• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

Confused about the best upgrade

Azen

Azen

Azen

Associate
Joined
8 May 2012
Posts
220
Location
The Padded room
So after nearly 3 years I'd like to upgrade my twin 560ti's (ACX ASUS versions) to something that can do the following:

Run BF4/ Latest games at 120fps (or as close as possible) as quiet as possible.
Also I'd like these to run as quietly as possible as due to space constraints my HAF X case is on the desk next to me. Currently the 560ti's sound like harrier jump jets when playing BF4 much to the amusement of those on TS with me.

System:

2700K @ 4.7
8gb Ram
http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=MY-168-CR&groupid=701&catid=8&subcat=2427 (in the red and Green)
256GB Crucial M4 SSD
Asus Mobo:
http://www.asus.com/Motherboards/P8Z77V_DELUXE/#overview
Monitor (hence the request for 120+ FPS)
BENQ 144HZ
http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=MO-070-BQ&groupid=17&catid=1851

PSU
Corsair 850W GOLD

I am normally ok at picking what I want but I have gotten myself in a complete tail spin over the current gen and the best solution for me.

Budget I'd like change from £600, and I can get Free shipping from here.

I am contemplating:

1.) A single 780ti
2.) Single 290X
3.) Dual 280X (MSI or Sapphire)
4.) Dual 770's EVGA or Gigabyte windforce 3 (Current I.e. this minutes favourite idea)

OR 21000 other ideas I keep getting since pretty much anything would be an upgrade for me, and I just keep getting confused.

I will NOT be over clocking, nor putting them under water due to time constraints (AKA a family) I'd like to plug in and Game.

I've been looking at scores and reviews all over the place, but just end up yo-yo-ing from one idea to the next, and there are few places that pit Dual of one car against a single of another.

Thanks for any advice input. I am loyal to only the Brand that gets me the best value for money and ease of use.

Jim
 
Last edited:
Settings high, would be nice on Ultra in BF4 but TBH I'd rather the FPS.

AA on, High (ish) settings
 
Last edited:
Azen said:
Thanks for your response Rolypolyman, wouildn't I get the same performance from 2 of these:

http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=gx-117-gi&groupid=701&catid=1914&subcat=1750

& save myself the £60?

they both get the same scores on:

http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/high_end_gpus.html

Uncle Petey, why do you say that I run 2x 560ti's today on it?
Click to expand...

Are you going to play games or run benchmarks, then look at this comparison between the 770 and the R9 290. The 290 has the grunt to use 4Gb of vram, I'm not sure the 770 has. :)

'Right now 2GB is about all you need for 1920x1080. If you're looking to go 2560x1440 or multi-monitor, then you really should consider SLI/Xfire or at least 3GB of Vram or more. However, getting a GTX Titan is a bad idea because it's a hybrid professional/gaming graphics card. There are applications out there in the professional world where it can use 6GB of Vram without requiring a lot of graphical horse power to support it. In gaming, 6GB of textures would require TWICE the power the titan has to execute. A card like a GTX 770 4GB isn't a BAD idea, but note, it probably won't be able to utilize the 4GB but it should be able to handle more than 2GB with ease given the improvements in the GK104 architecture.'

'Lastly, 2 things effect bandwidth when looking at the specs. Memory clock and memory interface. Bandwidth will determine how much textures and such you can jam through your graphics card per frame pretty much. What's nice is higher bandwidth means more efficiently your Vram is being used. 2GB video cards with 256bit interfaces will use more Vram than a 2 or 3GB card with 384bit interfaces.' OR a 4Gb card with 512bit. :D
 
Last edited:
rolypolyman said:
Are you going to play games or run benchmarks, then look at this comparison between the 770 and the R9 290. The 290 has the grunt to use 4Gb of vram, I'm not sure the 770 has. :)

'Right now 2GB is about all you need for 1920x1080. If you're looking to go 2560x1440 or multi-monitor, then you really should consider SLI/Xfire or at least 3GB of Vram or more. However, getting a GTX Titan is a bad idea because it's a hybrid professional/gaming graphics card. There are applications out there in the professional world where it can use 6GB of Vram without requiring a lot of graphical horse power to support it. In gaming, 6GB of textures would require TWICE the power the titan has to execute. A card like a GTX 770 4GB isn't a BAD idea, but note, it probably won't be able to utilize the 4GB but it should be able to handle more than 2GB with ease given the improvements in the GK104 architecture.'

'Lastly, 2 things effect bandwidth when looking at the specs. Memory clock and memory interface. Bandwidth will determine how much textures and such you can jam through your graphics card per frame pretty much. What's nice is higher bandwidth means more efficiently your Vram is being used. 2GB video cards with 256bit interfaces will use more Vram than a 2 or 3GB card with 384bit interfaces.' OR a 4Gb card with 512bit. :D
Click to expand...

Gaming. Metro/ BF4/ Thief/ Watchdogs

1080p @100+ FPS
 
Based off what you stated there Roly,

How does the 770 end up scoring lower than the 290 ?

The 770 has a faster mem clock, and at 2 gb has the same texture rate (right? 4gb/512 on 290 Vs 2 gb on a 256 clock but the 770 is a 7ghz mem speed over 5 ghz)

http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=GX-115-GI&groupid=701&catid=1914&subcat=1750

Since this is (770)

- Core Clock: 1137MHz (GK104)
- Core Boost Clock: 1189MHz
- Memory: 2048MB GDDR5
- Memory Clock: 7010MHz (Effective)
- Memory Interface: 256-Bit
- Processing Cores: 1536
- Shader Clock: 2220MHz
VS 290
(Double mem and bus speed, would put it equal but 770 has faster mem speed and core clock.)
Stream Processors: 2560
- Core Speed: 977MHz
- Memory Speed: 5000Mhz
- Memory interface: 512-Bit
- Memory capacity: 4096MB GDDR5

**EDIT**
Think I get it :
IS it because the 770 has - Processing Cores: 1536 VS - Stream Processors: 2560
 
Last edited:
290-Tri-X on special pre-order right now, buy one of those, hell buy 2 of those if you can stretch the budget although you might want a PSU upgrade if you wanna run 2, depending on your PSU of course.

A single 290-Tri-X will be all you need for now, they run like a beast, i have one and a Ref 290, the ref's are just too loud really, where the Tri-X is so much quieter in comparison.
 
SiDeards73 said:
290-Tri-X on special pre-order right now, buy one of those, hell buy 2 of those if you can stretch the budget although you might want a PSU upgrade if you wanna run 2, depending on your PSU of course.

A single 290-Tri-X will be all you need for now, they run like a beast, i have one and a Ref 290, the ref's are just too loud really, where the Tri-X is so much quieter in comparison.
Click to expand...

I was looking at those but it looks pretty damm fat (wide) not sure there would be much space between them on my Mobo.

Is the MSI that wide and it is a picture/ perspective thing?
 
SiDeards73 said:
they arent any wider than other 290's but they are a lot longer than a ref 290, when i get in i will take out both and take a few shots and upload them
Click to expand...

Yeah. Reference 290 is 275mm (10.83 inches) long and the Tri-X is 305mm (12 inches) long. So an extra inch and a bit in length.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom