Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Solved

AMD R9 270X or Nvidia GeForce GTX 760 ?

Tags:
  • Gtx
  • Nvidia
  • AMD
  • Geforce
  • Graphics
Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
August 22, 2014 10:45:48 PM

I am planning to buy one of the two above graphic cards. However, GTX 760 is priced almost 50 $ or 3000 INR more than R9 270x in India, which is a lot for me. So is there any performance difference between both worth this much money ?

I am buying these mainly for gaming as my old HD 7850 stopped working.

Also my budget is approx 15k INR or 250 $.
Is there any better card than these two in this price range ?

One last thing, my Processor is pretty old, Intel Core i3 550 3.2 GHz dual core. Will it be a bottleneck for any of the two ?

I will be playing at a resolution of 1366 x 768 only.

I also thought about R9 280 but its even more here in india, almost 65 $ more than R9 270X

More about : amd 270x nvidia geforce gtx 760

Best solution

a b Î Nvidia
a b À AMD
August 22, 2014 11:06:52 PM

The CPU will be a bottleneck , I suggest investing in a newer system but to answer your question the 760 is better


The 760 is 5-12% Faster dependent on the game.
Share
August 22, 2014 11:18:46 PM

TopLuca said:
The CPU will be a bottleneck , I suggest investing in a newer system but to answer your question the 760 is better


The 760 is 5-12% Faster dependent on the game.


Yep, i know GTX 760 is better bro, but i wanted to know, is it worth the 50 $ more price i would give for it ?
m
0
l
Related resources
August 22, 2014 11:25:22 PM

I would rather go to the R9 270x. Yes 760 is better, but the difference is insignificant considering that the price. 50 USD for about 10% improvement? PhysX might be worth it. But you should just save the 50 USD, add about another 50 USD and buy a newer i3 4150. It has hyperthreading technology if you are using autocad or any multimedia tasks.

m
0
l
a b Î Nvidia
a b À AMD
August 22, 2014 11:25:32 PM

I said its 5-12% faster dependent on the game , so In practical terms it might be about 3-10 Fps difference in games . You decide whether its worth it or not but imo it is not , Total upgrade is better !
m
0
l
August 22, 2014 11:30:22 PM

I recommande 760. Much less power hungry. and I do think nvidia drivers are better.(personal opinion though)
m
0
l
August 22, 2014 11:52:31 PM

nVidea said:
I would rather go to the R9 270x. Yes 760 is better, but the difference is insignificant considering that the price. 50 USD for about 10% improvement? PhysX might be worth it. But you should just save the 50 USD, add about another 50 USD and buy a newer i3 4150. It has hyperthreading technology if you are using autocad or any multimedia tasks.



TopLuca said:
I said its 5-12% faster dependent on the game , so In practical terms it might be about 3-10 Fps difference in games . You decide whether its worth it or not but imo it is not , Total upgrade is better !


Also, can you please tell me how much bottlenecking would be there ? Just an approximate
m
0
l
a b Î Nvidia
a b À AMD
August 22, 2014 11:53:48 PM

Well we aren't scientists , every case is unique in all honesty and that processor is quite old. So My answer will be I don't know.
m
0
l
August 22, 2014 11:56:03 PM

Id say maybe 10-15% bottle neck. If u dont do something that is excessively cpu intensive. (like wvw in gw2)
m
0
l
August 23, 2014 1:55:42 AM

If you are not hard-core/ heavy gamer, and if you're tight on budget go for the R9 270x, and upgrade your i3 to i3 4150. You'll still enjoy your gaming experience.
I had a Palit GTX 650 ti 2gb and my Battlefield 3 was perfect. I'm upgrading to Sapphire R9 270x 4gb OC and it will be more than enough for me to play BF 4.

If you have the budget, then go for the 760, and upgrade your processor

Even if there's 5-13 FPS difference, you will rarely notice the difference. Watch youtube videos 30fps vs 60fps.
m
0
l
!