting too much? I read someone said that the 280X should play DayZ on medium settings, but my laptop can play it on low-medium easily, is the 280X really not that much better, based on passmark if I can play a game on low I would have thought the 280X would do ultra with no problems.

BloodBath

They are relatively accurate but game performance will vary depending on the game.

Dayz is a terribly optimised game so I wouldn't use that as a basis for anything. If the goal is to play any game at max settings with 1080p/60fps then a 970 is the card to get.

If you are happy with max settings in most games and slightly lower in others then a 280 or 280x is fine.

GarIT

BloodBath wrote: »

They are relatively accurate but game performance will vary depending on the game.

Dayz is a terribly optimised game so I wouldn't use that as a basis for anything. If the goal is to play any game at max settings with 1080p/60fps then a 970 is the card to get.

If you are happy with max settings in most games and slightly lower in others then a 280 or 280x is fine.

Thanks, I had just seen a few things to say that desktop GPUs weren't as powerful as I had expected but I've just seen benchmarks there that says the 280x will give 100fps in F1 2014 on Ultra and similar in Civ: BE so I'd be very happy with that, obviously the 970 is a good upgrade so it will be down to budget. I'll probably post a final build here to see what people think.

TerrorFirmer

If you're getting by with a GT635m, going to an R9 280 is like going from night to day.

DayZ isn't particularly well optimized, but I'm willing to bet that when you say 'low-medium' on your GT635m, the framerate is pretty poor.

Generally when people refer to what settings a desktop card can run a game at, they're referring to the level it can run a game at circa 60 frames per second.

An r9 280 will run DayZ at 1920x1080 at high settings fantastically.

A GT635M would be looking at maybe 1024x768 lowish settings at 25-35fps.

So rest assured it is an absolutely titanic difference.

GarIT

TerrorFirmer wrote: »

If you're getting by with a GT635m, going to an R9 280 is like going from night to day.

DayZ isn't particularly well optimized, but I'm willing to bet that when you say 'low-medium' on your GT635m, the framerate is pretty poor.

Generally when people refer to what settings a desktop card can run a game at, they're referring to the level it can run a game at circa 60 frames per second.

An r9 280 will run DayZ at 1920x1080 at high settings fantastically.

A GT635M would be looking at maybe 1024x768 lowish settings at 25-35fps.

So rest assured it is an absolutely titanic difference.

I think the resolution is a bit higher than that but yeah I don't think the current laptop would go over 30fps on low.

Thanks.