• 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.

Is there much difference between these two cards please?

apple_man77

apple_man77

apple_man77

Associate
Joined
25 Aug 2010
Posts
535
Hello,

I've recently put together a new system and want to add a graphics card now.
I'm not a huge gamer and just dabble in a bit of flight sim, age of empires etc!

Due to this I don't want to spend silly money. I've got a 550w EVGA supernova G2 PSU so looking to use that to power it.

The two I've been looking at...

1. https://www.overclockers.co.uk/evga...-ea.html?campaign=affiliate/tag&__ckdesktop=2

2. https://www.overclockers.co.uk/evga...s-graphics-card-02g-p4-2966-kr-gx-271-ea.html

I don't really know a lot about over clocking etc so would just leave the cards running stock. Would I gain much going for the 960 over the 750ti??

Thanks for any help.
 
Last edited:
Another £20-30 will get you a second hand 970 that is a big jump up from the 960. Personally i would be grabbing a second hand 970 as its got a fair chunk more performance and will last you a lot longer.
 
MS Flight Sim X prefers Nvidia cards so if that is one of your main requirements I would stick with Nvidia. As advised if you can find an affordable second hand 970 that would be a good option particularly if you can source one with a transferrable warranty such as EVGA.

/Edit: As Prepar3d is based on the FSX engine I assume this will also benefit from an Nvidia card. You don't mention what flight sim you use but those are the 2 main ones.
 
Last edited:
yea if it doesnt bother you to get a 2nd hand, then 970 or a 390 is a good choice, if you want new card 380/380X 4Go is better choice, i can't possibly advise anyone today to get 2Go ram card
 
Thanks for all the replies guys, much appreciated.

I will see if any 970's pop up but I had set a max budget of £150 in my head so feel they might still be a little out of reach but a 380 looks a good shout!
 
380 is the best choice for you. Mid range Nvidia cards are 10-15% overpriced at the moment because of the momentum they've gained in the last year.
 
If your an FSX fan grab an Nvidia card. Having used both on FSX Nvidia gives a clear advantage in FSX. Especially if you use OrbX or VFR.

I have no idea why however its quite well documented over the net. a 970 really is a stonking card for performance vs heat output and power consumption.
 
apple_man77 said:
Thanks for all the replies guys, much appreciated.

I will see if any 970's pop up but I had set a max budget of £150 in my head so feel they might still be a little out of reach but a 380 looks a good shout!
Click to expand...

970 is a good 20% - 25% faster in all situations.

Edit some comparison charts for you.

http://gpuboss.com/gpus/Radeon-R9-380-vs-GeForce-GTX-970

2nd edit if £150 is your budget then the 970 really is over. I have seen them going for £180 but thats the lowest i have seen. If i was in your shoes would i grab a second hand 970? Absolutely. But if £150 really was the limit then a 380 would be my second choice.
 
Last edited:
Thanks again for the replies.

I've noticed a couple of my games come up with the Nvidia logo at the menu so not sure if this is just advertising or showing the games better suited to Nvidia gfx cards like FSX etc.

£150 was my budget but if an extra £30 will get me a 970 and it's a quicker card that uses less power and generates less heat then I may hold out for a decent used one.

I will hold out buying that R9 for now.

Thanks again your advice is much appreciated.
 
Some games do run better or are more optimised for Nvidia, However it also works the other way around however i have found it tends to lean towards the Nvidia optimised side. But its not a massive difference and i would say its not really an issue at all. However it is quite measurable in FSX I think holding out for a good priced 970 is the best option. Its a fair chunk more powerful and will support your sim better.

Not putting the 380 down as its a brilliant card and a clear winner over the 960 (they are same price point) just for your application the 970 really is the better option.
 
Randall8686 said:
Some games do run better or are more optimised for Nvidia, However it also works the other way around however i have found it tends to lean towards the Nvidia optimised side. But its not a massive difference and i would say its not really an issue at all. However it is quite measurable in FSX I think holding out for a good priced 970 is the best option. Its a fair chunk more powerful and will support your sim better.

Not putting the 380 down as its a brilliant card and a clear winner over the 960 (they are same price point) just for your application the 970 really is the better option.
Click to expand...


I'd agree with this.
 
Randall8686 said:
If your an FSX fan grab an Nvidia card. Having used both on FSX Nvidia gives a clear advantage in FSX. Especially if you use OrbX or VFR.

I have no idea why however its quite well documented over the net. a 970 really is a stonking card for performance vs heat output and power consumption.
Click to expand...

I think the reason people favor Nvidia for FSX is purely down to Nvidea Inspector controlling the AA in game. You can use Catalyst with AMD to the same effect. Other than that I have found no "favorable" Nvidea results in FSX. FSX hardly touches the GPU anyway, it's all CPU driven. The only thing the GPU really does is handle the AA (and thats only if you ask it to via Inspector or Catalyst).
 
apple_man77 said:
Thanks again for the replies.

I've noticed a couple of my games come up with the Nvidia logo at the menu so not sure if this is just advertising or showing the games better suited to Nvidia gfx cards like FSX etc.
Click to expand...

I suspect with some games they are "slightly" more tailored to Nvidia or AMD. Hairworks for example. But a lot of it comes down to marketing and cash trading hands between companies. It's a bit dirty to be honest.
As said above. FSX for all intensive purposes doesn't even use the GPU. All the terrain is drawn by the CPU. Yes that includes VFR and special terrains.
 
beany_bot said:
I think the reason people favor Nvidia for FSX is purely down to Nvidea Inspector controlling the AA in game. You can use Catalyst with AMD to the same effect. Other than that I have found no "favorable" Nvidea results in FSX. FSX hardly touches the GPU anyway, it's all CPU driven. The only thing the GPU really does is handle the AA (and thats only if you ask it to via Inspector or Catalyst).
Click to expand...
That's not correct there is something intrinsic in the architecture of Nvidia cards that make them better for FSX the performance of their AMD counterparts is noticeably poorer this is the sole reason why I am using an Nvidia card as I have always preferred the stock image quality of AMD cards. FSX makes full use of the graphics card I experienced a 40% increase in frame rates when I upgraded my 680 to 780ti.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom