Maybe I asked the question wrong.
Example: Based on a Guru3D benchmark, the Nvidia GTX 780 has about 27 more Frames per Second over the GTX 760(Which I have) on Tomb Raider.
I have the FX-6300 processor, but the test was performed with a Core i7 3960 Extreme (Sandy Bridge-E) @ 4.6 GHz on all six cores .
If that benchmark is correct and my processor has the same tendency, and the minimum based on my settings was 24, will my new minimum will be 51FPS if I upgrade to the GTX 780?
As for max, I have V-Sync on, so 60 it is.
Benchmark on Tomb Raider with settings of: DX11, Ultra Quality mode, FX AA enabled, 16x AF enabled, Hair Quality Normal (TressFX disabled), Tessellation On, SSAO Ultra. Resolution used on this benchmark is 2560X1600.
(I, on the other hand, will be using those same settings, but with TressFX on. Also, I will be using the resolution of 1920X1080.)
Example: Based on a Guru3D benchmark, the Nvidia GTX 780 has about 27 more Frames per Second over the GTX 760(Which I have) on Tomb Raider.
I have the FX-6300 processor, but the test was performed with a Core i7 3960 Extreme (Sandy Bridge-E) @ 4.6 GHz on all six cores .
If that benchmark is correct and my processor has the same tendency, and the minimum based on my settings was 24, will my new minimum will be 51FPS if I upgrade to the GTX 780?
As for max, I have V-Sync on, so 60 it is.
Benchmark on Tomb Raider with settings of: DX11, Ultra Quality mode, FX AA enabled, 16x AF enabled, Hair Quality Normal (TressFX disabled), Tessellation On, SSAO Ultra. Resolution used on this benchmark is 2560X1600.
(I, on the other hand, will be using those same settings, but with TressFX on. Also, I will be using the resolution of 1920X1080.)