Best Graphics Cards for the Money (Archive)

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.


What? Didn't I post: " I think it would be more helpful to gamers wanting to do that if there was an air cooled version, wait the Fury Nano that's right." Isn't that showing some love? ;^D
 
You need to have TWO maxed out categories...one for a 60Hz monitor and on for a 144Hz monitor. For example, you list the 390X as the maxed out recommendation for 1440p, but no way will that card come anywhere near maxing out a 144Hz 1440p monitor!
 
They're overestimating the graphics card that you need, even for "playable." I've got a gtx 660 running gta v at mostly high settings at a resolution of 2560x1440 (QHD), with a stable 60 frames per second, and they're saying that you need a gtx 950 for games to be "playable" at 1900x1080 (FHD)? I'll admit, I'm using the boosting software, but if the performance improvements are what I think they'd be, you really wouldn't need anything more than a gtx 970 for any game that's been properly made (some will just run horribly regardless of the graphics card). I don't know what AMD cards are like, but I assume it's a similar story there.
 
The last two resolutions are a bit out of whack. If you take maxed out to mean playing a game at 60fps amd ultra, then the 970 makes sense for 1080p. But does the 390x make sense for 1440p? Is the 390x 78% more powerful than the 970? No. The 980 ti would fit here. Also, recommending two gpus is silly for 4k playable. Just recommend the 980 ti for 1440p maxed out amd the fury for 4k playable. In summary:

1440p playable: 390
1440p maxed: 980 ti

4k playable: fury x
4k maxed: sli 980 ti
 
not a fan of the new style of doing the article i prefer the older one where you have it ranked based on pricing

or i uno maybe am just crazy, i like this one cause its based on the resolution so 1080 would be like standard
 


Hardly, these rankings are completely inaccurate and lazily done.
 

These cards are going to have different tdp's because they aren't the same as the "reference" model referred to on nvidia's website. If you want to confirm the numbers for those things, look them up on the website of the manufacturer (Asus, evga, msi).
 

I live in India , here a 390 costs 100$ more than a 970 , performs same or above a 390 at full hd (since 2k and 4k monitors cost atleast double for the same screen size) , and allows you to reduce 100W on your power supply and on the UPS which leads to an overall saving of over 170$ . For my frame of reference a 390 is insulting
 


Do you donate to the website? do you see any source of income other than advertising ?
 
Interesting, when the Fury X came out everyone including Tom's was saying how the 980TI was much better, and they were a big disappointment and now they are tied?
Click to expand...

They really aren't tied, and it's really nowhere near as close as is suggested. These comparisons always seem to compare a stock Fury X to a stock 980 Ti completely ignoring the fact that the 980 Ti (even reference models) benefits massively from overclocking where the Fury X is already significantly closer to it's performance ceiling. I'd assume they do this for people that don't overclock/tweak but I don't know anyone who purchases a $600+ graphics card that doesn't also overclock the card to get their full money's worth.
 


I checked the manufacturer websites. The 64bit version of gt 730 is not a 65w card. That is the older 128bit version.
 
a point not mentioned - If you plan to buy a monitor and a graphics card, then consider free sync versus g sync. As the two technologies are about the same, going with free sync will save about $100-200 on the monitor. If you have a fixed sum to spend, then going free sync with free sync card will yield higher performance than g-sync and g-sync card.

My situation is that I own a gtx 970 and use an Acer XB270HU bprz 27-inch WQHD NVIDIA G-SYNC (2560 x 1440) Widescreen Monitor. It works great at the highest resolution + max settings + well past 60 frames. It doesn't heat my house nor cause the fans to be noticeable. Notwithstanding, this quality could have been purchased for about $200 less going the free-sync route. Just a thought worth mentioning.
 
The R9 290 release was a great leap forward and the GTX 970 was good answer. The offerings, now, after a year and a half are only marginally more helpful for most gamers.

Both the GTX 960 and R9 380 are not up to the task of gaming in 2016, IMO. I would only take a 380X at a huge discount price, while, the 970 and 390 are definitely up to the task but I would feel really burned spending $350 dollars if/when, two months later, Polaris and Pascal boards are shaking up the market in favor the consumer.

In other words, I wouldn't buy anything, now, unless I were desperate and also saw a *really* good discount price i.e. a 970 or 390 at $300 or less. Lastly, the 390X is a way better buy than is the GTX 980. But wait 2 months!
 

Imo, this statement is silly on its face. Although neither card is suitable for VR, or for UltraMaxOhWOW settings on the latest games on a 4K monitor or multiple 1080p screens, either one can play any currently available game at "enjoyable" settings on a single 1920x1080 screen, and I'd expect them to be able to do so for another 2-3 years at least.

 


Exactly. It's like people have to watch how much money they spend or something...
 


Well, fair enough. I should qualify my definition of "up to the task". To me it's at least 80 fps in 1080p Ultra settings because anything less is to lose out on visuals and competitiveness. But that's coming from someone who values first person shooter games (and visuals) likely more than most. If you're in to, say, MMO's or Civ-like strategy and not first person shooters there is very little chance you'll need anything more than a GTX 960 or R9 380 and surely a 950 or 370 would also do fine.
 
Well I just saw the EVGA GeForce GTX 970 04G-P4-3978-KR 4GB FTW+ GAMING w/ACX 2.0+, Whisper Silent Cooling w/ Free Installed Backplate Graphics Card on sale for $319.99 after $20 MIR on NewEgg. That is a pretty good deal.
 
Now that the 750 Ti's price dropped to $105 i'd choose it as the graphics card to max out 720p. The performance difference is quite big considering their costs are $5 apart.
 
i miss the previous version of best graphics guide. i was able to spot the "fastest graphics card without aux power connector" easily with the previous version of best graphics guide. now i need to do extra research to find the "fastest graphics card without aux power connector". i don't want to have a monster size, power hungry, heat dissipating, expensive card be installed in my pc. a normal size with adequate speed one is ok for me
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom