Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Closed

Price Jump worth it? Can someone just tell me what to get?

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
February 25, 2013 6:05:11 AM

Max i can spend if i want a card this week is 435$ before rebate.
With these prices and model's are the price jumps really worth it?
These are the best prices i could find for myself not sure if there is a better deal anywhere else.
I can afford all but the gigabyte one today but there all so expensive.

I game on a 23 inch Monitor 1080p i like to go on the highest settings i can, in general i haven't ever used Anti aliasing mainly because i never could. don't know what im missing there.

Curentlly using a gtx 430.. cant play much.

I play, Diablo3, Starcraft 2/Expansion(when it comes out), League of legends, Portal/2, Tribes ascend, Dota 2, Ava
I want to play crysis 3, Black Ops II, I have metro 2033 would like to play that, dead island, Planning on playing Elder Scrolls MMO When it comes out, Arma II, Civ 5

My current build (already purchased)
http://pcpartpicker.com/p/FQ0T


Ive narrowed down my choices to these cards
SAPPHIRE 7950
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
280$ After Rebate

MSI N660Ti
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
300 After Rebate


Galaxy GTX 670 Dual Fan
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B007ZSYC72/?tag=...
340 After Rebate


Sapphire 7970
389 After Rebate
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

Gigabyte 7970GHZ edition
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
430$ Flat +tax I would have to wait 2 weeks or borrow money :I



150$ from the bottom card to the the top with 40$ increments inbetween 280- 430$
I really dont know what is the best value, looking at benchmarks its a few 5-10 fps difference between each cards for a 40$ price increase inbetween

Can someone just tell me what i should get, or if they know of a better deal on some of these models.

More about : price jump worth

a b U Graphics card
February 25, 2013 6:10:30 AM

Either 7950 and overclock it (if you are an overclocker), or 7970 GHZ and stock (if you don't). I would say value wise the 7950 overlocked hands down but some people don't overclock. Forget about the 660, and the 670 unless you have a specific game with physx that does better. A 680 might compete but of course it's more expensive and gives similar or less performance depending on game and drive than the 7970, but you knew that you would have listed it (:
Score
0
a c 87 U Graphics card
February 25, 2013 6:12:56 AM

I'd say that either goign for a cheap Radeon 7950 OC (such as the gigabyte WindForce x3) or Boost (such as Sapphire's current model) or a cheaper Radeon 7870 XT (such as Sapphire's model) would offer the most value. Regardless, don't spend more than you want to just to get more value. You may get more performance for the money, but you're spending a lot more money than intended to and really, at that point, was it really more value to spend a lot of money just because the more expensive option is a little faster per dollar spent? I don't think so. Decide on how much you intend to spend and go from there :) 

If you want further advice on how much you should spend, then keep in mind that all of these choices will play all of those games. At what graphics level you want to go to to get ideal performance is what determines how much you need to spend so long as that amount of money is within what you're willing to spend. Basically, first decide on what level of graphics you want to play- do you want just to get something at a decent price, or go far-out for graphics performance, or somewhere between the two?
Score
0
Related resources
February 25, 2013 6:37:19 AM

blazorthon said:
I'd say that either goign for a cheap Radeon 7950 OC (such as the gigabyte WindForce x3) or Boost (such as Sapphire's current model) or a cheaper Radeon 7870 XT (such as Sapphire's model) would offer the most value. Regardless, don't spend more than you want to just to get more value. You may get more performance for the money, but you're spending a lot more money than intended to and really, at that point, was it really more value to spend a lot of money just because the more expensive option is a little faster per dollar spent? I don't think so. Decide on how much you intend to spend and go from there :) 

If you want further advice on how much you should spend, then keep in mind that all of these choices will play all of those games. At what graphics level you want to go to to get ideal performance is what determines how much you need to spend so long as that amount of money is within what you're willing to spend. Basically, first decide on what level of graphics you want to play- do you want just to get something at a decent price, or go far-out for graphics performance, or somewhere between the two?



Well, I have lived with medium to low all my life 30-40 fps.
I cant even play dead island on the lowest settings with my current card and i have wanted to play that for ages...
I really do not know what i am missing and would probably be happy with whatever card i picked as long as it could run something halfway decent.

This is the first computer i have ever built and its been a really agonizing experience for me mainly because im bad at making decisions and usually regret the ones that i do make even if its a good one, ive read tons of pages of benchmarks and peoples opinions its just hard to sift through it all, the main gist of all the post is you cant really go wrong with any of them which hasn't helped my predicament at all

This time i would just like to get the best that i can but what is the best, i really dont know since i have never experienced any of these cards or anything other than low/medium settings, i would like some opinions of people who have owned maybe a few other these models. To them is it night and day between versions? Can you really tell the difference between the performance of the cards? Do you play with Vsync? How is nvidias adaptive vsync compared to just plain vsync on amd, I dont even know what anti aliasing is like so i cant tell you whether i would like it or not or even turn it on for that matter i know it gives a big graphics hit.


Main point.
I want something thats going to last me as long as it can i probably wont be building another computer within the next 3-4 years unless this thing breaks down.
Everything seems to be pointing me to the 7970 mainly because thats the card everyone has been pushing within the past week. I just wanted some more opinions from other people but everything has already been said about every single card out there.

Some things to consider, i have never overclocked before so im not sure how much that affects my purchase
My Current case is a zalman ms800 i made another thread about this im worried about the airflow in the case (can take it back and get a Thor v2)
MS800
http://www.hardwaresecrets.com/article/Zalman-MS800-Cas...
Thorv2
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

My psu is 750 watt
I am open to the possibility of sli or xfire in the future but that probably wouldnt happen for a few months, and by then something better will have probably come out.
Score
0
February 25, 2013 6:46:01 AM

Say i do get a 7970 are they all basically 390$+
Score
0

Best solution

a c 87 U Graphics card
February 25, 2013 7:00:18 AM

Well said, that does get your point across and I can make recommendations from that :) 

I'd recommend, for a graphics card, the Gigabyte Radeon 7970 GHz Edition WindForce X3. It is easily about as fast as you can get without spending like $600 to over $1000 right now.

If the issues that you said you'd have with buying it are too much, then the 7970 non-GHz Edition version of it is $30 cheaper and still almost as fast. You won't need to do any overclocking with this card to get extreme performance. It should last you 3-4 years with ease, if not even longer.

If you want opinions between versions, I'll give them. It is rarely night and day between any of the cards that are around $400 and up to over $500 They're all not extremely far from each other. There are best and worst cards, but by raw performance, the differences is not huge. In many cases, it can be noticeable if you do a comparison. However, it's not like going from unplayable to playable. Cards such as the Gigabyte WindForce X3 models generally represent the top of their class despite reasonable pricing, so they're often recommended, especially the 7970 versions.

I only play with V-Sync if my frame rate is always over the refresh rate of my monitor (Usually 60Hz/60FPS). V-Sync reduces tearing caused by some frames getting mixed together. This is usually not an issue and V-Sync is a trade off in that it can also increase input lag, possibly making the situation worse if it is very bad. Nvidia's adaptive V-Sync counters one issue with regular V-Sync. That issue is that if for example, you have a 60Hz monitor (almost all monitors are, so let's just assume that you do). If you have regular V-Sync on and your frame rate ever drops below 60FPS, then it screws with V-Sync, making it limit your FPS to a very noticeably more choppy 30FPAS until you can get back over 60FPS again. Adaptive V-Sync fixes this by dynamically turning V-Sync off and on depending on your FPS to monitor Hz ratio and any settings that you edit for it if you want to.

AA, which stands for anti-aliasing, is a feature used to alleviate the jaggyness of lower resolutions. Basically,it attempts to let lower resolutions look as smooth as a higher resolution. If you want an example, take a picture of a circle and blow it way up on your screen until you can see the pixels on the edge of the circle. The circle then looks like a bunch of small squares instead of a real circle. AA tries to smooth it out to get rid of that issue. The best type of AA that is often used is MSAA and that is because other, weaker types such as FXAA simply don't have the clarity of MSAA, granted they also eat through less performance. Those so-called jaggies are called aliasing, hence anti-aliasing is the name given to features that reduce it's visual impact.

Whether or not you play with it and if so, what level and type of it, like V-Sync, will depend on your personal preferences, if you care to explore them. If you don't care to explore them, then it's okay to not use them. They're there for if you want them.

Last, but not least, we should make sure that the rest of your system is up to snuff for this upgrade. The rest of the hardware components have to be good enough to not be a bottle-neck and the PSU has to be able to handle the increased power consumption.

Does this help?
Share
a b U Graphics card
February 25, 2013 7:03:40 AM

Humor us and tell us the make and model of your PSU, important but often overlooked.

For the right game the difference between a good gaming PC and bad is night and day. I often suffered through low frame rates when I was younger just so that I could experience the amazing picture quality and texture resolution (obviously not for first person online shooters). Also, not all setting must be at max for a great experience, not everyone has a top end or multi card setup. But once you play the right game with max texture quality, all else pales in comparision.
Score
0
February 25, 2013 7:46:26 AM

blazorthon said:
Well said, that does get your point across and I can make recommendations from that :) 

I'd recommend, for a graphics card, the Gigabyte Radeon 7970 GHz Edition WindForce X3. It is easily about as fast as you can get without spending like $600 to over $1000 right now.

If the issues that you said you'd have with buying it are too much, then the 7970 non-GHz Edition version of it is $30 cheaper and still almost as fast. You won't need to do any overclocking with this card to get extreme performance. It should last you 3-4 years with ease, if not even longer.

If you want opinions between versions, I'll give them. It is rarely night and day between any of the cards that are around $400 and up to over $500 They're all not extremely far from each other. There are best and worst cards, but by raw performance, the differences is not huge. In many cases, it can be noticeable if you do a comparison. However, it's not like going from unplayable to playable. Cards such as the Gigabyte WindForce X3 models generally represent the top of their class despite reasonable pricing, so they're often recommended, especially the 7970 versions.

I only play with V-Sync if my frame rate is always over the refresh rate of my monitor (Usually 60Hz/60FPS). V-Sync reduces tearing caused by some frames getting mixed together. This is usually not an issue and V-Sync is a trade off in that it can also increase input lag, possibly making the situation worse if it is very bad. Nvidia's adaptive V-Sync counters one issue with regular V-Sync. That issue is that if for example, you have a 60Hz monitor (almost all monitors are, so let's just assume that you do). If you have regular V-Sync on and your frame rate ever drops below 60FPS, then it screws with V-Sync, making it limit your FPS to a very noticeably more choppy 30FPAS until you can get back over 60FPS again. Adaptive V-Sync fixes this by dynamically turning V-Sync off and on depending on your FPS to monitor Hz ratio and any settings that you edit for it if you want to.

AA, which stands for anti-aliasing, is a feature used to alleviate the jaggyness of lower resolutions. Basically,it attempts to let lower resolutions look as smooth as a higher resolution. If you want an example, take a picture of a circle and blow it way up on your screen until you can see the pixels on the edge of the circle. The circle then looks like a bunch of small squares instead of a real circle. AA tries to smooth it out to get rid of that issue. The best type of AA that is often used is MSAA and that is because other, weaker types such as FXAA simply don't have the clarity of MSAA, granted they also eat through less performance. Those so-called jaggies are called aliasing, hence anti-aliasing is the name given to features that reduce it's visual impact.

Whether or not you play with it and if so, what level and type of it, like V-Sync, will depend on your personal preferences, if you care to explore them. If you don't care to explore them, then it's okay to not use them. They're there for if you want them.

Last, but not least, we should make sure that the rest of your system is up to snuff for this upgrade. The rest of the hardware components have to be good enough to not be a bottle-neck and the PSU has to be able to handle the increased power consumption.

Does this help?




@blazorthorn yes it does help i think i will get a 7970 non ghz because its what i can afford and im sure ill be happy with it. Thanks for the detailed input, i mean if it cant really play a game on the highest settings, or down the road new games have better graphics im sure i can always turn it down to high/medium and it will look just as good.



@abbadon_34

I posted my Parts list but this is what i currently have

http://pcpartpicker.com/p/FQ0T

CPU
Intel Core i5-3570K 3.4GHz Quad-Core Processor

Motherboard
Asus P8Z77-V LK ATX LGA1155 Motherboard

Memory
Crucial Ballistix sport 16GB (2 x 8GB) DDR3-1600 Memory

Storage
Western Digital Caviar Black 1TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive
Samsung 840 Pro Series 128GB 2.5" Solid State Disk

Power Supply
Rosewill Capstone 750W 80 PLUS Gold Certified ATX12V / EPS12V Power Supply

Optical Drive
Lite-On iHAS124-04 DVD/CD Writer

Case
Zalman ms800


I mean everything seem's pretty standard nowadays

My powersupply is the rosewill captsone 750watt
http://www.jonnyguru.com/modules.php?name=NDReviews&op=...
Which is a rebranded Super Flower Unit, i chose this one mainly because i was afraid of coil whine on Seasonic units and i got it for a good price 80$ i think.
Mine is the modular version. I am not to worried about it, they seem like solid units and its gold rated.


I feel like i got pretty good prices on all my stuff
The i5 was 180, 16gb of ram for 65$, my ssd was 110, optical drives are cheap. motherboard was 80$ i think. Picking those parts were fairly easy, i want to add a cpu cooler eventually and the Cm Hyper 212 is in my budget, but i have been lookign at corsair closed water units (might need to take my case back if i do that :(  )
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
February 25, 2013 7:56:29 AM

Thanks, for some reason the link wasn't working. Sounds like you are on a good track, go with the 212 until/unless you go custom loop water, as good air (like yours) is on par with closed or low end water but less expensive.
Score
0
February 25, 2013 8:00:44 AM

Best answer selected by Repress.
Score
0
!