Which GTX 780?

koldphuzion · 7 Mar 2014 at 18:44

I have noticed that everyone who is recommending I use an R9 and not a 780 are all mostly Intel users............

Its good to mix it up,dont be biased and remove the blinkers! I want objective advise that will give me bang for my buk!

thefogo · 7 Mar 2014 at 18:52

koldphuzion said:
I have noticed that everyone who is recommending I use an R9 and not a 780 are all mostly Intel users............

Its good to mix it up,dont be biased and remove the blinkers! I want objective advise that will give me bang for my buk!

If you only play BF4 then a 290 is a much better option.
EDIT: Though for the price a 290 may be better completely.

Panos · 7 Mar 2014 at 18:56

ubersonic said:
Just so you know, your sig is setting off the "this page contains malware" alert in Chrome lol.

I have no idea. Was a hard coded change to my signature by this forum.

I had the link of my 5Ghz overclock of the 4820K as always.

mmj_uk said:
People are talking as if Mantle is supported by every game, there are what 2 games? just buy whatever GPU you want with a view to upgrading your CPU in the future (if you want to alleviate CPU bottlenecks).

Because it does make sense. R9 290 is in par with the GTX780. So no matter the CPU they will perform both the same on the same CPU.

However, since the guy has an AMD FX, the R9 290 makes more sense than the GTX780. Because those 2 games (BF4 & Thief while many are following up), will give that extra boost needed to his FX8350.

I personally have a GTX780, however if I still had the FX (which sold), I would have done so because is more sensible option.

koldphuzion · 7 Mar 2014 at 19:01

thefogo said:
If you only play BF4 then a 290 is a much better option.
EDIT: Though for the price a 290 may be better completely.

I dont only play BF4 bro....
Skyrim heavily modded, FEAR, Outlast, Theif, Titanfall, Half-life, Tomb Raider, Elder Scrolls online to name a few......

The R9's do look tempting, although i fancy a change, bu then if my CPU is going to bottleneck a 780 then an R9 is the best choice.

koldphuzion · 7 Mar 2014 at 19:44

I am very tempted by this......
http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=GX-129-GI

mmj_uk · 7 Mar 2014 at 20:38

Panos said:
Because it does make sense. R9 290 is in par with the GTX780. So no matter the CPU they will perform both the same on the same CPU.

However, since the guy has an AMD FX, the R9 290 makes more sense than the GTX780. Because those 2 games (BF4 & Thief while many are following up), will give that extra boost needed to his FX8350.

There are more games utilising PhysX which will run much better on NVidia than there are Mantle games so it's swings and roundabouts, plus Mantle is not even likely to take off now that DX12 is announced.

If he wants to bring power usage down his best bet is to look to get away from the FX8350 and then he doesn't even have to worry about CPU bottlenecks either, especially given that he wants to play Skyrim etc.

Neither the 290 or 780 is going to be running at its best in the majority of games without an Intel processor, so that would be his best course of upgrade instead of gambling on Mantle.

koldphuzion · 7 Mar 2014 at 20:57

mmj_uk said:
There are more games utilising PhysX which will run much better on NVidia than there are Mantle games so it's swings and roundabouts, plus Mantle is not even likely to take off now that DX12 is announced.

If he wants to bring power usage down his best bet is to look to get away from the FX8350 and then he doesn't even have to worry about CPU bottlenecks either, especially given that he wants to play Skyrim etc.

Neither the 290 or 780 is going to be running at its best in the majority of games without an Intel processor, so that would be his best course of upgrade instead of gambling on Mantle.

Im not interested in Mantle, or power saving. I want the best performing card for my money. I want the card to last me a couple of years and not cauae me any problems with stability. Hence why im looking at Nvidia.

Panos · 7 Mar 2014 at 21:05

mmj_uk said:
There are more games utilising PhysX which will run much better on NVidia than there are Mantle games so it's swings and roundabouts, plus Mantle is not even likely to take off now that DX12 is announced.

If he wants to bring power usage down his best bet is to look to get away from the FX8350 and then he doesn't even have to worry about CPU bottlenecks either, especially given that he wants to play Skyrim etc.

Neither the 290 or 780 is going to be running at its best in the majority of games without an Intel processor, so that would be his best course of upgrade instead of gambling on Mantle.

FYI there are 55 games that support GPU PhysX over the last 8 years of which worthy games to play are counted on two hands. 10 games over 8 years......

There are 5 games that are announced supporting Mantle this year already, while can be retrofitted to any engine also.

As for DX12, no GPU supports is atm. So is pointless to point at it as an "obvious alternative". The guy wants to buy something now, not next year along with Windows 9.

And more likely to see DX12 support to GCN cards by driver update, than Nvidia cards. As happened with the 11.2 that is now supported all way to the HD7000 series by a simple driver update 6 months ago, while Nvdia cards are stuck to DX11.1.

Finally, he cannot go wrong either way by buying 780 or R9 290 and I pointed that on my initial post. The OP will just benefit more by getting R9 290 on those games that support Mantle. If he isn't planning to play any of them, ofc is pointless to even consider it.

koldphuzion · 8 Mar 2014 at 10:14

Thanks for eveyones input, made some interesting reading and ive learnt a bit!

Ive decided on the Gigabyte 780ti OC that overclockers have on offer.
Like I previously said, I wanted a card that will last for a few years and have the grunt to play most games ill throw at it.

Are you ready for Titanfall!!?? Haha....

Cheers guys...

Geeman1979 · 8 Mar 2014 at 12:16

Good choice, enjoy.

Boomstick777 · 8 Mar 2014 at 12:20

Good choice the Ti is a monster.

sieze2 · 8 Mar 2014 at 18:06

koldphuzion said:
Thanks for eveyones input, made some interesting reading and ive learnt a bit!

Ive decided on the Gigabyte 780ti OC that overclockers have on offer.
Like I previously said, I wanted a card that will last for a few years and have the grunt to play most games ill throw at it.

Are you ready for Titanfall!!?? Haha....

Cheers guys...

Good choice. I was one the Titanfall beta and even at 1440P maxed it was not a problem for a 780.

thefogo · 8 Mar 2014 at 20:54

koldphuzion said:
Thanks for eveyones input, made some interesting reading and ive learnt a bit!

Ive decided on the Gigabyte 780ti OC that overclockers have on offer.
Like I previously said, I wanted a card that will last for a few years and have the grunt to play most games ill throw at it.

Are you ready for Titanfall!!?? Haha....

Cheers guys...

Nice

The Gigabyte is a beast. Enjoy.

TAZOO7 · 9 Mar 2014 at 09:36

Why some think you need an I7 to go with a high end card is baffling as an I5 can more than match the I7 in FPS at high res

And also DX11.2 is supported by Nvidia Cards, just not all, but not everyone is on Window 8 so makes no difference anyways to the majority

OP, i had that card and its a beast out of the box, clocks in at 1163 before you even start overclocking it, its a noticeable over the 780 which i had before it but not sure its worth the £200 difference some ask for but £100 is far more reasonable

enjoy

Marine-RX179 · 9 Mar 2014 at 10:11

koldphuzion said:
Thanks for eveyones input, made some interesting reading and ive learnt a bit!

Ive decided on the Gigabyte 780ti OC that overclockers have on offer.
Like I previously said, I wanted a card that will last for a few years and have the grunt to play most games ill throw at it.

Are you ready for Titanfall!!?? Haha....

Cheers guys...

I hope you will enjoy your new card, but you'd definitely need to do something about the CPU if you are expecting to last a few years on the Nvidia card.

I'm still disappointed on how some people being too over keen on pushing Nvidia without proper consideration toward the user even when he already mentioned the games that he plays. Take Thief for example, the game utilize like what...3-4 CPU cores? And with the FX8 using only up to 4 cores, it effectively like pairing a FX4 with a 290 or GTX780. With 290, at least they will be adding Mantle which will reduce/remove the CPU bottleneck, whereas a GTX780/GTX780Ti, they will be still be bottlenecked by the "FX4".

Also you mentioned you play Skyrim heavily modded, which would require huge amount of vram; you'd always see certain group of people keep on banging the "with the heavily mod on Skyrim using crazy amount vram, it doesn't matter if peoples' card had 3GB or 4GB since neither will be enough blah blah blah...". Personally if I had a keen interest on heavily modding Skyim, I'd rather have a 290 with 4GB vram "not enough" than a GTX780 with 3GB vram "not enough", as I'd still have 1GB more vram to play with.

