Soldato
- Joined
- 17 Jun 2012
- Posts
- 5,951
It will be leagues and leagues ahead of the upgrade you'll get from the CPU.
-
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.
New 1060 barely faster than my old 960
- Thread starter bongpig
- Start date
It will be leagues and leagues ahead of the upgrade you'll get from the CPU.
How do you figure? It doesn't matter what performance and frame-rate im getting... if the thing actually delivering the image to my eyeballs is a cheap monitor then whats the point?
I have a 1060 and an i3 4130. A CPU a lot weaker than yours. It doesn't bottleneck me (up to a point). I have the highest 1060 score on the Heaven benchmark thread. I get 100fps at 1080 ultra on battlefront and bf4. I know if I had a better CPU I could get more fps, so yes there is a potential bottleneck. Because I run it on a 60hz tv that then becomes the bottleneck.
My CPU is not a problem. Yours isn't either.
My CPU is not a problem. Yours isn't either.
Like I said, I get cracking performance running GPU specific benchmarks like Valley. Right up there with typical 1060 scores.
Dont know what battlefield is like as far as CPU usage goes. Are you running max settings?
Im not sure your reading my posts. Like I said, several times, I wasn't hitting rock solid 60fps at 720p at max settings. I wanted to hit that target. So I upgraded my graphics card. I did some research and found that in fact the 960 isnt really capable of playing the latest games at solid 60 at max settings, even at 720. So I knew it wasn't just my system having issues.
The next logical step was the 970, but I managed to find a 1060 for £20 more. I mean, is it really such an absurd thing to do?
People telling me that a 960 is overkill. Do you have one? Have you tried the latest titles on one? Im pretty sure you are advising me based on nothing solid at all.
Anyhoo, thanks to everybody for your thoughts. Ive learned a bit following this thread. Im going to keep the card I think, confident ill be able to bring the rest of the system up to spec soon enough. Cheers.
I think you'll be very pleasantly surprised. The VT series plasmas were almost the pinnacle of plasma technology and their picture quality is still outstanding.
I'm still very pleased with mine.
Soldato
- Joined
- 1 Apr 2010
- Posts
- 3,034
Something like a Dell UltraSharp U2515H 2560 x 1440 for around £250 will be a huge step up from your 1024 x 720 display for gaming. Well worth trying out, if you don't see the value in it you can always ship it back. The higher res will also remove some of the bottle neck you are currently seeing.
This is of course if you want to consider a monitor just for gaming.
This is of course if you want to consider a monitor just for gaming.
if your 960 is not hitting 60fps solid at 720 then its the system
I have core2quad q8400 its not hitting 100% load in GTA V but I get only around 30fps
I upgraded to a i5 6400 using the same gpu 7950
my frame rate double
although your cpu is not hitting 100% it doesn't mean its not bottlenecking
digital foundary also done a test where it show memory speed can also bottle neck
although 1600mhz ddr3 is not slow but don't forget modern memory has reached over 3000mhz
I have core2quad q8400 its not hitting 100% load in GTA V but I get only around 30fps
I upgraded to a i5 6400 using the same gpu 7950
my frame rate double
although your cpu is not hitting 100% it doesn't mean its not bottlenecking
digital foundary also done a test where it show memory speed can also bottle neck
although 1600mhz ddr3 is not slow but don't forget modern memory has reached over 3000mhz
And you know that how? Ive read and seen lots of online benchmarks and youtube videos of people testing a 960 at 720 and not managing 60. People with better CPUs than me still not hitting that mark with full settings. When I got my 960, for sure it could do it. but now, it cant. Regardless of how good your cpu is.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H24aNHMRyNQ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=35z4nb01CZc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x7J9BCZem6Y
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yyBRO-tzk5M
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Eu1Fkyv6PyE
There are games out there right now that crush the 960 at 1080. Look at this group of benches:
http://www.pcgamer.com/geforce-gtx-1060-review/
Look at the 960 scores. These games are starting to push the 960 well below 30fps at 1080. You really think these games will magically play at a solid 60fps if you run them at 720p?
So please. Enough with the "960 will run all games maxed out 60fps at 720p". Trust me. It wont.
4 times? No chance. You have got your maths wonky. Regardless of system, the very best you will see going from 1080 to 720 is a 50% improvement and thats being very optimistic. In the real world its generally 30% or less.
As for your second comment, again, not true. Not by a long shot. See the links I posted. There's plenty of evidence the 960 cant handle what I require, let alone a card with half the power. Where are you getting this info?
Last edited:
Yes it's 55% less pixels which meens 55% less for the card to do.
My 280x which is roughly around the same speed as 960 is running all my games 1080p 60fps so to say that the card isn't enough for 720p is crazy.
My old 7790 which is less than half the speed of 960 was maxing out 720p
Really? You are running the latest games, max settings, 1080p, with a rock solid 60fps? On a 280x? I dont know what 280x you have, but you are the only person on the planet who has it. I want one!
And just because there are 55% more pixels, it doesn't mean a 55% drop in performance. Like I said, real world results are closer to 30%.
Last edited:
its not the graphics that's hammering the system in GTA V
its the draw distance that's stressing the system
when you increase the draw distance you are calculating the buildings from miles and miles away which increase the cpu load
if you walk inside a house you get 60fps solid
everyone has given an opinion and if you don't wanna listen then its up to you
I'm not here to argue with you just stating what I think
you already proven a point that you bought a 1060 and it didn't help
each game is program differently
older games prefer fast single core performance
newer games can use more cores
like 10 years ago a fast 2 core cpu was way better than a quad core for gaming
Last edited:
I skipped the 960 for a 1060. My 750ti ran happily at 1080p 60fps (medium-high settings on the afore mentioned games. Food for thought
720p is around 920k pixels, 1080p is over 2million. 55% here we are talking about image fidelity loss over 1080p.
A 1060 is a 1080p card and it is what you should be running really. It certainly is wasted on a 720p display.
Other than this it could be anything. If it's an old mobo etc, cards can struggle. I'd suggest upgrading to a i5 6600k in the near future.
You can have a look if your mobo supports it in the bios but, PCIE lane at x16? PCIE lane at Gen 3.0? Can check this using GPU-Z.
A 1060 is a 1080p card and it is what you should be running really. It certainly is wasted on a 720p display.
Other than this it could be anything. If it's an old mobo etc, cards can struggle. I'd suggest upgrading to a i5 6600k in the near future.
You can have a look if your mobo supports it in the bios but, PCIE lane at x16? PCIE lane at Gen 3.0? Can check this using GPU-Z.
Last edited: