Im looking at getting a gpu for a ryzen 5 2400g build. I have a asrock ab350m pro 4 motherboard and corsair vengence 3000 speed ram. I am not sure what gpu would max out the preformace for my system. I was told to go with nvidia becaue their drivers are much better than amd. But being i have and amd system is it better to go amd or nvidia? If someone could help it would be greatly appreciated.
Differene between Gtx 1060 and rx580 besides v ram and brands?
- Thread starter bobismaa
- Start date
Solution
dontlistentome
Glorious
- Sep 5, 2016
- 5,987
- 26
- 43,440
Some games run better with AMD, some with Nvidia. At 1080p the real world difference is negligible. They both can handle all the games.
In situations like this I go down my checklist of priorities. I look at cost, reputation for heat and/or noise, physical size, and power demands. Lower price is good, cool running and/or quiet is good, small size is good, and using lower amounts of power is good. Your priorities may be different.
In situations like this I go down my checklist of priorities. I look at cost, reputation for heat and/or noise, physical size, and power demands. Lower price is good, cool running and/or quiet is good, small size is good, and using lower amounts of power is good. Your priorities may be different.
In my opinion, only concern is price, size, and noise. I want the best performance I can get for price for that system without bottlnecking it. I was told the nvidia drivers are way better than amd. But I’m not 100% sure about that. Going through Newegg their are tons of cards to choose from and I don’t have a clue which ones to choose.
- Mar 15, 2017
- 1,777
- 0
- 4,960
Drivers are highly subjective on user experience but honestly i'd say Radeons are far better right now, even as a primarily Nvidia user. As for the RX 580 8GB vs GTX 1060 6GB, on average the RX 580 is the stronger card by a couple % but it does come down to specific titles. Most Nvidia Gameworks games for example, run better on the 1060 naturally. Whereas a majority of DX12 & Vulkan titles run better on the RX 580. As for efficiency, the 1060 is definitely slightly cooler and more power efficient. I'd personally take the RX 580 especially since they are generally cheaper and better performing on average, but if cooling/power efficiency is important to you, the 1060 is a good pick and you can't really go wrong with either card. Hope this helps!
CRO5513Y :
Drivers are highly subjective on user experience but honestly i'd say Radeons are far better right now, even as a primarily Nvidia user. As for the RX 580 8GB vs GTX 1060 6GB, on average the RX 580 is the stronger card by a couple % but it does come down to specific titles. Most Nvidia Gameworks games for example, run better on the 1060 naturally. Whereas a majority of DX12 & Vulkan titles run better on the RX 580. As for efficiency, the 1060 is definitely slightly cooler and more power efficient. I'd personally take the RX 580 especially since they are generally cheaper and better performing on average, but if cooling/power efficiency is important to you, the 1060 is a good pick and you can't really go wrong with either card. Hope this helps!
Actually that helps a lot. I mainly just want a gpu that gets the job done but is good at what it is doing. I have high pressure fans so a little hotter card isn’t a bad issue. I just don’t want to buy a card and it end up regretting it. I’ve never owned a powerful gpu as this is my first pc so. Games I’m looking at are games like doom, bf1, Witcher games, slime rancher, and possibly csgo. I have thought about the rx580 because it’s generally cheaper for the same performance. If the drivers are a bit more optimized then they were earlier on, I might go with them.
photonboy
Titan
- Jun 20, 2006
- 21,566
- 13
- 85,015
1) NVidia has better DX11 drivers, so any advantage there is solely down to whether you are experiencing a CPU bottleneck or not. If YES you should get a higher FPS but it's pretty hard to compare with two different GPU's.
I don't think this is significant with your CPU and any losses there in some games should be under 10% and as I'll discuss OTHER games will see an advantage to the AMD card anyway due to architectural differences.
2) AMD CPU itself does not impart an advantage to an AMD graphics card.
3) asynchronous monitors are tied to the GPU (so Freesync for AMD and GSync for NVidia).
4) GTX1060 6GB vs RX-580 8GB?
*I'd ignore points #1 and 2 since they are mostly not an issue and look at price vs performance for cards of similar build quality. Having said that you'll want a BETTER cooler for the RX-580 or the noise will be higher as it produces more heat.
Example GTX1060 6GB: https://pcpartpicker.com/product/MDRFf7/evga-geforce-gtx-1060-6gb-6gb-acx-30-video-card-06g-p4-6262-kr
$275USD (after rebate) for a dual-fan card
Example RX-580 8GB: https://pcpartpicker.com/product/9ZmxFT/asus-radeon-rx-580-8gb-rog-strix-video-card-rog-strix-rx580-o8g-gaming
$300USD
Prices change but if I was forced to choose I'd get the Asus Strix RX-580 8GB card... if you get a lower-end solution the quality may not be as good and the cooler may be insufficient to prevent throttling.
The RX-400/500 cards have some mostly untapped potential that helps the pull ahead a bit for newer games that optimize for it (mostly stuff like FP16) so you might gain 15% or so due to that.
Generally speaking I'd say these cards are close enough in performance to be called roughly EQUAL.
Summary:
Honestly I think both solutions will give similar results provided the card has a relatively good cooler and is of good quality.
If I was forced to choose it would be specifically the RX-580 8GB Asus Strix model if the price is about $300USD. Otherwise adjust my comments based on price.
I don't think this is significant with your CPU and any losses there in some games should be under 10% and as I'll discuss OTHER games will see an advantage to the AMD card anyway due to architectural differences.
2) AMD CPU itself does not impart an advantage to an AMD graphics card.
3) asynchronous monitors are tied to the GPU (so Freesync for AMD and GSync for NVidia).
4) GTX1060 6GB vs RX-580 8GB?
*I'd ignore points #1 and 2 since they are mostly not an issue and look at price vs performance for cards of similar build quality. Having said that you'll want a BETTER cooler for the RX-580 or the noise will be higher as it produces more heat.
Example GTX1060 6GB: https://pcpartpicker.com/product/MDRFf7/evga-geforce-gtx-1060-6gb-6gb-acx-30-video-card-06g-p4-6262-kr
$275USD (after rebate) for a dual-fan card
Example RX-580 8GB: https://pcpartpicker.com/product/9ZmxFT/asus-radeon-rx-580-8gb-rog-strix-video-card-rog-strix-rx580-o8g-gaming
$300USD
Prices change but if I was forced to choose I'd get the Asus Strix RX-580 8GB card... if you get a lower-end solution the quality may not be as good and the cooler may be insufficient to prevent throttling.
The RX-400/500 cards have some mostly untapped potential that helps the pull ahead a bit for newer games that optimize for it (mostly stuff like FP16) so you might gain 15% or so due to that.
Generally speaking I'd say these cards are close enough in performance to be called roughly EQUAL.
Summary:
Honestly I think both solutions will give similar results provided the card has a relatively good cooler and is of good quality.
If I was forced to choose it would be specifically the RX-580 8GB Asus Strix model if the price is about $300USD. Otherwise adjust my comments based on price.
- Mar 15, 2017
- 1,777
- 0
- 4,960
bobismaa :
CRO5513Y :
Drivers are highly subjective on user experience but honestly i'd say Radeons are far better right now, even as a primarily Nvidia user. As for the RX 580 8GB vs GTX 1060 6GB, on average the RX 580 is the stronger card by a couple % but it does come down to specific titles. Most Nvidia Gameworks games for example, run better on the 1060 naturally. Whereas a majority of DX12 & Vulkan titles run better on the RX 580. As for efficiency, the 1060 is definitely slightly cooler and more power efficient. I'd personally take the RX 580 especially since they are generally cheaper and better performing on average, but if cooling/power efficiency is important to you, the 1060 is a good pick and you can't really go wrong with either card. Hope this helps!
Actually that helps a lot. I mainly just want a gpu that gets the job done but is good at what it is doing. I have high pressure fans so a little hotter card isn’t a bad issue. I just don’t want to buy a card and it end up regretting it. I’ve never owned a powerful gpu as this is my first pc so. Games I’m looking at are games like doom, bf1, Witcher games, slime rancher, and possibly csgo. I have thought about the rx580 because it’s generally cheaper for the same performance. If the drivers are a bit more optimized then they were earlier on, I might go with them.
Well for the games you listed, Witcher 3 is an Nvidia Gameworks title and typically performs slightly better on the 1060 but BF1 & DOOM run better on the RX 580. But either way this is usually a couple FPS difference at most. It is true Radeon drivers before early 2016ish were horrible before they launched the Crimson control panel which came with much more frequent and stable drivers to their old Catalyst days. I had a Radeon card up until a few months ago and i would definitely say the control panel and driver stability was a far better experience from my time on the Radeon card. It being the first i've had in quite a long time. But everyone has had their own experiences.
Here are a couple RX 580 8GBs that are cheaper or on par with GTX 1060 6GB prices (in USD).
https://pcpartpicker.com/product/MsWfrH/xfx-radeon-rx-580-8gb-gts-xxx-ed-video-card-rx-580p8dfd6
https://pcpartpicker.com/product/QvGj4D/gigabyte-radeon-rx-580-8gb-aorus-8g-video-card-gv-rx580aorus-8gd
https://pcpartpicker.com/product/y2DzK8/sapphire-radeon-rx-580-8gb-pulse-video-card-11265-05
The XFX GTS XXX is a particularly good price but i am unsure of exact cooler quality. I can safely say the Sapphire Pulse and Gigabyte Aorus run well though.
photonboy
Titan
- Jun 20, 2006
- 21,566
- 13
- 85,015
BTW, I have an EVGA GTX1080 which I'm very happy with... if you'd asked me a couple years ago I would have said NVidia hands down but I think AMD has made enough driver progress to be roughly considered equal to NVidia.
Make sure your PSU has sufficient x6/x8 power connectors for the card you choose.
Make sure your PSU has sufficient x6/x8 power connectors for the card you choose.
So it’s kind of which ever I can get for a descent price? I’ll look at the asus rx580. I don’t plan on using free sync or g sync because I don’t have the money or knowledge of how to use it or get monitors that have it. So I’m just going to use a vga to hdmi adapter for my dell monitor. Thanks for the help
Their was one game I believe it’s assasins creed origins that did interest me. That would be a plus for amd side. Also, I just looked at the 580 and the core clocks seem to be like 300 MHz less. I don’t plan on manually overclocking because it shortens the life span of the components. Is that an issue for performance?
- Mar 15, 2017
- 1,777
- 0
- 4,960
If you're comparing against other cards, core clocks don't always represent better performance due to architecture differences. Same with CPUs. If you're comparing the same cards (Eg. RX 580 @ 1200 MHz vs RX 580 @ 1300 MHz) then yes the faster one will very likely perform better, but only by a fraction in most cases. Regardless of whether you overclock or not, the RX 580 (or GTX 1060) will both run most modern titles at 1080p High/Ultra settings @ 60 FPS.
photonboy
Titan
- Jun 20, 2006
- 21,566
- 13
- 85,015
1) GPU Frequency isn't comparable as said between architectures. Within that as I mention though you want a good cooler especially with the AMD cards or else the frequency can be throttled down.
That's why I like the Asus Strix RX-580 8GB card.
2) It's not just AVERAGE FPS but frame time stability. You can have judder/stutter introduced if the frequency is jumping around too much due to throttle/temp issues. They've probably fixed a lot of that with video drivers but I'm sure it's still an issue that worsens a lot once you hit GPU throttling territory due to insufficient cooling.
3) I see some people say they think the AMD drivers are better?
Well all I can say is that my GTX680 ran great with every single game (100+) nor do I have any issues now with my GTX1080. I've had periodic issues that relate to Windows that got fixed (so in part may have been Microsoft's fault).
I TEST GAMES. I've got over 600 games running without any obvious issues on my system which is an i7-3770K (OC to 4.4GHz), 16GB DDR3, GTX1080. Running 2560x1440.
Update: I have TWO games that have a weird double-frame (hard to describe) issue that produces a kind of JUDDER when I move. That seems to have been introduced with my swap to GTX1080 but I'm not certain. Those two games are:
a) Prototype 1 (not 2), and
b) Halo 2
So to be clear, I just don't think there are many big issues out there that make one card a better choice over the other in terms of DRIVER support. There are also likely issues I'm not aware of but if I have this many games running smoothly (some tested only briefly) it's hard to think there's enough to justify AMD vs NVidia or vice versa based on that.
4) Freesync/GSync:
It's frankly amazing SIMPLE to use. The main issues with modern monitors are related to VSYNC. If you have it OFF you get screen tearing since new frames and old frames get mixed up within the same monitor refresh cycle (causing vertical and horizontal lines to not match up like a telephone pole in multiple pieces... ah, just Google it).
But with VSYNC ON you not only add LATENCY (lag/sluggishness) but you also get STUTTER if your FPS is dropping below the target (i.e. 60FPS for 60Hz monitor)… there's a workaround called Adaptive VSYNC that will auto disable VSYNC if you can't maintain the target FPS but you'll still get the screen tearing.
*So... if you enable Freesync for AMD cards then what happens is the MONITOR refresh synchs to the FPS output. So each new FRAME is a different length. This gives the best of everything:
a) no added lag
b) no screen tearing
c) no stutter issues related to missing the FPS target using VSYNC
So let's say you have a 144Hz monitor with Freesync support ranging from 40Hz to 144Hz. If your game is ranging from 50FPS to 80FPS then your monitor refresh is matching it between 50Hz and 80Hz. and if you drop below 40FPS then for AMD the drivers resend each frame so 39FPS becomes "78FPS" resulting in 78Hz.
(NVidia GSync handles low FPS in its GSync hardware in the monitor but the result is basically the same... many AMD monitors don't support this though. The rule of thumb is 2.5x max vs min. For example if the range is 40Hz to 60Hz then there's no support for this below 40FPS with AMD. But if it's say 30Hz to 75Hz then there is as it can DOUBLE say 29FPS to become "58FPS"... you really, really don't want a monitor that doesn't support LFC.)
*I'm sure that's confusing but you don't really need to understand it beyond how to choose a good Freesync monitor as many aren't very good. Some are great... then just ensure Freesync is enabled in the drivers, tweak the game settings to achieve an FPS target suitable for the game (i.e. 50FPS average for Tomb Raider and maybe 100FPS+ for faster shooters) and for the most part that's all you need to do. There are a few game exceptions where you may want to cap the FPS manually but for the most part that's it.
GSYNC has a higher quality standard but also adds more to the cost of the monitor. And top-end Freesync monitors are arguably almost identical to top-end GSync monitors to the average person.
So... sorry if that's confusing but if you want my absolute "just get this" opinion then it's again the Asus Strix RX-580 8GB card if it's roughly $300USD. It's maybe 10 to 15% premium for a much better cooling solution that can help maintain a higher average FPS as well as prevent judder/stutter in some situations.
That's why I like the Asus Strix RX-580 8GB card.
2) It's not just AVERAGE FPS but frame time stability. You can have judder/stutter introduced if the frequency is jumping around too much due to throttle/temp issues. They've probably fixed a lot of that with video drivers but I'm sure it's still an issue that worsens a lot once you hit GPU throttling territory due to insufficient cooling.
3) I see some people say they think the AMD drivers are better?
Well all I can say is that my GTX680 ran great with every single game (100+) nor do I have any issues now with my GTX1080. I've had periodic issues that relate to Windows that got fixed (so in part may have been Microsoft's fault).
I TEST GAMES. I've got over 600 games running without any obvious issues on my system which is an i7-3770K (OC to 4.4GHz), 16GB DDR3, GTX1080. Running 2560x1440.
Update: I have TWO games that have a weird double-frame (hard to describe) issue that produces a kind of JUDDER when I move. That seems to have been introduced with my swap to GTX1080 but I'm not certain. Those two games are:
a) Prototype 1 (not 2), and
b) Halo 2
So to be clear, I just don't think there are many big issues out there that make one card a better choice over the other in terms of DRIVER support. There are also likely issues I'm not aware of but if I have this many games running smoothly (some tested only briefly) it's hard to think there's enough to justify AMD vs NVidia or vice versa based on that.
4) Freesync/GSync:
It's frankly amazing SIMPLE to use. The main issues with modern monitors are related to VSYNC. If you have it OFF you get screen tearing since new frames and old frames get mixed up within the same monitor refresh cycle (causing vertical and horizontal lines to not match up like a telephone pole in multiple pieces... ah, just Google it).
But with VSYNC ON you not only add LATENCY (lag/sluggishness) but you also get STUTTER if your FPS is dropping below the target (i.e. 60FPS for 60Hz monitor)… there's a workaround called Adaptive VSYNC that will auto disable VSYNC if you can't maintain the target FPS but you'll still get the screen tearing.
*So... if you enable Freesync for AMD cards then what happens is the MONITOR refresh synchs to the FPS output. So each new FRAME is a different length. This gives the best of everything:
a) no added lag
b) no screen tearing
c) no stutter issues related to missing the FPS target using VSYNC
So let's say you have a 144Hz monitor with Freesync support ranging from 40Hz to 144Hz. If your game is ranging from 50FPS to 80FPS then your monitor refresh is matching it between 50Hz and 80Hz. and if you drop below 40FPS then for AMD the drivers resend each frame so 39FPS becomes "78FPS" resulting in 78Hz.
(NVidia GSync handles low FPS in its GSync hardware in the monitor but the result is basically the same... many AMD monitors don't support this though. The rule of thumb is 2.5x max vs min. For example if the range is 40Hz to 60Hz then there's no support for this below 40FPS with AMD. But if it's say 30Hz to 75Hz then there is as it can DOUBLE say 29FPS to become "58FPS"... you really, really don't want a monitor that doesn't support LFC.)
*I'm sure that's confusing but you don't really need to understand it beyond how to choose a good Freesync monitor as many aren't very good. Some are great... then just ensure Freesync is enabled in the drivers, tweak the game settings to achieve an FPS target suitable for the game (i.e. 50FPS average for Tomb Raider and maybe 100FPS+ for faster shooters) and for the most part that's all you need to do. There are a few game exceptions where you may want to cap the FPS manually but for the most part that's it.
GSYNC has a higher quality standard but also adds more to the cost of the monitor. And top-end Freesync monitors are arguably almost identical to top-end GSync monitors to the average person.
So... sorry if that's confusing but if you want my absolute "just get this" opinion then it's again the Asus Strix RX-580 8GB card if it's roughly $300USD. It's maybe 10 to 15% premium for a much better cooling solution that can help maintain a higher average FPS as well as prevent judder/stutter in some situations.
It really isn’t that confusing. I don’t know if I’ll get a monitor with the gsync/freesync as I don’t have money to get one. But maybe down the road I will pick one up. As for the asus card, I probably will hold out another month or two and see if prices drop at all.
Yeah, the monitor I bought for 20 bucks from a friend. It’s a good monitor but probably should be upgraded. I just don’t know if I want to spend extra money. I’m already almost 800 in the hole with the pc I built so. Still gotta add the gpu as well lol.
photonboy
Titan
- Jun 20, 2006
- 21,566
- 13
- 85,015
https://www.amazon.com/VicTsing-Gold-plated-DisplayPort-Adapter-Converter/dp/B06VWCB587/ref=sr_1_2?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1535592904&sr=1-2&keywords=vga+to+displayport
I believe that's correct. It plugs into the DP (DisplayPort) on the card which is also where it gets power. You would run your VGA cable from the monitor to this adapter.
Supports up to 1920x1080@60Hz.
Here's the same thing but HDMI to VGA instead:
https://www.amazon.com/VicTsing-Gold-Plated-Converter-Adapter-Desktop/dp/B016HL4CAY/ref=pd_sim_147_7?_encoding=UTF8&pd_rd_i=B016HL4CAY&pd_rd_r=16209058-abf5-11e8-9f1d-0fdf2b561195&pd_rd_w=IsaDb&pd_rd_wg=PBrBy&pf_rd_i=desktop-dp-sims&pf_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_p=a180fdfb-b54e-4904-85ba-d852197d6c09&pf_rd_r=467YVR5JQ1M30CKFGFMP&pf_rd_s=desktop-dp-sims&pf_rd_t=40701&psc=1&refRID=467YVR5JQ1M30CKFGFMP
I'm including it to point out there are NO SCREW HOLES so the connector may get loose. I suggest one with holes like the following one has:
https://www.amazon.com/VicTsing-Converter-Adapter-Charging-Devices/dp/B078X3B849/ref=pd_sbs_147_6?_encoding=UTF8&pd_rd_i=B078X3B849&pd_rd_r=7cdb8b41-abf5-11e8-a8ea-092258445276&pd_rd_w=PGsgg&pd_rd_wg=PpWPz&pf_rd_i=desktop-dp-sims&pf_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_p=0bb14103-7f67-4c21-9b0b-31f42dc047e7&pf_rd_r=Y88X2DYP53SWE334XRMX&pf_rd_s=desktop-dp-sims&pf_rd_t=40701&psc=1&refRID=Y88X2DYP53SWE334XRMX
I believe that's correct. It plugs into the DP (DisplayPort) on the card which is also where it gets power. You would run your VGA cable from the monitor to this adapter.
Supports up to 1920x1080@60Hz.
Here's the same thing but HDMI to VGA instead:
https://www.amazon.com/VicTsing-Gold-Plated-Converter-Adapter-Desktop/dp/B016HL4CAY/ref=pd_sim_147_7?_encoding=UTF8&pd_rd_i=B016HL4CAY&pd_rd_r=16209058-abf5-11e8-9f1d-0fdf2b561195&pd_rd_w=IsaDb&pd_rd_wg=PBrBy&pf_rd_i=desktop-dp-sims&pf_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_p=a180fdfb-b54e-4904-85ba-d852197d6c09&pf_rd_r=467YVR5JQ1M30CKFGFMP&pf_rd_s=desktop-dp-sims&pf_rd_t=40701&psc=1&refRID=467YVR5JQ1M30CKFGFMP
I'm including it to point out there are NO SCREW HOLES so the connector may get loose. I suggest one with holes like the following one has:
https://www.amazon.com/VicTsing-Converter-Adapter-Charging-Devices/dp/B078X3B849/ref=pd_sbs_147_6?_encoding=UTF8&pd_rd_i=B078X3B849&pd_rd_r=7cdb8b41-abf5-11e8-a8ea-092258445276&pd_rd_w=PGsgg&pd_rd_wg=PpWPz&pf_rd_i=desktop-dp-sims&pf_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_p=0bb14103-7f67-4c21-9b0b-31f42dc047e7&pf_rd_r=Y88X2DYP53SWE334XRMX&pf_rd_s=desktop-dp-sims&pf_rd_t=40701&psc=1&refRID=Y88X2DYP53SWE334XRMX
TRENDING THREADS
-
Question upgraded to 32gb ddr4 and now it wont boot above 2133mhz - help appreciated- Started by SophieTheMeh
- Replies: 4
-
-
-
-
Question Difficulty over Nord (and other) VPN configuration
- Started by kurtepearl22
- Replies: 0
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram