Graphics Card Options for 1080p

[arandomguy]

1080p gaming. Technically this is upgrading from a 650ti (although this is just the latest in a roulette of graphics options).

Going to ask this in a different way since current US retail prices aren't very relevant for my situation. Not going to buy used.

Assume the benchmark is a MSI GTX 970 Gaming for $315 (in USD terms you can think of it as $240). Maybe a $10 MIR on top of that.

At what prices would the following be a better option -

GM206 (GTX 950/960. 2/4GB)
Tonga (285,380,380x. 2/4GB)
Hawaii (290/290x/390/390x) as another reference point. Although not really interested in Hawaii.

Please factor in estimated resale value (cost of ownership differences) if I were to upgrade again next generation or at most 2 generations from now. Basically if card A is $100 more but will still sell for $80 more 1 year later than card B, to me it is really only $20 more expensive to use for that 1 year.

 

[RussianSensation]

Why aren't you interested in the R9 390? At similar prices I would pick R9 390 over the GTX970 unless you require PhysX or TXAA.

This post summarizes why I'd pick the 390 over GTX970:
http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=37707486&postcount=8

If you are leaning towards NV, go for the 970. 2GB cards are DOA (this post covers why that is) so I'd count all of those out.

That leaves you with R9 290/290X/390/390X. You said you won't buy used but didn't mention anything about retail prices of 290/290X cards in your country. 390X is usually a much worse value than 390/970 so that means your choice really comes down to the 970 or 390 and since you ruled out the 390, get the 970.

 

[happy medium]

1080p gaming

the gtx970 is the absolute best card in its price range for 1080p gaming.
good choice.

 

[shady28]

Assume the benchmark is a MSI GTX 970 Gaming for $315 (in USD terms you can think of it as $240). Maybe a $10 MIR on top of that.

No idea where you are finding a 970 at $240 USD, but at that price it is easily the best deal.

 

[poofyhairguy]

This post summarizes why I'd pick the 390 over GTX970:
http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=37707486&postcount=8

Isn't it a little different for 1080p though? Genuine question, it seems Maxwell likes 1080p more than it likes higher resolutions.

 

[happy medium]

Isn't it a little different for 1080p though? Genuine question, it seems Maxwell likes 1080p more than it likes higher resolutions.

he will never admit it.

 

[RussianSensation]

Isn't it a little different for 1080p though? Genuine question, it seems Maxwell likes 1080p more than it likes higher resolutions.

Computerbase tested 18 games and 390 beats GTX 970 OC at 1080P HQ:
http://www.computerbase.de/2015-09/...t/4/#diagramm-rating-2560-1440-hohe-qualitaet

There is no particular advantage that 970 has at 1080P on average.

To me since 970 and 390 are so close at 1080P, I would pick 390 because:

1) 8GB GDDR5 > 3.5GB of GDDR5

2) 390 does better as GPU load increases (aka we can't predict the future but better performance at 1440P suggests the card can handle increased GPU load better than the 970. We've seen this scenario play out with 7970/7970Ghz/R9 280X vs. 670/680/770 and how did that turn out long-term?)

Remember how you recommended GTX660Ti over HD7950 or GTX680 over HD7970 or 780 over R9 290? How did that work out? Well from day 1 the HD7950/7970/R9 290 cards did better at 1440P/1600P and sure enough today they are beating 660Ti/670/680/780 at 1080P too. At 1440P/1600P/4K, we can see what happens to the GPU's performance as the load increases and how well it handles it. It doesn't mean, a 390/970/980 should be recommended to 1440P or 4K but it can tell us a lot sometimes. Once more demanding next gen games come out, how the standings look like now at 1440P is very likely to reflect the standing of next gen games at 1080P.

This could change of course if many games are using UE4 (a game engine that heavily favours NV's Maxwell), or if NV scores many GW marketing deals.

3) NV's Kepler driver support has been very poor in the last 12 months which makes it safer to buy a GCN card. Early DX12 performance and 390's 8 ACE engines only contribute to this.

4) We need strong competition in the GPU industry. Furthermore, NV showed 0 remorse for the 970 marketing fiasco. For that reason, when the two cards are extremely close in performance and price/performance, I would recommend the 390.

Long-term, things could change if we have a lot of GW titles. Also, if someone needs PhysX or TXAA, by all means get the 970. Can't go wrong with the 970 or the 390 really.

he will never admit it.

Historically speaking based on all the data we have of many previous generations, a GPU's performance at higher GPU loads (i.e., higher MSAA or higher resolution) is the safest indication of how well it will age long-term barring non-extraordinary events (i.e., HD5870 bombing in tessellation, GeForce FX bombing in DX9, etc.). Therefore, on paper 390 has more +s on its side -- 8GB of GDDR5, 8 ACEs for DX12, superior 1440P performance, and especially the wins it garners at 1440P at Guru3D are huge.

Also, one can argue that AMD's average 1080P performance is the result of lack of multi-threading in their DX11 drivers. What happens in DX12 games?

Interestingly enough it looks like you didn't even read my first post to the OP:

"390X is usually a much worse value than 390/970 so that means your choice really comes down to the 970 or 390 and since you ruled out the 390, get the 970."

 

[tweakboy]

970 gtx

 

[Attic]

At 1080P a 970 is great.

I'd give advantage to the R9 390 for the reasons RS stated, though it's one of those can't go wrong spots if you are looking at 970 or 390.

 

[arandomguy]

Why aren't you interested in the R9 390? At similar prices I would pick R9 390 over the GTX970 unless you require PhysX or TXAA.

This post summarizes why I'd pick the 390 over GTX970:
http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=37707486&postcount=8

If you are leaning towards NV, go for the 970. 2GB cards are DOA (this post covers why that is) so I'd count all of those out.

That leaves you with R9 290/290X/390/390X. You said you won't buy used but didn't mention anything about retail prices of 290/290X cards in your country. 390X is usually a much worse value than 390/970 so that means your choice really comes down to the 970 or 390 and since you ruled out the 390, get the 970.

It isn't an AMD/Nvidia thing. I am considering Tonga, even the yet unreleased variant in the rumor mill, as well. I won't completely rule out Hawaii but it isn't that interesting to me at this point due to a multitude of reasons. To avoid arguing the minutiae the best way to look at it is this, I could've bought a Hawaii card last year for less then what they cost now due to changes in FX and AMD being extremely passive with the 3xx series (somewhat salty about this last point since I did wait for AMD's lackluster response which is part of the reason for having delayed so long, but that is my own personal side issue) so it makes little sense to buy the same thing now unless the deal is at least better then what I could have bought last year.

I tried to phrase my question the way I did because I thought it might easier foster inter-market advice. So if say the advice was a R9 390 4GB at $300 would be a better deal or a GTX 960 2GB at $150 (not saying those are, which is why I'm asking) I'll then factor in myself if I can find such a deal or what the probability of one showing up given the time I want to wait (wait for holiday sales, etc). I'm a willing wait and poach type buyer.

I also did want to factor in hypothetical resell and ease of resell one to two generations later.

No idea where you are finding a 970 at $240 USD, but at that price it is easily the best deal.

I just managed to luck into a price error situation where the retailer listed at straight US MSRP without adjusting for foreign exchange. I also had an additional discount on top of that. The actual lowest price for a 970 is I think $400 (which I can consider as $360 if I wait for a bundle to resell) with the MSI variant at about $450.

Another example of an option I was also considering earlier in the month was a GTX 960 2GB, the cost would have been about $180-$190 ($140 US) but this would have required reselling Phantom Pain and getting a rebate.

 

[Seba]

It would be much simpler if you would just list the local prices for the cards in your price range.

 

[arandomguy]

It would be much simpler if you would just list the local prices for the cards in your price range.

Can use this as a gauge - https://ca.pcpartpicker.com/parts/video-card/

 

[Seba]

And your price range is?

Also, what CPU, power supply and case do you have?

 

[b-mac]

If your budget is a bit on the lower side there is an XFX 280X for $189.99 (219.99 - 30 MIR) over at newegg.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814150678

Also saw the XFX 280 for 169.99 (199.99 - 30 MIR) at new egg as well. Might be an option if your budget is a bit lower.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814150706&cm_re=xfx_280-_-14-150-706-_-Product

 

[arandomguy]

I don't really have a price range. I buy based on whatever is a good deal as long as it fits certain base requirements and whether or not it is worth spending that much on. I guess this means 2GB and 950/7870 levels as a minimum. You can say I have enough disposable income for the hobby but I'm also a saver personality type.

At the moment a 2500k, TX750, max length is 290mm (in - 2x120mm, 1x140mm, out - 1x120mm. Optional 1x140mm in/out side).

 

[Seba]

In that case I'll choose either a GTX 970 or a R9 390. But your maximum length of 290 mm will eliminate a lot of models (especially R9 390 cards).

The resale value may be significantly decreased if the new generation of graphics cards will be as good as some people are expecting them to be. If you are very concerned about the resale value, a cheaper GTX 960 2GB could be adequate for 1920x1080. I am not aware of any game that can not run on this card at 1920x1080, at least at reasonable graphic settings (no need to turn all the settings to minimum). This card will retain some of it's value at least as a HTPC card.

