• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

NLooking for NEW NVIDIA GPU

J

JOSHSKORN

Limp Gawd
Joined
May 29, 2007
Messages
262
My old computer just died last week, and I'm looking to build a new system. I play PC games, so having a great GPU is important to me. I've been looking into the GTX 980, POSSIBLY 2-way SLI. My question is this:

My monitor is an ASUS VS278Q-P. I've heard that GPU nowadays exist, such that, unless your monitor is good enough, you may or may not see a difference. Given the specs of my monitor, is purchasing a GTX 980 worth it? What about for 2-way SLI?
 
a single GTX 970 its already overkill in terms for raw power for 1080P@60hz.. but at this point in the market asking for so much vRAM that would be my choice for 1080P and be locked at 60fps..
 
Araxie said:
a single GTX 970 its already overkill in terms for raw power for 1080P@60hz.. but at this point in the market asking for so much vRAM that would be my choice for 1080P and be locked at 60fps..
Click to expand...

I noticed the system requirements for Crysis 3 say GTX 680. How much different is that from the GTX 970?
 
JOSHSKORN said:
I noticed the system requirements for Crysis 3 say GTX 680. How much different is that from the GTX 970?
Click to expand...

Well I think that was just the best card at the time of release. A 970 is a good card. A 980 is about 18% faster but cost 60% more.

At 1080 you can pretty much max everything, in just about every game, with AA and hold 60 FPS with either card. For Crysis 3 I downscale (DSR) from a higher resolution (a mild downscale, like 23xx by 13xx to 1920x1200p) and use 2xMSAA with all eye candy on. 1920x1200 is about 11% more pixels than 1080p. I found 2xMSAA and DSR looks much better than any sort of higher MSAA.

You might want to see if a single 970 or 980 "does it" for you since you can always add a second card later. SLI comes with a lot of annoyances and right now I haven't seen a title I can't downscale from and use at least 2xMSAA. I run a lot of games at 4k downscaled and I never knew my monitor could look this good. (Bioshock infinite, Dirt 3, Starcraft, ect.)

So for comparison rough firestrike scores:
460 SE: 3k
680: 6.5k
970: 10-11k
980: 12-13k
 
Last edited:
I am running a GTX 970 overclocked on a 1600p monitor... I can max out almost everything in Far Cry 4 and get 60FPS... So you have an idea of how insanely good graphics cards today are. I came from a GTX 770 which was a bit faster than the GTX 680 and I can still feel the improvement of 970 vs. 770.
So bottom line, a GTX 970 would already be more than enough for a 1080p/60Hz monitor. And when overclocked, you can get really close to GTX 980 performance (at least mine does, GFXBench declare a tie between my OC'd 970 and a stock 980)
 
Depends on what you are playing and the exact settings but a 970 can easily be slowed down to below 60 fps even at just 1080. Heck I have a 980 and have to oc it for some games on the settings I want at 1080 and I dont even normally use more than 2x SSAA or high levels of MSAA either. The 980 is a rip off compared to the 970 though so I would go with that and just use some common sense in the handful of really demanding games.
 
FPS games tend to be less demanding on graphics, My 970 struggles with mordor, FF!3 and some other games. I only play at 1050p never mind 1080p. Also struggles with AC unity.
 
chrcoluk said:
FPS games tend to be less demanding on graphics, My 970 struggles with mordor, FF!3 and some other games. I only play at 1050p never mind 1080p. Also struggles with AC unity.
Click to expand...

I think something is wrong for you.... Are you trying to use 8xAA or something?

According to pcper Shadow of Mordor runs fine at 1440p on Ultra on a stock 970 with no OC. That's 90% more pixels than you are pushing.
http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Graphics-Cards/Middle-earth-Shadow-Mordor-Performance-Testing
 
chrcoluk said:
FPS games tend to be less demanding on graphics, My 970 struggles with mordor, FF!3 and some other games. I only play at 1050p never mind 1080p. Also struggles with AC unity.
Click to expand...

I would assume that you're playing in Windowed Borderless? Many games struggle in that mode and others don't. In Project Cars for example, Windowed Borderless was a 30% fps drop. That's why you rarely see Project Cars streams on Twitch as many of the free streaming programs require Windowed mode.
 
chrcoluk said:
FPS games tend to be less demanding on graphics, My 970 struggles with mordor, FF!3 and some other games. I only play at 1050p never mind 1080p. Also struggles with AC unity.
Click to expand...

Something might be wrong with your setup. I ran Mordor at 1080p maxed out with ultra textures and never dropped below 60fps.
 
mordor with ultra everything on the benchmark for me dips down a couple of times and averages about 50-55.
 
I don't think you would go wrong with a 970, although a 980 is better. I know I'm very happy with my 980, and that ASUS monitor is a nice monitor where you can use the display port.

Also, what are you salvaging off your old rig? Why spend the money when you already have a perfectly working power supply and DVD drive?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top