What 900 series is right for me

Chukanukah

Reputable
Jan 22, 2015
47
0
4,540
i7 4790k
gtx 760 sc acx
8gb hyperx ram
all air cooled
asus z97a mobo
I'm looking to upgrade my PC without completely breaking the bank, I'm focusing on my gpu and cooling, I play games like GTA, Farcry, Just Cause 3, etc. I have 2 monitors, one 144hz, and one 60, both 1080p. Essentially, I want to run every game at max settings at the highest fps possible, I understand a 970 is the best bang for my buck, but will it lack the performance I need? I think the 980ti would just be overkill expecially for 1080, but I may look into a 1440p monitor depending on my graphics solution. Also, is it worth paying for the hybrid model 980 or 980ti if that is what I choose or getting a water cooling mount and doing it manually.
To sum up
-Best Graphics Card(or cards in SLI) for graphically intense games at 1080p, maybe 1440p
-Worth liquid cooling at all?
-Worth getting hybrid model or manually liquid cooling?
 
Solution

Best bang for buck is NOT nVidia. I realise you're asking for which 900 card to get, but have you considered getting a 300 card? If not, why not? You can get an R9 390 8GB for about the same price as a GTX 970 3.5GB, and it's about as fast as a GTX 980!
 
Solution

Chukanukah

Reputable
Jan 22, 2015
47
0
4,540

well, I have a couple friends with AMD cards, and they complain about out of date drivers, general failures, etc, I guess I'm willing to pay the Nvidia premium and I kind of have the Nvidia/Intel build going rather than AMD
 
If you are wanting an upgrade that is noticeable, the the GTX 970 is the next step up. And the next would be the GTX 980.

If you are used to the Nvidia graphics cards and their drivers, then I would avoid going the AMD route. I think you would be disappointed. The GTX 970 is an excellent buy. I have one myself.
 

Chukanukah

Reputable
Jan 22, 2015
47
0
4,540

do you ever find that you wish you had more power? What kind of games do you like to play?
 
https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Powercolor/R9_390_PCS_Plus/30.html

This averages many games so use a REFERENCE.

There are other things to consider with NVidia vs AMD such as:
a) features (PhysX etc)
b) POWER (may need to buy a better power supply, or too much heat into room may be a temp issue... AMD produces a LOT more heat)
c) VRAM (R9-390 8GB model is more future-proofed this way)

*So, pros and cons.

Money aside I'd get the GTX980Ti hands down but it is a lot more money.

**I'd strongly recommend buying a FREESYNC or GSYNC monitor at some point as well. If you go AMD and buy a Freesync monitor at some point it needs to support an asynchronous range of 2.5X the base (i.e. 30Hz to 75Hz). That allows the frame doubling to work properly or you'll have problems with game smoothness on the low end (dropping below 30Hz or whatever the monitor minimum is).

AVOID CROSSFIRE and SLI.

Summary:
A quality R9-390 8GB is definitely one good option.
 

Chukanukah

Reputable
Jan 22, 2015
47
0
4,540

I currently have a 750w evga gold PSU, do you think I would need to upgrade if I got the 980ti?
 

subhaac

Honorable
Sep 2, 2013
63
0
10,630


I had a Gigabyte Windforce GTX 970, absolute beast of a card, even with that 3.5GB VRAM limitation. I was using it with a 1080p 60Hz screen, it was way more than enough for that setup since going way above 60FPS is not gonna give any benefit since the screen can only display 60Hz. Adding to that, I still stand with GTX 970 being the best bang for buck, you don't need loads of VRAM for 1080p, unless you're really keen on modding the games you play. I tried maxing out the VRAM on the GTX 970 just to see how bad the RAM limitation actually affects performance. I ran Shadow of Mordor at Ultra settings, downloaded the Ultra texture pack too. It started stuttering once in a while, but frankly at 1080p, there's absolutely no difference between the Very High and Ultra textures so it's a waste in my opinion. Maybe the difference in texture would be more obvious at higher resolutions. Finally, if you're considering SLI, it's better to get a single powerful card than two lesser cards. SLI has it's own problems, stuttering, poor game optimizations and many more. You won't get double the performance of a single card with SLI, usually it'll be around 50% more FPS with SLI compared to a single card. There's also the power high power requirements to power two cards. A single GTX 980Ti will always be better than two GTX 970s, when you consider everything from performance, power and value for money.

If you're looking into going to 1440p, then I would suggest the 980, if you're considering a water cooled 980, then you're better off with a stock 980Ti, since the price wouldn't be that much higher than a watercooled 980. You can put aftermarket watercoolers on the stock 980Ti when you have the money later, if you're planning to water-cool your whole rig. I have an Asus Strix GTX 980Ti now, even with this powerhouse it's not gonna max every single graphics settings in a triple A game, i'm talking about maxing anti-aliasing mostly. You don't need alot of AA at 1440p anyway. So my suggestion would be to get the 980 if you're short on cash, or get the 980Ti if you can afford it. The 980Ti does have a better value since it offers Titan X performance at a much lower price. Strictly looking at performance/money, 980Ti and 970 is at the top, if you're looking at Nvidia alone.

If you already have a custom liquid cooled rig, then manually liquid cooling would make sense, custom water-cooling is very expensive. If you don't, then a hybrid cooler would do, it is more quiet than an air cooled solution. Also, make sure you have radiator mountings free, to mount the radiator for the GPU, if you're going for something like the 980Ti SeaHawk.