I'm looking to spend £350(or slightly more, £375ish maximum) on a new CPU and GPU. I've decided on an i5-4590 as it's slightly cheaper and slightly better than the i5-4570(as far as I'm aware). However, I would like to spend as little as possible. A GTX 770 and the CPU will put me at around £365. The R9 280 and CPU will put me at about £320. Is the extra £45-£50 really worth it for me? I don't game much, just every now and again and I don't really play demanding games. I would like to run my monitor at 1920x1080 though and would like nice graphics when I DO game.
GTX 770 vs. R9 280
- Thread starter Sanctyy
- Start date
Jameson Clark
Honorable
- Jul 15, 2013
- 1,531
- 0
- 12,460
Well the 770 is the better card but price vs performance the 280 is better. Take a look at benchmarks for games you care about to see if the 280 is enough for you.
You may be right. Though in most cases, graphics look "nice" without PhysicX. If it was me spending money I would go with NVidia as well but that's because I game a lot and I am a performance junkie that tells the difference between PhysicX and no PhysicX. To this guy I would still recommend R9 280.
TRENDING THREADS
-
-
-
Question Intel Arc A750 for around $190. Is it worth it?
- Started by Dolphing Kujog
- Replies: 2
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram