Guest
home
beatmaps
rankings
community
store
help
forum
  1. Forums
  2. Other
  3. Off-Topic

Graphic's card discussions (and other hardware)

posted
Total Posts
102
Hornet-
10 posts
Joined November 2014
Topic Starter
Hornet-
Ey boys, this'll be a thread where our mad geek circle-clicking selves discuss the wonders of the PC hardware universe, so have at it!

Oh, and i was wondering, as a conversation topic, if the ASUS Nvidia GTX 750ti is worth the money? I currently have a potato GT 520 and would really like an entry level upgrade so i can get on the right track to upgrading my PC. I don't need anything fancy right now.

Also, Am i the only one who thinks that the Titan X is extremely overpriced for it's specs, when the 980ti is so close to it and about 300 bucks cheaper?
IppE
IppE
Most high end GPUs are silly overpriced. Thats just how it goes.

And yes the 750Ti would be a worthwhile upgrade to that.
abraker
Global Moderator
8,327 posts
Joined July 2014
abraker
Intel HD scrub here.

6/10, There is better shit out there.
Vuelo Eluko
5,484 posts
Joined October 2013
Vuelo Eluko
anything above a gtx 970 is poor value for the money.
yes that includes the 980

titan's are not meant for gaming in the first place, they are worth it if you're doing physics simulation or 3d animating etc.

it's a waste of hardware otherwise
IppE
IppE

xxjesus1412fanx wrote:

titan's are not meant for gaming in the first place, they are worth it if you're doing physics simulation or 3d animating etc.
They sort of are, but also aren't.

The actual gpu line that is meant for physics simulation and other compute work is Quadro (and Tesla). GTX Titan/Titan Black/Titan X is still in the gaming oriented Geforce line, although using much of the same design choices as the more expensive Quadro cards, they just have lower quality chips that weren't good enough for the tight power and thermal limits of the workstation counterparts.

Kind of the same thing as with Intel that use the same physical chip for i5, i7 and Xeon processors, just with different binnings for each.
Hornet-
10 posts
Joined November 2014
Topic Starter
Hornet-
Well, Seeing as how the Quadro and Titan X's are normally seen as workstation GPU's, that could explain the hefty price tag, but I feel as if people buy the Titans just to say they have an extremely expensive graphics card that is top of the line, even though they could save money.

Speaking of processors, even the AMD Cpu's and Apu's performance is similar, i think you are getting more bang for your buck rather than with Intel i-whatevers. Especially when it comes to the i7 brands, specifically 6 core processors.
IppE
IppE
The top of the line part never makes sense. Their pricing is off the whack because the people it is marketed for do not care about price to performance, they just want the absolute best at any cost.

Titan X is a defective Quadro. i7-5960X is a defective Xeon.

Hornet- wrote:

Speaking of processors, even the AMD Cpu's and Apu's performance is similar, i think you are getting more bang for your buck rather than with Intel i-whatevers.
Barely, while AMD can offer more "cores" (FX-8350 is not a 8-core processor, it only has 4 floating point pipelines), Intel is so far ahead in IPC that it doesn't really even matter. Especially in games and other programs that either don't multithread at all or multithread poorly Intel performs so much better that it's sad.

I just wish Zen changes things up a bit so that there is actual competition for Jewtel.
A Medic
460 posts
Joined May 2013
A Medic
If your just doing a beginning upgrade the 750TI is extremely worth it. It's not too expensive and it's a fairly solid card. Just make sure your psu can handle your new card.
Zelda
5 posts
Joined June 2012
Zelda

A Medic wrote:

Just make sure your psu can handle your new card.
Yeah man, make sure that your PSU can handle a 60W graphics card !

He'll be fine lol
balldoowell
35 posts
Joined July 2014
balldoowell
I have a 750ti, runs pretty much anything I throw at it, including "next gen" (or now current gen) games.

Though with your gt 520, anything will be worth the upgrade lmao
A Medic
460 posts
Joined May 2013
A Medic

Zelda wrote:

A Medic wrote:

Just make sure your psu can handle your new card.

