https://youtu.be/5GhoYs2VDnsHow does a gpu get considered overkill? Does that mean low usage? If so, why is that a bad thing?
As for the CPU, well I can't afford an i7 unless I want a lower end gpu, my budget on the CPU is $250.
A 480, if on par with a 1060 is a better bet then, at around $40 cheaper.
Is a 1070 truly overkill for 1080p60? A 1080/1080-MKII sure.
I'd go for a 1070. A 1070 is definitely not overkill for 1080/60p.
A 1070 is more meant to do 1440p120/144 on most games, so yeah it's overkill for 1080p60, a 1060 or the upcoming 1060Ti would be the choice.Is a 1070 truly overkill for 1080p60? A 1080/1080-MKII sure.
Both the 480 and 1060 will go below 60 fps in multiple games on that list. Also note that an average of ~60 fps means that you will probably go below that quite often.Yes, it is overkill for 1080p60 gaming. I don't understand how people can claim that it isn't. Go look at benchmark numbers and the 1070 is going to pull over 60 FPS in just about anything out there today with everything cranked to the maximum where there's very little visual difference.
Here's TPU's 1070 review: https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/NVIDIA/GeForce_GTX_1070/
All games were run at highest settings (i.e. Ultra or Very High)
Anno 2205: 59.1
AC Syndicate: 71.2
BF3: 187
BF4: 129.1
Batman AK: 139
COD BO3: 91.1
Crysis 3: 69
FO4: 114.7
FC Primal: 88.1
GTA 5: 101
Hitman: 71.8
Just Cause 3: 110.7
R6 Siege: 156.4
RoTR: 98.9
Witcher 3: 81.5
WoW: 184.5
So in all but one game (Another site gets 100 FPS in that game for the 1070, so dunno if there was a patch or just not having the AA cranked to max does it), the 1070 has vastly more than 60 FPS and that is running at the highest possible graphical settings, which typically don't look noticeably better than High, but will usually get you at least 15% more frames unless there's a CPU bottleneck.
So instead of spending an extra $150 on a GPU that is massive overkill, get a 1060/480 and put the extra money towards a better CPU or see what the Ryzen R5 chips can due as those should have reviews up on Monday and they'll be priced similar to an i5, but have a massive thread advantage that will probably be significantly better than any clock speed advantage of an i5, especially going forward.
P.S. Is there any way to have table formatting? It would make information above much easier to read.
This. Also note that dropping a couple settings, which have very little impact on the graphical fidelity of the game, will drastically increase performance.Yes, it is overkill for 1080p60 gaming. I don't understand how people can claim that it isn't. Go look at benchmark numbers and the 1070 is going to pull over 60 FPS in just about anything out there today with everything cranked to the maximum where there's very little visual difference.
Here's TPU's 1070 review: https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/NVIDIA/GeForce_GTX_1070/
All games were run at highest settings (i.e. Ultra or Very High)
Anno 2205: 59.1
AC Syndicate: 71.2
BF3: 187
BF4: 129.1
Batman AK: 139
COD BO3: 91.1
Crysis 3: 69
FO4: 114.7
FC Primal: 88.1
GTA 5: 101
Hitman: 71.8
Just Cause 3: 110.7
R6 Siege: 156.4
RoTR: 98.9
Witcher 3: 81.5
WoW: 184.5
So in all but one game (Another site gets 100 FPS in that game for the 1070, so dunno if there was a patch or just not having the AA cranked to max does it), the 1070 has vastly more than 60 FPS and that is running at the highest possible graphical settings, which typically don't look noticeably better than High, but will usually get you at least 15% more frames unless there's a CPU bottleneck.
So instead of spending an extra $150 on a GPU that is massive overkill, get a 1060/480 and put the extra money towards a better CPU or see what the Ryzen R5 chips can due as those should have reviews up on Monday and they'll be priced similar to an i5, but have a massive thread advantage that will probably be significantly better than any clock speed advantage of an i5, especially going forward.
P.S. Is there any way to have table formatting? It would make information above much easier to read.
Both the 480 and 1060 will go below 60 fps in multiple games on that list. Also note that an average of ~60 fps means that you will probably go below that quite often.
A 1070 would provide a really smooth experience and a 480/1060 will occasionally dip. Is it a must? No, but it definitely isn't overkill.
Here is a good video that summarizes what I am talking about,
Turn the settings down to high, and stick with 4x AA/AF instead of running 8x or 16x and both of those cards will stay above 60 FPS. You're asking someone to spend upwards of $200 for performance they don't need. Better off putting that money towards a free/g-sync monitor that can be used again in the future instead of towards a card that will be an utter waste
I agree that the 1080ti is overkill for 1080p/60fps as it will not provide noticeable smoother in general.Otherwise, using your argument, OP should really buy a 1080 Ti for 1080p60 gaming because even the 1080 is going to have 1% and .1% low framerates below 60 FPS in 1080p.
I'm not saying that if there are dips under 60fps then it's unplayable. I did not say that the 480 and 1060 are not decent cards. I just said that the 1070 provides noticeably better FPS at some harder games, in very high/ultra settings and is not overkill. For example, in PCGH's benchmarks Witcher 3/Metro Last Light/Crysis 3/AC Unity are all noticeably better on the 1070 at max details without gameworks. If you want to lower settings - then yes, a 1060 and RX 480 are good enough. However at max 1070 basically gets you 60fps. It's not overkill. The RX480/1060 have you lowering settings and tinkering from day one.Just look at that, 58 FPS .1% low. Shameful that you can't even do 1080p gaming on a 1080. Better go after NVidia for false advertisement. Or just drop the settings to high and get ~50% more FPS, probably without being able to tell the difference.
Keep your eyes peeled for a deal on the 1700 (non-X) as well. Was as low as $249.99 (even $22x.xx IIRC).Let's keep in mind right now, I'm open to everything out there. I have no bias to or against either manufacturer of cards or CPUs. Ryzen is definitely in the running, especially if the 1600x comes in at or under it's $260 MSRP.
That's a good deal, but I'd prefer to stay away from eBay.Keep your eyes peeled for a deal on the 1700 (non-X) as well. Was as low as $249.99 (even $22x.xx IIRC).
Yes, I found that one previously, thanks. It's not listed on PCPartpicker, which is why I didn't see it sooner.Here's a white AM4 motherboard: https://m.newegg.com/products/N82E16813144028