PC build thread
- noiseredux
- Next-Gen
- Posts: 38148
- Joined: Fri Nov 14, 2008 1:09 pm
- Contact:
Re: PC build thread
Well Nvidia cards use far less power than AMD... I will come up with a longer response and part list tomorrow.
Re: PC build thread
I never use stock HSF. I find they generate too much ambient noise. I will definitely be getting and aftermarket cooler for my CPU. I usually just go to MicroCenter and browse their offerings, see which one has the biggest fan.
- s1mplehumar
- Next-Gen
- Posts: 5143
- Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 2:26 pm
- Location: Ragol (FORREST 1)
- Contact:
Re: PC build thread
Fiji is bumming me out.
980 Ti is sounding better with each read. I still need a compelling reason to upgrade though.
980 Ti is sounding better with each read. I still need a compelling reason to upgrade though.
Nintendo ID, PSN, XBL: Eronnicus * Steam ID: s1mplehumar * Switch Friend Code: SW-3270-7921-5525
Re: PC build thread
Blizzard Entertainment Software Developer - All comments and views are my own and not representative of the company.
- SpaceBooger
- Moderator
- Posts: 4420
- Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2008 6:40 am
- Location: The AK-Rowdy
- Contact:
Re: PC build thread
Ok I need some help, I want to upgrade my pc's (my current rig) ability to play new games (Arkham Knight, Mordor etc) instead of buying a new gen console. I want to start with my GPU (lm on a limited budget).
I currently have aEVGA SuperClocked GeForce GTX 560 (Fermi) 2GB 256-bit GDDR5 card. It runs things well.
Example:
Arkham City: 1920x1080, V-sync, everything on and at highest levels other than the DirectX11 features and I get 45fps - Very Playable
Shadow of Mordor: 1920x1080, V-sync, Ambient Occlusion off, Shadow and Vegetation quality is low, everything else is set at Medium and I get 35fps - Playable
Arkham Origins: 1920x1080, V-sync, Everything but Ambient Occlusion is set at highest levels 30fps - Very Playable
Arkham Knight: 1280x720, V-sync, everything low 29fps - Playable (since they locked it at 30)
I have V-Sync on all my games because I hate screen tearing and without it on every one of those games max out 20+fps higher than the above but they all tear like crazy.
I guess, my question is without upgrading my CPU will getting a better GPU, specifically a EVGA GeForce GTX 960 4GB 128-Bit GDDR5, card increase the performance enough to justify the price in my current PC?
I currently have aEVGA SuperClocked GeForce GTX 560 (Fermi) 2GB 256-bit GDDR5 card. It runs things well.
Example:
Arkham City: 1920x1080, V-sync, everything on and at highest levels other than the DirectX11 features and I get 45fps - Very Playable
Shadow of Mordor: 1920x1080, V-sync, Ambient Occlusion off, Shadow and Vegetation quality is low, everything else is set at Medium and I get 35fps - Playable
Arkham Origins: 1920x1080, V-sync, Everything but Ambient Occlusion is set at highest levels 30fps - Very Playable
Arkham Knight: 1280x720, V-sync, everything low 29fps - Playable (since they locked it at 30)
I have V-Sync on all my games because I hate screen tearing and without it on every one of those games max out 20+fps higher than the above but they all tear like crazy.
I guess, my question is without upgrading my CPU will getting a better GPU, specifically a EVGA GeForce GTX 960 4GB 128-Bit GDDR5, card increase the performance enough to justify the price in my current PC?
- SpaceBooger
- Moderator
- Posts: 4420
- Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2008 6:40 am
- Location: The AK-Rowdy
- Contact:
Re: PC build thread
Any suggestions on if upgrading my gpu will make a huge difference or not?
- Cronozilla
- Next-Gen
- Posts: 2609
- Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2012 8:15 pm
- Location: Oregon, USA.
Re: PC build thread
Something along the lines of the GTX 970 would blow that out of the water (You would even get some better performance with a 760 or 960) It comes down to what the card itself can do, there's not really a lot in that system that'd be bottlenecking the GPU.
Keep in mind you have the one AM3+ board that uses an nvidia chipset.
You might want to update the CPU as well if you're experiencing any issues with load. You can toss up to a AMD FX 8370 in that machine with no issue.
RAM seems OK, if you're getting slow down not related to the CPU (it's very easy to find out, just take a look at the taskmanager/process explorer and look at what the CPU load is. If it's low and the system is slowing down, the CPU isn't the issue), then it's likely an HDD speed issue. And SSD would help with that.
Keep in mind, the board that's in that is a little old, so you should check for a BIOS update. It might not support the newer FX chips in the current state.
Keep in mind you have the one AM3+ board that uses an nvidia chipset.
You might want to update the CPU as well if you're experiencing any issues with load. You can toss up to a AMD FX 8370 in that machine with no issue.
RAM seems OK, if you're getting slow down not related to the CPU (it's very easy to find out, just take a look at the taskmanager/process explorer and look at what the CPU load is. If it's low and the system is slowing down, the CPU isn't the issue), then it's likely an HDD speed issue. And SSD would help with that.
Keep in mind, the board that's in that is a little old, so you should check for a BIOS update. It might not support the newer FX chips in the current state.
- SpaceBooger
- Moderator
- Posts: 4420
- Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2008 6:40 am
- Location: The AK-Rowdy
- Contact:
Re: PC build thread
Will a 4gb 960 be a worthy upgrade? I read somewhere my 2gb 560's ram is 256bit and the 960's 4gb is 128bit. Will that make a difference? I just want to make sure if I spend $200 it will be worth it with the games I listed.Cronozilla wrote:Something along the lines of the GTX 970 would blow that out of the water (You would even get some better performance with a 760 or 960) It comes down to what the card itself can do, there's not really a lot in that system that'd be bottlenecking the GPU.
Keep in mind you have the one AM3+ board that uses an nvidia chipset.
You might want to update the CPU as well if you're experiencing any issues with load. You can toss up to a AMD FX 8370 in that machine with no issue.
RAM seems OK, if you're getting slow down not related to the CPU (it's very easy to find out, just take a look at the taskmanager/process explorer and look at what the CPU load is. If it's low and the system is slowing down, the CPU isn't the issue), then it's likely an HDD speed issue. And SSD would help with that.
Keep in mind, the board that's in that is a little old, so you should check for a BIOS update. It might not support the newer FX chips in the current state.
- Cronozilla
- Next-Gen
- Posts: 2609
- Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2012 8:15 pm
- Location: Oregon, USA.
Re: PC build thread
If you want to see how a card performs, just look it up on YouTube with some game, I'm sure someone has benched a GTX 960 with Arkham City, for instance.
RAM will help, you currently have a 1GB card, that's being filled by just about any game you're looking to play. I went from a GTX 460 1GB to a GTX 560 2GB, the difference was night and day. It's going to be a significant (i.e. more than 2-5fps) increase.
The bandwidth of the memory on the card can matter, sure, but that's more about throughput. Currently, your card might not be able to hold everything it'd otherwise operate on. Most games at 1080P will max out around 3GB of memory usage on the card, outside of specific titles like Max Payne 3 and Skyrim with mods, they'll take up whatever you give them.
Looking at benchmarks (that I can actually find) online something like Arkham Origins or Arkham City will get a 10fps increase at similar settings with a GTX 960 over a GTX 560. But something like Witcher 3 the difference between the cards is the difference between playable at 1080P and not. The 560 will be in the 30s fps range on low settings at 720p resolution. On a 960, 1080p, medium settings, and it'll be in the 40s. That's a big difference.
The 960 does get a performance hit because of the bandwidth, but that's mostly compared to other GTX900 cards. The chipset being used is a different architecture than the 500 series, there's more cores, more memory, and higher clock speeds. If the bus is slower, that won't necessarily break that or make it worse than something from 5 years ago. (Yes, that is how old the GTX 560 is)
I only said 960, because it's going to be the easiest to find for deals and variety. But if you want to go hunting down a 770 that might be cheaper (they're around $300, I think), that'll perform better than a 960. (In the Witcher 3 example, it looks like a 770 can be in the high to ultra range and still be in the 30-40s fps at 1080p) But even that card is 3 years old and a GTX 970 is extremely close in price and will, of course, outperform all this stuff. (The 980 Ti's are where you can get into 4K. Even on a 1080P monitor using nvidia's scaling. Those, however, are expensive, less than a Titan, sure, but not less than $700)
Anyway a 960 can't max everything out, it can't max many current games out, but it can max out older games that the 560 can't. And it will easily out perform the 560 in current games.
RAM will help, you currently have a 1GB card, that's being filled by just about any game you're looking to play. I went from a GTX 460 1GB to a GTX 560 2GB, the difference was night and day. It's going to be a significant (i.e. more than 2-5fps) increase.
The bandwidth of the memory on the card can matter, sure, but that's more about throughput. Currently, your card might not be able to hold everything it'd otherwise operate on. Most games at 1080P will max out around 3GB of memory usage on the card, outside of specific titles like Max Payne 3 and Skyrim with mods, they'll take up whatever you give them.
Looking at benchmarks (that I can actually find) online something like Arkham Origins or Arkham City will get a 10fps increase at similar settings with a GTX 960 over a GTX 560. But something like Witcher 3 the difference between the cards is the difference between playable at 1080P and not. The 560 will be in the 30s fps range on low settings at 720p resolution. On a 960, 1080p, medium settings, and it'll be in the 40s. That's a big difference.
The 960 does get a performance hit because of the bandwidth, but that's mostly compared to other GTX900 cards. The chipset being used is a different architecture than the 500 series, there's more cores, more memory, and higher clock speeds. If the bus is slower, that won't necessarily break that or make it worse than something from 5 years ago. (Yes, that is how old the GTX 560 is)
I only said 960, because it's going to be the easiest to find for deals and variety. But if you want to go hunting down a 770 that might be cheaper (they're around $300, I think), that'll perform better than a 960. (In the Witcher 3 example, it looks like a 770 can be in the high to ultra range and still be in the 30-40s fps at 1080p) But even that card is 3 years old and a GTX 970 is extremely close in price and will, of course, outperform all this stuff. (The 980 Ti's are where you can get into 4K. Even on a 1080P monitor using nvidia's scaling. Those, however, are expensive, less than a Titan, sure, but not less than $700)
Anyway a 960 can't max everything out, it can't max many current games out, but it can max out older games that the 560 can't. And it will easily out perform the 560 in current games.
- SpaceBooger
- Moderator
- Posts: 4420
- Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2008 6:40 am
- Location: The AK-Rowdy
- Contact:
Re: PC build thread
Ok so it would be worth it then. By the way my 560 is a 2GB card... but the doubling of the ram from 2 to 4gb should be a vast improvement.Cronozilla wrote: RAM will help, you currently have a 1GB card, that's being filled by just about any game you're looking to play. I went from a GTX 460 1GB to a GTX 560 2GB, the difference was night and day. It's going to be a significant (i.e. more than 2-5fps) increase.
