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.
Whilst true for a lot of games, there are definetly some where it will make a difference. Assassin's Creed: Unity is an extreme example, but you'd almost certainly want to play it at a locked 30fps on a card of this calibre, and the 4GB version makes a huge difference to the minimums there.Realistically speaking, at the graphic quality level which these cards can provide smooth enough gaming it is not going to use more than 2GB of vram, unless you are getting an extra one to crossfire or sli.
Whilst true for a lot of games, there are definetly some where it will make a difference. Assassin's Creed: Unity is an extreme example, but you'd almost certainly want to play it at a locked 30fps on a card of this calibre, and the 4GB version makes a huge difference to the minimums there.
I would personally save and push towards the 390 for sure!
Opposed to a 960/380? :S
I think what ever card someone gets at that price point who has gamed before with decent settings will be disappointed until they hit the 390/970 area.
was just a question about 2gb cards. and there ability to game.
Sorry man i misread.
Honestly thought you was after buying one to game![]()
As I said, those kind of frame rate clearly imply that the graphic setting is too high for the 960 to game comfortably on. Also with it being a Ubisoft game, it would be the usually unoptimised console port piece of poo, using far more vram than most PC games do.lol with numbers like that i would not ever look at the 960's, i like a smooth 60 fps
noo!, it was more why do we still sell cards like that for "gaming" can they do it??. and like post above said it was give lower than console gaming, so i dont understand why anyone would get one?