Sell my gtx 770 for gtx 960

[Ketchup]

z34type, I was just wondering why you wanted to sell your 770? Is it too large/too slow/drawing too much power?

 

[BonzaiDuck]

I'm not an expert, but some may say that the gap between $250-$270 to $350-$390 is not good value, especially when both cards are separated by close to single digit percentage points.

It may be a function of a "starting point." I wouldn't buy the card simply to replace a 770 or 780. I'd only buy it to replace a 570 in a recent and separate PC build.

Tom's Hardware had published a "bang-for-buck" analysis last year for the 7x0 cards --probably throwing in certain 6x0 cards for useful comparison. The "IT techie" point of view picked the 770 card from the ratios.

I'll need to look again, but I don't think the review results for the just-released 960 were all that stellar. The 970 reviews I've seen so far were consistently . . . . upbeat, anyway . . . Actually, it was either TechReport or HardOCP which (I thought) gave their "gold" to a 970 board. But it may have been only among all 970's, so . . .

 

[RussianSensation]

^ I am not sure you answered the question at all. Right now an after-market R9 290 is $240-250, which means with $25 off VISA coupon on Newegg, it's possible for the OP to get a $25 upgrade to a faster card with double the VRAM. If a 970 got Gold awards 3-4 months ago in reviews, how is that relevant to today's price/performance? A $400 MSI Gold 970 today is way overpriced for what it is. 5-6% more performance for $150 more over a cool and quiet 290 sounds like a horrible buy today. That's why your recommendation for a 970 seems like it was made not even taking into consideration the current GPU landscape. Sure, 970 was good value 3 months ago. Today it isn't.

Also, you said why upgrade from a 770? It's because he can sell his 770 for $200, pay $240 - VISA checkout on Newegg and get 30% more performance and double the VRAM for $40 or less!
http://m.newegg.com/Product/index?itemnumber=14-121-842

That's a no brainer upgrade.

 

[96Firebird]

A $400 MSI Gold 970 today is way overpriced for what it is. 5-6% more performance for $150 more over a cool and quiet 290 sounds like a horrible buy today. That's why your recommendation for a 970 seems like it was made not even taking into consideration the current GPU landscape.

Did you just pick the highest priced 970 and the lowest priced 290?

LOL.

 

[DooKey]

Did you just pick the highest priced 970 and the lowest priced 290?

LOL.

Standard operating procedure. Kinda like pimping 290s in a 970/980 owners thread.

 

[RussianSensation]

Did you just pick the highest priced 970 and the lowest priced 290?

LOL.

Standard operating procedure.

Expected NOTHING different from either of you. Maybe you can try paying attention to the thread and actually learn to READ what the context is in me talking about an MSI Gold Edition card at $400. :sneaky:

And the 2nd one of you, you can't even separate my comments about AMD vs. NV business practices and how I view AMD and NV SKUs completely in a vacuum not allowing business practices to skew my judgement on the actual card comparisons. All either of you just wants to see in my posts is AMD vs. NV, always, instead of actually looking at the advice I am providing or the context of my posts without reading the entire thread. :thumbsdown:

 

[96Firebird]

Not worth my time...

 

[DooKey]

Expected NOTHING different from either of you. Maybe you can try paying attention to the thread and actually learn to READ what the context is in me talking about an MSI Gold Edition card at $400. :sneaky:

And the 2nd one of you, you can't even separate my comments about AMD vs. NV business practices and how I view AMD and NV SKUs completely in a vacuum not allowing business practices to skew my judgement on the actual card comparisons. All either of you just wants to see in my posts is AMD vs. NV, always, instead of actually looking at the advice I am providing or the context of my posts without reading the entire thread. :thumbsdown:

I might not do that if you didn't come right out and say you would buy AMD if all things were equal because you don't like NV business practices. LOL.

 

[RussianSensation]

I might not do that if you didn't come right out and say you would buy AMD if all things were equal because you don't like NV business practices. LOL.

You really want me to report you for blatant trolling and spreading lies?

"If the conditions you describe in your post remain thereafter, 50/50% market share is reached, I'd flip a coin."
The conditions were "If NVIDIA and AMD ran at exactly the same price/performance/heat/RAM ratios..."
http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=37104949&postcount=5

Learn to read.

Also, anyone who followed your post history knows you weren't interested in AMD's cards at all. You actually defended 680 SLI at some point and ripped apart HD7000 CF. You only started paying attention to AMD cards when we told you that you can make $ with them via bitcoin mining and buy your NV cards for gaming if you want. You think I don't remember that? Regardless this changes nothing that I've recommend both NV and AMD cards and continue to do so. It's not my fault you can't see me recommending NV cards in many cases. I am pretty sure I've recommended more NV cards on our forum in 10+ years than you ever have. Considering you only have 825 posts since 2005, you don't come off as someone that even cares to provide gamers with good advice on which GPUs or CPUs to buy.

If you have no advice to give to the OP, move along please. Either present a strong case for him moving from a 770 to a 960, or why he shouldn't spend $25-40 more and get a way better card in the Asus R9 290 or tell him why spending extra for a 970 is warranted. It seems all you are interested here is attacking me, not the OP.

Thats a great example........
of cherry picking.

you really dont have to do that. its clear enough when you look at the big picture
http://www.techpowerup.com/mobile/reviews/Palit/GeForce_GTX_960_Super_JetStream/29.html

Ironically I did look at the big picture by linking Shadow of Mordor - it precisely shows that in future titles the 960 will run into memory bandwidth and VRAM bottlenecks. Therefore, it's only going to get worse for the 960 vs. the 970/R9 290 in future titles and AC Unity and SoM are just 2 examples of games that are pushing the limits of the 960. Did I say that a 970 is 2X faster than a 960 on average? No, I did not.

However, ignoring that 960 tanks in SoM and AC Unity is pure ignorance. It's actually cherry-picking by NOT showing this to the OP. He needs to know upfront what it means to buy a 2GB /128-bit bus card in 2015 for $200, all the Pros and Cons. Trying to use the average performance of a 960 here and ignore (1) awful frame times per TechSpot and (2) horrible memory bandwidth and VRAM bottlenecks in modern games -- that is cherry-picking and not even attempting to provide good consumer advice to a fellow PC gamer.

 

[DooKey]

Yep, I misspoke. You said you'd go with AMD because the market is 70/30. I'll admit when I'm wrong unlike some.

 

[RussianSensation]

Yep, I misspoke. You said you'd go with AMD because the market is 70/30. I'll admit when I'm wrong unlike some.

I'll buy an NV card if it has amazing price/performance or some other killer features, etc. I know it's hard for you to believe even despite 70/30% market share. Is it my fault that since HD4890 days bitcoin paid for all of my GPU upgrades, including 3x GTX470s? Maybe I should have not bought AMD cards with free bitcoins and instead spent money on NV cards that made me no $ for future GPU upgrades. My bad if this sounds AMD-biased to you. :hmm:

Unless you have a better card for the OP to recommend than a Sapphire Tri-X 290 or Asus R9 290 for $240-250, I am not sure why you need to attack my recommendation to the OP.

 

[garagisti]

Did you just pick the highest priced 970 and the lowest priced 290?

LOL.

Someone who was recommending to buy GTX970, recommended that card. In the link below you can see my reply to the person concerned:
http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=37111519&postcount=23

May i implore you to actually read and respond? I think RussianSensation just went on from there before you quoted him. Edit: he's way more informed and contributes more to a forum than some others. I find a lot of his posts to be rather thorough. Of course, he's only human, but still, as i said, his posts imho are informative more often than not.

Standard operating procedure. Kinda like pimping 290s in a 970/980 owners thread.

Read the above-mentioned.

 

[DooKey]

I'll buy an NV card if it has amazing price/performance or some other killer features, etc. I know it's hard for you to believe even despite 70/30% market share. Is it my fault that since HD4890 days bitcoin paid for all of my GPU upgrades, including 3x GTX470s? Maybe I should have not bought AMD cards with free bitcoins and instead spent money on NV, my bad. :hmm:

See that's your problem. You are what you accuse others of. Just because I disagree with you at times doesn't mean I prefer one over the other. You let bitcoin color your perception of the video card world. I mined as well and bought from both companies. That's the difference between you and me. I buy new tech because I like it and don't favor one over the other for any reason. I spend money on my hobby and make money on my hobby at times. If you check my post history you'll see that I bought 18 AMD cards this current gen. I guess that means I hate AMD...........I only bought 6 NV cards this generation.

You are biased and won't admit it.

 

[garagisti]

See that's your problem. You are what you accuse others of. Just because I disagree with you at times doesn't mean I prefer one over the other. You let bitcoin color your perception of the video card world. I mined as well and bought from both companies. That's the difference between you and me. I buy new tech because I like it and don't favor one over the other for any reason. I spend money on my hobby and make money on my hobby at times. If you check my post history you'll see that I bought 18 AMD cards this current gen. I guess that means I hate AMD...........I only bought 6 NV cards this generation.

You are biased and won't admit it.

He just mentioned that he has a value criteria... i don't know what is so hard to understand. Just as you have preferences, he prefers that he doesn't have to spend money to buy/ maintain ownership of cards. He advices the same... does that need labelling as biased? IMO, not...

edit: Mind, you have not provided an alternative buy at around that price range, which is better than say a Tri-X 290 which can be had for about 250.

 

[DooKey]

We'll just have to agree to disagree on some things, RS. Nothing personal on my part. I have a wider definition of value than you do and we'll leave it at that.

I come at things video card related from a stand point of I want to try everything out and I buy all the high end stuff from both companies each generation. I figure why knock something if you haven't tried it yourself. New tech is fun and I don't keep my PC stuff much over a year anymore. Nothing beats a nice new shiny precious on a regular basis!

 

[RussianSensation]

See that's your problem. You are what you accuse others of. Just because I disagree with you at times doesn't mean I prefer one over the other.

garagisti even posted the reference to where BonzaiDuck was discussing a Gold 970, which is why in his post in this thread I suggested to Bonzai to re-assess the curernt GPU landscape since even though back then his MSI Gold edition 970 wasn't that overpriced, today it is.

BonzaiDuck: "The MSI GTX 970 "Gaming" 4G model has great reviews. For about $40 more, you can have the GTX 970 4G Gold LE version, which has a vented back-plate. These cards are so heavy and huge, I decided to pay for it."

You are biased and won't admit it.

I am not biased towards AMD, I am biased towards price/performance. I am also biased towards trying to give consumers what I think is better advice based on experience and how GPUs age and based on GPU cycles. You know what advice that is?

It's better to find a sweet spot, get a card good enough for your needs, pocket the savings and move on. If you can spend a little more and get a lot more performance, I recommend that often. Later on upgrade sooner instead of overspending today on a flagship card, unless you can afford to do that almost every gen. For gamers who can, I have no reservations about recommending 780Ti SLI, 290X CF or 980 SLI at launch @ their MSRPs. Hence why I recommend R9 290 instead of R9 290X, 670 over 680, 970 over 980, 970 SLI over 980 SLI, 570 over 580, or HD7950 instead of HD7970, or unlocked 6950 over a 6970. But you haven't paid attention to any of this over the years since all you see in my posts is AMD vs. NV. You aren't even seeing that I don't like recommending expensive AMD cards either. Why is that? I usually go out of my way to find a better sweet spot and advise the gamer to upgrade sooner with the $ saved.

Further, is it my fault now that AMD had superior price/performance for nearly every generation since HD4850? Because AMD met that criteria, it got my $, not because I magically love AMD or something.

You want me to outline my reasons for buying AMD cards based on price/performance, I can. I paid just $195 for my HD4890 when GTX275 was $230-240. I lucked out and got 3 GTX470s for $210 a piece when the market price was $350. I later paid $230 for my unlocked HD6950 2GB to get more VRAM when GTX570 was $350 and GTX580 1.5GB was $480. All of the AMD cards I bought with bitcoins and they mined me more to get free 7970s. Why would I need to buy so many NV and AMD cards when the mining cards are also gaming cards? I don't understand your point. Just because I skipped Kepler and 970/980, doesn't mean I won't buy an NV card.

Notice that I also skipped 290/290X. I won't upgrade until I find a good sweet spot for me with price/performance, but I will still recommend others AMD and NV cards depending on their needs. If I get a good enough for myself deal on an R9 290/290X/970/980, I might get those, or I might wait to Pascal or get discounted GM200/390 cards. It all depends. I don't just buy new hardware when it comes out like you. For example right now my HD7970s OC are good enough for me. If Witcher 3 or some other game changes that, I'll grab something better. I can't tell you since such game didn't come out yet that made me really want to upgrade. If I was AMD biased, I would have bought R9 290s a long time ago and would have never recommended NV cards on the forums.

Also, I link hot deals on NV cards too! In this 960 thread, I provided a GTX750Ti at $100, and my post clearly states a gamer could save $ and get this card for MOBA style games like LoL and DOTA 2 instead of wasting it on a 960 unnecessarily. Maybe someone out there playing these games was thinking of buying a 960, read my post and bam saved themselves $100 and got that great 750Ti. You don't see the trends in my posts though. Because most of the recent years I recommend AMD based on price/performance, all you see is me recommending AMD. I can't dictate the market pricing of AMD vs. NV though, which is why that I have recommend so many more AMD cards in the last 5 years. That said if I see an awesome NV deal, I do post it. Someone who is AMD biased would never do that.

 

[DooKey]

Fair enough. We each have a different level of interest in the hobby. I upgrade both ways and often. You don't. I, however, don't believe price/FPS is the ultimate arbiter of what is value and I don't believe anyone should try to make that the standard when giving advice as though it is accepted by all.

Anyway, this has gone on long enough and taken this thread OT. I'll take part of that blame. If you'd like to discuss this in PM I'm fine with that.

 

[z34type]

Well I was originally going to get the 960,but I've been seeing some GTX 970 locally on Craigslist for 300 dollars even as low as 270. Well I've sold my GTX 770 and now my PC is sitting with no GPU. I've seen some benchmark scores GTX 770 vs GTX 960 and looks like the GTX 960 beats it by a small margin due to the fact that it uses a new "Maxwelll Architecture" vs "Keplar" Some newer games will take advantage of the new Maxwell so I'm looking to get a GTX 970 if those guys reply back to me since 300 and 970 is such a good deal if they work that is.

 

[z34type]

z34type, I was just wondering why you wanted to sell your 770? Is it too large/too slow/drawing too much power?

Because someone offered me 200 for it and I've been thinking about moving into these new Maxwell GTX over the Keplar.

 

[z34type]

It looks like a AMD vs Nvidia arguement has broke out over here lol. I personally never owned any type of AMD video gpu's,but I do love their CPU's low cost+performance over Intel. In gaming I don't really see much of a difference in comparison. Not trying to start a Intel vs AMD war I see most of you guys are all rocking Intel Cpu's. I went with Nvidia because of the support for drivers are better than AMD. I have friends who all have AMD Graphics Card always complained about driver support is lacking especially in Crossfire setups.

 

[MeldarthX]

Honestly 290 - new is better value over used 970 used.....specially still one is 250; with visa discount 25 dollars puts them around 225......

Warranty are still a good thing; and with free games with AMD card you can sell those and actually made money on your cards that's the route I'd go.....

 

[MeldarthX]

Z in the past yea driver support wasn't the greatest with ATI; but AMD has turned that around so drivers are even. crossfire with 290s is smoother and faster usually than Nvidia's counterpart with Kepler; Maxwell has made nvidia's side better but still not exactly equal to frame pacing that AMD's has.

both drivers are fine - as I said; I'd go with 290; with the visa discount.....and if you don't want the games that come with sell them for even cheaper card......in the end you could pocket like 15-20 dollars as profit..... in doing that.

 

[RussianSensation]

It looks like a AMD vs Nvidia arguement has broke out over here lol. I personally never owned any type of AMD video gpu's,but I do love their CPU's low cost+performance over Intel. In gaming I don't really see much of a difference in comparison. Not trying to start a Intel vs AMD war I see most of you guys are all rocking Intel Cpu's. I went with Nvidia because of the support for drivers are better than AMD. I have friends who all have AMD Graphics Card always complained about driver support is lacking especially in Crossfire setups.

AMD drivers are perfectly fine. In fact AMD's control panel has been superior to NV's for a long time now. It simply has more options. CF drivers do not even apply to you. The irony is GCN drivers have been way better than Kepler's (280X on the heels of 780, 290X > 970/780Ti).

With your CPU, you will get no extra performance with a 970 over a 290. You'll be basically paying $80-100+ for lower power usage. This is like saving $80-100 towards a new GPU upgrade in 2016.

 

[monkeydelmagico]

With your CPU, you will get no extra performance with a 970 over a 290. You'll be basically paying $80-100+ for lower power usage. This is like saving $80-100 towards a new GPU upgrade in 2016.

Or a CPU upgrade.....:hmm:

 

[Magic Carpet]

AMD drivers are perfectly fine. In fact AMD's control panel has been superior to NV's for a long time now. It simply has more options.

There is one area where AMD drivers are better for my uses, and that is multi-monitor support. Eyefinity is just so much better, imo.

But of course, they are far from perfect. Windows XP support is waaaay behind and you still need to reboot your 'puter when you install a new set.

Intel drivers have improved, I like them. The system tray icon is really useful.