Just Had a Look on Ebay and found some GTX 780 Ti (Last Gen Equivalent of the GTX 980) & GTX 980, Even a GTX 690 (Duel GPU/x2 Card so Needs to be Run in SLI Even Though it's a Single Card, Tied for 2nd Most Powerful Nvidia card with the Titan X & GTX 980 Ti) for <$350:
MSI GTX 980, 1 Bid for $299.99, 6 Days Remaining: http://www.ebay.com/...=item28061fca43
Asus GTX 690, Buy it Now for $325 or Make a Offer: http://www.ebay.com/...=item1a04b7a914
EVGA 780 Ti Superclocked with G-SYNC, Buy it now of $348: http://www.ebay.com/...=item1a04270c1e
EVGA 780 Ti Superclocked, Buy it now of $350: http://www.ebay.com/...=item35f00ddc73
Asus 780 Ti with a Buy ir now of $350 or Make a Offer: http://www.ebay.com/...=item419b52964c
1
Looking To Upgrade My Gpu
Started by DarkBazerker, Aug 17 2015 02:43 PM
26 replies to this topic
#22
-
-
- Elite Founder
- 1,805 posts
Member
Posted 22 August 2015 - 11:45 AM
DarkBazerker, on 21 August 2015 - 10:58 AM, said:
I game at 1080/1050, depending what game I'm playing. To be honest I was leaning towards the 390/390x (msi), more then I was the 970 (zotac). But I wanted to ask around cause I thought there has to be something I'm missing with the 970. After all I've been a ati/amd user for a long time, and I felt like I was being biased.
While I respect your opinion, I do not share it. Its not a matter of price but rather value for me. You see for $330(http://www.newegg.co...N82E16814127874) I can get an extra 30-40 fps increase plus all the extra bells and whistles. If I were to add an extra $330 (http://www.newegg.co...N82E16814500378) I could gain another 20-30 fps more then the 390. So the question I have to ask myself, is the extra performance worth the extra cost to me. For me personal its not, not for $660. I might have high standards but, for $650+ I expect a lot more performance. I gave Intel crap for the same thing when they release ivy bridge, when Ivy only had 10% performance boost over Sandy.
The other thing to remember is DX12 games are being developed. With Radeon having more to gain from DX12 then Nividia, Nividia needs to pick up there game or drop some prices.
7950vs390 http://gpuboss.com/g...-Radeon-HD-7950
390vs980ti http://gpuboss.com/g...372036823111234
2 things:
1) It's not MY opinion, it's the general rule of thumb to get the best you can get at the time.
2) If you were worried about being biased, well, it appears you no longer have to worry. It's confirmed.
I used to be an AMD fan. I tried to hide behind the "price vs performance" curtain for years. Then I went Intel+Nvidia. With such a blatant night and day difference (less driver issues, less instability, more performance), it is a hard sell to tell somebody to go with an AMD CPU or GPU unless there's a budget. With all options affordable, I can't reasonably recommend anything less than the top-tier. If you told me you played at a higher resolution and had a budget of $450 then I'd be inclined to rethink that position, but that simply isn't the case.
Either way, you're gonna end up with an awesome card. Pull the trigger already!
#23
-
-
- LIEUTENANT, JUNIOR GRADE
- 3,305 posts
Member
- LocationBoone, NC
Posted 22 August 2015 - 05:21 PM
I feel obliged to point out that at the moment AMD's drivers appear far less buggy in Windows 10 than Nvidia's. The list of problems I've had is longer than my arm (RMAing my 980TI and popping in a 750 for a week borked the drivers, a driver update made the GPU unusable until running DDU and reinstalling, etc), while my AMD-using friends have had 100% smooth sailing.
Anyways, performance/$ makes perfect sense when you have fixed budgets, because you're trying to get the best on every component with less money than you want (ie waste is bad). When you don't have fixed budgets, you pay a little extra for the performance. Why? Because you care about performance. That's why you're buying a high end GPU instead of a $150 GPU in the first place. There's no reason to set the point at which you stop increasing your GPU at the point at which the $/unit of performance hikes up a little bit, especially when the 390 itself has considerably worse performance/$ than the R9 380. So it's not even picking the best performance/$; it's just arbitrarily deciding to pick the performance/$ of the R9 390. That makes no sense.
In a month it's not like your wallet is going to care whether you spent $150 for extra performance or $300. In a couple years, however, your framerate might care a great deal that you got the better card.
Either will do the job, of course. It's your choice.
Anyways, performance/$ makes perfect sense when you have fixed budgets, because you're trying to get the best on every component with less money than you want (ie waste is bad). When you don't have fixed budgets, you pay a little extra for the performance. Why? Because you care about performance. That's why you're buying a high end GPU instead of a $150 GPU in the first place. There's no reason to set the point at which you stop increasing your GPU at the point at which the $/unit of performance hikes up a little bit, especially when the 390 itself has considerably worse performance/$ than the R9 380. So it's not even picking the best performance/$; it's just arbitrarily deciding to pick the performance/$ of the R9 390. That makes no sense.
In a month it's not like your wallet is going to care whether you spent $150 for extra performance or $300. In a couple years, however, your framerate might care a great deal that you got the better card.
Either will do the job, of course. It's your choice.
Edited by Catamount, 22 August 2015 - 05:23 PM.
#24
-
-
- The God
- 258 posts
Member
- Twitch: Link
- LocationWaffle House
Posted 22 August 2015 - 08:40 PM
@Catamount
It all comes down to what people are willing to spend on a product. The point you seem to be missing, some people regardless of performance or brand. Will only spend, X amount of money on gpus or any other product. For me my top $ will always be $400, because $400+ is a crazy amount of money to spend on a gpu. To each there own.
@Everyone who took the time to give helpful feedback
Thank you all, for taking time out of your day to help me. You all are what is great about this community! Peace out.
It all comes down to what people are willing to spend on a product. The point you seem to be missing, some people regardless of performance or brand. Will only spend, X amount of money on gpus or any other product. For me my top $ will always be $400, because $400+ is a crazy amount of money to spend on a gpu. To each there own.
@Everyone who took the time to give helpful feedback
Thank you all, for taking time out of your day to help me. You all are what is great about this community! Peace out.
#25
-
-
- LIEUTENANT, JUNIOR GRADE
- 3,305 posts
Member
- LocationBoone, NC
Posted 23 August 2015 - 07:26 AM
I guess it really just does come down to the arbitrary amount one will spend, and it's no less so for me than you. Fair enough.
I spend $600/year on my cell phone plan, the same for Internet, I spend $1825 a year for coffee down the street ($2.50 twice a day... it keeps me sane) and spent $1040 a year for gas up until recently when I graduated college, and now I still spend roughly half that.
I guess I just figure that when put into context like that, spending $200/year on my GPU, or put another way maybe $300-$400 a year on the CPU/GPU combo to entirely dictates how well my computer functions, a computer that's central to my life in many ways (especially now that I live in MA and have five month winters), I consider costs that so easily are dwarfed by mere background expenses to be trivial. One trivial amount is the same as the next to me I guess, or put another way, my PC's ability to game is worth at least a fifth of my coffee bill.
You might feel differently, but then, I can only imagine how hard you work to curb every other cost in your life.
Have fun with the GPU.
I spend $600/year on my cell phone plan, the same for Internet, I spend $1825 a year for coffee down the street ($2.50 twice a day... it keeps me sane) and spent $1040 a year for gas up until recently when I graduated college, and now I still spend roughly half that.
I guess I just figure that when put into context like that, spending $200/year on my GPU, or put another way maybe $300-$400 a year on the CPU/GPU combo to entirely dictates how well my computer functions, a computer that's central to my life in many ways (especially now that I live in MA and have five month winters), I consider costs that so easily are dwarfed by mere background expenses to be trivial. One trivial amount is the same as the next to me I guess, or put another way, my PC's ability to game is worth at least a fifth of my coffee bill.
You might feel differently, but then, I can only imagine how hard you work to curb every other cost in your life.
Have fun with the GPU.
#26
-
-
- Ace Of Spades
- 4,758 posts
Member
- LocationUnited Kingdom
Posted 24 August 2015 - 09:00 AM
Catamount, on 22 August 2015 - 05:21 PM, said:
I feel obliged to point out that at the moment AMD's drivers appear far less buggy in Windows 10 than Nvidia's. The list of problems I've had is longer than my arm (RMAing my 980TI and popping in a 750 for a week borked the drivers, a driver update made the GPU unusable until running DDU and reinstalling, etc), while my AMD-using friends have had 100% smooth sailing.
I feel obliged to point out this is anecdotal.
As an AMD GPU user i can quite handily testify to it not having been smoothsailing in Win10. Various driver issues and bugs VSR keeps disappearing or will be there for one monitor and not the other for example or the fact my displayport now glitches in certain games that it didn't before.
Whilst a 2 people i play with using 970 (single) and 980 SLI have had zero problems.
Only 2 more weeks for me, then i'll be back to Nvidia tinkering and benching 970 SLI out of curiosity.
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users
