Stick with 680 or upgrade?

BRIGGBOY81 · 27 Oct 2013 at 10:42

Yeah absolutely go for a 7990, if I was buying now that's what I would do

spankingtexan · 27 Oct 2013 at 11:29

ALXAndy said:
No it isn't.

Sony Playstation 4 - AMD Jaguar APU 8 core.
Xbox one - AMD 8 core custom APU.

AMD Gaming Evolved. AMD APUs, which will use HSA the same as the consoles do. AMD Mantle - an API designed specifically for AMD's CPUs and GPUs.

Even if you ignore HSA and what it will do for budget APU rigs (running the soon to be launched Kaveri APUs that mimic the consoles) and Mantle, and Gaming Evolved (where AMD offer up huge sums of money for full hardware support and liasons with the developers) and this article -

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-future-proofing-your-pc-for-next-gen

Then it simply comes down to history and what has happened in the past.

99% of PC games (Arma series and some Crysis games being the exception to the rule) are console cross coded 'ports'

Payday goes something like this for a game developer.

Xbox 360.
Playstation 4.
Handhelds.
PC.

Thus, they will always prioritise on what will sell the most units. Thus, they will optimise it better for what sells, rather than what doesn't. With AMD having their own custom APUs in both consoles you can bet your ass that games will support 8 AMD cores. That's just a given, and, requires hardly any work to make it do the same on the PC.

If you think game devs are going to spend loads of time to make something work on something that has no relevance to them? then shame on you. That's why Intel have dominated the PC gaming market for so long, simply because game devs could not be bothered to spend the time needed to make a game fully work properly on a Bulldozer CPU.

As time passes? right now I could easily write you a review where the 8320 overclocked beats the 4670k overclocked in every single area. Be it games, benchmarks? doesn't matter. There are now enough of both to show how well AMD FX CPUs can work.

Oh, ok.

IvanDobskey · 27 Oct 2013 at 11:35

Well I run a 680 on my 1440p screen quite happily so I can only imagine a 680 would be massive overkill for 1080p. No need to upgrade in my opinion, spend your money on a 1440p screen instead.

nicnik · 27 Oct 2013 at 11:36

almighty15 said:
I would say AMD have Nvidia by the balls at every price point so his statement is pretty much true..

£100 - 2GB 7850, beats anything from NVIDIA at sub £125
£150 - R9 270X, close to HD 7950 performance for sub £150, really has no competition at this price point.
£200 - HD 7950 3GB, this simply has no competition at this price and 3GB of RAM.
£230 - £250 - R9 280X and HD 7970 GHz, again nothing rivals the performance of these at this price point.
£450 - HD 7990, absolutely destroys everything!

gtx 680 if there's any offers around £200-240 is an amazing buy as well. it certainly isnt behind much (if at all) behind the 280x and 7970ghz

For an upgrade to GTX680 you're looking at any card that performs around GTX780 or above. else it's really too small of a sidegrade

IvanDobskey said:
Well I run a 680 on my 1440p screen quite happily so I can only imagine a 680 would be massive overkill for 1080p. No need to upgrade in my opinion, spend your money on a 1440p screen instead.

I agree with this, not worth it at the moment @ 1080p

Elfmeister. · 27 Oct 2013 at 11:49

Hold out til next year, I am or at least until there's an after market coolers available for the 290(X).

spankingtexan · 27 Oct 2013 at 11:57

Elfmeister. said:
Hold out til next year, I am or at least until there's an after market coolers available for the 290(X).

I've heard it may be 2014 before we see custom 290X's, It's a shame AMD didn't use a better cooler on their reference cards.

~>Dg<~ · 27 Oct 2013 at 12:02

almighty15 said:
For BF4 I think moving to an i7 would maybe benefit you more then a GPU upgrade... Especially if the BETA is anything to go by.

there is no benefit in bf4 with a i7 over a i5 :rolleyes:

how many times must people spout this crap

there is a benefit in crossfire/sli cards but single cards there is nothing !

id wait four week and play bf4 first. a 680 should still play very well and by actually trying it youll see what your getting.

in 4-6 weeks youll probably have cheaper 780gtx of 400 or better cooling on the 290 amd cards.

spankingtexan · 27 Oct 2013 at 12:02

OP, have you considered getting another GTX 680? sli 680's paired with an i7 would be the dogs ********.

shatpank81 · 27 Oct 2013 at 12:14

Wow great response people, thanks

At present i have
Coolermaster silencio 352 (got this cheap so moved from prodigy)
Asrock z77e-itx
i5 3570k (at stock)
Corsair h55
2 x 8gb patriot viper ram
Msi gtx 680 TF OC

Now at xmas i was going to pop into ocuk and pick me up a new case to go atx (height needs to be under 50cm if possible lol) and was going to buy the msi gaming z77 g45 motherboard
But i was wondering whether to go haswell now as i was getting a new motherboard anyway

Back on topic, i have experienced no problems as such with my 680 but would like to play games on highest settings (ultra) where possible
Getting a new screen aint really an option at the moment
But if i did decide to sli etc i would need an new mobo anyway, so thats where the quandry of sticking with ivy bridge or moving to haswell and going i7 came from

Fire_fly · 27 Oct 2013 at 12:31

OP, I'm in a very similar situation to you with a 680 and 3570K.

