Closed Solved

AMD or Nvidia this year...

I am currently in the process of picking out a new video card for an update. However, i cannot decide on whether to stick with AMD (currently on a 5870), more make the jump back to nvidia (last nvidia card was the early 8000's times).
Presently looking to get one before the end of the year, and im not going to go too crazy knowing that there will be a better lineup next year, just a newer card to complement my new build.
Currently, i am looking at the sapphire 7950, and the EVGA 670, and ive seen equal parts good and equal parts bad about them. One thing that concerns me for AMD is the apparent lack of 3rd party support and what ive heard of heat, voltage locking, and graphical glitches. On the Nvidia side, the lower and slower memory is a huge concern for me, along with the problems of running alot of games on certain settings.
At the time the only games i play all the time are games like dota 2, planet side 2, payday, arma II, and along with whatever game that comes out that suits my fancy, such as far cry 3. I am unfortunately a bit of a quality bug, but things like AA never really bother me too much, just high quality... everything else.
Currently i have a 750w power supply on my list of new parts, so power should not be of concern since i could up that to a 800w without much concern.
I usually dont worry myself over overclocking too much, but i do OC when the situation calls for it.
So, to state my question clearly, which card would be the best bang for my buck to run these games on a 1920x1200 screen with stable fps without worrying about AA? Is physx even worth it to go in for an nvidia card?
For reference, a screenshot of the build is here:
Thank you in advance.
10 answers Last reply Best Answer
More about nvidia year
  1. voltage locking is on the nvidia side

    and for the build, this is a lot better

    -sabertooth is a scam
    -cheap watercooling = no watercooling
    -more memory does nothing in games
    -silver 5 isnt that good. stuff that comes with the heatsink i have is way better
    -cooler master fans are total crap. dies in 6 months
  2. -Removed the fan a while ago from before i repicked to the case i have
    -Not budging on the case, and no need for a bunch of harddrives or any larger SSD since i have 2 1tb discs already
    -motherboard i could care less about either way, never really cared about the sabertooth anyways
    -16gb is cheap anyways, and i do a multitude of thing not limited only to gaming
    -id rather not trust stock mud, which is why i have AS5
    -I cant stand large bulky air coolers and i cant stand cleaning around them.

    You also missed my actual question of which card would be best for what i do and why,
  3. Best answer
    -you still need to swap out that 840. its comparable to a ocz agility 3 in terms of speed and performance. the 830 performs way better
    -there are other ways to do 16gb. get this

    price match on this site

    -its noctua nt-h1. it doesnt need curing and performs better. go and read reviews about it
    -performs better. id rather have a huge cooler than have to risk my system from something that is way more likely to fail. pump failures are not fun

    from a value standpoint, amd just wins. 3 free games, lower prices, and unlocked voltage is unbeatable. but then you have nvidia where they generally have better support and some other features like physx and 3d. those features dont really matter though if you are not going to use them. if you play borderlands2, you better get a nvidia card

    id stick with a amd card. but nvidia options are also good
  4. either of those cards would be fine for what you want to do

    just got myself a new card and was simliar choice

    a toss up between a 7970 and a gtx670

    the gtx670 is newer and had better power consumption

    but the 7970 has far more compute power--as well as gaming i also use software that uses that compute power

    so i got the 7970

    and much to my surprise gigabyte have starting locking overvolting on some newer revision cards

    you can under volt but not increase it
  5. Thanks, looks like im staying on the AMD side again this year.

    EDIT: Nevermind about the ssd question, used a quick google search.
  6. Best answer selected by somedood4.
  7. Sure, they're newer, but they use cheapo tech... The 830s are both faster AND more reliable... the 840 PROs, on the other hand, are the upgrade to the 830s, but it's so small of a difference as to not be noticeable.

    I'd go with an 830, myself. Just don't get the normal 840, as it uses bad NAND, and will die faster.

    Also, just so you know, on a single monitor, 2GB is more than enough - more VRAM only helps if you don't have enough of it. After the mark, wherever it is, more vram is simply pointless. I'd still go with AMD, though.

    Just a thought, however... you could get a 7750 to tide you over, wait just a couple months, and see what the 8k / 700 series has to offer.
  8. yes the 840 is newer

    but theres also the 840 pro

    havent read about any 840 issues

    but i bought an 830 just before they announced the 840 :(

    but to be honest benchmarks are one thing and real life use is another

    could you tell the difference between a pc with an 830 and a pc with an 840 just by doing real life use

    i doubt it

    ssds are just FAST anyway
  9. @ Darkstable: Probably will end up going longer then a year with this card, since i dont know for sure when ill be able to readily afford a newer, better one, or if ill just skip over the next generation entirely.

    @mcnumpty: already hunting down an 830 thats in stock :) 840 pro sounds a bit like ego stroking anyways.
  10. from what i heard, the 840 pro has some firmware issues right now. id avoid it until they fix it

    if the 830 is out of stock, this is a very viable replacement
Ask a new question

Read More

Graphics Cards AMD Nvidia Graphics Product