I just find it ironic that people would talk about both GTX780 and 290 will be bottleneck all the same with the AMD CPU, and then go off and pushing the more expensive GTX780, and then talk how like PhysX would be the next big thing (despite it never really taken off after all these years and added very little when they are in games)- a feature that require paying the Nvidia price premium, and dismissing Mantle which have already shown and proven its practical impact on reducing/removing CPU bottleneck. People are too quick to forget that unlike an Intel i5, in games utilize only 4 cores or less will effectively cutdown the FX8's performance by half, effectively become a "FX4".

Granted not all games will support Mantle, but I find it funny some people beating it down so much, despite there's no price premium for the feature (unlike Nvidia has a price premium for just...being Nvidia...and PhysX?

), and a 290 is cheaper than a GTX780 while offering the same, if not better performance. They'd rather have you invest money on more expensive card for a feature that's most likely not going to matter much to you, than something that will have a positive impact on improving performance on number of games in the very near feature (performance boost plus leaving changes in your pocket).

TAZOO7 said:
Why some think you need an I7 to go with a high end card is baffling as an I5 can more than match the I7 in FPS at high rest

Nobody says a i7 is require over a i5. But with 4 cores games as mentioned above the FX8 would effectively be ran at no faster than a FX4- to put it into contrast, just try imagine your i5 only be able to use half of its total cores counts in games (only using 2 out of 4)...and tell me you don't see there's gonna be a issue with that to be used with a GTX780/290 or above.

thefogo · 9 Mar 2014 at 11:01

^ Isn't Mantle for Thief not out for another month? You can finish it in a day so I don't think it really matters so much. Plus I've heard it's a bit naff anyway.
As people on here have mentioned, the Skyrim VRAM thing is a myth.

Marine-RX179 · 9 Mar 2014 at 11:53

thefogo said:
^ Isn't Mantle for Thief not out for another month? You can finish it in a day so I don't think it really matters so much. Plus I've heard it's a bit naff anyway.
As people on here have mentioned, the Skyrim VRAM thing is a myth.

290 still cost £50-£80 less than the GTX780 on average, just as fast and has 1GB more vram :rolleyes:

It's funny to see people to keeping recommending against 290 and to pay more money for GTX780 that offer less in return.

When both GTX780 and 290 were at the same price, I recommeded people to make decision base on their preference, but now the GTX780 is more expensive by a fair margin, it's difficult to find a reason to pay the extra money for it, unless the reason is "because it is Nvidia"

thefogo · 9 Mar 2014 at 13:52

Marine-RX179 said:
290 still cost £50-£80 less than the GTX780 on average, just as fast and has 1GB more vram

It's funny to see people to keeping recommending against 290 and to pay more money for GTX780 that offer less in return.

When both GTX780 and 290 were at the same price, I recommeded people to make decision base on their preference, but now the GTX780 is more expensive by a fair margin, it's difficult to find a reason to pay the extra money for it, unless the reason is "because it is Nvidia"

I didn't recommend the 780, I'm just saying the points you made may not make any difference.
Though I'd hate to recommend a 290 to someone and then they get a card that has the problems described many times on these forums. Some people will pay extra for the reliability.

Ian Evey · 9 Mar 2014 at 14:07

Marine-RX179 said:
290 still cost £50-£80 less than the GTX780 on average, just as fast and has 1GB more vram

It's funny to see people to keeping recommending against 290 and to pay more money for GTX780 that offer less in return.

When both GTX780 and 290 were at the same price, I recommeded people to make decision base on their preference, but now the GTX780 is more expensive by a fair margin, it's difficult to find a reason to pay the extra money for it, unless the reason is "because it is Nvidia"

I got a 780 when on offer and could not be happier. I went for a 290x first but had problems with it and even though the 1 day I had it I could not get the card setup as I would have liked.

Got the 780 put it in. It's cool a quiet and was just as fast as the 290x was in the 20 minutes I was allowed to play with it.

Bottom line is everyone has an opinion on many things and no 1 persons opinion means more than another's.

r7slayer · 9 Mar 2014 at 14:22

I would have gone with the 290 tbh, seems like a no brainer with the games OP plays and the price difference. The people recommending more expensive 780 cards which are overclocking cards or even a 780Ti just baffles me when overclocking a 780 is pointless with his setup and so is the extra performance from a 780Ti when it will just get bottlenecked.
290 in this situation would have been the best card to get.