Video card upgrade... opinions?

T

toddw

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Sep 9, 2004
Messages
1,374
See rig in sig. 1900x1200.
Can't make up my mind between GTX 560 SLI and 6950 w/6970 bios. My board can't do xfire otherwise I'd go dual 6870s. The thing is I like to run native rez with minimum frames that don't dip below 40 fps, and am looking at Metro 2033, Crysis 2, etc gamer quality w/minimum AAA/16AF.

The 6950 can be had for $260 or so AR, 560 GTX is going to run $500. I know the 560 SLI is going to perform a lot better and I'm probably going to be happier in the long run, but right now AMD has the price/performance edge IMO and I'm having a hard time justifying Nvidia pricing. I've ruled out 460 SLI as I only lose about 10 in min. frames as compared to a 6950 w/6970 bios, and for that difference I'd rather just go single card.

So I spend more than I think is warranted, go 560 SLI, but have absolutley no regret with frames, or go 6950/w 6970 mod, save alot of cash, but may deal with minimum frames below 40 with no chance of xfire in the future to improve performance.... thoughts? Yes I know this is subjective....
 
$500 and 400W for 65fps, versus $280 and 210W for 40fps. (Frames are arbitrary but comparative), your call really. Personally I don't really relish SLI with modern cards on a scabby old nforce chipset, though 6950s do lose a bit of their performance at 1920x1200.
I have my suspicions you'd be a bit CPU limited with a Q9450 at 3.6Ghz in some games, and that will become increasingly an issue in the future.
 
I highly doubt CPU limited. That is still a beast of a CPU.

I prefer single cards. I'd do a single 560GTX... if the performance REALLY wasn't good enough. It'd leave me open to the option of putting in a second one.
 
Starcraft 2's a pretty extreme example, but to highlight the growing importance of a CPU when looking for high minimum frame rates (Remember the OP's after a 40 minimum):

CPU.png
 
I run metro2033 at 40+ fps with a Phenom II x3 unlocked to four cores at 3.6GHz which is slightly slower then your c2q at 3.6GHz and a 6950 I've unlocked to a 6970. Also to make it even better for you I underclock my "6970" to the stock speeds of the 6950 800/1250. So If you keep your proc where it is and unlock a reference 6950 to 6970 and keep the 6970 speeds you'll be a lot better off for Metro 2033.

Crysis 2 has joke requirements because it's an over-glorified console port. The discussed hardware again will be more then enough for Crysis 2.

*Note if you're reading my Sig that states eyefinity I do NOT run eyefinity for Metro. I game at a single monitor.
 
In that price range the 6950 1GB is the best bang for the buck even if you don't BIOS unlock if you just want a single card. If you were going multiple monitor then dual 560's would be the best option. I wouldn't entirely give up on dual 460's, they scale well in SLi. A friend I have on Youtube has dual 465's and getting avg 52 fps in Crysis Warhead, then 55-60 avg in Metro 2033 on AMD quad core. Anyway, think about it.
 
Agree with OFaceSIG and ravensteel. The 6950 will give you the most return for your money. My 5870 handles 1920x1200 on a single monitor fine and a 6950 even if not flashed with 6970 BIOS is faster than a 5870.
 
Thanks all, split the difference and went with evga GTX 580 for $414 shipped (@bay)

A little bit better than a 6970 for a little bit more money. It won't be GTX 560 SLI performance, but close enough for $100 less.
 
Arguably if you wanted to save money you could have bought 560s or 6870s from ebay as well... :p
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top