best choice for 880k

[aggelos255]

Hello guys.I'm planning on upgrading my gtx 660 with a new card but I want help to decide.My set up is an Athlon X4 880k with 8gb ram,asus a88xm-a m/b,psu 600w coolermaster.Wich is the best card for my set up.I'm playing games such us project cars and sports games.Thanks a lot

 

[Jonathan Schiller]

If you want to get the most out of it the r9 380 would only be a little bottlenecked. Though a 750ti, 950, or 370 would also be good a good match. Anything more and you would just be throwing away money for power you can't use.

 

[rcald2000]

+aggelos255 The Nvidia GTX 1050 Ti is about to release. Best guess is a $150 price point. $260 gets you a GTX 1060 (6 GB). For a simulator like Project Cars, normally I would recommend the 1060 (6 GB), but I'm not sure how well a X4 880k will scale with such a powerful GPU.

 

[Jonathan Schiller]

The 1060 is a great card, but that CPU would bottlenecke a lot. For example the 1060 can run GTA V max at around 90 fps, but the amd 880k will plateau at around 60 fps.

 

[Mac070]

Your CPU is fine for games. May be a slight bottleneck to none at all. To get the most out of your system i would get the RX 480/ RX 470.

 

[aggelos255]

Would a Gtx 1060 3gb be better than an rn Rx 470?Should I wait for Gtx 1050ti?

 

[Jonathan Schiller]

Without a doubt the 1060 is a faster card... Now will you seed the speed difference in your build, I would lean to no. I will use the GTA V benchmarks as a reference point, so take it as you will. Your CPU maxes the game at around 63 fps, no matter how fast a gpu you put in it, the CPU really can't push it more.. the Rx 470 also maxes out at 63 fps, so they would be a balanced match. The gtx 1060 is a way batter card with fps close to 90 fps, but paired with your CPU it would be limited to the 63 fps. So if you plan on upgrading the soon, get the faster card. If you are going to stick with the 880k then go with a balance card... Whatever way you go, any game at 30 fps is smooth. 60+ fps is optional due to frame dip.

 

[aggelos255]

I want a balanced system.I'm not changing my cpu.So I guess rx 470 is the best option for me.4gb or 8gb.Should i look for the cheapest card or a more expensive one?I must say the cards are more expensive in Greece than the rest europe.

 

[Mac070]

The RX 480 outperforms the GTX 1060 in some cases. However that is the same with the GTX 1060. But the RX 480 offers more vram than the GTX 1060. Seeing that Battlefield 1 and GTA V eat Vram I would not consider the GTX 1060 3GB.
Battlefield 1 Vram- 3.5GB USAGE
GTA V- Over 4GB
The RX 470 is very close to the RX 480 but is 10% less in performance..... But yes the RX 470 is the best choice unless your budget qualifies you for a RX 480. I mean in the end what is the point of having a Power House GPU and not being able to use all that juice because of the limiting VRAM. Good Luck!

 

[Jonathan Schiller]

The RX 480 outperforms the GTX 1060 in some cases. However that is the same with the GTX 1060. But the RX 480 offers more vram than the GTX 1060. Seeing that Battlefield 1 and GTA V eat Vram I would not consider the GTX 1060 3GB.
Battlefield 1 Vram- 3.5GB USAGE
GTA V- Over 4GB
The RX 470 is very close to the RX 480 but is 10% less in performance..... But yes the RX 470 is the best choice unless your budget qualifies you for a RX 480. I mean in the end what is the point of having a Power House GPU and not being able to use all that juice because of the limiting VRAM. Good Luck!

Ah the age old problem when buying a gpu 😉 could get the RX470 and hit the 60 fps sweet spot, but for only $10 USD more i could get the GTX 1060 and 10+ more fps.... But then if i am going for the 1060 i could spend only 10 more USD and get the RX780.... "three hours and 9 GPUs latter" i look in my shopping cart . "OMG How am i so over budget! " ah the memories .

 

[amtseung]

To put things into perspective, that CPU will hardcore bottleneck a stock reference clocked HD4870, even with its paltry 512MB of VRAM, in a game like the original Borderlands, with the ini files editted as much as I could. Good luck putting anything more powerful in there.

 

[Jonathan Schiller]

To put things into perspective, that CPU will hardcore bottleneck a stock reference clocked HD4870, even with its paltry 512MB of VRAM, in a game like the original Borderlands, with the ini files editted as much as I could. Good luck putting anything more powerful in there.

As much I hate to defend a low budget CPU like the 880k, that comparison is just awful. It is true that the 880k is closer to a laptop CPU in raw power, it is still a little capable chip. For example

It's not great, but still plays Witcher 3 at over 30 fps.

 

[amtseung]

As much I hate to defend a low budget CPU like the 880k, that comparison is just awful. It is true that the 880k is closer to a laptop CPU in raw power, it is still a little capable chip. For example

It's not great, but still plays Witcher 3 at over 30 fps.

I speak from several years of personal experience with a heavily overclocked Athlon 760k. The 880k isn't all that much better than my 4.8ghz 760k in terms of raw performance or architecture. I've paired it with an R7 240, HD4870, HD7950, HD7970 GHZ edition, and my current R9 380x, and beyond the HD4870, framerates didn't improve (at 1080p) at any settings with the vast majority of games I tried. Since most of the games I do play are not widely known and thus relatable, I used the original Borderlands as a comparison. It's also the one game I've played on the most platforms. The Witcher 3 also isn't particularly CPU heavy, thus making it a poor comparison. Once you've tried playing something like Planetside 2, Arma 3, H1Z1, TERA, Blade and Soul, Dirty Bomb, Skryim, or even the relatively lightweight Warframe on any piledriver or bulldozer CPU, you'll quickly realize where the shortcomings of those architectures are.

TL;DR Benchmark charts are great generalizations, but personal experience speaks volumes.

 

[Jonathan Schiller]

I speak from several years of personal experience with a heavily overclocked Athlon 760k. The 880k isn't all that much better than my 4.8ghz 760k in terms of raw performance or architecture. I've paired it with an R7 240, HD4870, HD7950, HD7970 GHZ edition, and my current R9 380x, and beyond the HD4870, framerates didn't improve (at 1080p) at any settings with the vast majority of games I tried. Since most of the games I do play are not widely known and thus relatable, I used the original Borderlands as a comparison. It's also the one game I've played on the most platforms. The Witcher 3 also isn't particularly CPU heavy, thus making it a poor comparison. Once you've tried playing something like Planetside 2, Arma 3, H1Z1, TERA, Blade and Soul, Dirty Bomb, Skryim, or even the relatively lightweight Warframe on any piledriver or bulldozer CPU, you'll quickly realize where the shortcomings of those architectures are.

TL;DR Benchmark charts are great generalizations, but personal experience speaks volumes.

Oh I totally agree. I have had plenty of experience with the disappointment of AMD support over the years. I understand that they are not bad cpus, but the semantics of the software industry leaves the market sketchy at best. I am just defending the posters position. Being that he/she has a fm2+ motherboard, cpu upgrade is not much of an option. If he/she had the money for a new build, he/she would have asked for the best components. And being the 880k just came out in march, even if they had the money there would be little desire to upgrade so soon.
it is true In situations where developers get lazy and make poor, cpu dependent, ports it will be a limited cpu.

Benchmark charts are just generalizations, but with how many people come through my shop, I have found that personal experience can very drastically, even with the exact same hardware.

In conclusion: again you are "RIGHT" about the cpu. I have read and agree with many of your reply's on this forum, and you have my respect. but i am going to have to stand by their system as a whole, and say they still have "some" potential to improve performance, "maybe not in every situation", with a slightly more powerful GPU. whether or not they find it worth it is not up to me.

 

[jeffredo]

Your best choice once it's released in a few days is the GTX 1050 Ti. Anything greater than that is going to be held back quite a lot by you CPU and you might as well not pay for extra performance you can't make use of (GTX 1060, RX 480).

 

[aggelos255]

Then I'm gonna wait for the 1050ti and see the best option for me.