GTX 980 ti vs GTX 970 + 144hz Monitor vs GTX 970x2 SLI

[Slickly]

This is a bit of a complicated question and I'm looking for some opinions on the matter. I have about $800 that I want to spend, and I want to upgrade my eye candy in some way. First my specs are:

FX-8350 @ 4.4ghz http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819113284
8gb ram
Mobo http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813131754
800w psu
Currently GTX 760

So, I'm trying to decide for myself what I should upgrade. Initially, I was going to buy two MSI 970's, but I got to thinking, maybe I should just get one and a 140hz monitor, so I asked a friend about it.... he recommended the 980 ti.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814487142

Which I thought might be a good idea... then he told me that I should check my PCI-E slots bandwidth to make sure that I don't run into any issues. I have been looking into that for a few hours, and I have to be honest.... I'm not sure. The numbers don't seem to add up on a few things. If the PCI-E slot is only capble of 8GT/s, and the 980 is 334ish, then it must be 8 per lane right? That's 128. If that's true, the 760 I have now is 192GT/s, and I have no problems. I know I must just have a bad understanding of this...

Can someone please help me, I guess I just want a little bit of facts and some opinions... can someone just tell me if I will run into technical issues? What would you do in my situation? Monitor, or cards? Any help is appreciated.

 

[Ohmybad]

A single card setup will always be better in the long run over SLI/Xfire

in your case getting a 144hz monitor and a 980(non-ti) would be your best bet.

980 for $500 http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814487079&cm_re=980gtx-_-14-487-079-_-Product would leave you $300 for the 144 monitor.

 

[Slickly]

First, thank you very much for the quick reply. I'm just browsing around reading threads by people asking similar questions to mine.

What do you think about upcoming technology, and waiting to see if something is a better bang for my buck? Anything I should know besides the 300x series that is coming soon?

 

[photonboy]

1) Non-issue with motherboard.

2) Verify it fits the case (probably)

3) PSU is a non-issue.

4) MONITOR??

Here's my problem with recommending ANYTHING. We don't know what monitor you currently have. I can't recommend a GTX980Ti just to drive a single 1080p monitor.

For the money I'd recommend a GTX970 + new monitor (IPS, 27", 2560x1440). I'd far rather have my high-res monitor with my old GTX680 than take a GTX980Ti but with a 1080p monitor. There are LOTS of games that look far better at 27", 1440p such as CIV5, Starcraft 2 etc. In fact, every game looks better even if set to 1920x1080 and scaled to fit the 2560x1440 monitor.

*If you have a good monitor or plan to UPGRADE to one in the next year then disregard my recommendation below. Here's a link my recommended GSYNC monitor which is too expensive for now but worth reading about.

$800 G-Sync monitor: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_LTHr96NueA

5) Recommendation if you have a 1080p monitor:

a) GTX970: http://pcpartpicker.com/part/evga-video-card-04gp42974kr , and
b) Monitor (IPS, 4ms, 25" to 27", 1440p, 60Hz):

#1 - 25" ($280): http://pcpartpicker.com/part/acer-monitor-umkg7aa002

#2 - 27" ($400): http://pcpartpicker.com/part/benq-monitor-gw2765ht

Summary:
Yes, GTX980Ti is an awesome card but it's only part of the experience. Again, you want a nice monitor as well.

 

[Slickly]

Oh sorry, thanks for the reply. I have a 23'' 1080p 60hz monitor. Nice when I got it, not so much anymore. You'd recommend a 1440p IPS over a 144hz 1080p? Can you tell me why?

 

[photonboy]

About AMD:
I'm not a "fanboy" however NVidia is simply a better way to go in general. AMD's main problem stems to being strapped for cash. That's why they've been massively delayed for performance x86 desktop CPU's, late for GPU upgrading (how long ago did the GTX970 launch?), has difficulty upgrading driver in a timely fashion, and is limited in their ability to add new FEATURES.

