Upgrade path from a 560ti?

[rootaxs]

Howdy!

Currently hoping to upgrade my old 1gb GTX 560ti to something slightly better. I do mostly graphics and multimedia work, with the occasional gaming with my kids (Starcraft, Minecraft, World of Tanks/Warships.)

The 560ti has worked just fine, but my sons computer has a somewhat subpar mobo-based chip. Figured i could pass this on to him.

I'm thinking of a 2 or 4gb GTX 750 or 950. I know either one will be better than my 560, especially since i've upgraded to a WQHD monitor since the 560 was put into service (thus, supporting higher resolutions and lowering the capabilities of the 560 somewhat.)

My biggest concern is PSU requirements. It seems the 750/950 cards are much more efficient and will require less power than my 560ti, so i should be safe going either route -- right?

Thank you.

p.s. PSU is a 7+ year old Corsair CMPSU-400cx powering an i2700k/16g/5 ssd/hdd setup. Lehtv and Halogen(?) had help me calculate what this PSU is capable of 4 years ago, and it seems it's a pretty robust unit capable of more than what it's rated.

 

[LTC8K6]

750 would probably not be a very noticeable upgrade.

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/1337?vs=1131

950 at least, I think. But then you are into 960 price territory...

 

[Seba]

GTX 750 Ti 2GB would be safe to use with almost any power supply that is not complete garbage, but it's performance is in the same area as your GTX 560 Ti.

I'll say GTX 960 at least. Your PSU has 30A on 12V so it should be good for it. GTX 950 is usually to close in price to GTX 960 to make sense, anyway.

 

[Charlie98]

950 at least, I think. But then you are into 960 price territory...

I agree. The natural choice is the GTX950, but it's not a very good value at this point... the GTX960 is, given the OP's needs.

The GTX750 is attractive, given it's price, but at this point I would go for newer tech.

 

[Zodiark1593]

I'd go for the 2 GB GTX 960. You can get them as low as $160. There are 4 GB models, but typically exceed the $200 mark, and really don't make sense when for a bit more, you can grab a 970 instead.

 

[rootaxs]

Thanks folks. I'll look closer into the 960 territory then. Looks like, power-wise, it will still use slightly less than the 560ti.

I take it the extra 2gb (if going 4gb) won't really benefit me much, even at WQHD resolutions (or going dual screens in the near future perhaps)? If going that route, maybe the EVGA one -- although i can't find just how much power this thing draws, other than a 400w PSU is required.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...-na-_-na&cm_sp=&AID=10446076&PID=3938566&SID=

Thanks again!

 

[Headfoot]

4gb 960s are a bad deal because you can get something with 4gb vram but its also over 50% faster for not much more money (290x @ $253 for as long as that deal lasts).

the $160 2gb 960s are about the only ones youd ever want to go for, except that 2gb is already too little vram for some games and it will only get worse as time goes on.

Honestly I think you're better off buying a used 7950/7950 Boost/R9 280 for $100 and stop gapping it until theres a new midrange launch on 14nm. Mostly because its roughly on par with the 960, maybe a bit slower at times, but it has 3GB vram which will make a difference if you keep this thing for a while. The midrange chips have been pretty incredibly underwhelming this last round. There is no (new) equivalent to the price/perf the 560 Ti offered when it was the go-to midrange chip. The best price/perf chip is the R9 290 but that looks to be more than you need. Everything below it except used 7950's are underwhelming.

 

[rootaxs]

Thanks, Headfoot. I appreciate the suggestions on the AMD-based cards, but i'll stick with Nvidia on this one for now, partly because it performs better with the Mercury Playback Engine (MPE) on some of the Adobe apps i use.

AMD supports OpenCL, similar to CUDA but not entirely as good, but that aside, going the AMD route would also would mean i'd have to update all my applications as the current versions i use don't support OCL. Too much $ for me to go through right now.

That said, seems like the 960/2gb is the sweet spot. I'll just settle for the idea that the 560ti served me well over the past 4+ years, a decent upgrade now should last just as long.

Thanks again, folks.

p.s. Headfoot, great sig line. I did just that, saved enough energy to offset what it costs to charge our EV, and then some.

 

[Seba]

Honestly I think you're better off buying a used 7950/7950 Boost/R9 280 for $100 and stop gapping it until theres a new midrange launch on 14nm.

Good option, but not with his power supply.

 

[Headfoot]

Thanks, Headfoot. I appreciate the suggestions on the AMD-based cards, but i'll stick with Nvidia on this one for now, partly because it performs better with the Mercury Playback Engine (MPE) on some of the Adobe apps i use.

AMD supports OpenCL, similar to CUDA but not entirely as good, but that aside, going the AMD route would also would mean i'd have to update all my applications as the current versions i use don't support OCL. Too much $ for me to go through right now.

That said, seems like the 960/2gb is the sweet spot. I'll just settle for the idea that the 560ti served me well over the past 4+ years, a decent upgrade now should last just as long.

Gotcha, yeah if you've got CUDA apps there is no substitute. Using one of the old pre-Creative Suite pre-SaaS adobe installed products I assume ?

That said, I would not expect your 960 2gb to last you 4 years at least for gaming purposes. The 560 Ti was really quite a good chip in the line up when it came out. The 960 is not today's equivalent of the 560 Ti. It's more like the old GTX 550 Ti. Today's equivalent in terms of price/perf for nvidia is the gtx 970. In terms of pure product lineup the equivalent is the 980. In terms of the best price/perf midrange chip around the $250 mark (like the 560ti at launch), its the R9 290.

NOTE: All of this is a "roughly equals," obviously not an exact comparison
Titan X = GTX 580
980 Ti = GTX 570+, if GTX 570 was slightly higher clocked, didn't have cut down memory bus, and was closer to the 580 in total perf
980 = GTX 560 Ti
970 = GTX 560 (no ti)
960 = GTX 550 Ti
950 = GTS 450

In general the chip die sizes are larger than they were in Fermi and priced higher across the board so its not a 1 to 1 comparison but that is roughly how they compare. Titan X = max, 980 (no ti) is half of a Titan X and the 960 is half of a 980.

I'd expect a couple of years out of that 960 and when the 16 Finfet generation comes out (Pascal, Arctic Islands) then the true midrange bang-for-the-buck chip should show up. I'd just plan to spend a little here on the 960 2gb as a stopgap until 16nm hits.

 

[ocre]

Gotcha, yeah if you've got CUDA apps there is no substitute. Using one of the old pre-Creative Suite pre-SaaS adobe installed products I assume ?

That said, I would not expect your 960 2gb to last you 4 years at least for gaming purposes. The 560 Ti was really quite a good chip in the line up when it came out. The 960 is not today's equivalent of the 560 Ti. It's more like the old GTX 550 Ti. Today's equivalent in terms of price/perf for nvidia is the gtx 970. In terms of pure product lineup the equivalent is the 980. In terms of the best price/perf midrange chip around the $250 mark (like the 560ti at launch), its the R9 290.

NOTE: All of this is a "roughly equals," obviously not an exact comparison
Titan X = GTX 580
980 Ti = GTX 570+, if GTX 570 was slightly higher clocked, didn't have cut down memory bus, and was closer to the 580 in total perf
980 = GTX 560 Ti
970 = GTX 560 (no ti)
960 = GTX 550 Ti
950 = GTS 450

In general the chip die sizes are larger than they were in Fermi and priced higher across the board so its not a 1 to 1 comparison but that is roughly how they compare. Titan X = max, 980 (no ti) is half of a Titan X and the 960 is half of a 980.

I'd expect a couple of years out of that 960 and when the 16 Finfet generation comes out (Pascal, Arctic Islands) then the true midrange bang-for-the-buck chip should show up. I'd just plan to spend a little here on the 960 2gb as a stopgap until 16nm hits.

good post

 

[guskline]

With your cpu, 2700k, your ram 16g, ssds, etc, I would upgrade my psu and buy a GTX970.

 

[rootaxs]

Gotcha, yeah if you've got CUDA apps there is no substitute. Using one of the old pre-Creative Suite pre-SaaS adobe installed products I assume ?

Adobe isn't very friendly to its customers, what with the constant updates and rather pricey upgrade paths.

Very helpful post, by the way, thanks for clearing that up for me! I may go the 960 route -- found a rather decent deal at Newegg for about 150AR. I think that's the best i've seen so far for a new unit.

With your cpu, 2700k, your ram 16g, ssds, etc, I would upgrade my psu and buy a GTX970.

Thanks though it'll be a bit too much to swallow at the moment having to upgrade something else and experiencing the extra downtime (i haven't had much luck with PSU replacements, tried that a few times and for some unexplainable reason, they're always DOA). Just hoping to pass down the 560 to my son and get some bit of a performance bump for me.

Thanks again everyone!

 

[Zodiark1593]

Gotcha, yeah if you've got CUDA apps there is no substitute. Using one of the old pre-Creative Suite pre-SaaS adobe installed products I assume ?

That said, I would not expect your 960 2gb to last you 4 years at least for gaming purposes. The 560 Ti was really quite a good chip in the line up when it came out. The 960 is not today's equivalent of the 560 Ti. It's more like the old GTX 550 Ti. Today's equivalent in terms of price/perf for nvidia is the gtx 970. In terms of pure product lineup the equivalent is the 980. In terms of the best price/perf midrange chip around the $250 mark (like the 560ti at launch), its the R9 290.

NOTE: All of this is a "roughly equals," obviously not an exact comparison
Titan X = GTX 580
980 Ti = GTX 570+, if GTX 570 was slightly higher clocked, didn't have cut down memory bus, and was closer to the 580 in total perf
980 = GTX 560 Ti
970 = GTX 560 (no ti)
960 = GTX 550 Ti
950 = GTS 450

In general the chip die sizes are larger than they were in Fermi and priced higher across the board so its not a 1 to 1 comparison but that is roughly how they compare. Titan X = max, 980 (no ti) is half of a Titan X and the 960 is half of a 980.

I'd expect a couple of years out of that 960 and when the 16 Finfet generation comes out (Pascal, Arctic Islands) then the true midrange bang-for-the-buck chip should show up. I'd just plan to spend a little here on the 960 2gb as a stopgap until 16nm hits.

It was also the same thing with the GTX 660 as the GK106 in that and the 650 was half the GK104.

 

[FalseChristian]

I'd say a 2GB GTX 960 also. It is about 10-15% faster than one of my 2GB GTX 760 even though the specs look terrible in comparison.

 

[rootaxs]

Just wanted to update this thread. I went ahead with an Asus Strix 960 4gb that Microcenter had on sale for about $200ar. So far so good. Actually freed up a couple inches inside the case, as well as freeing up a 6-pin (the 560ti used two 6-pin power connectors.)

Haven't done much testing, but did play a bit on WOT and was able to bump things up from a previous 38fps/custom medium setting to 75fps/high setting. WQHD res at that.

All while saving a few watts to boot!

My kiddo is having fun with the hand-me-down, too.

Thanks again for all the help, folks!

 

[xorbe]

960 4GB is a tidy card, just keep the settings in check!