upgrade path

[finbarqs]

So right now I'm rocking a i7 930 with 12gb ram 160 ssd and a gtx 480. Games are okay, but I'm afraid I'm going to start scaling the graphics to obtain acceptable framerates.

For example, the new ac3 and crysis 3 and the new tomb raider and re6. I'm thinking about a gtx680. Good idea, or is it a little late? Titan just seems ridiculous and too much.

I want at least 60fps and above.

 

[Jaydip]

Wait till haswell comes out, upgrade your cpu along with a new gpu.680 or 7970 will probably be ever more cheaper down the road.Actually I'm in the same boat, was eyeing titan but will upgrade cpu first.

 

[finbarqs]

I probably should say that I'm running 1680x1050... at most, i'll ever do is 1080p...

I want the next "gtx780" if that ever comes out. I figure at this point, I'm more GPU limited in my games than cpu.

 

[g3n3ticlyg3nius]

At 1680 x 1050 ?

A Gtx 680 is overkill.

 

[bleucharm28]

At 1680 x 1050 ?

A Gtx 680 is overkill.

no such thing as overkill

 

[bleucharm28]

I say wait for Haswell.

But then again, i sold my 1366 setup; took those money and bought me a nice 1155 mobo, ram, and cpu; 3570k.

My excuse was i wanted my SSD to perform at 6GB speed and my GTX 680's in water to perform in PCIE 3.0 speeds. My previous did not those 2 features i want.

 

[Majcric]

At 1680 x 1050 ?

A Gtx 680 is overkill.

This is not true. I'm running 1680x1050. (waiting for my monitor to die.) Metro 2033, BF3, any Crysis game and a few others have made glad of this lower rez. Not to mention some of the upcoming releases going to need just as much GPU power if not more.

 

[finbarqs]

So for right now, I'll stay with my 930 and wait for haswell. But I'll get a Gtx 680 2gb because 4gb is unnecessary right?

I have my incredible dual nec 20wmgx2 monitors that just won't die... And looks amazing in color reproduction and brightness!!

 

[g3n3ticlyg3nius]

This is not true. I'm running 1680x1050. (waiting for my monitor to die.) Metro 2033, BF3, any Crysis game and a few others have made glad of this lower rez. Not to mention some of the upcoming releases going to need just as much GPU power if not more.

At that resolution no matter what game you play maybe besides Crysis 3 or Metro you are fine off

A 7870 XT joker for half the price of Gtx 680 can handle 4XAA like a charm in battlefield 3

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Club_3D/HD_7870_jokerCard_Tahiti_LE/8.html

Crysis 3 struggles even on a Gtx 680 and same is for Metro 2033

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Club_3D/HD_7870_jokerCard_Tahiti_LE/16.html

What's the point of buying something for double the price and still getting struggles in both the games ? Notice he said he wants 60 fps or above.

Does a Gtx 680 give him that in both games ? Hell no. Why pay more then ?

If he wants to play both these games, he prolly needs to buy a titan to make it work flawlessly



Having said that, if the OP plans on increasing to 1920 x 1080p in near future, Gtx 680 down the road could be a logical choice.

 

[finbarqs]

You know, I don't know how these work today: It use to be that you only get SLI to drive higher resolutions, but maintain the same framerate as you would get on a single card. Which is kind of weird to me:

It's like if you're only getting 17 fps @ 1680x1050, and you decided to get sli, you'll still get 17 fps @ 1680x1050. But when you increase that to 1440p, you'll still get 17 fps. You'd think it'd scale better than that... That use to be how SLI worked... has it gotten better? Would it definitely give you more FPS on the lower range?

 

[g3n3ticlyg3nius]

You know, I don't know how these work today: It use to be that you only get SLI to drive higher resolutions, but maintain the same framerate as you would get on a single card. Which is kind of weird to me:

It's like if you're only getting 17 fps @ 1680x1050, and you decided to get sli, you'll still get 17 fps @ 1680x1050. But when you increase that to 1440p, you'll still get 17 fps. You'd think it'd scale better than that... That use to be how SLI worked... has it gotten better? Would it definitely give you more FPS on the lower range?

SLI combines the power of both the cards.

So yes, it would definitely give you more FPS , but off course they are stuttering issues sometimes.

New drivers are continuously being released though which help in improving the SLI gameplay.

As the resolution increases the GPU's have to work harder so FPS drops.

But at lower resolutions it's not a problem.

I would recommend buying a pair of 7870's in Crossfire mode.

http://www.amazon.com/HIS-Mini-Dipla...&keywords=7870

A single costs 240 dollars. And a Gtx 680 costs 470 dollars.

The performance gain will nearly be double. And you'll easily max out any game at your preferred resolution.

Why spend so much on Gtx 680 when it won't give you 60 fps in certain games ? : )

 

[finbarqs]

'Cause I can get two if them. Now it seems like either a 7970 or Gtx 680

 

[finbarqs]

so i plopped down and got the gtx780, and everything runs great again... Gonna try out Crysis 3 on "Very High", but still tempted at Haswell... Probably gonna swap out my case as well, sell the pc as a stand alone, to fund my new upgrade.

Thinking about going compact, mATX with FT03 and 3 drives + 1 SSD. BluRay writer or something...

 

[MooMooCow]

A GTX 780 for only 1680 x 1050 seems a bit overkill. I would have gotten a GTX 770 4 GB or 7970.

 

[finbarqs]

is it me or Crysis 3 graphics aren't all that impressive? seems like crysis 2 graphics... I'm waiting for all my volumetric fog, and realistic characters.

 

[RaistlinZ]

so i plopped down and got the gtx780, and everything runs great again... Gonna try out Crysis 3 on "Very High", but still tempted at Haswell... Probably gonna swap out my case as well, sell the pc as a stand alone, to fund my new upgrade.

Thinking about going compact, mATX with FT03 and 3 drives + 1 SSD. BluRay writer or something...

I don't get spending that much on a video card but not upgrading your monitor.

 

[finbarqs]

I'll sacrifice resolution for framerates

 

[toyota]

is it me or Crysis 3 graphics aren't all that impressive? seems like crysis 2 graphics... I'm waiting for all my volumetric fog, and realistic characters.

get real. Crysis 3 graphics blows Crysis 2 out of the water.

and getting a 780 for 1680x1050 is flat out silly even more so with an old 930 cpu.

 

[finbarqs]

i'm ranging around 50-60 fps, so it's good for me, on max detail. I've never been a big resolution person... But I guess I'm just not a huge fan of the art direction. Crysis 3 doesn't really blow me away in terms of graphics I guess...

 

[toyota]

i'm ranging around 50-60 fps, so it's good for me, on max detail. I've never been a big resolution person... But I guess I'm just not a huge fan of the art direction. Crysis 3 doesn't really blow me away in terms of graphics I guess...

it may not be your style but from a technical standpoint Crysis 3 is much much better looking than Crysis 2. except for some wonky looking vegetation its quite stunning in many areas. I was never impressed with the visuals on Crysis 2.

 

[finbarqs]

yeah the vegetation I think kind of ruined it for me... I thought it was gonna be like the vegetation from what I've seen in crysis 1 demos... where there are a bunch of highlights on the leaves themselves, reflecting sunspots (specular highlights). But their just plain flat unlit leaves, that casts shadows...

 

[Carfax83]

yeah the vegetation I think kind of ruined it for me... I thought it was gonna be like the vegetation from what I've seen in crysis 1 demos... where there are a bunch of highlights on the leaves themselves, reflecting sunspots (specular highlights). But their just plain flat unlit leaves, that casts shadows...

Did you guys play the same game that I did?

The vegetation in Crysis 3 is amazing, and pretty much all tessellated (and reacts to the environment) so the detail is miles above any other game when it comes to how detailed it looks.

 

[toyota]

Did you guys play the same game that I did?

The vegetation in Crysis 3 is amazing, and pretty much all tessellated (and reacts to the environment) so the detail is miles above any other game when it comes to how detailed it looks.

the vegetation might be better than other games but some of it in Crysis 3 is ugly and out of place looking compared to the rest of the graphics. the awkward moving water stands out too though.

 

[lilrayray69]

is it me or Crysis 3 graphics aren't all that impressive? seems like crysis 2 graphics... I'm waiting for all my volumetric fog, and realistic characters.

Maybe you oughta play at 1080p...or you could go to much higher resolutions with a 780.

The vegetation in Crysis 3 is, I thought, excellent.

I'm with the others - spending $600 on a GPU but not spending $100 on a monitor for 1080p doesn't make much sense.

Getting a GPU with even 2GB, let alone 3-4GB for less than 1080p just doesn't make sense. You'd get just as good frames per second and performance with a far cheaper GPU at that resolution.

 

[blastingcap]

GTX 480 is still strong, that's like a GTX 570 or HD 7850/7870. If you can wait till the end of 2013 I would do that instead... the lower prices are one thing, but another benefit is knowing better what kind of card you need to play next-gen console ports.