[Tech] In the market for a graphics card...

[Razaak]

... and could use some sagely THN advice.

Looking around the £100-150 mark, preferably nVidia after some trouble with my previous ATI card.

What will give me the best bang for the buck - a quick search suggests something like a GTX 560 Ti but I have no idea how current that information is.

 

[Ronin Storm]

I have the Geforce GTX 560 Ti and it works pretty decently for recent and intensive games such as Battlefield 3. It's no longer state-of-the-art (but you're not expecting that around £150). I seem to remember being advised to choose clock speed over memory if offered the choice if you're not interested in surround desktop (which is different to multiple monitors)... Traxata might remember better than me...

In fact:

me: Yeah, I see a 1.2GB 448 core card and a 2GB 384 core card. More memory or more cores?
17:48 Traxata: If you're in IRC that's a spicypixel question
me: Spicy and niax are of the opinion that 1.2GB with more cores is better for single screen gaming, but more memory if I plan to use surround desktop. So, 1.2GB version it is.

As a result of that conversation (which is now quite some time ago), I have MSI GeForce N560GTX-448 1.2GB. Can recommend it.

 

[Ki!ler-Mk1]

Whats the lifetime on that now?

 

[Traxata]

... and could use some sagely THN advice.

Looking around the £100-150 mark, preferably nVidia after some trouble with my previous ATI card.

What will give me the best bang for the buck - a quick search suggests something like a GTX 560 Ti but I have no idea how current that information is.

I have the Geforce GTX 560 Ti and it works pretty decently for recent and intensive games such as Battlefield 3. It's no longer state-of-the-art (but you're not expecting that around £150). I seem to remember being advised to choose clock speed over memory if offered the choice if you're not interested in surround desktop (which is different to multiple monitors)... Traxata might remember better than me...

In fact:


As a result of that conversation (which is now quite some time ago), I have MSI GeForce N560GTX-448 1.2GB. Can recommend it.

Spicypixel: http://www.scan.co.uk/products/2gb-...008mhz-gddr5-gpu-1006mhz-cores-768-dport-dl-d

That's the suggestion. Kepler cores run more efficiently, too.

 

[Ronin Storm]

Whats the lifetime on that now?

Not sure I understand...?

 

[Ki!ler-Mk1]

Not sure I understand...?

Graphics cards generally cost just under £100/year. If there is an expectation to play the latest and greatest games and software at max over a 3 year period. This has been my experience and that which i have observed, I just wondered if £150 on a card at least 2 years old might be a bit steep. But rather than wonder I've asked if it would be good for top notch games, lets say the next call of duty engine or cryengine 3 in 3 years?

 

[Ronin Storm]

Graphics cards generally cost just under £100/year. If there is an expectation to play the latest and greatest games and software at max over a 3 year period. This has been my experience and that which i have observed, I just wondered if £150 on a card at least 2 years old might be a bit steep. But rather than wonder I've asked if it would be good for top notch games, lets say the next call of duty engine or cryengine 3 in 3 years?

I honestly don't know. CryEngine3 is pretty relevant to me as I'll be part of the Star Citizen dogfighting alpha later this year. A quick review of my invoice tells me that my GTX560 is almost 1 year old at around £145 at time of purchase. I imagine, given the price comparison, that the GTX650 that Trax linked is going to last better and survive against next-gen engines better.

 

[Ki!ler-Mk1]

Which pledge level did you take?

 

[Ronin Storm]

Which pledge level did you take?

Wandering OT here, but Digital Mercenary.

 

[Nanor]

I was contemplating getting a 7870 once I start my job but only because my my current 4870 has lasted me 3 1/2 years. Anyone who knows my track record with computer hardware ought to be forging a medal for me 'cause that's damned impressive. That said I like the look of the one Trax has linked looks pretty swell. Though, I nVidia cards tended to last me about a year before they'd die.

 

[Traxata]

Graphics cards generally cost just under £100/year. If there is an expectation to play the latest and greatest games and software at max over a 3 year period. This has been my experience and that which i have observed, I just wondered if £150 on a card at least 2 years old might be a bit steep. But rather than wonder I've asked if it would be good for top notch games, lets say the next call of duty engine or cryengine 3 in 3 years?

I spent around £350 on my graphics card. nVidia GTX 670 (ASUS Direct CUII 2GB)

I also made sure I got the same card in my laptop. nVidia GTX 680M (Which is a GTX 670 desktop card with lower timings and power consumption)

I have considered the idea of a GTX Titan card. I would probably pick this one, http://www.scan.co.uk/products/6gb-...-837mhz-boost-876mhz-cores-2688-dp-2x-dl-dvi- until a non-reference design cooler becomes available but that's again a little off topic / out of the price range. I also don't have much in the way of expenses, and depending on my upcoming choices in the next few weeks they may go down further...

 

[Razaak]

Well, since I don't need anything really high end and it looks like a decent balance of price and performance, I'll give the 650 Ti Boost a whirl.

Thanks for the advice, fellas

 

[Haven]

Probably a bit low powered for what you need (and its ATI) but I just ordered a Radeon HD7750 for £89.

My requirements are a bit of an arse though as I need a half height card for this old system as well as dual monitor support which limits my choice considerably. If you want to save a few pounds on the 650Ti they look pretty decent though (although the 650Ti "should" be the faster card).

 

[Razaak]

New card arrived, installed and OMG SHINY. Not running anything too taxing (namely WoW) but 60FPS with maximum settings - including those pesky shadows that always did horrendous things to my old card...

Happy days are here again

 

[Ki!ler-Mk1]

That is awesome Razzak, the new GFX card feeling is lovely, only wish it could be afforded to come around more often and with the next set of Nvidia cards being rehashes good cards are now available even cheaper.

 

[Razaak]

RIFT is a bit more of a graphics hog, and I get 30-40 fps on maximum settings (the old card got around 2-3 fps if it could hack it at all, more often than not it just froze).

There is some overclocking/overvoltage tweaking software called Afterburner that came with the card which I haven't played with yet. I'm not sure if fiddling around with that is going to reduce the lifespan of the card and I don't really see the need to risk it. Any advice welcomed though

 

[BiG D]

Don't.

 

[Ronin Storm]

Don't.

Yeah, seconded. Or depends on how soon you'd like to buy a new graphics card.

 

[Haven]

Ignore the two posts above mine, they have no sense of adventure

In reality over clocking your graphics card will tend to push noise and power up significantly for at best a 10% gain in performance. So if 33-44 fps would make your world a happier place for the cost of 30-40% more power usage and up to twice the noise (depending on the cooling solution you use) then go for it

I used to do this a lot - these days I don't bother so much mostly due to the low gains realised. I've not yet destroyed anything by over clocking. As long as you make sure its really well cooled you'll generally blue screen before anything lets the the smoke out.

 

[Razaak]

Well, since my "cooling solution" is to take the side of the case off, I'll stick with the factory settings