Yeah man, make sure that your PSU can handle a 60W graphics card !
He'll be fine lol


I once owned a toaster that couldn't power a GT610
IppE
IppE

A Medic wrote:

I once owned a toaster that couldn't power a GT610
#Just3rdWorldThings
Cyclohexane
osu! Alumni
4,568 posts
Joined May 2009
Cyclohexane
intel HD 4000

it's worth it just to post about it on forums and see everyone else cringe and foam at the mouth
IppE
IppE

Mr Color wrote:

intel HD 4000

it's worth it just to post about it on forums and see everyone else cringe and foam at the mouth
It works doesn't it? I even made a few videos on a laptop with HD 3000.
Cyclohexane
osu! Alumni
4,568 posts
Joined May 2009
Cyclohexane
it does, it does. not that what i do on my computer is particularly resource intensive.

aside from maybe editing videos but even that is anecdotal
a1l2d3r4e5d6
1,189 posts
Joined February 2014
a1l2d3r4e5d6
GPUs huh?
I'm looking around for one to add to my pc build. A GTX 970 would be enough for maxing out settings at 1080p, right?
A Medic
460 posts
Joined May 2013
A Medic

a1l2d3r4e5d6 wrote:

GPUs huh?
I'm looking around for one to add to my pc build. A GTX 970 would be enough for maxing out settings at 1080p, right?


As long as the rest of your equipment doesn't bottleneck your gpu then you can likely reach your desired performance.
a1l2d3r4e5d6
1,189 posts
Joined February 2014
a1l2d3r4e5d6
I should be okay then. I hardly think that anything is gonna bottleneck that GPU anyway, especially when the parts are new.
A Medic
460 posts
Joined May 2013
A Medic
I know people who attempt to use AMD-A6/A8 with high end cards, but they don't release they are using a processor that should really just stay with laptops and not desktops.
a1l2d3r4e5d6
1,189 posts
Joined February 2014
a1l2d3r4e5d6
I didn't know that AMD A-series APUs could have that kind of problem. I still think that I should be okay though as I'm going to use an i5-4690k.
Nameless
517 posts
Joined April 2014
Nameless
If you have a little extra money, I recommend going for the 760 instead. The EVGA one is pretty good.
Vuelo Eluko
5,484 posts
Joined October 2013
Vuelo Eluko
when it comes to picking a cpu, look for good single core performance and no less than 4 cores, you dont need an i7
dNextGen
4,689 posts
Joined May 2010
dNextGen
why aren't you using the superior gpu yet friends.

re : r9 290 tri-x

you can pick em second-hand as low as $230 i believe



this was taken after 3 hours session of bioshock infinite

Hornet- wrote:

Ey boys, this'll be a thread where our mad geek circle-clicking selves discuss the wonders of the PC hardware universe, so have at it!

Oh, and i was wondering, as a conversation topic, if the ASUS Nvidia GTX 750ti is worth the money? I currently have a potato GT 520 and would really like an entry level upgrade so i can get on the right track to upgrading my PC. I don't need anything fancy right now.

Also, Am i the only one who thinks that the Titan X is extremely overpriced for it's specs, when the 980ti is so close to it and about 300 bucks cheaper?
well i liked my 750Ti at least, so you probably can't go wrong with that

980Ti is basically a gimped Titan X, the same shit happen when nvidia released the Titan back in 2013, they decided to release the 780Ti which is faster than Titan just to save face after the 780 and Titan got rekt by the 290X
a1l2d3r4e5d6
1,189 posts
Joined February 2014
a1l2d3r4e5d6

xxjesus1412fanx wrote:

when it comes to picking a cpu, look for good single core performance and no less than 4 cores, you dont need an i7
So, a cpu like the one that I mentioned (i5-4690) fits in this criteria then?
IppE
IppE

a1l2d3r4e5d6 wrote:

So, a cpu like the one that I mentioned (i5-4690) fits in this criteria then?
If you can, get the K one. Free performance ~w~
a1l2d3r4e5d6
1,189 posts
Joined February 2014
a1l2d3r4e5d6

IppE wrote:

If you can, get the K one. Free performance ~w~
I figured that I should. The price difference between the locked and the unlocked version of that cpu here is so small that you'd be a fool to not pick the K version.
Vuelo Eluko
5,484 posts
Joined October 2013
Vuelo Eluko

a1l2d3r4e5d6 wrote:

xxjesus1412fanx wrote:

when it comes to picking a cpu, look for good single core performance and no less than 4 cores, you dont need an i7
So, a cpu like the one that I mentioned (i5-4690) fits in this criteria then?
Absolutely. There's no single gpu that would bottleneck on that, even a Titan X. You probably won't notice a performance difference between the 4690 and the 4690k at this point in time... BUT the K would make you slightly more future proof since your graphics card will almost definitely die before your processor or motherboard, and should save you from any potential bottlenecks on whatever GPU you get as a replacement a few years down the line even.

Despite the fact that for gaming you don't really need a high-end chip, cpu's are always worth the investment because they stay relevant performance-wise a very long time and can usually last 'forever' under the right conditions (my old duo core lasted almost 10 years of near continuous power-on and is currently sitting in a box perfectly operable if i need it)
TakuMii
1,874 posts
Joined October 2009
TakuMii
I'm still on a Radeon HD7970 3GB, and I really don't think I'll need to upgrade any time soon. I haven't really played any games that have come out in the past 3 or so years (nor do I want to), so I don't really need extra power. The only reason I'd have for upgrading is to get a GPU that supports one of the new variable refresh rate technologies, but that in itself requires an expensive new monitor that I'd need to buy with money I don't currently have.

EDIT: Oh, and a better video encoder would be nice. I'm pretty much stuck with GPU-rendering at 720p60 or 1080p30 unless I switch over to the green team or get a card with GCN1.2.
Last edited by TakuMii , edited 1 time in total.
dNextGen
4,689 posts
Joined May 2010
dNextGen
the 7970 is still relevant to this day though, just like the 670/680 counterpart

most people who bought any latest gpus aren't really playing games anyway
A Medic
460 posts
Joined May 2013
A Medic
I usually opt for an upper mid range card because I know I won't be playing like crysis 3 on max settings on a 4K monitor.
Hornet-
10 posts
Joined November 2014
Topic Starter
Hornet-

Zelda wrote:

A Medic wrote:

Just make sure your psu can handle your new card.
Yeah man, make sure that your PSU can handle a 60W graphics card !

He'll be fine lol
Well, I have a Quad core AMD Phehom 2 X4 Quad core so i think i'll be aight :P
ZenithPhantasm
ZenithPhantasm
My 2x R9 280X in xfire still works fine for most games. Gonna upgrade to AMD's Zen CPU and their Arctic Islands GPU next year
Vuelo Eluko
5,484 posts
Joined October 2013
Vuelo Eluko

Hornet- wrote:

Well, I have a Quad core AMD Phehom 2 X4 Quad core so i think i'll be aight :P

im also currently using an AMD Phenom II x4 965, these old chips can handle pretty much any modern graphics card that costs 200$ or less without issues. Especially if it's a BE and you overclock that thing.
dNextGen
4,689 posts
Joined May 2010
dNextGen
what do you guys think about the i5 3570K and Z77 mobo, is it worth to get by today's standard ? someone was trying to sell me both items at $230

i think it's bretty gud since the cheapest i5 (haswell) alone would set me back around $220 here
Vuelo Eluko
5,484 posts
Joined October 2013
Vuelo Eluko
it appears to be a nice deal, solid chip, good single core performance too

http://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Intel-Core ... ating/1316
abraker
Global Moderator
8,327 posts
Joined July 2014
abraker
Intel HD does its job, but you only get the basics. I consider it the bare minimum needed to survive in the gaming world, but you would be starving for more.
ColdTooth
1,104 posts
Joined June 2012
ColdTooth
I have a 550Ti. I agree I need some upgrade, but it's fine for now
A Medic
460 posts
Joined May 2013
A Medic
I'm planning on doing a micro itx or micro atx build soon so I can bring something a bit more powerful/compact to the LAN's that my university hosts.
xXxSkippyxXx
14 posts
Joined October 2015
xXxSkippyxXx
Wish i could afford a powerful gaming rig. All i have is a laptop with Intel HD graphics lmao
dNextGen
4,689 posts
Joined May 2010
dNextGen

xxjesus1412fanx wrote:

it appears to be a nice deal, solid chip, good single core performance too

http://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Intel-Core ... ating/1316
indeed, i got a feeling that i should take the offer and stay away from skylake for good

abraker wrote:

Intel HD does its job, but you only get the basics. I consider it the bare minimum needed to survive in the gaming world, but you would be starving for more.
its not even a bare minimum, i'd call it unuseable for shit when it comes to gaymen related
abraker
Global Moderator
8,327 posts
Joined July 2014
abraker

dNextGen wrote:

its not even a bare minimum, i'd call it unuseable for shit when it comes to gaymen related
Considering I was stuck on early 2000's hardware until 6 years ago, I consider it a blessing. Not having a graphics card sucks. What is this Voodoo3 gpu? Now that is utter shit. It was like using a twig to fight someone with a gun. Then I moved on to Intel GMA for some 4 years until I got the laptop I have right now with the Intel HD graphics.
Zelda
5 posts
Joined June 2012
Zelda
Depends on which generation, and which games you intend to play, really. HD3000 and above can all manage some lightweight games just fine, while anything below HD3000 is just barely enough to manage hardware acceleration in a desktop environment.

For instance, Killing Floor and such runs just fine on HD3000. It's not going to run anything more demanding than that, but older games and indie games are mostly a-ok. HD4000 is a good bit better than HD3000 too, so video games on an Intel chipset aren't necessarily completely hopeless.

But yeah, don't expect to play the latest AAA games on any Intel chipset, that would just be plain silly.
IppE
IppE

Zelda wrote:

Depends on which generation, and which games you intend to play, really. HD3000 and above can all manage some lightweight games just fine, while anything below HD3000 is just barely enough to manage hardware acceleration in a desktop environment.

For instance, Killing Floor and such runs just fine on HD3000. It's not going to run anything more demanding than that, but older games and indie games are mostly a-ok. HD4000 is a good bit better than HD3000 too, so video games on an Intel chipset aren't necessarily completely hopeless.

But yeah, don't expect to play the latest AAA games on any Intel chipset, that would just be plain silly.
Talking about chipsets is kind of redundant since the northbridge and the iGPU are both integrated on the CPU die.
Zelda
5 posts
Joined June 2012
Zelda
Kind of, chipset is probably the wrong word to use there. Oh well.
IppE
IppE
Well the chipset that is present there, the southbridge, does nothing graphics related other than PCI lane traffic handling in the worst case.
Zelda
5 posts
Joined June 2012
Zelda
Kinda hard to play AAA games on a southbridge, so there's that. But yes, GPU or iGPU would have been correct. cba to edit
dNextGen
4,689 posts
Joined May 2010
dNextGen
yfw i got higher score than people using i7 / GTX 980



or perhaps i'm just seeing things

a1l2d3r4e5d6
1,189 posts
Joined February 2014
a1l2d3r4e5d6

dNextGen wrote:

yfw i got higher score than people using i7 / GTX 980



or perhaps i'm just seeing things

Seriously?

I never thought that I'd see an i3 doing that.
A Medic
460 posts
Joined May 2013
A Medic
A lot of games don't really advantage of multiple cores. That i3 has extremely good single core performance. Although you won't be able to do anything else while your playing that game.
Zelda
5 posts
Joined June 2012
Zelda
Holy crap that afterburner overlay is ugly
show more
Please sign in to reply.

New reply

0
1 / 102