CPU and GPU recommendations for max settings?

[(PSN)WHATSMYENAME]

I am saving up to build a relatively mid to high tier PC and warframe was the game I primarily wanted to build it around. I want to run this game at max settings around the 1080p 60fps range while also factoring in all of the updates that have happened up until now. So far the CPU I've been thinking of getting is the Intel i5 4690k and as far as the GPU I was thinking about going with the GTX 750 ti or 970. I'm not really on a budget but I do want the best bang for my buck. Thoughts or recommendations? 

Edited June 7, 2016 by (PS4)WHATSMYENAME

[bubbabenali]

GTX 750 ti or 970? Thats a rather large price difference.

I played the game on max settings with a FX 8120 and a GTX 650 Ti Boost.

I think your combination seems to be ok.

But keep in mind that nvidia brings out the new 1070 and 1080 in the next months and AMD has it's RX480 ready to go to the market at the end of this month (AMD has no physix support though).

Edited June 7, 2016 by bubbabenali

[(PSN)WHATSMYENAME]

I heard about the RX 480 and have considered waiting for it but no physx kind of sucks. Does AMD have an alternative to Physx? Also what is the real benefit to having physx because if it doesn't add that much to the game then I will wait for the RX 480. 

[bubbabenali]

5 minutes ago, (PS4)WHATSMYENAME said:

I heard about the RX 480 and have considered waiting for it but no physx kind of sucks. Does AMD have an alternative to Physx? Also what is the real benefit to having physx because if it doesn't add that much to the game then I will wait for the RX 480. 

It seem that DE does not support CPU mode for physx, so no there isn't an easy way if one at all to have physx with an AMD card in Warframe.

To be hones aside from the particle effects of the Penta granades and the Jat Kittag groiund slams I don't see much of a difference.

But the Jat Kittag is 200% more awesome with the physx ground slam.

[(PSN)WHATSMYENAME]

Just looked at a couple of vids of the jat kittag. I think I'll go with the GTX because of particles galore lol On a serious note however when you played the game with a GTX 650 was that on the current build or an earlier one. I want to know if the it can still handle the current build. 

Edited June 7, 2016 by (PS4)WHATSMYENAME

[Camdex]

Far as I've read the nvidia physx option in the display setting doesn't do anything any more. I play Warframe on a two different PCs one with a R9 270x and the other with a GTX960. I've played countless hours on both with all kinds of weapons and frames and it seems exactly the same. Since Warframe has been available on the new consoles "which are AMD based" and DX12 coming sometime which has its own physx effects the nvidia physx may go away all together because it just won't be need anymore, in any game. I been trying to get a straight answer out of DE about this but they never really talk about it. Warframe has actually seemed to run smoother on my AMD PC the last year, kinda ever since it was introduced to the new consoles. In the past 6-8 months my GTX960 and other friends with nvidia cards have had issues with the game crashing the nvidia driver. It seems like DE got it fixed recently but there for a while it was really annoying. I most likely will sell my GTX960 soon before its worthless, because after the launch of the RX 480 at $200 the price of used cards might tank on ebay. Considering fairly reliable leaks have shown the RX 480 scoring just over 14000 in Firestrike which destroys my GTX960s score of 7400 that I paid $220 for.

[DatDarkOne]

At the moment, AMD cards are showing serious promise with DirectX 12.  They're also scoring higher than Nvidia cards in the same categories in DirectX12.  Nvidia looks they will no longer have software advantage in DirectX 12 that it currently has now.  Another question is DE going to add support for DirectX 12?  The future is ever changing and anything can happen.   It really depends on what you are looking for: good experience now or possible future proofing. :D

Edited June 17, 2016 by DatDarkOne
edited content

[(PSN)WHATSMYENAME]

But doesn't AMD have bad driver support?

[DatDarkOne]

1 hour ago, (PS4)WHATSMYENAME said:

But doesn't AMD have bad driver support?

I haven't had a problem with any of mine for the last ten years.  None with Vista, 7, 8, 8.1, or 10.  Maybe back in 2003.  I know for a fact that Microsoft kept a chart (I personally saw it when I worked there) of driver issues for both Vista and Win7 (they both could use the same drivers).  Nvidia was high on that list of problems reported with drivers.  But that was back in early Win 7 era.  Truthfully I don't think there have been any driver issues for either company in recent years.  

 

Edit:  I'm trying to give you info hopefully without sounding like a fanboi.  

Edited June 19, 2016 by DatDarkOne
added info

[(PSN)WHATSMYENAME]

OK that was my main concern if I got the rx 480. Plus since it's new there might be some early issues with the card being that it's brand new and all.

[Hosanin]

I know this post has been around for a bit now, but as someone who runs the standard 2Gb EVGA Nvidia GTX 750 until the RX 480 is avail, I'd wait it out to see how AMD does. The 750 and 750ti are amazing cards, good value for what you pay  and can hold their own in most of the newer games. The RX 480 is light years beyond it and will compliment any system very nicely.

About driver support; Nvidia has actually had some pretty big mistakes in the past few months where the driver was actually killing cards. AMD on the other hand, not so much.You have to deal with Catalyst for AMD or GeForce Experience for Nvidia. After using GeForce Experience on my Computer and Catalyst on the one I built for a friend,Catalyst is just a lot nicer to use. This coming from an EVGA fanboi XD

[Nerf_SupYo]

I run a 750ti and couldn't see any reason to change out my card for this* game, I'm all the setting maxed and hit 60fps+ consistently - I did troubleshoot various bottlenecks like the cpu core unpark (and cpu multithreading via the launcher), disabling v-sync,  switching out the hard drive for an SSD, running ethernet instead of WiFi sort of stuff.

^Which is not* to say I wouldn't gladly accept a fancy new card, just that when i compare my graphics and smoothe fps to the best of what I see on youtube examples of other people's in game experience, mine is the same, or better.

 

Edited June 20, 2016 by ghandibots

[(PSN)WHATSMYENAME]

Have you had any problems with the Crimson drivers? @Hosanin

Edited June 23, 2016 by (PS4)WHATSMYENAME

[Hosanin]

5 hours ago, (PS4)WHATSMYENAME said:

Have you had any problems with the Crimson drivers? @Hosanin

I've used it once when building my friends computer* and couldn't find anything wrong with it and honestly, it is WAY better than Catalyst. I find it's always nice to see when a company actually listens to the customers. There are a few things to play with in it that makes it feel like you have more control and it's a lot smoother than GeForce Experience.

As much as I love my EVGA products, I am definitely going to be switching over to the new AMD cards. I play a lot of other games that the extra power will come in handy for (War Thunder being a big one).

*I should add that I build computers for fun XD

Edited June 23, 2016 by Hosanin

[(PSN)WHATSMYENAME]

Okay well I'm probably going to wait for the rx 480 to come out next week. I appreciate all of the feedback though you guys really helped me out.