• 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.

Upgrade from 760gtx

W

wdeydwondrer

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jun 21, 2014
Messages
488
OK guys, currently have a 760gtx running with my 8320. I'll be upgrading the 8320 to a 4770 (or xeon equivalent) hopefully within the month. After that I'm wondering what would be the next step up for video card upgrade for gaming at 19x12 resolution. Obviously have a 760 right now shows my budgeting mind set where I'm not going to be spending tons on the gpu, but is there anything in the 200-300 range that would be an upgrade from this? Or am I looking at having to sink some decent money into a new card,
 
wdeydwondrer said:
OK guys, currently have a 760gtx running with my 8320. I'll be upgrading the 8320 to a 4770 (or xeon equivalent) hopefully within the month. After that I'm wondering what would be the next step up for video card upgrade for gaming at 19x12 resolution. Obviously have a 760 right now shows my budgeting mind set where I'm not going to be spending tons on the gpu, but is there anything in the 200-300 range that would be an upgrade from this? Or am I looking at having to sink some decent money into a new card,
Click to expand...

With a hard cap of $300, looks like you'll be eyeing the GTX 960 from team green or a R9 290 from team red. There are a few 290X's that occasionally get down below your $300 threshold, can't speak to the brand though.
 
Its gtx760 not the other way around. And save up just 30-40 more bucks and get a gtx970 if you want to stick with nvidia.
 
Yeah the 960 is turtle speed. Really basicly pointless. I think it takes 2 960s in sli just to compete with the 970.
 
eclypse said:
Yeah the 960 is turtle speed. Really basicly pointless. I think it takes 2 960s in sli just to compete with the 970.
Click to expand...

The 960 isn't really turtle speed but its not an upgrade from his card. Of course it is turtle speed compared to your 980s in SLI lol.
 
haha.. Nah I've seen benches and man I was like why?

Yeah compared to mine it would no doubt look like the old man with a hat driving in the right lane doing 30 on the freeway. :)
 
Get a used 970 or a deal on a 970 if you want to stick with nVidia and actually have drivers released when the games are released and play games with gameworks that don't royally screw up performance on AMD cards (purposeful move by nVidia).
 
If your motherboard supports it. Pick up another 760 used from somewhere (saw a few here in the forum) for SLI.

That way you save money, and will get more performance then 1 970 GTX.

Just my 0.02c
 
wdeydwondrer said:
Once i move to the 4770,would my corsair 750 be enough to sli the 760?
Click to expand...

OP if you can wait till early June I suggest you do so. The R9 3xx series are launching. The R9 380X is expected to launch with High Bandwidth Memory. that could cause price cuts on GTX 980 and GTX 970 too.

btw avoid SLI / CF. Right now there are really powerful GPUs which are better than 760 SLI. On avg SLI scaling is 1.5 - 1.6x. Already R9 290 is better than that with the consistency and reliability of a single GPU. The most important reason to avoid GTX 760 is its a 2GB card. The latest games like Dying Light , Evolve, AC Unity, Middle Earth Shadow of Mordor, Watchdogs require 3 GB even at 1080p to play at the highest texture settings. Buying a 2GB card is a really bad idea. SLI of 2GB cards is even worse. so decide wisely. If you are in a hurry get a R9 290 or GTX 970. If you can wait then surely hold on till early June. Computex is when the next gen AMD cards launch.
 
Wait until you get the i7-4770. You might get a nice little performance boost using your current card once you do. I noticed that just going from an FX-6300 @ 4.4 Ghz to an i5-4690k at stock. Some games (WoW) it was about 10-15 FPS more with the same GPU. I also use a 1920x1200 monitor.
 
Do you really need a core i7?

If primary use is gaming, then save on the cpu and put it towards a GTX970.

Get a core i5 4690 or 4670k (if you want to OC).
 
Stoly said:
Do you really need a core i7?

If primary use is gaming, then save on the cpu and put it towards a GTX970.

Get a core i5 4690 or 4670k (if you want to OC).
Click to expand...

actually there are games that really benefit from the use of a core i7.. while yes, the i5s offer a great performance.. most actual games receive a jump in performance using a i7, Watchdogs, Shadow of mordor, Dragon Age inquisition, Far Cry 4.. just as examples run much better in a 4790K vs a 4690K at the same clocks and by a good margin.. so if the OP its buying a new platform why limit to a i5?.. im one of those who think at this moment on the market its pointless to buy a i5 over a 4790K which its actually the best gaming chip, unless the money are a big restriction..
 
actually there are games that really benefit from the use of a core i7.. while yes, the i5s offer a great performance.. most actual games receive a jump in performance using a i7, Watchdogs, Shadow of mordor, Dragon Age inquisition, Far Cry 4.. just as examples run much better in a 4790K vs a 4690K at the same clocks and by a good margin.. so if the OP its buying a new platform why limit to a i5?.. im one of those who think at this moment on the market its pointless to buy a i5 over a 4790K which its actually the best gaming chip, unless the money are a big restriction..
Click to expand...

I think the primary point is that a slight downgrade on the CPU side to a 4690K could net the OP enough of a savings to get a better GPU in the form of the GTX 970, which would lead to a higher overall satisfaction without breaking through his budget barrier. Either way, it should be a noticeable boost over the FX CPU and the performance bump of a GTX 970 at 1200p should be worthwhile as well. He could then always upgrade to the i7 down the road if/when funds are available.

Relevant Anandtech Bench comparison: http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/836?vs=1261

To the OP: as a Xeon owner myself, they are a great investment if you are not going to be overclocking. You can get some Xeons for around the same price as the Core i5 CPUs, get most of the performance of the i7s, and potentially gain some extra virtualization features if you decide to tinker with that stuff in the future - all while not really sacrificing much in the way of gaming performance.
 
Last edited:
wdeydwondrer said:
Once i move to the 4770,would my corsair 750 be enough to sli the 760?
Click to expand...

Get the i7 4790k! If you have a microcenter locally to you it would be the cheapest price at $275. I got mine for $250 on sale over the holidays.

Don't know about the 760 but I do know the 970s and 980's are really energy efficent and a 750 watt ps is good enough for 980 in SLI. Most draw I've seen Overclocked and under load was 560watts. Most say around 500 watts. So you could get away with a 500 watt ps no prob with a single 970/980.
 
Everlast said:
With a hard cap of $300, looks like you'll be eyeing the GTX 960 from team green or a R9 290 from team red. There are a few 290X's that occasionally get down below your $300 threshold, can't speak to the brand though.
Click to expand...


Uggh. OP's in the wrong product line (x60), at the wrong time, and with the wrong budget. It's practically the perfect storm to pulling your hair out with Nvidia. I'd have to second this though. With a hard budget you have no real options other than the R9-290/960 as a step up. For that $50 more there's the 970, which is beyond worth it. Nvidia mastered getting you stuck in that + or - $50 game.

The way they've treated the GTX x60 line is embarrassing since the 600 Series. They've kept most of the trickle down performance gains with the x70 Series. I never buy used myself, but I think you could probably get some killer deals with a watchful eye on a R9-290X, GTX780, or even GTX780 Ti. If I was in your shoes I might consider it. Or you can play the waiting game until the inevitable GM200/980Ti comes down in a couple months and pushes the 970 down to $300 or so.
 
Stoly said:
Do you really need a core i7?

If primary use is gaming, then save on the cpu and put it towards a GTX970.

Get a core i5 4690 or 4670k (if you want to OC).
Click to expand...

I do game a bunch, but I also put roughly equal time into not touching the rig while I'm encoding movies, usually set it to go overnight. Not willing to cut my cores in half.

MrCaffeineX said:
I think the primary point is that a slight downgrade on the CPU side to a 4690K could net the OP enough of a savings to get a better GPU in the form of the GTX 970, which would lead to a higher overall satisfaction without breaking through his budget barrier. Either way, it should be a noticeable boost over the FX CPU and the performance bump of a GTX 970 at 1200p should be worthwhile as well. He could then always upgrade to the i7 down the road if/when funds are available.

Relevant Anandtech Bench comparison: http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/836?vs=1261

To the OP: as a Xeon owner myself, they are a great investment if you are not going to be overclocking. You can get some Xeons for around the same price as the Core i5 CPUs, get most of the performance of the i7s, and potentially gain some extra virtualization features if you decide to tinker with that stuff in the future - all while not really sacrificing much in the way of gaming performance.
Click to expand...

I have always overclocked everything I have owned, but the performance of modern cpus (paired with the heat generated from an o/c here in the south) makes it feel rather moot. Add to that the fact that I would have to set my 8320 on fire to catch up to any of the stock i7, lol. But the fact that the xeon version of the 4770 could be had for the same price as the top i5 is really selling me. And like you point out, I'll have the option of an i7 later if it's not cutting it.

eclypse said:
Get the i7 4790k! If you have a microcenter locally to you it would be the cheapest price at $275. I got mine for $250 on sale over the holidays.

Don't know about the 760 but I do know the 970s and 980's are really energy efficent and a 750 watt ps is good enough for 980 in SLI. Most draw I've seen Overclocked and under load was 560watts. Most say around 500 watts. So you could get away with a 500 watt ps no prob with a single 970/980.
Click to expand...

Don't have a microcenter. But very good to know on the power use. I'm pulling 600+ watts with this current setup overclocked.

Liger88 said:
Uggh. OP's in the wrong product line (x60), at the wrong time, and with the wrong budget. It's practically the perfect storm to pulling your hair out with Nvidia. I'd have to second this though. With a hard budget you have no real options other than the R9-290/960 as a step up. For that $50 more there's the 970, which is beyond worth it. Nvidia mastered getting you stuck in that + or - $50 game.

The way they've treated the GTX x60 line is embarrassing since the 600 Series. They've kept most of the trickle down performance gains with the x70 Series. I never buy used myself, but I think you could probably get some killer deals with a watchful eye on a R9-290X, GTX780, or even GTX780 Ti. If I was in your shoes I might consider it. Or you can play the waiting game until the inevitable GM200/980Ti comes down in a couple months and pushes the 970 down to $300 or so.
Click to expand...

I moved up into the 760 from the 470 I'd had for ages. The price was right and it overclocked fairly well. But having been mildly watching, I keep seeing how this was a rather meh purchase. I did just miss a 290x for $250, though from what I glanced over quickly, the reference version is something to stay away from on that card :/ If we're only a couple months away from new lines (and assuming a slight price drop) would I still be looking at the 290x/780 or just jump to the 970?

General question, what IS the consensus on grabbing a second 760 for SLI?
 
I would sell the 760 and get a 970. SLI should be avoided if a single card solution can perform about the same. SLI can have have many different issues and it does not even work in some games. Plus the Kepler architecture seems to fall farther behind Maxwell in most newer games. You will have a much better overall gaming experience with a 970 over 760 SLI.
 
wdeydwondrer said:
I do game a bunch, but I also put roughly equal time into not touching the rig while I'm encoding movies, usually set it to go overnight. Not willing to cut my cores in half.
Click to expand...

Not cutting cores in half. Those extra cores are virtual cores aka hyperthreading.
Hyperthreading really doesn't do much for gaming. Performance varies a lot. From 0 to maybe 5% in most cases and probably 15% in a best case scenario.

It can be slower than 4 cores or maybe 30% faster in many multithreaded apps. Encoding does bring up to 70% increase in performance though.
 
If you have time to wait for a sale, I would say wait for a GTX 970. They can drop to the $300-320 range every once in awhile. If you don't mind used, I would say you could save even more. EVGA and MSI both have warranties that follow the card without the need of proof of purchase. Some people will say they had luck with Gigabyte warranty without proof of purchase as well, but be forewarned that Gigabyte's official policy is to ask for proof of purchase.
 
I'll probably end up waiting a few months and watching the 970 (need to wait on gathering up the money anyways).

I do really like EVGA (currently have their superclocked card, will the extended 10 yr warranty go with the card if I sell it?) and have had MSI in the past so I'll likely stick with those two. Gigabyte on the other hand, I've sworn them off for the near future due to their horrifically terrible CS and products that I've owned.
 
Stoly said:
Not cutting cores in half. Those extra cores are virtual cores aka hyperthreading.
Hyperthreading really doesn't do much for gaming. Performance varies a lot. From 0 to maybe 5% in most cases and probably 15% in a best case scenario.

It can be slower than 4 cores or maybe 30% faster in many multithreaded apps. Encoding does bring up to 70% increase in performance though.
Click to expand...

I'm not concerned with hyperthreading/multicore bonus in gaming. Main thing is I do enough on my rig that IS multithreaded (including encoding) so the cores/threads are necessary from my standpoint for this.

Not terribly concerned about overclocking or single core performance since every review I've seen has the i5/i7 dominating single threads vs my card.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top