Need to upgrade my GPU for Fallout, was thinking of grabbing this due to it being the same price as a 2GB version:
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Gigabyte-GV-N960OC-4GD-Express-Graphics-Cards/dp/B012G7VCGU?tag=hotukdeals03-21
Just found a 380 for £120 though it only has 2GB: http://www.novatech.co.uk/products/components/amdradeongraphicscards/amdr9380series/vxr9380-2gbd5-dhe.html#utm_source=tradedoubler&utm_medium=affiliate&utm_campaign=1018132_HotUKDeals
Which one would you guys recommend? I cant really go more than £160, if i could i would prolly get a 970.
>even considering a Maxwell below 980
You're getting an AMD mang
Fun Fact: the 960 can't use 4gb
>>51436049
For ~200 GBP you could get the 380X, which would be a good deal faster than the 960. I'd recommend saving up another 40 GBP and look for a deal on the Sapphire 380X Nitro.
i have a 2gb r9 270x. i can run the game on mostly ultra with shadows set to high and shadow distance to medium, godrays on low, and limit tessellation to 8x. 1080p
i get at least 30 fps with these settings. that is to say, at the absolute worst it manages 30fps.
in enclosed areas such as metro tunnels and building interiors, i sit at 60fps most of the time.
i feel like 2gb is sufficient for this game vanilla.
if you plan on doing a lot of modding, youll exceed that very quickly. at the same time, you wont have enough horsepower to make it worth it. youll run out of gpu before you run out of vram, so to speak.
afaik, the 960 is about on parity with my card, and the 380 is a 285 with more vram or something to that effect.
i honestly have to recommend at least a 970 or a 390. it will be worth the money in the long run, as both those cards arent exactly stellar performers to begin with.
I just realised its black friday next week, reckon i could get a deal on a 970?
>>51436120
>Fun Fact: the 960 can't use 4gb
Nice meme, faggot.
The real reason to avoid the 960 is because it's an underpowered piece of trash that only a fucking moron would buy over a 380/380X.
>>51436192
>buying the meme card
You should be looking for a deal on a 390.
£160 buys you a 4gb 380
£200 buys you a 380x
>>51436049
>For Fallout.
So you can see PS2 era graphics in ultra HD?
>>51436435
no so i can run it you faggot
>>51436313
Reviews mostly say 970 is better?
>>51436494
Given the 390 should sit basically where the 290x is the 390 is the faster card.
>>51436494
I don't know what reviews you're reading, buddy. The 970 and 390 are close in terms of raw performance, but the 390 has more than twice as much VRAM and won't be crippled at a driver level by AMD when their next product line arrives.
>>51436049
>Hmmm, it's in yurbcuks. Better hack it.
>*change '.UK' to 'm'
>462 people bucks
Yeah, that's a sweet deal <_<
>>51436145
>R9 270X = X
>R7 270X =
>tfw got the EVGA GTX 750 for like 150 bucks
refurbished is fun
I know its a couple generations behind, but im still clocking >55fps for 99% of the time on fallout 4
I don't want to make a new thread so I'll post it here. I need to upgrade my card and was thinking of getting a 980. Are there any better alternatives? Also when do you think it'll be at its cheapest?
>>51438451
R9 390 offers almost the same performance for a lot less cash.
R9 Fury offers a lot more performance for just a little more cash.
Both are way better deals, price/performance wise.
How is the Fury X in comparison to 980 Ti
both in same price range..
>>51438495
It depends on if you ask a nVidia shill or an AMD shill.
Looks like mostly the latter in this thread.
>>51438506
I just wanted sum opinions.
I will throw a dice then.
>>51438511
i've been with AMD for a long time now and have bought everything MAD for the past 6 years but as of late i've been thinking of getting the 980ti so i'm kind of on the fence about it.
I'd recommend you look at review and benchmarks before you buy.
>>51438640
Is techpowerup reliable site for objective reviews
>>51438302
Purchased an msi 750ti oc a number of months ago. Was new, $100 plus a $20 American express card essentially making it $80. Where are you shopping? That should've been $100 new tops if purchased anywhere considered recent
>>51438511
Well in my not professional opinion it seems to me nVidia tends to work a bit better, AMD tends to be a bit cheaper.
YMMV but it also seems like nVidia is just better built and last longer then AMD, but I admit I have my own baseless bias on the subject.
If you're _just_ buying it for Fallout, first of all, get some taste, secondly, get the best nVidia GFX you can afford, since it's an nVidia-sponsored game.
If not, get the best benchmarked card you can afford in your region. I've been out of the loop for a while on which 'benchmarking' sites are shill sites but be aware a lot of them are paid off.
>>51438758
>Where are you shopping?
Canada, we don't get very nice deals. also shipping is always a pain
Also, 150 bucks CAD is about 110.00 USD
buynop
OP OP READ
I have an FX-8350, 8GB RAM, and a GTX 960 4GB, fallout runs on ultra at 60 FPS, with dip sinto 52 ish range when it gets graphically heavy
>>51438495
>>51438511
Right now, as in, if you bought one today, the 980Ti is better. Not by much, but it is.
It's better optimized for current games and DX11, and they both cost roughly the same.
If you want some extra longevity, the FuryX is what you want though. AMD usually has much better lasting support for their GPUs, and the FuryX being their flagship right now, will most likely be supported for a long time to come. There's new drivers coming the next couple of weeks, and they claim that the FuryX can already outperform the 980Ti, but I'll believe it when I see it.
So if you want the absolute best right now with no doubt, 980Ti. If you're in it for the long run, FuryX.
Both cost roughly the same, and they both have good power/performance. Can't help you much more than that m8
>>51440404
>>51440404
What does one do to the coil whine of Fury X
I've also been looking around for parts so I can play fallout and the glorious mods to come
I've been looking at this for the cpu + mother board
http://www.frys.com/product/8546399?site=sa:adpages%20page:P129_SU%20date:111515
And I'm looking at an R9 390 for my graphics card. Would you guys recommend?
Also, I've been thinking about buying a used/refurbished card to save a few bucks.
Bad idea? Any bad experiences with buying used?
>>51440328
>braggin about 52 FPS
get a 980 Ti
>>51436467
even people with 980's are getting frame stutter and drops. it's a console port, it runs like shit on any hardware. no point in upgrading solely to play fallout.
>>51436838
stale meme is stale. no cards are being crippled by nvidia. in fact on average the previous 3 generations gains 5 - 15% performance with current drivers. stop being spoon fed bullshit
>>51440560
Fury X owner here. No coil whine for me.
I was the first person to post a Fury X on /g/ so I can assure you I got one of the very first cards in the UK.
It's a revision pump version, which might be why.
>>51440560
Newer fury X models are quiet. SOME cards from any line get coil whine, it just happens sometimes, but the consistent whine from old fury X models was because of the pump, which has been replaced by a silent one now.
Hoi
>>51439155
Lol I got a 750ti for $145 new in Ontario months ago
What would be the best CPU to pair up with 380x? I'm planning a build with it once it gets fully released and put on sale for black friday/tech tuesday
you all loose
>>51440784
Bethesda still uses Gamebryo trash yes, but it's anything but a console port.
Fallout 4 plays better by far on pretty much any PC than either of the consoles.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iipDWbd6HNg
There's several reports of single digit frame rate drops and stutters inside of buildings for both consoles, but not PC.
Bethesda can't into multi-threading.
>>51436120
>the 960 can't use 4gb
Are you fucking retarded? There is literally nothing stopping a GTX 960 from using 4 GB of RAM, specially now that games are using increasingly larger textures (which use a lot of VRAM but have minimal impact on framerate).
The R8 380/380X is still a much better option, but people who say the 960 can't use 4 GB of VRAM are just clueless idiots.
>>51443594
Noone lost but you Jesse.
0/10 apply yourself, now get over here, its time to cook.
>>51440810
>no cards are being crippled by nvidia
>GTX 780 slower than GTX 960 on the witcher
>Kepler cards suffer the most with gameworks features on Project Cars
>Kepler cards suffer the most with godrays on Fallout 4
>AMD cards don't suffer because you can just use catalyst to limit tesselation to non-retarded levels set by Nvidia and enjoy gameworks features better than Kepler cards can
>>51444152
This. Nvidia is shoving Tessellation down everyone's throat with every Gameworks game because they know it cripples anything but Maxwell performance and there isn't a DAMN thing Kepler users can do about it.
>>51444177
And after all the features Nvidia implemented in their drivers first, like per-application settings (which is really basic stuff and AMD went years without it) and forced ambient occlusion (as far as I know AMD doesn't have this, tell me if I'm wrong because I have an AMD card and I'd like to have it), it seems really trivial to implement a tesselation limiter like there is in catalyst.
It's very suspicious that they didn't, and now their absurd levels of tesselation cripple everything that's not Maxwell.
>>51444055
>128bit bus
Even with stupidly fast ram it chokes.
>>51444055
380 4gb owner here
the 960 and 380 are nice cards not huge on performance but nice none the less.
The middle range is just that, middle range nothing much too look at but at lest you can max out most of the games at 1080p and high on 1440p monitors.
41~75FPS on ultra is nice not unplayable but tolerable I think
>>51444241
Not him but It's exactly half a 980, with half the bandwidth.
How the hell does the 960 choke if the 980 doesn't?
>>51444241
>Even with stupidly fast ram it chokes.
Are you retarded?
Seriously, like, do you have a mental disability?
Bus size is just one of the components of bandwidth, you retard. Bus size alone means nothing. 2000 MHz RAM on a 128-bit bus has the exact same bandwidth as 1000 MHz RAM on a 256-bit bus, there is no such thing as "choking" just because a bus is 128-bit. (and in that case, the 128-bit setup is actually better, because bandwidth is the same while the higher frequency also means lower latency, something that doesn't depend on the bus)
Second, the 960 has lower bandwidth than usual, since cards at that price range traditionally used larger buses (even accounting the fact that is uses delta color compression, meaning effective bandwidth is more than the listed spec, same for the 380/380X). But despite that, to this day there is no gaming scenario where the 960's performance has been limited by memory bandwidth. As of now, at that price range, stream processor or ROP performance ALWAYS becomes a limiting factor before memory bandwidth does. It might not be so in the future, which is why the 280/280X or the 380/380X are safer bets. But saying a 960 "can't use 4 GB of VRAM" or that "it 'chokes' on a 128-bit bus" just shows your complete cluelessness about how memory works.
>>51444124
Using amd products?
Not op.
I currently have a 2500k paired with a 290 and just bought a 144hz 1440p freesync monitor. However now that I am running at 1440p my poor 290 can't really keep up with some games. I can still play Battlefield/Hardline with everything Ultra with no AA but Battlefront is chugging along. Sometimes I feel the GPU is lagging and sometimes I feel it is the CPU (which I can't get above 4.2).
Would it be better for me to go ahead and buy a 6700k, motherboard and DDR4 ram for roughly $650 or just buy a Fury X for $650?
I also can't really find any benchmarks comparing the 290/390 and Fury X. Could someone provide?
>>51436049
http://www.amazon.co.uk/ASUS-GeForce-STRIX-4096MB-GDDR5/dp/B00UHAYMMA/ref=sr_1_3?s=computers&ie=UTF8&qid=1448076003&sr=1-3&keywords=970+strix
get dis
>>51436313
Care to show any other benches?
>>51446375
>>51446392
>buy two msi r9 280s
>both DOA
seriously still unaware if its my PSU or mobo
shits wack as fuck
msi never again sticking with asus or xfx
>>51445858
fury x>390>290
I would hope that would be obvious...
>>51446470
No shit the fury x is better than the 290. I want to know by how many frames.
gtx 950 is the best budget card you can get
it only falls behind on shit like witcher 3
>>51446505
it's barely stronger than a 4 year old card
it's trash
>>51436530
I'm running 2 980ti's in SLI, it's not on this list though :(
