Advice Required

[Imy]

I'll try to keep this as short and to the point as I can:


My current key specs:

• Mobo: Asus P5Q Deluxe (supports Crossfire)
• CPU: Q6600 GO @ permanent 3.2GHz
• RAM: 8GB DDR2 PC2-6400C5
• Graphics: 8800GT @ 1680x1050
• Primary HDD: 2 x Velociraptor 150GB in RAID 0

Future plans:

Ivy Bridge upgrade next year (when available) including new mobo, cpu, ram, SSD and Kepler/ATI 7XXX graphics.


Games I want to play:

Battlefield 3 (released in a few days) - I played the beta on the lowest of possible settings and with my current spec and it wasn't very smooth. I forgot to check the actual FPS I was getting but I'm sure it wasn't very high. It also looked worse than BF2 on those settings.

X: Rebirth (early 2012) - Judging by previous X games and what they've said about this one's multi-core support I think a fair chunk of the workload will be on the CPU and I think my current one still has a lot of life left in it. There are completely new visuals though so I can't be sure on this.

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive (early 2012) - Excellent and stable high FPS will be essential for me here. I'm guessing it'll need something better than what I got now.

Mass Effect 3 (?) - The Mass Effect series of games have never given me any trouble with my current spec and I doubt the 3rd one will.


My dilemma:

ATI and nVidia's new graphics cards are under 6 months away (I think) but unfortunately will likely not be available to actually buy until after most of the games I want to play have been released.


Here are the options I think I have:

1. Buy a mid-range (< £200) card now then upgrade in 6 months
2. Buy a high-end (< £400) card now and stick with it (will depreciate a lot when the new cards are near release)
3. Stick with what I got and play on lower settings until the new cards are out.

If you think 1) or 2) is best then any suggestions of specific cards would be welcome although from reading other posts on here, the 560Ti looks to be the mid-range card choice.


Also, baring in mind I only game at 1680 x 1050, is 2GB vRAM worth spending the extra on over the 1GB cards?


p.s. sorry for another spec me a BF3 card thread - I did read through the existing ones - honest!

 

[James J]

Personally I'd choose 1, get a 560ti 1gb or a second hand 470 1.2gb and then sell that when the big upgrade happens and use the funds that generates to go towards a better monitor.

 

[Imy]

Thanks for your response James. Would the 2TB 560Ti have any advantages over the 1TB version when gaming at 1680x1050?

Also just wondering why you picked out the monitor for upgrade? It wasn't something I was planning on upgrading. Are you referring to a larger size or something else?

 

[Imy]

Ordered this card:

http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=GX-114-MS&groupid=701&catid=1914&subcat=1341

 

[Wiry]

It would have been more beneficial if you'd ordered the 2gb version but it is abit more so should hold you out! If you have any problems...you know where to come!!

 

[James J]

Thanks for your response James. Would the 2TB 560Ti have any advantages over the 1TB version when gaming at 1680x1050?

Also just wondering why you picked out the monitor for upgrade? It wasn't something I was planning on upgrading. Are you referring to a larger size or something else?

Mentioned the monitor as most gamers seem to be moving onto 1080p panels now, especially 120hz screens for the higher vsync refresh rates and possibly 3D ect (as an option).

Ordered this card:

http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=GX-114-MS&groupid=701&catid=1914&subcat=1341

For your resolution, thats a very nice card to pick. Not sure the 2gb one would have been properly used unless your a serious anti-aliasing whore!

 

[Imy]

Yeah research told me same thing; 2GB for higher resolutions but 1GB will be fine for my resolution so wasn't much benefit in spending more right now. I'll get more memory on my next card. I don't intend to move away from 1680 x 1050 at the moment for 3 reasons:

1. I'm a programmer and find the high dot pitch comfortable to work with.
2. I have dual-monitors which give me enough of a work area.
3. Lower res means I don't need to spend as much on graphics cards in order to run high settings at native resolution and still have a decent FPS.

The new 120hz screens are interesting and I may look into them one day but for the moment my main monitor's refresh rate feels fine and it has a 2ms response time.

Looks like the card has good cooling and will overclock to 1GHz fairly easily so should hopefully be money well spent. Speaking of which, what's the best tool for overclocking graphics cards?

 

[Leezor]

Yeah research told me same thing; 2GB for higher resolutions but 1GB will be fine for my resolution so wasn't much benefit in spending more right now. I'll get more memory on my next card. I don't intend to move away from 1680 x 1050 at the moment for 3 reasons:

1. I'm a programmer and find the high dot pitch comfortable to work with.
2. I have dual-monitors which give me enough of a work area.
3. Lower res means I don't need to spend as much on graphics cards in order to run high settings at native resolution and still have a decent FPS.

The new 120hz screens are interesting and I may look into them one day but for the moment my main monitor's refresh rate feels fine and it has a 2ms response time.

Looks like the card has good cooling and will overclock to 1GHz fairly easily so should hopefully be money well spent. Speaking of which, what's the best tool for overclocking graphics cards?

Amen, i play at the same res and wont be changing unless my monitor dies. Im also thinking of getting the card you got, will have to let me know how it runs

 

[Imy]

Will do

 

[James J]

Yeah research told me same thing; 2GB for higher resolutions but 1GB will be fine for my resolution so wasn't much benefit in spending more right now. I'll get more memory on my next card. I don't intend to move away from 1680 x 1050 at the moment for 3 reasons:

1. I'm a programmer and find the high dot pitch comfortable to work with.
2. I have dual-monitors which give me enough of a work area.
3. Lower res means I don't need to spend as much on graphics cards in order to run high settings at native resolution and still have a decent FPS.

The new 120hz screens are interesting and I may look into them one day but for the moment my main monitor's refresh rate feels fine and it has a 2ms response time.

Looks like the card has good cooling and will overclock to 1GHz fairly easily so should hopefully be money well spent. Speaking of which, what's the best tool for overclocking graphics cards?

3 very good reasons also. MSI afterburner is arguably the best utility for overclocking a graphics card and the "kombuster" program that comes with it is quite accurate in testing for instability. Its quite hard to hit 1ghz core on most cards even with good cooling as the shaders are locked into the same ratio with the gpu clock, raising one ends up raising both ect.

Good luck though, it'll be a nice and quick card regardless of the overclock lol.

 

[Imy]

Oh well - thanks for the info. I'll report back with how the overclocking goes.

 

[Imy]

Got the card last night. Didn't get much time to play with the overclocking but I did get it up to 1,050Mhz Core clock without upping the default voltage.

Used Furmark to test for artifacts and stability. Temps were 78c max with fan set to 100% after about 5 minutes.

Questions:

1. Where's the best place to get Kombuster from? It didn't come with Afterburner and I couldn't find it on the MSI site.
2. How high should I allow temps to go in Furmark?
3. Actual game usage shouldn't produce temps like those in Furmark right?
4. What's the max temp you would run a card at for say up to 6hrs straight of gaming?