What graphics should I get for best performance?

[netrunner3242]

Hey,

Recently I got myself new PC without GPU as it wasn't really needed.
But as GTA5 is about to come to PC I am considering a decent graphics card up to £150 - £160.

This one seems tempting to me but only because of Ram amount and as far as I know its not only about it.
Sapphire Radeon R9 270X Boost OC 4096MB GDDR5
http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=GX-327-SP&groupid=701&catid=56

My processor is AMD A8 6600K.
Would this card be a right choice? or something with less ram would perform better? and why?
I will mainly use it to play games I guess.

Thanks in advance

edit.

I Will also connect card to multiple outputs (2 monitors and TV)

 

[Epic Sasa]

that card is nice but 4 gb of memory is nice for multi monitor but you will need a 600 watt plus power supply i think if you have a smaller power supply 750 ti is nice the 4gb versions are available i think

 

[B Beast]

I think you should look at what the cpu can run first. I think that the r9 270x would be too much...

 

[netrunner3242]

I am not sure atm but I guess my PSU is 650 watt Corsair (should be good!)

I think you should look at what the cpu can run first. I think that the r9 270x would be too much...

@B Beast
What do you mean dude?

 

[jerdle]

An A8 is one of the higher tier APUs, i doubt it would noticeably hurt a 270x.

270x should get you medium settings on games w/ good FPS.

 

[Karadjgne]

I prefer the non-x cards, they seem to have less issues with coil whine and drivers and you can get a r9 280 for the same or close price as a 270x, which is a good match for a A8

 

[netrunner3242]

I prefer the non-x cards, they seem to have less issues with coil whine and drivers and you can get a r9 280 for the same or close price as a 270x, which is a good match for a A8

Hey there is one with 1GB RAM less and its 5 pound cheaper. Why is that?
Sapphire Radeon R9 280 Dual-X 3072MB GDDR5
http://

Is it better? and why if you could explain?

 

[bembene]

for a 270x u don t need 4gb vram. The card is to weak to use this much. I guess u play at 1920x1080?
At this resolution only skyrim with 100mods will use this much vram. But the 270x won t be powerful enough to run it at a decent framerate anyhow.
270x is a 1080p card for medium to high settings, the 2gb version is enough.4 gb version is a marketing trick.
the r9 280 3gb version is the next higher card from amd. Umostly will play high settings. Go check some youtube videos and u see what it is capable of.

 

[netrunner3242]

for a 270x u don t need 4gb vram. The card is to weak to use this much. I guess u play at 1920x1080?
At this resolution only skyrim with 100mods will use this much vram. But the 270x won t be powerful enough to run it at a decent framerate anyhow.
270x is a 1080p card for medium to high settings, the 2gb version is enough.4 gb version is a marketing trick.
the r9 280 3gb version is the next higher card from amd. Umostly will play high settings. Go check some youtube videos and u see what it is capable of.

Should I go for this?

http://www.amazon.co.uk/SAPPHIRE-AMD-Graphics-Card-DDR5/dp/B00IRTXPBM/ref=cm_cr_pr_product_top

 

[bembene]

for a 270x u don t need 4gb vram. The card is to weak to use this much. I guess u play at 1920x1080?
At this resolution only skyrim with 100mods will use this much vram. But the 270x won t be powerful enough to run it at a decent framerate anyhow.
270x is a 1080p card for medium to high settings, the 2gb version is enough.4 gb version is a marketing trick.
the r9 280 3gb version is the next higher card from amd. Umostly will play high settings. Go check some youtube videos and u see what it is capable of.

Should I go for this?
thecard is good. The price also but before u buy it s important to tell us what psu u have? r9 280 is power hungry

http://www.amazon.co.uk/SAPPHIRE-AMD-Graphics-Card-DDR5/dp/B00IRTXPBM/ref=cm_cr_pr_product_top

 

[bembene]

something wrent wrong. Yes it s good card and price but we need to know what psu u have? It s important cause thecard is power hungry.
Also I m not sure if your cpu is strong enough for this card or if it will bottleneck and how bad, others here knowmore about this stuff

 

[bembene]

ah sorry me again, looks like the guys above say your cpu is strong enough and when u have 650 watts powersupply you are good to go.

 

[netrunner3242]

ah sorry me again, looks like the guys above say your cpu is strong enough and when u have 650 watts powersupply you are good to go.

Thanks, I think I'll go for it as it seems little bit cheaper than else where.

 

[sora]

OP, the R9 280 is a great card for the price in my opinion. If you want a card that uses less power go for the GTX 750Ti or even the GTX 760.

 

[Karadjgne]

I run skyrim heavily modded with over 130 mods, more than a few of which use 2k and 4k texture packs, like the flora/fauna and towns, all on a gtx 660ti at ultra settings with 4x/8x AA/AF and don't see more than 64% gpu usage unless it's raining hard and I'm standing in tall grass, then the PhysX will put me to 99%. It's a 2Gb card.

You can run a r9 280 off a quality 520-550w psu all day long. No worries.

 

[netrunner3242]

OP, the R9 280 is a great card for the price in my opinion. If you want a card that uses less power go for the GTX 750Ti or even the GTX 760.

Isn't it better to stick to AMD? because of my processor?

I run skyrim heavily modded with over 130 mods, more than a few of which use 2k and 4k texture packs, like the flora/fauna and towns, all on a gtx 660ti at ultra settings with 4x/8x AA/AF and don't see more than 64% gpu usage unless it's raining hard and I'm standing in tall grass, then the PhysX will put me to 99%. It's a 2Gb card.

You can run a r9 280 off a quality 520-550w psu all day long. No worries.

I would aim for 3GB one tho! thanks for your input

 

[Karadjgne]

No, the 2 are mutually exclusive. For a good majority of games, the only real difference you'll notice is with the cpu, not so much the gpu. Intel cpu's are stronger than AMD on single threaded games like Skyrim, so even if you run a weaker gpu, the cpu gives it a boost, compared to an AMD cpu running a slightly stronger gpu. It's all in the game engine, for example, BF4 multi-player responds very well to amd, be it cpu or gpu, whereas skyrim responds better to intel/nvidia.

So in the end it's pretty well balanced overall, just off balance when you start getting particular.

 

[netrunner3242]

No, the 2 are mutually exclusive. For a good majority of games, the only real difference you'll notice is with the cpu, not so much the gpu. Intel cpu's are stronger than AMD on single threaded games like Skyrim, so even if you run a weaker gpu, the cpu gives it a boost, compared to an AMD cpu running a slightly stronger gpu. It's all in the game engine, for example, BF4 multi-player responds very well to amd, be it cpu or gpu, whereas skyrim responds better to intel/nvidia.

So in the end it's pretty well balanced overall, just off balance when you start getting particular.

Is there gona be some kind of 'bootleneck' - not 100% sure what it means(newb here)? If yes, will it be really bad?

 

[Karadjgne]

A 'bottleneck' in common usage here, is a weak part that squeeze the flow of information (data) from start to finish. So ram can bottleneck a cpu, a cpu can bottleneck a gpu, a gpu can bottleneck a monitor, but not in reverse as data flows out fromm hdd to monitor, not the other way around.

So, if you have a really weak cpu, and a strong gpu, yes the gpu is starved, since the cpu can't flow enough data to fill the gpu potential.

Balance is important, cpu = gpu in strength. The A8 6600k is among the stronger APU's, so it won't bottleneck a r9 280, you'll not see bottleneck in on any noticeable amount until you get to 280x, or above or gtx 780 and above.