 

[Piroko]

If I were to assume a GTX970 for 315$ as a benchmark, I would place both GTX960 4GB and 380 4GB at below 200$ to be interesting, and not give any recommendation to 2GB cards (or the 950) unless gaming is low priority to you.

I wouldn't be too surprised if used 970s stay above 200$ even after Pascal release while the 960 4GBs settle to 140$ and the 950s fall off a cliff.

 

[4K_shmoorK]

1) 8GB GDDR5 > 3.5GB of GDDR5

Really has no effect at 1080p and barely effects 1440p. Won't run into VRAM limitations until you hit 4k and higher.

That said, I do agree with you. 390 over 970 all afternoon but at the end of the day, whatever is cheaper. My vote is custom 290X. If I were in the market for a 1080p card, I'd most certainly snatch one of these up before they disappear from retail shelves.

50MHz bump and you are on par with 390X :thumbsup:

 

[poofyhairguy]

Remember how you recommended GTX660Ti over HD7950 or GTX680 over HD7970 or 780 over R9 290?

No way, I was a big fan of my 7970 Ghz! And I still use my 7850 pretty regularly as it's all I need (when overclocked) for desktop gaming. I think the 290 and 290x for a while were the best value in gaming, but that has kinda dried up for now.

The 390 have certainly come down in price in the US now that the 290s are gone, which does make them a pretty even price match for the 970 unlike near launch. I do agree that 8GB of VRAM is much more future proof in theory than 3.5GB, and I expect that late generation console games might push past 4GB as texture quality is a kinda "cheap" image quality improvement. Finally I agree that it seems Hawaii maybe still has a longer life left than the newer Maxwell depending on which Directx 12 features developers chose to employ. I am not trying to be unreasonable.

With that said, I can see somewhat of an argument for the 970 at 1080p and not just because that is my living room setup. In the tier of gamers above the laptop tier on Steam (aka people not playing on Intel GPUs at sub-1080p) the most popular combo by far is the 970 plus 1080p. Nvidia has sold millions of these cards and that is a very direct target for PC developers to aim for, like they aimed at that 660 for years. Whether anyone likes it or not Gameworks isn't going away, and that fact plus the sheer number of 970s sold means that the card might have a longer life than anyone might expect simply because game developers are doing it all to make money.

I honestly don't completely believe that. My honest belief is that ALL these cards short of a 980 Ti or Fury X will just be left behind when the next generation of GPUs hit. The popularity of the 970 won't save it when the same priced Pascal GPU is like 40% faster, and I honestly don't think the 8GB of VRAM on the 390 will save it when we get to games that really need that much VRAM. The only game without mods I know of that now needs that much VRAM is GTA V with everything turned up, and that really requires a 980 TI level GPU to run 60FPS with all those settings enabled.

In my opinion the best option is a second-hand 290x, as that is already depreciated down most of the way. You can get 970 or 390 level power for significantly less (kinda sorta taking advantage of AMD's brand position), and then you are sitting on a Directx 12 lottery ticket in case all that extra hardware gets used in significant AAA games. The 390 is the clear winner if you plan to crossfire though, where that RAM will be used and soon.

I honestly think between the 970 and the 390 at 1080p the surrounding situation matters more- like what games you play, how hot/large your case is, and what EXACT card you can get a deal on. For example, I know for me the 970 does have a little extra value because it brought down my overall case temps (even overclocked) from when I had the 7970 GHz in there. I don't know if the 390 maybe puts out less overall heat too than the 7970, but for someone like me who values low case fan speeds this kind of thing goes into the equation. I don't know if one option is always a slam dunk like the 280x over the 960.

But I don't know as much as you or some other people on here, so I wasn't going to give our my opinion as advice right off the bat. I kinda just wanted to discuss the situation civilly, as a lot has changed since the summer when 290 deals were everywhere.

 

[Seba]

Any second hand card is excluded:

Not going to buy used.

 

[kawi6rr]

I'd give advantage to the R9 390 for the reasons RS stated, though it's one of those can't go wrong spots if you are looking at 970 or 390.

I would also go with the 390 as well.

 

[poofyhairguy]

Any second hand card is excluded:

Which could change the game depending on where someone lives. Here in the US there are still some 290s for cheap:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814131569&cm_re=290_r9-_-14-131-569-_-Product

But outside the US if you take away new or used 290s and 290Xs then it seems you don't have an 100% obvious answer IMHO. That is all I was saying.

 

[b-mac]

I don't really have a price range. I buy based on whatever is a good deal as long as it fits certain base requirements and whether or not it is worth spending that much on. I guess this means 2GB and 950/7870 levels as a minimum. You can say I have enough disposable income for the hobby but I'm also a saver personality type.

At the moment a 2500k, TX750, max length is 290mm (in - 2x120mm, 1x140mm, out - 1x120mm. Optional 1x140mm in/out side).

I have a 7970 GHZ (Essentially the 280X) from sapphire and it has served me well so far at 1200P. I run most things at high/ultra, It is a pretty good deal for around $200. Obviosuly if you want 1080p60 at ultra on all games a 290/390 or 970 would serve you better but cost a bit more.

 

[RussianSensation]

No way, I was a big fan of my 7970 Ghz! And I still use my 7850 pretty regularly as it's all I need (when overclocked) for desktop gaming. I think the 290 and 290x for a while were the best value in gaming, but that has kinda dried up for now.

Sorry, sorry. My reply that started with "Remember how..." was supposed to be addressing poster from #3. This doesn't apply to you but I incorrectly edited the post. I know you weren't advocating 660Ti > 7950, 670 > 7970, 680 > 7970Ghz and 770 > 280X.

Whether anyone likes it or not Gameworks isn't going away, and that fact plus the sheer number of 970s sold means that the card might have a longer life than anyone might expect simply because game developers are doing it all to make money.

I am not sure the developer argument is sound though because the same could have been said of GTX660->780 cards, all of which were very popular. Their performance today is horrible given that they either cost similar for less performance to start or had big pricing premiums for performance advantage that has been wiped out in the last 15 months (680 4GB/770 2-4GB/780 3-6GB/780Ti/Titan in particular come to mind).

970 is a solid card for 1080P but if prices are similar, I think I'd pick the 390 instead.

I honestly don't completely believe that. My honest belief is that ALL these cards short of a 980 Ti or Fury X will just be left behind when the next generation of GPUs hit.

You are right but I desire more competition and don't aprpeciate when NV lied about the 970's marketing fiasco and did nothing about it. On paper the 390 has: (1) more free fast VRAM; (2) superior 1440P performance which gives a somewhat greater peace of mind that it can handle more demanding loads; (3) 8 ACE engines that may or may not benefit it in DX12 games in the real world. That makes the 390 a 'safer' choice imo if prices are similar.

I honestly think between the 970 and the 390 at 1080p the surrounding situation matters more- like what games you play, how hot/large your case is, and what EXACT card you can get a deal on.

Agreed

Assume the benchmark is a MSI GTX 970 Gaming for $315 (in USD terms you can think of it as $240). Maybe a $10 MIR on top of that.

If you can get an MSI Gaming 970 for $315 Canadian, there is no way to beat that deal with anything brand new. 2GB cards to keep for 2-3 years would be a waste of $, 280X is old. As a point of reference, NCIX has it for $460 CDN + tax, Canada Computers has it for $489 CDN + tax. You should just buy that because that's a massive discount from market prices of a 970 in Canada.

The only way to beat a $315 CDN 970 is to go into the used market of GTX780/7970Ghz/R9 290/290X cards.

 

[arandomguy]

Having gone through this what I'm getting in terms of relative values might be the following? -
<<<<0.6 - 2GB cards due to lack of VRAM.
0.6 - GTX 960 4GB. R9 285/380 4GB. I assume due to relative performance scaling?
0.9 - R9 290
1.0 - GTX 970
1.05?1.1? - R9 390. Larger VRAM. Speculated more future proof.

At the moment I'm leaning to keeping it due to the inherent risk in needing to time deals and bundles (along with reselling). Although I'm wondering about the probability of an non off brand (due to resell) R9 390 for the equivalent of about $300-$320 during BF/Boxing Day. Or a price cut since we are going to be at the post one year mark now for the 970 and whether or not any pressure exists from the 300 series.

I think I'll toss away the 2GB options unless a extreme deal happens. Otherwise I'd probably just stick with what I have and keep working at the lower demanding games.

Need to push myself to be willing to spend a little.

I guess another concern I have is whether or not the 970 will end up being stuck in middle so to speak. I had this problem with 2 previous cards in which they ended up being both too fast (pointlessly faster than the slower options I was considering. basically locked at 60fps even with low utilization) while also not being fast enough for other usages.

For example, I know for me the 970 does have a little extra value because it brought down my overall case temps (even overclocked) from when I had the 7970 GHz in there. I don't know if the 390 maybe puts out less overall heat too than the 7970, but for someone like me who values low case fan speeds this kind of thing goes into the equation. I don't know if one option is always a slam dunk like the 280x over the 960.

Interestingly enough this is actually a reason why I'm a bit hesitant even going to somewhat higher end option like the 970. Having used a wide range in the power scale over the last 2 years with a 5770 being the low end and either a OCed 7950 or GTX 780 at the high end the latter did have some quality of life issues related to heat output.