Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Solved

I'm looking to upgrade my EVGA 670 FTW for something else, what should i do?

Tags:
  • GPUs
  • Nvidia
  • AMD
  • Graphics
Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
June 7, 2014 11:07:33 PM

I have an 850 watt PSU, so that's not going to be the problem. I have a case that can fit any GPU in it. My MOBO also happens to support just about everything. I also happen to have plenty of fans in my rig, so heat shouldn't be an issue. So, any ideas which GPU I should consider getting? I like both Nvidia and AMD, so that's not going to be a problem. But I need a card that would be worth the upgrade investment. I want to see at least double digit FPS difference. I'll take any and all opinions.

More about : upgrade evga 670 ftw

June 7, 2014 11:17:11 PM

What resolution are you playing at? if 1080p it doesnt take much theses days to have playable frames @ 1080p.

1440p, 3x1080p or 4k require a bit more power GPU wise.

also are you using a monitor that runs faster than 60Hz? 60fps is the ceiling for most monitors.
m
0
l
June 7, 2014 11:47:47 PM

Ohmybad said:
What resolution are you playing at? if 1080p it doesnt take much theses days to have playable frames @ 1080p.

1440p, 3x1080p or 4k require a bit more power GPU wise.

also are you using a monitor that runs faster than 60Hz? 60fps is the ceiling for most monitors.

My monitor is 1080 and runs at 60. I do plan to upgrade to a 1440p one eventually.
m
0
l
Related resources
June 7, 2014 11:57:29 PM

Arishok N7 said:
Ohmybad said:
What resolution are you playing at? if 1080p it doesnt take much theses days to have playable frames @ 1080p.

1440p, 3x1080p or 4k require a bit more power GPU wise.

also are you using a monitor that runs faster than 60Hz? 60fps is the ceiling for most monitors.

My monitor is 1080 and runs at 60. I do plan to upgrade to a 1440p one eventually.


What's your budget?
m
0
l
June 8, 2014 12:05:37 AM

LogicalProcessing said:
Arishok N7 said:
Ohmybad said:
What resolution are you playing at? if 1080p it doesnt take much theses days to have playable frames @ 1080p.

1440p, 3x1080p or 4k require a bit more power GPU wise.

also are you using a monitor that runs faster than 60Hz? 60fps is the ceiling for most monitors.

My monitor is 1080 and runs at 60. I do plan to upgrade to a 1440p one eventually.


What's your budget?

I know I'm going to dish out some cash in order to get something that considerably beats my current card. I'm just not interested in the $1000 cards.
m
0
l
June 8, 2014 12:13:45 AM

Arishok N7 said:
LogicalProcessing said:
Arishok N7 said:
Ohmybad said:
What resolution are you playing at? if 1080p it doesnt take much theses days to have playable frames @ 1080p.

1440p, 3x1080p or 4k require a bit more power GPU wise.

also are you using a monitor that runs faster than 60Hz? 60fps is the ceiling for most monitors.

My monitor is 1080 and runs at 60. I do plan to upgrade to a 1440p one eventually.


What's your budget?

I know I'm going to dish out some cash in order to get something that considerably beats my current card. I'm just not interested in the $1000 cards.


Here are two options that I would highly recommend. Your might be an Nvidia guy like I used to be...but after I blew the capacitors out on both of my GTX 680's...I've become an AMD guy. Both of these card you should see a double digit FPS increase. These are so much more powerful and efficient than the Nvidia video cards are.

I have two XFX HD Radeon 7970 GHz edition video cards...crossfire enabled...and I noticed 20-40 fps more than what I was getting with my EVGA Geforce GTX 680 SLI video cards.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
m
0
l
June 8, 2014 12:14:58 AM

For just about every game @ ultra settings on 1080p, all you need is a gtx 770 or r9 280x to max out the fps and then some. Since you plan on 1440p, is go for a gtx 780, 780ti, r9 290 or r9 290x. Expect prices of @ $400-$700 depending on card.
m
0
l
June 8, 2014 12:25:28 AM

What would adding another 670 achieve?
m
0
l
June 8, 2014 12:27:14 AM

Arishok N7 said:
What would adding another 670 achieve?


Hmmm...SLI Configuration...unless you added three more 670's to make it a Quad SLI...nothing much at all.
m
0
l
June 8, 2014 1:40:49 AM

780ti or 290x. I have seen 780ti's as low as $630 and 290x for $580. I went with 780ti from my 670 and love it, 780ti costs more but is faster at 1080p and 2k. You really can't go wrong with either card.
m
0
l

Best solution

June 8, 2014 9:04:25 AM

LogicalProcessing said:
I wouldn't even go the Nvidia route, recent benchmarks on the new AMD video cards have proven to be of better value and efficiency than the Nvidia video cards are currently as proven here: http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/graphics/2013/11/27/ba... .


You may want to take a closer look at that benchmark again. In BF4 the 780ti scores higher than the 290x in average fps. Considering the test scores the minimum, that means the maximum is higher still than the 290x. Either way, only the minimum is rated there and that counts for little as its only in one instance it hit that low. 780ti is better overall.

