I5 with 770 or 780

[BF04]

My cpu is a Core i5-4670 Haswell 3.4GHz LGA 1150
I can get a 4gb GTX 770 or a GTX 780 for about $50 more.

Question is it worth it. Would my cpu bottleneck the 780?

I will be provided playing Titanfall and Watch dogs at 1920x1080 or if I can 2560x1440

Thanks for any help

 

[DooKey]

For $50 more you should go for the 780.

 

[NTMBK]

For most games, the i5 is very close to the i7 in performance. You should be able to drive the 780. Have you considered an R9 290 instead, though?

 

[Attic]

You won't be bottle necked by that CPU, i'd buy the fastest GPU you want.

There's a worthwhile consideration for having more than 3gb's of VRAM for a high end GPU purchase, particularly if you'll want option to be gaming at 2560x1440.

 

[PC_gamer5150]

for $50 more a 780 is a no brainer

 

[blackened23]

For 50$ more, definitely the 780.

 

[TreVader]

Just make sure you get the 6GB

 

[toyota]

how can there only be 50 bucks between those? there is a 770 4gb on newegg for $359 while the cheapest 780 is $479.

and regardless of what some people say, yes a 4670 could hold back a 780 in some cases especially Crysis 3 where there is a playable difference. Looks to be difference in Watch Dogs too depending on what review you look at as performance is all over the place.

 

[mkmitch]

I just paid $480 for a 290X at Egg.

 

[Techhog]

how can there only be 50 bucks between those? there is a 770 4gb on newegg for $359 while the cheapest 780 is $479.

and regardless of what some people say, yes a 4670 could hold back a 780 in some cases especially Crysis 3 where there is a playable difference. Looks to be difference in Watch Dogs too depending on what review you look at as performance is all over the place.

It would hold back a 770 in those cases too, though. Heck, it would even hold back a 760 at times in Watch_Dogs. In all of these cases, however, the CPU won't reduce performance as much as a weaker GPU would. The entire system is the bottleneck in those games.

 

[Bubbleawsome]

I have a 4670k (albeit at 4.3Ghz) and it isn't near limiting my 770, it always is. It is probably the games I play and resolution, but it still does. I'd like more speed but the thing barley POSTs at 4.5 anyways.
Resolution is 1280x1024 or 1920x1536. I play minecraft, space engineers, and a game called beamng drive. All very CPU intensive.

That said, I would still reccomend the 780. (I still get over 100fps in those games (not beamng), but I am CPU limited.)

 

[Majcric]

Just make sure you get the 6GB

this op, get the 6gb 780.
you can thank me later

 

[RussianSensation]

this op, get the 6gb 780.
you can thank me later

6GB 780 is $550+. How in the world can such a card be recommended? I am shocked people are recommend 780, especially the 6GB overpriced edition.

With cards like HIS IceQ2 R9 290 for $380, the 780 3GB and especially the 6GB version for $550 make little sense imo. Heck, the R9 290X from PowerColor PCS+ is $469 and it is still cheaper than the slower 780 6GB. I would either get an after-market R9 290 card, or if you must stick with NV, wait until their prices come down to earth/800-series launches later this year.

Think about this, if you buy an R9 290 for $380, and save yourself nearly $170 from not buying a 780 6GB, in 2 years when the GPU gets slow, just take that $170 from your bank/envelope that you set aside and get a much faster GPU. That's a much smarter way to upgrade.

Titanfall is not GPU demanding at all for this level of cards. For Watch Dogs at 1440p, 3GB of VRAM will cause problems from user's experience/reviews.

 

[PC_gamer5150]

if you must stick with NV, wait until their prices come down to earth/800-series launches later this year.

they wont be out until sometime 2015

 

[Majcric]

6GB 780 is $550+. How in the world can such a card be recommended? I am shocked people are recommend 780, especially the 6GB overpriced edition.

With cards like HIS IceQ2 R9 290 for $380, the 780 3GB and especially the 6GB version for $550 make little sense imo. Heck, the R9 290X from PowerColor PCS+ is $469 and it is still cheaper than the slower 780 6GB. I would either get an after-market R9 290 card, or if you must stick with NV, wait until their prices come down to earth/800-series launches later this year.

Think about this, if you buy an R9 290 for $380, and save yourself nearly $170 from not buying a 780 6GB, in 2 years when the GPU gets slow, just take that $170 from your bank/envelope that you set aside and get a much faster GPU. That's a much smarter way to upgrade.

Titanfall is not GPU demanding at all for this level of cards. For Watch Dogs at 1440p, 3GB of VRAM will cause problems from user's experience/reviews.

Its not always about money though.

 

[PC_gamer5150]

Its not always about money though.

thanks i wanted to say that

 

[TreVader]

6GB 780 or if you would rather not spend $550 then 4GB 290X

 

[DooKey]

nm

 

[TeknoBug]

Whoa, where can you get a 780 for $50 more than a 770? Here a 780 is $120-200 more than a 770. ^_^

 

[skipsneeky2]

Made the switch from a i5 to a i7 recently and in BF4 there is nearly no stutter now, good load on those 8 threads and with the right settings or enough gpu power the difference in some spots was a good 10+. Very worthwhile purchase.

Seems like ultra and high in BF4 run the same fps now with a low resolution test on my 2gb 770 then when i had my i5, where the switch to ultra cost me in some spots a good 15.

My observations might not matter to most as some don't care for a solid 60+ but i feel i got my moneys worth and yeah the i5 held back the 770 with the settings i used.

 

[RussianSensation]

Its not always about money though.

So you would pay 40-45% more for a 6GB 780 card that doesn't perform much better than an after-market R9 290 card? What's the compelling reason for that? With Crucial MX100 just $225 for a 512GB model, a gamer can almost buy an R9 290 + this SSD for the same price as a 780 6GB model. You can put a decent amount of games on that SSD.

Alternatively this is like comparing a system with i5 4690 + stock heatsink + 780 6GB vs. i7 4790K max overclocked on say Noctua NH-D14 + R9 290. No contest really.

OR spending $170 on Steam Games!

When all is said and done, a 780 6GB will not last any longer for PC gaming over the next 3-4 years than an after-market R9 290 4GB.

--

OP if you must go NV, I'd pick the 780 3GB over the 770 4GB for the price difference you listed.

 

[Triglet]

FWIW, I haven't ran into any VRAM issues with my 3 GB 780 at 25x16 thus far on any of the AAA titles. Max I've probably seen is 2.4 GB via Precision and that was on a heavily modded Skyrim. BF4/ESO/others rarely ever seem to break 2 GB.

Obviously that will probably change going forward, but the 3 to 4/6 GB choice isn't nearly as critical as the 2 to 3 GB decision.

Regardless, overclock that CPU/GPU!

 

[SlowSpyder]

Out of those two options, I'd go with the 780.

 

[BF04]

thanks for all the information and help. After double checking it looks like I had my numbers little wrong and the 780 is $110 more, I believe I was originally looking at a 780 refurb which is not available now. With that, I ended up with a 770 4gb and the I5-4690 3.5ghz. I save little and might upgrade next year depending on what the new 800's are like.

 

[PC_gamer5150]

thanks for all the information and help. After double checking it looks like I had my numbers little wrong and the 780 is $110 more, I believe I was originally looking at a 780 refurb which is not available now. With that, I ended up with a 770 4gb and the I5-4690 3.5ghz. I save little and might upgrade next year depending on what the new 800's are like.

I think you made out just fine.
sometimes we over think these things.
going by benchmarks the 770 is no slouch and if you OC it it will be pretty close in FPS to a 780 reference.