I5 4590 + gtx 970 + 1866mhz hyper x fury ram life in 1080p gaming

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
V

vasu srivastava

Honorable
Apr 2, 2012
17
0
10,510
Like how long will it be possible to play all the latest titles in 1080p in ultra 60+ fps?

I am gonna be buying a new PC this year for gaming.
 
Sort by date Sort by votes
A

Alastair smith

Reputable
Nov 30, 2014
87
0
4,660


It might do the job at good FPS for minimum of 3 years but not at 60+ FPS, the reason for this is GTX 970's split RAM-3.5+0.5GB which can't be fully addressed at once without dropping the bandwidth which in turn effects the gaming performance tremendously. If you really need an equivalent of GTX 970 then you should go all the way with an AMD's R9 390 which has got 8GB of VRAM and a bit more gaming capabilities when it comes to DX-12 and Vulkan, apart from all it's cheaper and the new drivers from AMD are just of superior user interface.

Hope this help's you.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
T

turbopixel

Reputable
May 18, 2015
1,189
1
5,960
Every PS4 game equivalent will be playable on pc, if it gets ported. Even a GTX 750 Ti would be enough to play most games at 1080p in that case. In some cases, only 720p or 900p will be required, maybe. So the GTX 970 should be enough for longer time, with that relation. Why only 3 years? Not all games are badly optimized and you always can turn off some effects and image settings and get 30+ FPS. And if a game is really hard to play with that card, then you could even go 900p or 720p, but I bet nobody would want that 3 years from now on after playing 1080p. So it hardly depends on the games. And you always can add another GTX 970 for SLI power.

1080p with highest ultra settings, the latest games, 60+ FPS? On some games, you even can't do that today. If can live with PS4 like quality settings and 30+ FPS, then I bet you can play with the GTX newest titles even in 5+ years.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
L

lodders

Admirable
Nov 2, 2015
1,888
0
6,460
You only need 1600 memory with a 4590. The motherboard, CPU and memory should last at least 5 years before you need to upgrade.
However, if you are a serious gamer, you will probably need/want a new GPU after about 3 years
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
L

lodders

Admirable
Nov 2, 2015
1,888
0
6,460


Based on past experience, in about 3 years time, AMD and Nvidia will have bought out much faster GPUs and there will be new games which will only run well on the new GPUs. Look at GPUs from 3 years ago and you will see what I mean. IMHO it is not worth buying a really powerful GPU because it costs so much, yet in a few years will be easily beaten by a mid range GPU

However, a 3 year old Sandy Bridge Intel i5 is about 80% as fast as a new Skylake i5, and would still be absolutely fine for gaming or pretty much anything else.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
T

turbopixel

Reputable
May 18, 2015
1,189
1
5,960
3 years ago, say 2013. Lets Google and look what we have.
> http://www.gamesht.com/2013/04/03/top-5-best-nvidia-graphics-cards-for-gaming-in-2013/

Lets take the GTX 660 for around 300 USD, which performed less and was cheaper in price compared to todays GTX 970. Thats because i coulnd't find a 670 benchmarks comparison. Here some comparison, with 1080p and mostly ultra or high settings. Offcourse the 970 is better. My point is, that 3 years old cards are still good for gaming, with lower quality settings and at least 30 fps.

The Witcher 3, 1,920 x 1,080, graphics: medium, post-proc: high (AA, SSAO)
GTX 660: 32
GTX 970: 77
> http://www.techspot.com/review/1006-the-witcher-3-benchmarks/page2.html

Battlefield 4, 1,920 x 1,080, DirectX 11, 'Ultra' Settings
GTX 660: 37
GTX 970: 78
> http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/graphics/2014/09/19/nvidia-geforce-gtx-970-review/6

The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim, 1,920 x 1,080, 8x AA, 16x AF, 'Ultra' Settings, w/ High Res Texture Packs
GTX 660: 79
GTX 970: 152
> http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/graphics/2014/09/19/nvidia-geforce-gtx-970-review/9

Ahh, here I found a GTX 670 comparison.

Battlefield 4, 2560*1440p (!), Ultra settings, 2xMSAA
GTX 670: 37
GTX 970: 62
> http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/gigabyte_geforce_gtx_970_g1_gaming_review,15.html

 
Upvote 0 Downvote
L

lodders

Admirable
Nov 2, 2015
1,888
0
6,460


So in 3 years, GPUs have almost doubled in power.... Most people would upgrade for double the performance....
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
T

turbopixel

Reputable
May 18, 2015
1,189
1
5,960
No. Double power is not right. Look, the GTX 660 is a card more comparable to GTX 960. My point with these comparison is, that a card like GTX 970 is good for gaming longer than 3 years. Just not with ultra or high settings and no 60 fps for newest high demanding games. And you could start overclocking too, to get the most out of the 970.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
L

lodders

Admirable
Nov 2, 2015
1,888
0
6,460
Think of it this way... If I had been building a powerful gaming PC exactly 5 years ago and had a lot of money to spend, I would have chosen an Intel i5 2500, and a Nvidia GTX 480.
Specs for the GTX480 3 billion transistors, 700Mhz clock speed, 33 Gigapixels/second, 42 Gigatextures / second

If I was still using that PC, then the 2500 i5 is still easily fast enough for serious gaming - it benchmarks at over 80% of the score of the equivalent brand new skylake i5 CPU. In reality, the i5 2500 PC would probably get replaced at the next Intel generation change, when the PC was 6 to 7 years old.

Lets see how the 480 GTX GPU would compare against a modern GPU. GTX 950 has 2.9 billion transistors, 1024Mhz clock speed, 33 Gigapixels/second, 49 Gigatextures / second. The 950 is better than the 480.

So history has taught me that a fast quad core CPU has a life of 6-7 years, but a top of the range stupidly expensive GPU degrades to the level of an low level budget gaming GPU in only 5 years.
Therefore if past trends continue, I would expect to replace the GPU at roughly half the life of the PC, which is when it is 3 ish years old.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom