GTX 960 is expected to launch next month.

[tential]

Go ahead and make those claims that the GTX 760/GTX660 are better deals as well if you want.

That only helps the claim that the GTX 960 is a poor card for the performance you're getting.

R9 290, R9 280x, GTX 760, and GTX 660 all have better price/performance ratios.

AGain you bring up when a card was released? Who cares whether the R9 280 is a rebadge or not? Is it faster? That's all that matters.

The GTX 960 is a poor card for price/performance at $200. Whether you look at it from the Nvidia side, or the AMD side.

 

[voodoo7817]

I've had Nvidia cards the last 2 generations (8800gt and 560ti) and just made the move to the 290 rather than purchase a 960 (not enough performance) or 970 (too expensive compared to the 290s currently on sale).

Unless you're unable to get the same prices as most people in the US, or have strict power consumption needs, anyone purchasing the 960 over the 290 (at this point in time) is not making a decision that is in their best interest. People make bad decisions all the time and it's not like the world will end, but it's definitely a poor allocation of one's gaming budget. While I'm not getting as riled up as some in this thread, I do find the 'defense' of the 960 to be illogical.

 

[cmdrdredd]

I think the price will settle down when it's not as new.

 

[el etro]

In canada using pcpartpicker

Cheapest 960 $219
http://www.ncix.com/detail/gigabyte-geforce-gtx-960-oc-2c-105118-1481.htm?affiliateid=7474144

Cheapest 270X $209 - 15 MIR = $195
http://www.ncix.com/detail/gigabyte-radeon-hd-r9-270x-b1-90924-1356.htm?affiliateid=7474144

Cheapest 280 $215 - 20 MIR = $195
http://www.ncix.com/detail/gigabyte-radeon-r9-280-oc-0b-98788-1356.htm?affiliateid=7474144

Cheapest 280X $239
http://www.ncix.com/detail/club3d-radeon-r9-280x-royalqueen-15-94043-1356.htm?affiliateid=7474144

Cheapest 285 $219 - 20 MIR = $199
http://www.ncix.com/detail/powercolor-radeon-r9-285-turbo-11-101468-1356.htm?affiliateid=7474144

Cheapest 290 $339 - 30 MIR = $309
http://www.ncix.com/detail/asus-radeon-r9-290-directcu-71-93995-1356.htm?affiliateid=7474144

Cheapest 290X $339 - 30 MIR = $309
http://www.ncix.com/detail/powercolor-radeon-r9-290x-975mhz-d3-103515-1356.htm?affiliateid=7474144

Cheapest 970 $369
http://www.canadacomputers.com/product_info.php?cPath=43_1200_557_559&item_id=076658

960 is nothing special. However, the 290/290X is $90 more and reagrdless of perf/$ is much more expensive. The 270X is useless with the 280 or 280X giving the best perf/$.

This pricing needs to come to Brazil, i want a R9 290!

 

[voodoo7817]

I think the price will settle down when it's not as new.

If buying today, who cares what the price is in 2-3 months? The reality of the situation on January 24th is that the 290 is the price/performance king by a fairly wide margin. The 960ti will have a chance to claim that title (it will likely have great power consumption as well), but then again the 290 could see another price break.

 

[cmdrdredd]

If buying today, who cares what the price is in 2-3 months? The reality of the situation on January 24th is that the 290 is the price/performance king by a fairly wide margin. The 960ti will have a chance to claim that title (it will likely have great power consumption as well), but then again the 290 could see another price break.

Are you personally buying today? You seemed to take my post personally if I'm reading what you wrote correctly.

 

[Qwertilot]

Its just people valuing different aspects in their computers

Ruling out the 960 as not fast enough for your needs is entirely rational! Or deciding you just want as much power as you can get for your money, in which case you obviously don't buy a 960.

On the other hand there's people trying to get their computer, really, really quiet. They probably wouldn't even look at a GPU which doesn't turn off its fans at idle any more A modest premium to get a really quiet card is definitely not an issue in that context.

Then there's everyone in between! They'll have to decide what they most value. Its a free world and genuinely nice to have the choice, as it is with the 750ti.

 

[voodoo7817]

Are you personally buying today? You seemed to take my post personally if I'm reading what you wrote correctly.

I did purchase very recently (your post followed mine so while not quoting mine seemed to be somewhat of a response, so I added to the conversation. I didn't take your comment as a 'jab' or anything and I hope you don't take my comments too personally either).

I will agree with those who say that when considering the 960 over it's full lifespan, Nvidia may be able to discount the 960 aggressively because it appears to be a cheap card to produce. And that will be good for those customers in the future. But right now, it closely competes with the 290 on price and it handily loses performance-wise.

 

[cmdrdredd]

When cards are new they often sit around MSRP. As stock rises, prices fall. So if people can wait, they may as well right now. Also if the 960ti ever materializes, the regular 960 may drop pricing quickly.

 

[voodoo7817]

While cards often do sit at MSRP for a while following launch (some actually even increase in end-user price if demand is high), some cards are released and they set a new status quo for price/performance. The 970s in your sig are an example of that as it led the 290s to drop about $150 since the release of the 970. I don't see the 960 having any close to the same type of impact on the market as it simply doesn't offer good price/performance compared to cards in its price range. I think that's the main point the detractors are trying to make in this thread, not that there aren't some nice features or an absolute lower price for 960.

 

[tential]

If the R9 290 was relabeled to the GTX 960 Ti with all of its current pricing, this would be a no brainer. We'd choose the GTX 960 Ti over the GTX 960. That extra $50 spent is so much performance gained you'd be insane to pass it up, we'd tell potential buyers on this forum.

But because it's AMD vs Nvidia, now personal reasons come into play.

 

[shady28]

If the R9 290 was relabeled to the GTX 960 Ti with all of its current pricing, this would be a no brainer. We'd choose the GTX 960 Ti over the GTX 960. That extra $50 spent is so much performance gained you'd be insane to pass it up, we'd tell potential buyers on this forum.

But because it's AMD vs Nvidia, now personal reasons come into play.

And that R9 290 will overwhelm all but the best 500W PSUs. Anyone with an OEM system from a major mfr need not apply.

So right off the bat 90% of PCs are ruled out without replacing the PSU, and that's assuming all the DIY builds can handle it - many cannot.

And if your PC can handle it, it'll sound like a small vaccuum cleaner.

R9 290 power :

And for those that don't quite know how paying for power works -

An R9 290 puts out about 150W MORE than a 960. That 150W comes out in the form of heat, so not only do you power 150W more, you have to cool 150W more.

BTUs required to cool this 150W is 3.41BTU/W X 150W/Hr = 512 BTU

Energy Required Per Hour = 512 BTUs .293 watts/btu = 151W. Of course the AC will also have power loss, and not everyone has high efficiency AC.

You can go here to see what it costs you per year :

http://www.rapidtables.com/calc/electric/electricity-calculator.htm


At .15 per kwh @ 300W/hr, I calculate $65 per year *more* to run an R9 290 vs the 960. Edit: this is at 4 hours / day average use.

So at the end of your first year of ownership that 'cheap' $250 R9 290 is suddenly a $315 R9 290. And it will just keep giving (or should I say taking) every year.

R9 290 noise (for one of the cheaper ones at Newegg) - Idle, gaming open-air testbed, gaming closed case :

HIS R9 290X IceQ X² Turbo
31.2 dB(A)
46.2 dB(A)
48.8 dB(A)


The MIS Gaming 960 in fully stressed / loaded state was 38db.

If you don't understand the db system, 48db is literally twice as loud as 38db.

60 dBA Noisy lawn mower at 10 m distance
50 dBA Refrigerator at 1 m distance; bird twitter outside at 15 m distance
45 dBA Noise of normal living; talking or radio in the background
40 dBA Distraction when learning or when concentration is needed
35 dBA Very quiet room fan at low speed at 1 m distance
25 dBA Sound of breathing at 1 m distance
0 dBA Auditory threshold

 

[voodoo7817]

While the above may or may not be accurate, those are the types of arguments one must work hard to promote when you can't win the price/performance battle. The 960 isn't a 'bad' card, it's just not as good as others on the market at a similar price for most people considering buying a videocard in January 2015.

 

[Erenhardt]

snip

You know, you could run games on integrated gpu, that would be way cheaper compared to gtx960. A little kaveri system will run under 100W total. IGP will take maybe 40watts, that is less than a half of what 960 takes. /sarc ofc you know 290 is 50% faster, but ignored it totally and decided to concentrate on absolute power consumption.

15cent for 1kwh? Where is that, in Alaska?
...Alaska? You know, the heat from gpu could be actually a good thing there. Would you substrate the savings on heating from gpu running cost? In theory if you heat half a year and then next half run AC, the heat gpu produces evens out.
Also, real cheapskates wouldn't run AC at all, so yea... penny pincher argument is flawed on all fronts.

 

[Enigmoid]

You know, you could run games on integrated gpu, that would be way cheaper compared to gtx960. A little kaveri system will run under 100W total. IGP will take maybe 40watts, that is less than a half of what 960 takes. /sarc ofc you know 290 is 50% faster, but ignored it totally and decided to concentrate on absolute power consumption.

15cent for 1kwh? Where is that, in Alaska?
...Alaska? You know, the heat from gpu could be actually a good thing there. Would you substrate the savings on heating from gpu running cost? In theory if you heat half a year and then next half run AC, the heat gpu produces evens out.
Also, real cheapskates wouldn't run AC at all, so yea... penny pincher argument is flawed on all fronts.

Ontario has time of use pricing. In the summer the price is 14 cents/KWH. And the thing is there are a host of other charges and taxes on that price.

http://www.hydroone.com/MyHome/MyAccount/MyBill/Pages/Default.aspx

Actual charges end up being, at peak times.

14 cent + 0.7 cents debt retirement + some portion of delivery * 13% HST
All in all at peak time I'm paying 20 cent/kwH and around 17 off peak.

However, all in all this is a relatively modest power saving.

While the above may or may not be accurate, those are the types of arguments one must work hard to promote when you can't win the price/performance battle. The 960 isn't a 'bad' card, it's just not as good as others on the market at a similar price for most people considering buying a videocard in January 2015.

I agree completely. It is extremely difficult for new chips to move the perf/$ on the same node. You have similar costs + masks, R&D, design and you need the same margins. Thus the price of the chip must increase (like AMD's 285)

 

[el etro]

An R9 290 puts out about 150W MORE than a 960. That 150W comes out in the form of heat, so not only do you power 150W more, you have to cool 150W more.

150W More? Where did you get this? The 216W average is really 100W more, but with 50% more performance. Anyone with a 500W PSU can run a 290 flawlessly!

 

[RussianSensation]

I'm curious. Did you take the R9 285 to task five months ago for the same issues?

http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=36676253&postcount=347

Guess not. The GTX 960 is matching its performance at 1080p (which is what 75% of people play with) and only slightly slower @1440p with much more modest specs and greater efficiency (and launched for $50 less).

Huh? Of course I did. Go read that post again and my posts following 285's launch and even my comments on the 285 today. In that post I talk about how AMD used 285 to improve certain parts of GCN architecture as a test-bed for future product. That doesn't mean that I would recommend a 285 over 280/280X. Second, you completely missed the context of time and market prices. When 285 came out, could you as readily buy 290 for $240/250? No you could not. So you aren't comparing apples-to-apples market conditions. Did you see me recommend people buy a 285 2GB? Don't make stuff up. I tell people to get a $150 280 or step up to the R9 290. I ripped the 285 for 2GB of VRAM at $249, but today there is a mounting defense for a 960. This forum just loves to defend NV turds like $150 650Ti.

Today, all 280X/285/960 are worth skipping for a $240-250 R9 290. Whoever saves those $40-50 now, will suffer poor gaming performance and lower textures starting now. Hey, it's not my money but it's hilarous how an enthusiast forum like AT is defending a NV turd card because of perf/watt. This forum has no consistency whatsoever.

@ shady27,

I am not talking about used 290. I clearly showed plenty of examples of NEW after-market R9 290 for $240-260. Also, what are you on about rebadging and so on? R9 290 is not a rebadged chip. Don't shift goal posts and drop strawman. The discussion is clearly about skipping 285/280X and paying just $50 more for 45-50% more gaming performance in an R9 290 over 960.

 

[RussianSensation]

If the R9 290 was relabeled to the GTX 960 Ti with all of its current pricing, this would be a no brainer. We'd choose the GTX 960 Ti over the GTX 960. That extra $50 spent is so much performance gained you'd be insane to pass it up, we'd tell potential buyers on this forum.

But because it's AMD vs Nvidia, now personal reasons come into play.

Exactly. They can't accept that 960 is a failure because instead of comparing 1 product to another, it's an attack against their loved brand. Good thing the brand agnostic gamers have all the data to make the right choice.

More unsubstantiated claims are dropped that only the best 500W PSUs will run a 290. You can easily find a $50-60 Rosewill, XFX or EVGA 500-550W PSU that could run an i7 OC and a 290OC.

Also, using an example of a hardcore gamer who plays 4 hours a day x 365 games a year. Talk about grasping for straws. Are you kidding? You think someone who plays games that much will care to save $50 to lose 45-50% performance? People who game THAT much clearly love the hobby. At that point it's like telling someone who watches 4 hours of movies a day on a Plasma that it costs them too much in electricity per year and that they should downgrade to a worse IQ but power saving LCD/LED. What kind of an argument is that?! Go tell a videophile to sell his 65" Panasonic Plasma to save money on electricity by going LCD and see what they say.
While at it, tell someone with good headphones who loves music that paying extra for lossless audio costs way too much per year and that they should settle for cheaper MP3.

Looks like the same theories are presented here that we should stop being PC enthusiasts and become energy saving hipsters. But of course how many of these people have all-LED house, air dry their laundry, drive electric cars, all have upgraded to Platinum or Titanium PSU, unplug all their cable boxes and electronics every time they leave their house, bought a Nest, etc?

Would you go and tell someone who tracks a Mazda Miata to stop doing that and take a Prius on a track instead to save on fuel?!

Why don't we all pack up our PC gear and get Wii Us! Oh I would instantly save 500W over my 7970s, so much $$$$ saved in electricity per year!! Perf/watt and power sipping money saving gaming FTW!! Wow, 3 years of wasted high IQ/performance gaming on 680 SLI or 7970 CF over the amazing 35W Wii U!

Fast forward to 2025. Next thing the Saving on Electricity PC gaming movement will tell us all discrete GPUs are dead above 60W and we should honestly game on an Intel APU. Perf/watt gaming -- the new way to play, even if it means lower FPS, lower textures and card obsolescene every 12 months.

 

[RussianSensation]

In canada using pcpartpicker

Cheapest 960 $219
http://www.ncix.com/detail/gigabyte-geforce-gtx-960-oc-2c-105118-1481.htm?affiliateid=7474144

Cheapest 270X $209 - 15 MIR = $195
http://www.ncix.com/detail/gigabyte-radeon-hd-r9-270x-b1-90924-1356.htm?affiliateid=7474144

Cheapest 280 $215 - 20 MIR = $195
http://www.ncix.com/detail/gigabyte-radeon-r9-280-oc-0b-98788-1356.htm?affiliateid=7474144

Cheapest 280X $239
http://www.ncix.com/detail/club3d-radeon-r9-280x-royalqueen-15-94043-1356.htm?affiliateid=7474144

Cheapest 285 $219 - 20 MIR = $199
http://www.ncix.com/detail/powercolor-radeon-r9-285-turbo-11-101468-1356.htm?affiliateid=7474144

Cheapest 290 $339 - 30 MIR = $309
http://www.ncix.com/detail/asus-radeon-r9-290-directcu-71-93995-1356.htm?affiliateid=7474144

Cheapest 290X $339 - 30 MIR = $309
http://www.ncix.com/detail/powercolor-radeon-r9-290x-975mhz-d3-103515-1356.htm?affiliateid=7474144

Cheapest 970 $369
http://www.canadacomputers.com/product_info.php?cPath=43_1200_557_559&item_id=076658

960 is nothing special. However, the 290/290X is $90 more and reagrdless of perf/$ is much more expensive. The 270X is useless with the 280 or 280X giving the best perf/$.

PowerColor 290 for $249.99 CDN at NCIX after $30 MIR. How did you manage to miss that?
http://m.ncix.com/products/sku/104017/1356

Look, if a true budget gamer isn't savvy enough to not look for hot deals, that's his fault. Someone who really wants to find an R9 290 for $250 US/250-280 CDN can do it. At Canada Computers most 960s go for $250 CDN+.

Once deals pop up and 960 drops to $150 US, or $175 CDN, you'll have a point. Right now on the price/performance curve, the price of 1 new PC game separates the 2 cards with a 50% performance gap and double the VRAM. For someone intending to keep their gaming card for 2-3 years, that's a bargain.

I have this for the crowd screaming about saving $50. Do you tell people to save $160 on 290 CF over 970 SLI? Do you rip apart the 980's $250 price premium over the 290X? No, you don't. Hypocrites.

-----

Instead of just telling everyone here that one only buys NV and skips AMD cards for whatever reasons, why use illogical arguments and strawman? If someone said look I love NV and I would rather game on a 960 over a 295X2, most people would think you are crazy but at least honest crazy. Some members on our forum said that they would rather pay $1000 for a 780Ti than game for free on an R9 290X. At least they are man enough to come out and admit it.

 

[Qwertilot]

Actually no, I don't care less about NV. I'm just glad that someone is making the 'best 60w' and 'best 120w' GPU that they can, and are defending the right of that to exist as a useful entity for a reasonable number of people

They've moved the performance at those milestones a long way this time round and I hope they keep at it for the next few generations. Performance chips too of course, which you'll be getting plenty of quite soon.

To be honest, I don't think $50-60 either way is terribly significant in terms of computers So long as component is 'right' for what they're trying to do, people often pay at least that sort of premium for all sorts of things.

 

[RussianSensation]

But your "best" 60W and 120W boundaries/points are totally arbitrary. Why didn't you choose 75W and 150W or 100W and 200W best cards? Sounds like you want the best cards at your own random 60 and 120W intervals. Since when did the market assign 60W and 120W as some specific GPU TDP points we should adhere to?

Also, how come no one in this thread has addressed the poor frame times of a 960 compared to a 280X for example? Ok so the 960 turns off its fans at idle but when in games, it's stutter fest. What am I buying a gaming card for? Idle fan noise or gaming performance?

960 - poor frame times
http://www.techspot.com/review/948-geforce-gtx-960-sli-performance/page3.html

You say you won't even consider a card that doesn't turn its fans off. Do you think you could hear Sapphire Tri-X 290 fans at idle with a 25-30% fan speed over your PSU or case fans in a Fractal Design R4/5? To even get a solid 460-520W fanless PSU, or a PSU that doesn't turn on its fan up to 350W, one would have to spend a lot more than $50-60 on a PSU. Something tells me someone with such a high quality PSU isn't the target market for VRAM gimped and frame times stutter-fest 960.

If you actually watch the video and hear an after-market 290, are you honestly making a claim that it's audible inside a dampened case (ie, for someone that obsessed with noise levels they will buy a dampened case) to the point of being a nuisance?

Look at the Asus R9 290 vs. sapphire Tri-X 290 video noise levels. Those are loud to you?
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=pYxmW4JiJs8

Also, one can find something positive in almost every card. Sure, I could argue that a 7970Ghz crushes a 980 in double precision compute. Does that mean 7970Ghz should be recommended over the 980 for 99.9% of the gaming market?

When comparing an after-market R9 290 as a gaming product, overall it's a superior gaming videocard to any GTX960 at current market pricing in U.S./Canada. You can cherry-pick some aspect of a 960 that's better just like a 7970Ghz is better at double precision compute than a 980 but no one would suggest that a 7970Ghz is an overall better gaming product than a 980.

While an R9 290 sits 1 whole class above the 960 in performance, they are both selling in the $200-260 mid-range price bracket.

Look at PS4 flying off the shelves vs. XB1, and their price difference is only $50-60, yet the graphical power difference between a PS4 and XB1 is less than between a 290 and a 960. How many console gamers skip the XB1 because it's the weaker of the 2 consoles? A lot actually, if you read console forums.

 

[Qwertilot]

I presume the logic for 60/120 is it that corresponds to no extra PSU connector/just a 6 pin? Seems rational to me.

I do wonder if the 960 might also be the highest TDP you can keep sensibly quiet in a short card style mini ITX form cooler, but that'll have to wait for tests. Perhaps its still too much or someone will crack doing it for a 970.

Actually, people spending the money on high quality, low power, low fan speed etc PSU's are the logical market for 960's

They'll also spend similar amounts of money on quieter case fans, some very quiet CPU cooler even when not overclocking etc. They'll judge it money well spend too. Not about to be put off by a small premium in terms of the price/performance ratio for a very quiet GPU.

Maybe more likely to be wondering if the extra performance vs a 750ti is worth it than considering anything bigger The 960 really is plenty at 1080.

There will no doubt also be plenty of people buying the 960 for slightly random reasons.

 

[Magic Carpet]

The 960 really is plenty at 1080.

Nvidia targets MOBA market with GeForce GTX 960. Nvidia is making a strong play for a particular (and particularly massive) market: players of MOBAs like League of Legends and Dota 2.

This is the market, the 960 was designed for. If you like playing AAA titles at max eye candy with proper AA, this is a pass. Simple as that.

Get GTX 970/980 or R9 290 instead or wait for the more powerful 960 model (if it exists). This model is obviously a big misunderstanding trying to rip off customers expectations who don't want to spend more $, thinking 960 must be good enough (compared to prev. x60 models). This is so cheap. They could have designed a 960 Ti with 3GB of VRAM first to the market and everybody would be happy, even with a $250 price tag. Instead, this dodgy tactics. They could have as well released a 940 with 4GB of VRAM for the lulz (ala GT 640 2GB) :thumbsdown:

 

[WittyRemark]

And that R9 290 will overwhelm all but the best 500W PSUs. Anyone with an OEM system from a major mfr need not apply.

So right off the bat 90% of PCs are ruled out without replacing the PSU, and that's assuming all the DIY builds can handle it - many cannot.

How much an OEM or those prebuilt systems costs? idk about you but it's around $300-400 here ,most of them comes with 270w-450w PSUs ,while majority of them is 350w or below.
I have lots of friends who have those pre-built PCs ,and tell you what, they have no clue whatsoever about PC hardware, yes they know what it does and plays games(mw2 or some older games) on it, they never mess around with settings, they're happy with 30fps ,most of them don't even know what "fps" stands for, if they click on an icon and it runs, its fine ...that's why they have an OEM,
now do you think a person who bought a OEM for <$400 is going to pay $200 for a gpu? I don't think so,he'll be hard pressed on spending even a $100 ,most of them are fine with iGPU,ignorance is a bless for them.
Otoh a person who somehow ended up with a 400w or an OEM pc because of some reason,and want performance without changing the power supply, 960 is the only choice.
960 is a decent card, but spending that extra $50 is a logical choice, because the benefits outweighs the flaws, simple as that.

 

[RussianSensation]

I presume the logic for 60/120 is it that corresponds to no extra PSU connector/just a 6 pin? Seems rational to me.

I do wonder if the 960 might also be the highest TDP you can keep sensibly quiet in a short card style mini ITX form cooler, but that'll have to wait for tests. Perhaps its still too much or someone will crack doing it for a 970.

Actually, people spending the money on high quality, low power, low fan speed etc PSU's are the logical market for 960's

They'll also spend similar amounts of money on quieter case fans, some very quiet CPU cooler even when not overclocking etc. They'll judge it money well spend too. Not about to be put off by a small premium in terms of the price/performance ratio for a very quiet GPU.

Maybe more likely to be wondering if the extra performance vs a 750ti is worth it than considering anything bigger The 960 really is plenty at 1080.

There will no doubt also be plenty of people buying the 960 for slightly random reasons.

Your MiniITX argument in favour of the 960 doesn't work. First, Silverstone makes RVZ01 and soon RVZ02 that support up to 13 inch length cards:
http://www.silverstonetek.com/raven/products/index.php?model=RVZ01&area=en&top=C

That means you can fit a reference 980 in there and if you upgrade the PSU, I am sure even a GM200 will work.

Second, the reason why I said that someone spending premiums on a case and PSU of the quality described won't buy a 960 is because this person will have done his research. How many uninformed gamers buy Platinum Seasonic 460-520W silent PSU and Fractal R5 out of the blue. This gamer would have known that a 970 comes in mini-ITX and it nearly doubles the FPS of a 960 in Shadow of Mordor

http://m.newegg.com/Product/index?itemnumber=14-125-706

Someone that meticulous about component parts isn't going to be making a mistake of not stepping up to the 970 for modern gaming.

Third, as far as NV targetting the MOBA market, that's just pure marketing BS:

"DOTA 2
The two ultra-popular MOBAs don't really require much GPU power. I tried League of Legends and found that it ran at something crazy like 350 FPS on the GTX 960. Still, I wanted to test one of these games to see how the various GPUs handled them, so I cranked up the quality options in DOTA 2 and raised the display resolution to 2560x1440. Then I played back a portion of a game from the Asia championship tourney, since I lack the skillz to perform at this level myself.

At 2560x1440, everything maxed out, GTX560Ti gets 60 fps!
http://techreport.com/review/27702/nvidia-geforce-gtx-960-graphics-card-reviewed/6

750Ti is faster than a 560Ti and it costs $100.
http://m.newegg.com/Product/index?itemnumber=14-127-784

750Ti is plenty fast for DOTA2 and LoL style games. Why spend double for a 960 then for those titles? NV marketing logic.