Best Graphic card for next generation games?

Guest · Jun 28, 2013

Hi,

I've got enough money to afford any graphic card in the market today. Now, what would be the best graphic card to provide the best performance for all 2014 coming games? ( and for the years to come)
Battlefield 4, Watch dogs, Metal gear phantom pain, etc...

I wont start building a gaming pc untill ps4 comes out, then I'll decide

I heard that GTX 770 and Amd 7990 are on the top of the list.

Pleas advice.

DeathValley · Jun 28, 2013

If you really are looking for the best and don't care about the money, pick this one up (if you don't like it, thought it's the best; try one of these)

varundbest · Jun 28, 2013

What about GTX 780, i heard it was also good?

babernet_1 · Jun 28, 2013

No, here's the scoop on the graphics cards.

The 7990 on paper is the fastest card. However, it runs very hot and noisy. Plus AMD has horrible drivers for CF and when you try to put two of these cards together, they almost never work. In short, this card is all bark and no bite. It is basically two 7970 chips on one board.

The 690 is the equivalent two 680's on one board. Works well, but two of these together are not gameworthy. Virtually no game works well with quad graphics processors. Why should manufacturers make drivers for this when there are only a handful of people running quad systems? Plus this board is hampered by the lack of memory, just two sets of 2GB. It runs short of memory in triple monitor setups, and even in 2560x1600 monitors with extreme AA.

The best single board is the GTX Titan. The most powerful processor and a full 6GB of RAM. Put two or three of these on a triple monitor system and you are set. Two of them will max out any game on a 2560x1600 monitor.

A close second to the Titan, and only $650 instead of a full $1,000 is the GTX 780. One of these would be fine for your standard 1920x1080 monitors. Two would do for a 2560x1600 monitor. Again, three would be good for triple monitors, but the 3GB ram may start slowing you down.

You will have to wait for AMD's 8000 series before they can be compared to the GTX giants in play now.

DeathValley · Jun 28, 2013

No, here's the scoop on the graphics cards.

The 7990 on paper is the fastest card. However, it runs very hot and noisy. Plus AMD has horrible drivers for CF and when you try to put two of these cards together, they almost never work. In short, this card is all bark and no bite. It is basically two 7970 chips on one board.

The 690 is the equivalent two 680's on one board. Works well, but two of these together are not gameworthy. Virtually no game works well with quad graphics processors. Why should manufacturers make drivers for this when there are only a handful of people running quad systems? Plus this board is hampered by the lack of memory, just two sets of 2GB. It runs short of memory in triple monitor setups, and even in 2560x1600 monitors with extreme AA.

The best single board is the GTX Titan. The most powerful processor and a full 6GB of RAM. Put two or three of these on a triple monitor system and you are set. Two of them will max out any game on a 2560x1600 monitor.

A close second to the Titan, and only $650 instead of a full $1,000 is the GTX 780. One of these would be fine for your standard 1920x1080 monitors. Two would do for a 2560x1600 monitor. Again, three would be good for triple monitors, but the 3GB ram may start slowing you down.

You will have to wait for AMD's 8000 series before they can be compared to the GTX giants in play now.

You're ranked expert so, Ahmed Fayaa, you should follow his advice

ingtar33 · Jun 28, 2013

the Titan... would be the best single core gpu money can buy.

babernet_1 :

No, here's the scoop on the graphics cards.

The 7990 on paper is the fastest card. However, it runs very hot and noisy. Plus AMD has horrible drivers for CF and when you try to put two of these cards together, they almost never work. In short, this card is all bark and no bite. It is basically two 7970 chips on one board.

The 690 is the equivalent two 680's on one board. Works well, but two of these together are not gameworthy. Virtually no game works well with quad graphics processors. Why should manufacturers make drivers for this when there are only a handful of people running quad systems? Plus this board is hampered by the lack of memory, just two sets of 2GB. It runs short of memory in triple monitor setups, and even in 2560x1600 monitors with extreme AA.

The best single board is the GTX Titan. The most powerful processor and a full 6GB of RAM. Put two or three of these on a triple monitor system and you are set. Two of them will max out any game on a 2560x1600 monitor.

A close second to the Titan, and only $650 instead of a full $1,000 is the GTX 780. One of these would be fine for your standard 1920x1080 monitors. Two would do for a 2560x1600 monitor. Again, three would be good for triple monitors, but the 3GB ram may start slowing you down.

You will have to wait for AMD's 8000 series before they can be compared to the GTX giants in play now.

+1 agree, except for the bolded part.

frankly you won't need more then a 7950 or 760 for 1080p for years.... both those gpus are above and beyond what you'll need.

DeathValley · Jun 28, 2013

For Battlefield 4, Watch dogs, Metal gear phantom pain it shouldn't be a problem :bounce:

, but for GTA 5 you'll need at least 999.642 billion times more :rofl:

:fuck: you Rockstar :gun:

babernet_1 · Jun 28, 2013

DeathValley :

Thank you, very kind. But the 690 cannot be made into a quad for anything other than a couple games and running synthetic benchmarks, so you are stuck with the graphics power of two underclocked 680's. Two 770's, which are heavily overclocked 680's will smoke it. And the 770's can have 4GB each and will cost only $800 at 2GB and $900 at 4GB.

johnvonmacz · Jun 28, 2013

babernet_1 :

DeathValley :

Thank you, very kind. But the 690 cannot be made into a quad for anything other than a couple games and running synthetic benchmarks, so you are stuck with the graphics power of two underclocked 680's. Two 770's, which are heavily overclocked 680's will smoke it. And the 770's can have 4GB each and will cost only $800 at 2GB and $900 at 4GB.

Or he can just SLI a pair of 780's which has a 384bit bus because 770 4GB doesn't really get the benefit of the extra 2GB Vram because of the bus width limitation which is only 256bit.

babernet_1 · Jun 28, 2013

ingtar33 :

the Titan... would be the best single core gpu money can buy.

babernet_1 :

+1 agree, except for the bolded part.

frankly you won't need more then a 7950 or 760 for 1080p for years.... both those gpus are above and beyond what you'll need.

Ingtar you Dark Friend!

http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/crysis_3_graphics_performance_review_benchmark,7.html

We can see that the venerable 7950 runs in the lower 30's with Crysis 3. You need about 60FPS to "max" out a game.

ingtar33 · Jun 28, 2013

babernet_1 :

crysis3 is a unique game years beyond pretty much anything else on the market. And low 30's is more then enough to give a smooth gameplay assuming solid frame pacing. From what i remember, frame pacing was fine on the 7950 at 1080p for crysis3.

Hell i'm blasting through tomb raider right now on "ultra" with my 7770, apparently i'm averaging 31fps at 1080p... gameplay is smooth and flawless. I think there is a point you have to say "enough is enough"... i know i can't tell the difference between tomb raider's 31fps on ultra and 46fps i get when i play it on high... besides the obvious difference in graphic candy (and boy does tressfx destroy my frame rates... i can get 21fps with it on high settings... and it is obviously jerky at times)

DeathValley · Jun 28, 2013

ingtar33 :

Come on, guys, don't kill each others, you're both right since;
1) ingtar, good point, 30 fps is enough for a smooth gameplay, I've always played like that.
2)babernet, true that the more you have the best it is and it could save you from a few occasional lags.

It depends now on what Ahmed Fayaa chooses.
Now please reconcile yourselves.

babernet_1 · Jun 28, 2013

ingtar33 :

Did you finish all 14 books of The Wheel of Time? I did.

Yes, with my old system I played through Far Cry 3 on a laughable 5770 and an Intel Q6600. I had all settings minimized except for the resolution, a full 1920x1200 on my old monitor. My FPS hung at about 20-30. It was okay, I enjoyed the game. Once I finish my upgrade I will be able to play at 60+FPS maxed out at 2560x1600 with my SLI Titans. Should be there in a month or two. So, yes, you can enjoy games at even 20's frame rate. But it is better faster. And eye candy would be nice.

ingtar33 · Jun 28, 2013

babernet_1 :

haven't read the last book yet

babernet_1 · Jun 28, 2013

ingtar33 :

The last book is excellent. Talk about action! And there is a chapter called "The Last Battle." 150 freakin' pages! The ending is quite good, makes you think.

DeathValley · Jun 28, 2013

I didn't know there were any relations between GPUs and The Wheel of Time, you learn something every day.
By the way, what is this book about ?

Ahmed Fayaa · Jun 28, 2013

Thank you guys! you gave me alot to choose from.

though I like to have one monitor when gaming, more than one is just confusing for me.
I think I'll go with GTX TITAN.

thank you again guys, you've been most helpful.

johnvonmacz · Jun 28, 2013

Ahmed Fayaa :

Save $350 and get GTX 780, it performs pretty much the same as the TITAN. And when overclocked, it beats the TITAN in some games. The extra 5-10% performance you get from GTX TITAN over GTX 780 is not worth the $1000 Price tag.

varundbest · Jun 28, 2013

Check this out before buying - http://gpuboss.com/gpus/GeForce-GTX-780-vs-GeForce-GTX-690

http://gpuboss.com/gpus/GeForce-GTX-TITAN-vs-GeForce-GTX-780

Ahmed Fayaa · Jun 28, 2013

Man! how you guys know these tiny differences among different GUPs

you guys are good, I'll reconsider. it will take time for me to decide.

thank you all,

babernet_1 · Jun 28, 2013

Ahmed Fayaa :

The Titan is a beast. I own one and will be getting a second one for my 2560X1600 30 inch monitor. However, if I could do it again, I'd prefer 3XGTX780's. They would be faster than the 2XTitans, but I would have "only" 3GB. Hmmm, maybe not.

Don't forget that you can overclock the Titan too. I have read of guys slamming it up to 1200MHz. That gives you more graphics power than God. Well, sort of.

babernet_1 · Jun 28, 2013

DeathValley :

The Wheel of Time is an epic fantasy series of books. There are fourteen of them, each one about 800 pages long. They were started in 1990 and finished in 2013. The original author, Robert Jordan, died after finishing book eleven. Fortunately, he knew of his upcoming death, an odd form of cancer, and prepared extensive notes and recordings to finish the series. Brandon Sanderson finished the last three books and did a great job. Sadly, it wasn't until the final book that he finally got Mat right. The hero of the series is Rand, but he has a friend Mat that everyone likes the best, sort of a scoundrel.

A word of warning, The Wheel of Time is in the "High Fantasy" genre of fiction. What that means is the author attempts to fully flesh out a new world, requiring extensive descriptions and characterizations. Robert Jordan was such a great writer that he pulled it off. The world feels real, the characters become your friends, and you think you understand the magic and could almost do it yourself.

A second word of warning. The books sort of go down hill after the first one, "The Eye of the World." It is perhaps the best fantasy book of all. From there forward, the action tends to go down a bit with each successive book til you get to book ten, "The Crossroads of Twilight." Virtually nothing happens in that book. Jordan took an awful lot of criticism for that book. The next, and last book he wrote, "The Knife of Dreams," was really good and you can tell he put in a few extra fight scenes. His description of "spinning Sadin" was breathtaking. Of course he died and Sanderson did an excellent job with the last three books, all of which have plenty of action and stuff going on.

In short, these books, in my mind, are even better than "Lord of the Rings," and that says a lot.

ingtar33 · Jun 30, 2013

babernet_1 :

DeathValley :

The Wheel of Time is an epic fantasy series of books. There are fourteen of them, each one about 800 pages long. They were started in 1990 and finished in 2013. The original author, Robert Jordan, died after finishing book eleven. Fortunately, he knew of his upcoming death, an odd form of cancer, and prepared extensive notes and recordings to finish the series. Brandon Sanderson finished the last three books and did a great job. Sadly, it wasn't until the final book that he finally got Mat right. The hero of the series is Rand, but he has a friend Mat that everyone likes the best, sort of a scoundrel.

A word of warning, The Wheel of Time is in the "High Fantasy" genre of fiction. What that means is the author attempts to fully flesh out a new world, requiring extensive descriptions and characterizations. Robert Jordan was such a great writer that he pulled it off. The world feels real, the characters become your friends, and you think you understand the magic and could almost do it yourself.

A second word of warning. The books sort of go down hill after the first one, "The Eye of the World." It is perhaps the best fantasy book of all. From there forward, the action tends to go down a bit with each successive book til you get to book ten, "The Crossroads of Twilight." Virtually nothing happens in that book. Jordan took an awful lot of criticism for that book. The next, and last book he wrote, "The Knife of Dreams," was really good and you can tell he put in a few extra fight scenes. His description of "spinning Sadin" was breathtaking. Of course he died and Sanderson did an excellent job with the last three books, all of which have plenty of action and stuff going on.

In short, these books, in my mind, are even better than "Lord of the Rings," and that says a lot.

personally i thought the best book in the series was book 4... but you're right... the series sorts starts to slip in books 5-6, both are quite good but bloated (clearly it was intended to be 1 book originally, that just kept growing bigger), books 7-10 however were really hard to read for the most part. the last 4, 11-14 were all excellent.

(just finished the last book, didn't know it was out till you mentioned it here)

FlapjackFTW · Jun 30, 2013

ingtar33 :

the Titan... would be the best single core gpu money can buy.

babernet_1 :

+1 agree, except for the bolded part.

frankly you won't need more then a 7950 or 760 for 1080p for years.... both those gpus are above and beyond what you'll need.

I remember when I was told that a 560ti was suppose to run games at 60 fps max for years to come

ingtar33 · Jul 1, 2013

FlapjackFTW :

depending on the resolution, it still does.

Best Graphic card for next generation games?

Guest

Guest

Honorable

Honorable

Honorable

Honorable

Glorious

Honorable

Honorable

Honorable

Honorable

Glorious

Honorable

Honorable

Glorious

Honorable

Honorable

Honorable

Honorable

Honorable

Honorable

Honorable

Honorable

Glorious

Honorable

Glorious

Share this page