is this a bad time to get a card?

[AtenRa]

Game requirements only keep going up, so he should get the best GPU that he can afford so that he doesn't have to upgrade as soon and can be assured of being able to max everything out today.

If he has the budget, the GTX 1070 is the best option. Recommending an RX 480 or GTX 1060 in this situation is poor advice, IMO.

Why are you telling the OP to buy a 480 and then either crossfire with another 480 down the line or wait for Vega when he can just buy a 1070 and be done?

Why ?? because as you said Game requirements only keep going up. Getting GTX 1070 today will make him need an upgrade next year if you want to max out everything.
So getting a RX 480 8GB at $229 and getting a second one later on to almost double the performance or waiting for Vega for a new and much better architecture/ memory is the better way today. GTX 1070 is not able to max all games at 1080p today, next year it will be worse. Not to mention when he will transition to 4K.

This is not the time to spend big bucks in Pascal IMO.

Forget the silly advices about Crossfire or SLI for that matter. You end up with an idle card most of the time.

Get the 1070.

Just because NVIDIAs SLI is lucking scaling and support this time it doesnt mean its the same with CF. There is CrossFire support for almost all major new games in 2016 and many from day one as with Watch Dogs 2.

RX 480 8GB CF (2x $229) equals GTX 1080 ($560 AR) at 1440p, day one

 

[happy medium]

Budget $400? the absolute best option in the video card world is the gtx1070.
Your cpu is just fine and a gtx1070 will be an excellent choice for 1080p and be good for games for at least a few years.

Crossfire and sli sucks don't even think about that option, double the heat, double the power and don't always work and sometimes it stutters.
If you need links and proof I got em.

Zotac triple fan gtx1070 for $369 and free copy of Watchdogs 2.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814500409&cm_re=1070-_-14-500-409-_-Product

 

[guskline]

magomago, I realize that this is a video card/display section of the forum, but after reviewing your specs and comments, I have a suggestion. IF you don't have a SSD drive I would buy a 6G GTX 1060 AND a 400-500 gig new ssd. This would roughly equal the $400 budget and get you smooth gameplay. I notice you prefer Nvidia and that is fine. Otherwise, find a GTX1070 under $400.

Good luck.

 

[VirtualLarry]

Interesting thread, guys. I've got a friend, whom I haven't spoken to for a few months, that has a Core2Quad (non-overclocked, I think), and a GTX460 2GB card (unless he's upgraded).

Would there be any point to getting a newer card for that old a rig? Or best just to replace the whole kit?

I have a spare GTX950 2GB OC card, that might benefit him.

I just upgraded his PSU to a 735W RaidMax 80Plus Bronze PSU last Christmas, and his GTX460 2GB card takes two 6-pin PCI-E plugs, so he's got the PSU juice for a "bigger" card.

I've also got some spare R9 270X 2GB cards, which also take 2x6-pin PCI-E power plugs, I believe.

Would one of those two options (GTX950 2GB, or R9 270X 2GB) be a big improvement over his GTX460 2GB card? Or should I look into getting him an RX 470 4GB or something? (Would a Core2Quad bottleneck that?)

 

[nurturedhate]

Interesting thread, guys. I've got a friend, whom I haven't spoken to for a few months, that has a Core2Quad (non-overclocked, I think), and a GTX460 2GB card (unless he's upgraded).

Would there be any point to getting a newer card for that old a rig? Or best just to replace the whole kit?

I have a spare GTX950 2GB OC card, that might benefit him.

I just upgraded his PSU to a 735W RaidMax 80Plus Bronze PSU last Christmas, and his GTX460 2GB card takes two 6-pin PCI-E plugs, so he's got the PSU juice for a "bigger" card.

I've also got some spare R9 270X 2GB cards, which also take 2x6-pin PCI-E power plugs, I believe.

Would one of those two options (GTX950 2GB, or R9 270X 2GB) be a big improvement over his GTX460 2GB card? Or should I look into getting him an RX 470 4GB or something? (Would a Core2Quad bottleneck that?)

Had a friend with a q9550 and an oc'd 7850. There was a bottleneck there if that helps at all.

 

[nurturedhate]

Game requirements only keep going up, so he should get the best GPU that he can afford so that he doesn't have to upgrade as soon and can be assured of being able to max everything out today.

If he has the budget, the GTX 1070 is the best option. Recommending an RX 480 or GTX 1060 in this situation is poor advice, IMO.

Why are you telling the OP to buy a 480 and then either crossfire with another 480 down the line or wait for Vega when he can just buy a 1070 and be done?

I would lean towards the 1070 as well but the OP is going to be limiting the 1070 with a 2500k at 4.4. The 1060 4gb is more evenly matched with this cpu. This is mostly going to come down to usage and when the OP wants to upgrade the whole system. I'd look at the games I play, find out if the 1060 6gb gets the fps I want in said games, and proceed from there. Especially since he's on 1080p 60hz. We aren't trying to drive 144hz here. IF the 1060 6gb does what the OP needs it to do then get it, use it for a year and see about a complete system rebuild around Coffeelake and Volta in 2018. If it doesn't then see if the 1070 does.

In the end the OP as asking for advice. Everyone is just stating their personal "I'd buy that" list instead of creating a process to come to a solid decision.

 

[Newbian]

I mean Vega could come out either 3 months from now or up till 5 months from now, so its your choice if you want to wait. You can go for a stop-gap GPU like the RX 470 4gb, there are few models for $170, otherwise your best current and basically only option is the GTX 1070. Personally the 1070 is NOT worth it, at $370 to $400 its up to 30% slower than the 1080 in some games, the closes it gets is usually 15% at higher resolutions. On average 1070 is about 25% slower than the 1080.

If I were you I'd wait at least a month, AMD said they would release some more information about Vega in December and even if they don't(which I doubt), you could get some Christmas deal and possibly get a 1070 for $340 or something.

The problem is he is using 1080p so a gtx 1080 is overkill and even the 1070 is slightly in most games unless he was using a 144hz version.

 

[Arachnotronic]

A GTX 1070 is only "overkill" for most of today's games. I assume the OP plans to keep it for several years, so having as much gas in the tank as possible (without totally wrecking the perf/$ paid) is advisable.

 

[Arachnotronic]

Why ?? because as you said Game requirements only keep going up. Getting GTX 1070 today will make him need an upgrade next year if you want to max out everything.

Not at 1080p/60Hz. GTX 1070 should be solid for this kind of gaming for several years.

So getting a RX 480 8GB at $229 and getting a second one later on to almost double the performance or waiting for Vega for a new and much better architecture/ memory is the better way today. GTX 1070 is not able to max all games at 1080p today, next year it will be worse. Not to mention when he will transition to 4K.

You have no idea how Vega will perform, so how can you recommend that he wait for it? Also, if GTX 1070 can't max all the games at 1080p today
(citation seriously needed for this one), then why on earth would you recommend an RX 480 now with the intent of going with a second RX 480 later? Wouldn't that second RX 480 be needed NOW, so in reality you are advising that he buy TWO RX 480s upfront?

This is not the time to spend big bucks in Pascal IMO.

The OP has SLI'd GTX 460s. Now is the time for him to upgrade to something modern if he has the means and wants to play games.

Just because NVIDIAs SLI is lucking scaling and support this time it doesnt mean its the same with CF. There is CrossFire support for almost all major new games in 2016 and many from day one as with Watch Dogs 2.

*sigh* Let me know when Doom supports multi-GPU.

Also, looks like RX 480 in CrossFireX is getting just 51.1% scaling at 1080P. GTX 1080 gets 590% scaling at that resolution. The resolution that the OP is going to be using, BTW.

What is this again about NVIDIA SLI scaling being poor?

 

[ShintaiDK]

Why ?? because as you said Game requirements only keep going up. Getting GTX 1070 today will make him need an upgrade next year if you want to max out everything.
So getting a RX 480 8GB at $229 and getting a second one later on to almost double the performance or waiting for Vega for a new and much better architecture/ memory is the better way today. GTX 1070 is not able to max all games at 1080p today, next year it will be worse. Not to mention when he will transition to 4K.

This is not the time to spend big bucks in Pascal IMO.



Just because NVIDIAs SLI is lucking scaling and support this time it doesnt mean its the same with CF. There is CrossFire support for almost all major new games in 2016 and many from day one as with Watch Dogs 2.

RX 480 8GB CF (2x $229) equals GTX 1080 ($560 AR) at 1440p, day one

So 2 165W (330W) cards at 460$ combined doesn't even reach a single card at 180W. And what about all the other cases where mGPU falls short or comes months later if lucky? Its amazing how low the customer has to go before AMD can be shoehorned in. Whats next, mining too?

Oh, and the usual #waitforvega before it becomes #waitfornavi. Let me guess, you hope yet again on the "Titan killer" for cheap like Polaris?

Its amazing how much compromise that must be taken so more AMD cards can be sold on a forum. Shame the user always have to wait for AMD. And lets not hope he ever think of VR. Because then the RX480 cards is out the window.

 

[Newbian]

I guess he didn't see that op doesn't want a 1060 because of frame drops at times and by that issue he wouldn't want a rx 480 either as they perform so similar yet he thinks it's a good way to go.

Going cf / sli these days is a mistake when you could get a single card for about $75-$100 less with current deals and get much less issues and power draw while having less than 10% performance by his link at op's resolution.

 

[happy medium]

Interesting thread, guys. I've got a friend, whom I haven't spoken to for a few months, that has a Core2Quad (non-overclocked, I think), and a GTX460 2GB card (unless he's upgraded).

Would there be any point to getting a newer card for that old a rig? Or best just to replace the whole kit?

I have a spare GTX950 2GB OC card, that might benefit him.

I just upgraded his PSU to a 735W RaidMax 80Plus Bronze PSU last Christmas, and his GTX460 2GB card takes two 6-pin PCI-E plugs, so he's got the PSU juice for a "bigger" card.

I've also got some spare R9 270X 2GB cards, which also take 2x6-pin PCI-E power plugs, I believe.

Would one of those two options (GTX950 2GB, or R9 270X 2GB) be a big improvement over his GTX460 2GB card? Or should I look into getting him an RX 470 4GB or something? (Would a Core2Quad bottleneck that?)

I had a gtx460 overclocked to the max in my q9550 @ 4.0 rig and upgraded to 2 6870 2gb cards in crossfire. It was a massive improvement.
I stuck my gtx960 4gb in the machine and the q9550 pushed the card rather well also. It was faster than 2 6870's in crossfire.

I would say even without a cpu overclock you buddy will see a good improvement with a gtx950. mabe 75% faster than a gtx460 2gb.
If he overclocks his quad he should see 2x faster performance than his gtx460.

Anything faster than a gtx950 would be a bottleneck and a waste of money in my opinion..

 

[Freestyle7]

OP, I've been down the CF / SLI road & have had good & bad experiences. A lot of folks around these parts have reported problematic experiences. Until that tech improves drastically, I'd stick with a single card solution. I'm still running an OC'd 2500k paired with a 7970 & play @ 1080p.

I tested the BF1 beta on Ultra & met my personal requirement of maintaining a min. FPS of 60 with ease. I also play BF4 on Ultra & meet my requirement. In saying that, my recommendation would be to go for the 1070. When you're ready to step up in resolution, sell it & buy a 1080Ti & call it a day. If the other games you're looking at are more CPU intensive than BF1, you'll want to take a close look at benchmarks for those games with the 1070 (or 1060) / CPU combos.

I won't dispute the suggestion above to opt for the 1060, but make sure it meets your min. FPS requirements for your games when paired with the 2500k. If so, then it would be worthy of consideration.

 

[magomago]

(1) No preference to AMD or Nvidia. In fact I've been trying to go AMD (for better colors) my last 3 videocards, but every time Nvidia just had a more compelling offer in each particular situation.
(2) I obviously run SLI and never had issues save for 1 game (and i don't even remember the game anymore). This was in 2011, I'd be amazed that SLI/CF implementation got....suckier.

I think i'll just swig it for the next 2-3 weeks and see what pops up from a deals standpoint. Lots of 1070, but lots of people saying 1060 should be fine - I'm just assessinag the 1060 performance from AT Bench, and it does show averages around 45 for Witcher 3 (which is exactly what I want to play). So maybe 1070 or 1060/r9 fury x depending on what appears and how trigger happy i become. If there is nothing good, at least a 1070 will last a few years at 1080p and will be a worthwile 400 bucks.

although not vcg related, why are there voices saying to "upgrade" to 2600k? back during SB era, 2600 was seen as unnecessary because hyper-threading didn't make a huge difference for the cost difference. has the landscape changed then?

 

[AtenRa]

although not vcg related, why are there voices saying to "upgrade" to 2600k? back during SB era, 2600 was seen as unnecessary because hyper-threading didn't make a huge difference for the cost difference. has the landscape changed then?

Yes games start to use more and more threads, latest game Watch Dogs 2

But i believe you will be fine with an OCed Core i5 2500K at 4.4GHz even with a GTX 1080

 

[Arachnotronic]

(1) No preference to AMD or Nvidia. In fact I've been trying to go AMD (for better colors) my last 3 videocards, but every time Nvidia just had a more compelling offer in each particular situation.
(2) I obviously run SLI and never had issues save for 1 game (and i don't even remember the game anymore). This was in 2011, I'd be amazed that SLI/CF implementation got....suckier.

Games became less amenable to SLi due to new rendering techniques that use the results of the previously rendered frame to compute the next frame.

I think i'll just swig it for the next 2-3 weeks and see what pops up from a deals standpoint. Lots of 1070, but lots of people saying 1060 should be fine - I'm just assessinag the 1060 performance from AT Bench, and it does show averages around 45 for Witcher 3 (which is exactly what I want to play). So maybe 1070 or 1060/r9 fury x depending on what appears and how trigger happy i become. If there is nothing good, at least a 1070 will last a few years at 1080p and will be a worthwile 400 bucks

1070 is definitely the way to go.

although not vcg related, why are there voices saying to "upgrade" to 2600k? back during SB era, 2600 was seen as unnecessary because hyper-threading didn't make a huge difference for the cost difference. has the landscape changed then?

It's starting to make a difference as games slowly start being able to use more threads.

 

[Rifter]

I just recently upgraded to a RX480 from SLI GTX 460 1GB's. Its been a huge improvement.

I decided to do this for a few reasons,1 was price, up here in canada the RX480 is significantly cheaper than the GTX 1070/1080. And that i wasnt sure my CPU could support a faster card to its full potential anyways.

I did want a flagship card but since both Nvidia and AMD have yet to release their top end cards for this gen i decided to get a rx480 as stopgap for 1-2 years then do full system upgrade then, including a new GPU.

a 1060 was not out yet when i did my upgrade, so this would be another option, but id stay away from the 3GB version.

 

[nurturedhate]

Yea, if your one goal is witcher3 then the 1070 is the better choice.

 

[Bacon1]

Also, if GTX 1070 can't max all the games at 1080p today
(citation seriously needed for this one)

You posted a citation right below this comment. 1070 can't hold min 60 even when it wasn't maxed out (no gameworks stuff turned on except maybe HBAO+).

Now I hate "maxed" out because some settings are simply massive performance hit for little to no IQ gain even when screenshotting and comparing side by side, let alone when playing the game.

 

[littleg]

I'd go 1070 if the budget is there. 1060 is a decent card, as is the 480, but in the event of a system rebuild in the next year or so he'll be able to carry the 1070 over saving a few hundred on the build and not being left with a mismatched rig.

 

[Valantar]

How can it be perfect for him? we don't know his specs?
Did he email them to you?

He might have a core 2 quad and a 1600x900 monitor.

I'm using a C2Q and a 2560x1440 monitor, and I bought a Fury X last year. I have zero complaints, and when I upgrade my CPU in a few months it'll be even better. Given that the OP seems to upgrade rarely, splurging on a GPU is a good idea.

OP: Now is a great time to buy a GPU. With your budget, I'd go for a 1070. AMDs Vega will be coming at some unknown point in time, but it might just as likely be june as february. Nobody knows. I'd go for it. If you want to save some dough, a GTX 1060 or RX 480 will still be an enormous step up from your current GPU, but if you plan on keeping them as long as your current card, I'd go for the 1070.

 

[sandorski]

Whether you go 480, 1060, or 1070, right now is a good time to buy regardless what is coming in 6 months. Especially from what you are currently using.

 

[tential]

Yea, if your one goal is witcher3 then the 1070 is the better choice.

I just don't think we should ever ever ever recommend a gpu based off one game. Can anyone here say they spent a whole gpu cycle on one non competitive game?
Seriously?

Let's instead ask the ops more questions if we're truly honest in helping them make the right choice. Chances are, that's just the one game they care about. We should be asking game history more often. When and what games are you playing? That needs to be something we ask more.

This is like someone saying they want a $650 gpu to last them 5 years. We'd definitely try to help that person figure out what they really need that's actually feasible. Same way. We know OP isn't only playing Witcher 3 for next 3 years so we should probably try to figure out what he might play.

-------

To me though, there is only 1 gpu out there if you can afford it. Gtx 1070. If you can afford one get it.

Otherwise.... I don't even care enough to debate. I'll let others chime in.

As for is this a bad time to buy? Only if you want a 1080ti performance level card at the usual price drop the flagship ti card entails from the titan card along with the boost in performance? Then yes.... It's a bad time. And it looks grim as there doesn't seem to be a rush reason to release a 1080ti. I personally believe the card is coming. It's too profitable to not release the card.

 

[OatisCampbell]

As for is this a bad time to buy? Only if you want a 1080ti performance level card at the usual price drop the flagship ti card entails from the titan card along with the boost in performance? Then yes.... It's a bad time. And it looks grim as there doesn't seem to be a rush reason to release a 1080ti. I personally believe the card is coming. It's too profitable to not release the card.

My prediction:

1. Things stay as they are through the holiday season., so NV can keep selling their $600-$700 mid range card and their high end card for $1200.

2. The 1080Ti launches for $899-$999 early next year, before Vega.

3. A. If Vega competes with 1080Ti, prices on 1080 and 1080Ti drop a few hundred.
B. If Vega only competes with 1080, 1080 price matches Vega, and 1080Ti stays the same.

 

[Insomniator]

Lol at suggesting a 480 and the another down the line... as if that ever works out well.

Get a 1070 if its in your budget.