Say what you will about proprietary features however NVidia simply has a lot of things that AMD currently does not:
- PhysX
- MFAA
- H.265
- HUD support (minimal latency path for Occulus Rift and similar HUD's)
- HUD support to optimize scaling for HUD
- Voxel lighting support (future games)
- NVidia Hairworks and similar (see Witcher 3)
- Adaptive VSYNC (RadeonPro adds this for AMD but I don't think AMD themselves have this in the drivers).
- GSYNC
(GSYNC and FREESYNC are not identical but I'll not go on about that. Future GSYNC monitors will also improve by incorporating features that are unlikely to be possible on FREESYNC. NVidia took the approach of ripping out the guts of the monitor to replace everything with a single unit including scaler. So future products can do things like get light strobing to minimize blur done at the same time of GSYNC.

I've also read that most or all FREESYNC monitors have major issues which i won't address here.)

*It's also uncertain how much this will affect FUTURE SUPPORT of their products. I really want them to succeed and even recommend certain graphics cards like the R9-280X at times but in general there's too many cons.

The R9-390X would need to show a VALUE compared to similarly priced NVidia cards for me to recommend to offset the lack of features and level of overall support.

 

[Slickly]

But that is good advice, and what I was leaning toward earlier, before I talked to my friend. Was going to get a 970/980 and a monitor, but I was going to go 144hz. I do play a lot of immersive games though, so that's why I've been depending just getting a monitor at a higher resolution. I do play with DSR on a lot and it works quite well from what I can tell, so maybe an increase in FPS would be awesome, especially with the new card... I could play at some great frame rates. Currently playing Witcher, Alien: Isolation, Dark Souls 2, GTA V, Far Cry 4, The Evil Within.... I play games slowly.

 

[photonboy]

But that is good advice, and what I was leaning toward earlier, before I talked to my friend. Was going to get a 970/980 and a monitor, but I was going to go 144hz. I do play a lot of immersive games though, so that's why I've been depending just getting a monitor at a higher resolution. I do play with DSR on a lot and it works quite well from what I can tell, so maybe an increase in FPS would be awesome, especially with the new card... I could play at some great frame rates. Currently playing Witcher, Alien: Isolation, Dark Souls 2, GTA V, Far Cry 4, The Evil Within.... I play games slowly.

Hi,
Unfortunately at your budget you have to CHOOSE between high res or refresh rate (i.e. 2560x1440 @60Hz vs 1920x1080@144Hz).

GSYNC is awesome but beyond your budget.

DSR can improve the 1080p experience but it's not as good as true high-res.

Anyway, I've provided my information and do with it what you wish. Personally, I'll take the high-res 60Hz every time.

*I should add that if you do get a 144Hz monitor (non-GSYNC) you need to learn how to use Adaptive VSYNC properly. For example, let's say SCREEN TEAR is obvious so you want to enable VSYNC. However, you should NEVER use VSYNC if you can't output to match the refresh rate (i.e. 144FPS). Since that's unlikely for many games you should force on:

"HALF ADAPTIVE VSYNC" in the NVidia Control Panel.

Then tweak so you can maintain 72FPS almost all of the time (since 144FPS is rarely possible). What happens is VSYNC is working (to prevent screen tearing) but is automatically disabled if you can't output at least 72FPS. WHY? If you have VSYNC enabled but can't update fast enough the monitor has to WAIT and display the second time it upgrades. Thus it takes 2/72 of a second to display.

So you often end up (using VSYNC ON) hitting and missing the refresh rate multiple times a second which causes stutter instead of smooth motion (especially noticeable if panning).

(Another case scenario is there's a few games like Max Payne 3 that avoid the stutter issue by forcing HALF the refresh rate. On my 60Hz monitor I would be playing at 60FPS then BAM I dropped to a solid 30FPS which was sluggish. I forced on Adaptive VSYNC and in the same scene I temporarily dropped into the 55FPS range but with a small amount of screen tearing).

**Again though, turn VSYNC OFF if there's minimal screen tear to reduce latency (sluggishness). It's hard to predict as it varies between systems and games. Anyway, you can EXPERIMENT with Adaptive VSYNC vs VSYNC OFF (for regular VSYNC I use that only if I rarely drop below the target. The ONLY disadvantage Adaptive has is that pre-rendered cut scenes get screen tear.

Sorry to go on and on.... got to go.