The only 2 cards that actually beat the 780ti in average fps were dual gpu's. A lil unfair to test a single gpu up against xfire, but even so, they only barely beat it. you could put sli gtx 770's up against a gtx690 or hd7990 and the 770's would trounce either card, and quite handily.

I'm not ready to concede that based on 1 biased benchmark that ppl should not go nvidea. That test is also not recent. November of last year, on a 3570k. You base your opinion on 1 game, and I don't even play it. i'll stick with NVidia thanks, haven't had driver problems, no waiting for mantle, no bug fixes, no working on it, no bluescreens etc etc etc....

The other benchmarks put the Best AMD vrs the 2nd-best NVidia, 290x vrs 780, and then claim 'oh, AMD is better!" I wonder what those benchmarks would say if they put the best NVidia vrs the 2nd-best AMD... a 780ti vrs a 290... 'oh, NVidia is better!'

Like I said, biased benchmark... basically a bunch of BS
Share
a c 466 Î Nvidia
a c 179 À AMD
June 8, 2014 9:58:22 AM

So why wouldn't you just buy another GTX 670 FTW for SLI? That'll put you up at GTX 690 performance levels for about $250. It'll also allow you to keep your Nvidia driver support, PhysX, Adaptive VSync, forced FXAA, forced HBAO+, TXAA, Geforce Experience, Shadowplay, etc.; all of which you would lose by going with an AMD card.

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/MSI/R9_280X_Gaming_6...
m
0
l
June 8, 2014 12:51:14 PM

17seconds said:
So why wouldn't you just buy another GTX 670 FTW for SLI? That'll put you up at GTX 690 performance levels for about $250. It'll also allow you to keep your Nvidia driver support, PhysX, Adaptive VSync, forced FXAA, forced HBAO+, TXAA, Geforce Experience, Shadowplay, etc.; all of which you would lose by going with an AMD card.

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/MSI/R9_280X_Gaming_6...


Will SLI 670ftw really get 690 performance? How do you get that from that list?
m
0
l
a c 466 Î Nvidia
a c 179 À AMD
June 8, 2014 1:11:47 PM

Arishok N7 said:
17seconds said:
So why wouldn't you just buy another GTX 670 FTW for SLI? That'll put you up at GTX 690 performance levels for about $250. It'll also allow you to keep your Nvidia driver support, PhysX, Adaptive VSync, forced FXAA, forced HBAO+, TXAA, Geforce Experience, Shadowplay, etc.; all of which you would lose by going with an AMD card.

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/MSI/R9_280X_Gaming_6...


Will SLI 670ftw really get 690 performance? How do you get that from that list?

The GTX 690 is basically a pair of downclocked GTX 680 GPUs, or in other words pretty much exactly a pair of overclocked FTW 670 GPUs.
m
0
l
June 9, 2014 9:33:57 PM

Karadjgne said:
LogicalProcessing said:
I wouldn't even go the Nvidia route, recent benchmarks on the new AMD video cards have proven to be of better value and efficiency than the Nvidia video cards are currently as proven here: http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/graphics/2013/11/27/ba... .


You may want to take a closer look at that benchmark again. In BF4 the 780ti scores higher than the 290x in average fps. Considering the test scores the minimum, that means the maximum is higher still than the 290x. Either way, only the minimum is rated there and that counts for little as its only in one instance it hit that low. 780ti is better overall.

The only 2 cards that actually beat the 780ti in average fps were dual gpu's. A lil unfair to test a single gpu up against xfire, but even so, they only barely beat it. you could put sli gtx 770's up against a gtx690 or hd7990 and the 770's would trounce either card, and quite handily.

I'm not ready to concede that based on 1 biased benchmark that ppl should not go nvidea. That test is also not recent. November of last year, on a 3570k. You base your opinion on 1 game, and I don't even play it. i'll stick with NVidia thanks, haven't had driver problems, no waiting for mantle, no bug fixes, no working on it, no bluescreens etc etc etc....

The other benchmarks put the Best AMD vrs the 2nd-best NVidia, 290x vrs 780, and then claim 'oh, AMD is better!" I wonder what those benchmarks would say if they put the best NVidia vrs the 2nd-best AMD... a 780ti vrs a 290... 'oh, NVidia is better!'

Like I said, biased benchmark... basically a bunch of BS


Let me re-word myself. Nvidia has a time an place but I believe if you want the biggest bang for your buck and if your not into the whole OC thing then AMD is the way to go. One thing I loved about my Nvidia cards was how far I could OC them...I had the GPU core at a stable 1.54 GHz. But I like not dinking around with stuff too...especially when that's what I have to do all day long. Which I would think some folks would like that too.

As far as the benchmark goes...there are other benchmarks out there that can back me up...but at this point in time...there is no benefit for me or you to seeing me posting them. So I'll just leave it at that.
m
0
l
!