• 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.

what gtx 970 to go with a stock i5-3570k

vargojones

vargojones

vargojones

Associate
Joined
24 Aug 2004
Posts
207
So it seems my old gtx670 is starting to show its age :(.

I don't want to build a brand new PC and by all accounts the i5-3570k processor is still pretty good. So I'm thinking new GPU and probably up my RAM.

So i put it to you good chaps, what's a good gtx970? The processor is running stock at the min, do i need to OC it or will i be ok as is?

Thanks in advance
 
GTX970 struggles on late games due to the Vram, let alone DX12 which is not that good

Why not considering the AMD alternatives, which at the same price are far superior products?
 
I had a GTX MSI 970 Gaming card and it ran flawless. No issues at all and for 1080P was an awesome card. I would certainly recommend overclocking your CPU to at least 4.2 Ghz :)
 
Do you need to overclock your CPU? No. Should you? Of course ;) You can likely get a small overclock very easily without even increasing volts at all.

The 970 is fine, though I'd personally look at a 390 instead as they're cheaper & in general slightly faster (don't expect a big difference at 1080p though). The vram increase with the 390 is nice too, but I'd not worry about it too much as the 970's 3.5+0.5 is still fine for almost all games at playable settings.
 
I'm running a stock 3570k and a Gigbayte G1. I game at 1920x1200 and it's is very good card.

The beauty of an Nvidia card is that the majority of the top AAA titles are Nvidia Game Works!! Which really is the killer feature.

For a gaming PC, my recommendations are: SSD, 16Gb ram and a new GPU.

If you cant afford all that and have at least 8Gb of ram already then just get a new GPU.
 
Last edited:
390 is a better value card but suggesting a 970 struggles due to VRAM alone is ridiculous :p

At 4K yes and maybe a couple of titles at max settings on 1440p but 970 doesn't have the raw power needed for those scenarios anyway...
 
Panos said:
GTX970 struggles on late games due to the Vram, let alone DX12 which is not that good

Why not considering the AMD alternatives, which at the same price are far superior products?
Click to expand...

its tards like this what leads to sillyness.lol.

its struggles with modern games lol its the benchmark card for the VR launches . it possible cant handle newer games rofl.


:D

if you want a 970 get a 970. it will run everything at 1080 fine for 2 years yet.what many dont realize or understand is Devs have to make games to run on peoples hardware.guess what is the most common enthusiast new card lol. so a 970 will be good for years yet.

if you dont want a 970 get a 390. they are both the same performance. just dont be trolled by the vram nonsense.especially at 1080.
 
Last edited:
People who think the 390 will have an immense advantage over a 970 in single-gpu setups just because it has 8gb of vram (especially at 1080p) are just plain deluded. And I think I've played all the most demanding games currently out without VRAM problems, and that's at 1440p:p

Vram only matters when a given card has the grunt to saturate it and there are already quite a few games that can make the 390 sweat while using less than 4gb.

Having said all that, I'd grab a 390 over a 970 if buying new just because it's "newer" and has more vram for the same price but that depends on the games you play.

IMO, the best option by far is a used 290x/970.
 
390 is the best band for buck card atm, with 8GB VRAM it won't haven't any issues with VRAM usage. That said, i've only played a couple of games (GTA5 and Crysis 3) that completely saturate my 290X's 4GB of VRAM.
 
Last edited:
~>Dg<~ said:
its tards like this what leads to sillyness.lol.

its struggles with modern games lol its the benchmark card for the VR launches . it possible cant handle newer games rofl.


:D

if you want a 970 get a 970. it will run everything at 1080 fine for 2 years yet.what many dont realize or understand is Devs have to make games to run on peoples hardware.guess what is the most common enthusiast new card lol. so a 970 will be good for years yet.

if you dont want a 970 get a 390. they are both the same performance. just dont be trolled by the vram nonsense.especially at 1080.
Click to expand...

Good point. Also according to Steam the 970 is the most popular card in use.
 
they are not the same performance look at the division look at hitman look at all the latest games where the 970 gets rekt

and struggles und stutters with the vram

at this point everyone everyone who buys a gtx 970 over the r9 390 is just plain dumb

the only reason would be that in your country the power is so expensive that it would be nice to save some watts which isnt very common
 
I bought the Asus GTX 970 Strix a couple of months ago.

It runs everything on high / very high / ultra settings at 1080p at 60fps 99% of the time, including Witcher 3, ROTTR, Crysis 3, Project Cars and loads more. Not once have I ever seen VRAM being an issue.

This is my first nVidia card for about 8 years and am very happy with it. Overclocked to around 1480Mhz on clock speed and something like +401 on memory speed purely through MSI Afterburner and the card remains sub 65 degrees even at high clocks.

In contrast (and the new ones may be different), every AMD card I have had previously, I had driver issues, in some cases no new drivers for up to a month after AAA release and the cards all created more heat than my central heating.

Benchmarks say that 'on average', a 390 is slightly better than the 970, but with a simply overclock, a GTX 970 can at least be on par.
 
HardStyler3 said:
they are not the same performance look at the division look at hitman look at all the latest games where the 970 gets rekt

and struggles und stutters with the vram

at this point everyone everyone who buys a gtx 970 over the r9 390 is just plain dumb

the only reason would be that in your country the power is so expensive that it would be nice to save some watts which isnt very common
Click to expand...

Really?
So what if people want to use NVidia GameWorks effects that don't work on AMD GPUs? What if people want to use ShadowPlay for easy recording games, desktop? Are they dumb?
 
Gregster said:
Really?
So what if people want to use NVidia GameWorks effects that don't work on AMD GPUs? What if people want to use ShadowPlay for easy recording games, desktop? Are they dumb?
Click to expand...

most gameworks effects work on amd too

only the most special ones not and you can get them to work still then

shadowplay is not a reason anymore because in the amd gaming evolved software its as easy to record now

so no point in that anymore kinda
 
HardStyler3 said:
most gameworks effects work on amd too

only the most special ones not and you can get them to work still then

shadowplay is not a reason anymore because in the amd gaming evolved software its as easy to record now

so no point in that anymore kinda
Click to expand...

Having used both AMD and NVidia recently, you can't go wrong with either. If you had tried ShadowPlay, you would know exactly what I was talking about and Raptr is bloatware that doesn't record overlays most of the time. How do you get to run GameWorks effects that are blocked off to AMD users?

My 970 was on par with the 290X I had and both did well. The 390 has 4GB of extra VRAM, which could well come in handy if the OP ever went Crossfire but for a single card, either the 390 or 970 will do and The Division free with the 970 or Hitman free with the 390. A win for either but someone choosing the 970 isn't "dumb".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom