Best Recommended Gpu

[Rhundis]

Last year I built my own desktop, now I found out that I'm actually missing out on some sweet particle effects because my GPU unit doesn't support them.

Now my GPU is pretty good, 2gb graphic memory, etc. But I was wondering what would be Tue best bang for my buck if I were to buy an nvidia card?

Im looking for something that's gonna handle most of the game prossesing but isn't super expensive.

Aside from a somewhat annoying bug with my current GPU, which I'm too lazy to fix, Warframe runs great at max settings.

Any help would be appreciated and I'm looking forward to your suggestions.

[Angius]

nVidia GeForce - that's for sure.

[SolidBeer]

In order to keep the cost down, for the best card, this is what I plan on upgrading to.

 

EVGA GeForce GTX 750 2GB FTW with EVGA ACX Cooling, GDDR5 128bit

 

http://www.amazon.com/EVGA-GeForce-Dual-Link-Graphics-02G-P4-2758-KR/dp/B00J3ZNB04/ref=sr_1_5?s=pc&ie=UTF8&qid=1401282128&sr=1-5&keywords=gtx+750

[Cryp2Nite]

Geforce 760 / 770 is the current mid-range / lower end of high end card. Around 200 dollars. (I'm living in the EU,

so I don't know the real prices in dollars.) With such a card you are able to play every game on high settings, up

to full HD resolution. For really large monitors (26''+) you'll need a true high end card with more than 2GB VRAM,

to play smoothly in native resolutions.

 

EDIT: I wouldn't recommend the 750 series. You get so much more power for only a few bucks more with a 760 GTX.

Especially with full HD resolution. Up to 50% more. But depending on what games you are playing, a GTX 750 TI

is probably enough. Don't buy a non-TI version though. They aren't even on level with a R7 260.

Edited May 28, 2014 by Cryp2Nite

[Rhundis]

Thanks for the suggestions, I'll definetley take a look into those.

[Darzk]

If you're scrimping enough to consider a 750 you might want to drop right down to a 660/670. They'll perform about the same, probably better actually. Theres a considerable jump from 50-60 in the Nvidia series thats probably more important than the generation jump.

 

I'm running WF on maxxed settings (and yes, with PhysX) on two 460's. Can even turn off SLI and only get a tiny bit of lag. Its not that GPU intensive.

Edited May 28, 2014 by Darzk

[Cryp2Nite]

If you're scrimping enough to consider a 750 you might want to drop right down to a 660/670. They'll perform about the same, probably better actually. Theres a considerable jump from 50-60 in the Nvidia series thats probably more important than the generation jump.

 

A 660 is worse than a 760 (not that much though), and more expensive. This is because of the 660 is high end for the 600 series,

on the other hand 760 is only a mid-range card for the 700 series. A GTX 780 is more of a equivalent to the GTX 660, not a GTX 760.

[BaSiLB]

770 geforce go for it !

[Darzk]

A 660 is worse than a 760 (not that much though), and more expensive. This is because of the 660 is high end for the 600 series,

on the other hand 760 is only a mid-range card for the 700 series. A GTX 780 is more of a equivalent to the GTX 660, not a GTX 760.

 

Damn, they changed the #ing for the 7th generation? The performance cards don't start till the 80+?

Every generation before that always had a huge jump between 50-60. Is the jump now at 60-70(or 70-80?)? Or is there 2 spikes now?

 

I was basing advice on the old patterning, my bad for posting something I wasn't 100% sure about.

[Not_Oliver]

In my opinion, AMD is the best up to $250. Nvidia completely dominates the upper tier cards in my opinion. 

 

the 270x is a great bang for buck, while the 270, I think, is proven the best FPS:Dollar ratio. 

[Naftal]

In my opinion, AMD is the best up to $250. Nvidia completely dominates the upper tier cards in my opinion. 

 

the 270x is a great bang for buck, while the 270, I think, is proven the best FPS:Dollar ratio. 

But you can't use PhysX with AMD card.

[Not_Oliver]

Why is it that everytime I see a post like this on any game forum, Nvidia is always the goto? My brother runs a Nvidia and I use AMD and Nvidia isn't insanely better as far as I can tell. Seems like Nvidia is becoming the fanboy hipster brand. I know too many people that don't even know AMD makes GPUs... 

[Cryp2Nite]

Because Nvidia GPUs usually performs better on Direct3D Games. And the majority of modern engines uses D3D.

AMD GPUs usually have an advantage on OpenGL, especially on higher resolutions (1920:1200/1080+).

They beat Nvidia here (~equal cards of course). And the reference design of the Nvdia cards is mostly better,

there are alot of AMD reference cards that aren't really useable, cause they are as loud as a jet engine under full load.

The non-reference cards (the majority) from Nvidia are also more often than not better as their AMD counterparts.

They are (generally speaking) more quiet, have better air cooler and in addition: are smaller, more case friendly.

AMD also had some driver disasters, but Nvidia isn't really any better here - but people often remember only the AMD one.

 

Both have good cards, but I tend to prefer the Nvidia ones, especially if I should recommend a card to a more

casual like hardware noob. :-) There are less things that could go wrong with Nvidia, they have overall the superior cards

in architecture and quality.

(Of course we have to blame the OEMs for that, Nvidia/AMD themselves don't build any cards, only the microchips)

[Angius]

Why is it that everytime I see a post like this on any game forum, Nvidia is always the goto? My brother runs a Nvidia and I use AMD and Nvidia isn't insanely better as far as I can tell. Seems like Nvidia is becoming the fanboy hipster brand. I know too many people that don't even know AMD makes GPUs... 

Two reasons:

1. PhysX

2. Direct support in tons of games

[DefinitelyNotBellsEnd]

Two reasons:

1. PhysX

2. Direct support in tons of games

1.) wrong(see below)

2.) "direct support" what...i dont even...just what. gaming companies *directly* support both COMPLETELY EQUALLY. the only real thing that "NVIDIA THE WAY ITS MEANT TO BE PLAYED" or " OPTIMIZED FOR AMD" is, is marketing. 

 

Because Nvidia GPUs usually performs better on Direct3D Games. And the majority of modern engines uses D3D.

AMD GPUs usually have an advantage on OpenGL, especially on higher resolutions (1920:1200/1080+).

They beat Nvidia here (~equal cards of course). And the reference design of the Nvdia cards is mostly better,

there are alot of AMD reference cards that aren't really useable, cause they are as loud as a jet engine under full load.

The non-reference cards (the majority) from Nvidia are also more often than not better as their AMD counterparts.

They are (generally speaking) more quiet, have better air cooler and in addition: are smaller, more case friendly.

AMD also had some driver disasters, but Nvidia isn't really any better here - but people often remember only the AMD one.

 

Both have good cards, but I tend to prefer the Nvidia ones, especially if I should recommend a card to a more

casual like hardware noob. :-) There are less things that could go wrong with Nvidia, they have overall the superior cards

in architecture and quality.

(Of course we have to blame the OEMs for that, Nvidia/AMD themselves don't build any cards, only the microchips)

 

Wrong...nvidia tends to have better drivers. Only real difference, amd has had horrid drivers for a while.

 

they do tend to run hotter however.

 

Currently nvidia is noticeably better than AMD because they are running on a smaller die size(meaning cooler/more real estate on the silicon for more ram/other things). however if you take a look at midrange cards(amd DOES NOT COMPETE AT HIGH RANGE CURRENTLY, they simply are outclassed due to nvidias die size drops)....

 

Currently AMD outperforms nVidia in midrange cards....

 

now with all that being said...get the 770, currently in price/performance you cant beat it.

 

Personally i said F*** it and picked up a 780TI(reference, I wanted the ACX cooler...but they didnt have any...instantly sold out) on release slapped an arctic accelero IV on it, and now im overclocked by around 300mhz with around 200mhz on memory. running at 60c MAX loads(im talking about furmark burn in here...)

 

So mine outperforms the titan black for oh...a couple hundred dollars cheaper. I got over 15,000 3dmark firestorm score with a very conservative overclock(16gb ddr3 ram, and intel 4770k overclocked by 600mhz)

 

I got ALL of this for around 1500 slapped in in a Fractal Design R4, and I have a computer that craps on almost everything for well...$10,000 cheaper than a prebuilt of same quality.

 

http://imgur.com/a/fKlN9 Is it with everything notated for you all.

 

tbh its better to save up and grab it all at once. you wont get all I have thats around 5000$ total...but youll get close. Work for the summer get 1500 then enjoy the new nvidia maxwell architecture due out q3/q4 2014

But you can't use PhysX with AMD card.

 

WRONG. use google. all physx really is is an API layer that calls on hardware to do extra computations. it can absolutely be hacked around to run on amd hardware.

 

nVidia just does it for marketing, and to be honest it is gimmicky at best, it doesnt really look that much better with physx, you wouldnt really even notice 90% of physx enabled things in games if someone didnt point them out to you.

 

"OH LOOK THE FLAG FLAPS SLIGHTLY MORE REALISTICALLY..." "great what a waste of...my cpu/gfx card"

Edited May 29, 2014 by Faydes