I have come to the conclusion that it best to sit and wait until after BF4 is released before upgrading hardware. I am going to reassess the situation around Christmas time and then maybe consider and upgrade as there will hopefully be some better options (Custom cooled 290s, maybe a 780 price drop and hopefully some more solid news on 20nm GPUs.

I did however buy a cheap upgrade to windows 8, hopefully that will hep with any potential BF4 performance issues.

ibpalle · 27 Oct 2013 at 12:34

IvanDobskey said:
Well I run a 680 on my 1440p screen quite happily so I can only imagine a 680 would be massive overkill for 1080p. No need to upgrade in my opinion, spend your money on a 1440p screen instead.

+1 This.

680 on your current res is more than adequate and will prob be for some time. Save up and wait and wait and then... POUNCE!

shatpank81 · 27 Oct 2013 at 13:27

Well was waiting till xmas anyway because of extra bonus etc
So could walk into ocuk and walk out with a near enough new complete pc

Just wanting some clarity on which graphics card would be best to get on my budget

mjenabi2 · 27 Oct 2013 at 13:53

with your budget and system, i think a second 680gtx would make your system more powerful than a 780 or a 290x

murah · 27 Oct 2013 at 13:54

I use a 670 (just bought recently) Can honestly say I wont need more than that even for BF4 ultra (1080p)

a 680 is better, therefore for that reso you wont either (And overclock it if you have not already) SLI another one if you are that worried or save up a pick up a cheap one down the line

the 670 rinses every game I own, every setting on max (BF3 ultra + 4xMSAA, 90FOV - 80+ fps on 64man maps right in the thick of battle)

Newest batman: arkham origins, everything on max, TXAA high - 60FPS inside, upto 100FPS outside.

I also upscale to a higher resolution than my monitor supports which can tax the GPU significantly

By the time the 680 struggles at 1080p (Years to come!) it will be time to upgrade. No sense spending on a new GPU yet wait and see what your performance is like AFTER a few BF4 patches and a driver update or two as when its first released there will be issues/bugs and both Nvidia/AMD will release driver updates to bring in more performance.

See my sig for specs , I am not worried in the slighest!

spankingtexan · 27 Oct 2013 at 14:18

mjenabi2 said:
with your budget and system, i think a second 680gtx would make your system more powerful than a 780 or a 290x

Agree, it would even beat a 7990

flinco · 27 Oct 2013 at 14:55

Wait for the 20nm cards.

nicnik · 27 Oct 2013 at 16:13

overclock that processor! not worth going haswell

mrix · 27 Oct 2013 at 19:32

I use a 670 (just bought recently) Can honestly say I wont need more than that even for BF4 ultra (1080p)

I disagree, I played the Beta of BF4 and average frame rates using my GTX 680 Phantom 4GB card were around 55fps.

I also have 16gb ram with an i7 ivybridge processor.

If you want to play BF4 on ultra settings or high fps on high settings you are going to need something better than a GTX680.

I am considering going SLI at the moment or opt for a GTX690

Cheers all
mrix

almighty15 · 27 Oct 2013 at 19:40

Do. It buy another 680.... SLI'ing a couple of GPU's with as much shader power as the 680's have is a bad idea as they'll be limited by memory.

If they were 4Gb 680's I would put it forward as an option but 2Gb GPU's in SLI is a complete waste.

I would get a 7990 as they're going to increase in price tomorrow so get one now before that happens....

And because AMD scale better then Nvidia you'll have more performance then SLI 680's.

shatpank81 · 27 Oct 2013 at 21:10

Think i am going to get my pc to atx first (looking at the corsair carbide 540) rather than sticking with my m-itx
But also whether to stick with the i5 or go z87 and go i7.....

Will order my hardware next week either way (case and atx motherboard) need to find a black motherboard though-was going to the get the msi gaming then realised the board looks brown

Once that is in place should have a clearer image of what gpu to get, because amd will have released the 290 and hopefully nvidia will of showed their hand