Which GPU £280 budget

JediFragger · 5 Sep 2015 at 21:40

bru said:
The MSi 390 is probably the card of choice at the current TWO prices.

I would say that the 8GB is fairly irrelevant, as by the time it is needed at your resolution the card wont be fast enough anyway, the MSi 970 is a fine card, but the 390 is £16 cheaper TWO so definitely a better deal at the moment.

Yes but surely if Crossfire is an option then the 8GB makes more and more sense?

bru · 5 Sep 2015 at 21:45

JediFragger said:
Yes but surely if Crossfire is an option then the 8GB makes more and more sense?

As I said at 1080p by the time you gonna need 8GB the cards will be too slow anyway.

Remember the opening poster has said he games at 1080p and wants to stick to a single card.

JediFragger · 5 Sep 2015 at 21:46

bru said:
As I said at 1080p by the time you gonna need 8GB the cards will be too slow anyway.

Remember the opening poster has said he games at 1080p and wants to stick to a single card.

True, he said high Mhz is a future option and that doesn't use more vRam. I got it wrong, forgot about the 1080p bit

TheMorningStar · 5 Sep 2015 at 21:55

Another vote for the 390, If I had to buy a card today, that would be the card. Specifically the MSI one if it's still on offer.

It's not just a better performer than the 970, it has a brighter future.

phenx · 5 Sep 2015 at 22:25

I'd also go with the 390, its faster than the 970 and that gap will grow as the cards get older.

Marine-RX179 · 5 Sep 2015 at 22:39

bru said:
As I said at 1080p by the time you gonna need 8GB the cards will be too slow anyway.

Remember the opening poster has said he games at 1080p and wants to stick to a single card.

Even if that were true, why should someone restrict oneself from the possibility of moving up onto 2560 res in the future? What's the benefit of going for Nvidia with less memory (and likely worse dx12 performance)?

Geeman1979 · 5 Sep 2015 at 22:41

970

I liked to be different!

davewhite04 · 5 Sep 2015 at 23:07

madsin said:
Hi all

My b,day today so got some cash to splash

Ive decided to give my self a GPU upgade.

Im not a red or green fan boy just after best bang for buck.

I have decided to stick to a single GPU.

The only reason i went sli is because i got a really great deal on the second card.

4K is not something im gona be investing in any time soon how ever i may

invest in a 144 Hz monitor in the not to distant future.

1080p is were i game at.

Im not looking to stream.

My only stipulations are :

£280 - £290 is my absalout budget.

I will only be buying from Overclockers.co.uk

My son will be keeping the 2 gtx 570,s so selling to add to the budget is a no do.

currently my system consists of :

win 7 64bit
2 gtx 570,s sli
i5 2500k running at 4.8 ghz
8 gb ram
750 w corsair psu
Case is a CM Storm Trooper
CPU cooler is a Phanteks PH-TC14PE

Games i play are 3rd person 1st person and all racing.

All cod games and there type.

dragon age

witcher 3

Metal Gear Solid V

fifa

Thanks for reading guys

Personally I'd get this you get Metal Gear free, which saves you £30-£40 plus when you want a monitor, you can go G-Sync which is amazing technology. G-Sync Monitor

fs123 · 5 Sep 2015 at 23:12

davewhite04 said:
Personally I'd get this you get Metal Gear free, which saves you £30-£40 plus when you want a monitor, you can go G-Sync which is amazing technology. G-Sync Monitor

Only problem is Nvidia G-sync monitors are usually more expensive than the equivalent Freesync monitors so overall cost would be more than a 390 + Freesync monitor.

davewhite04 · 5 Sep 2015 at 23:18

fs123 said:
Only problem is Nvidia G-sync monitors are usually more expensive than the equivalent Freesync monitors so overall cost would be more than a 390 + Freesync monitor.

But you're getting a better product.

bru · 5 Sep 2015 at 23:50

Marine-RX179 said:
Even if that were true, why should someone restrict oneself from the possibility of moving up onto 2560 res in the future? What's the benefit of going for Nvidia with less memory (and likely worse dx12 performance)?

Er....I didn't recommend the Nvidia card, I never mentioned the 970 having any benefits over the 390.

To the opening poster, if you are going to be buying MGS V the phantom pain anyway, then maybe that brings the 970 back in to the play as the free game would easily make up the price difference over the 390.

Poneros · 6 Sep 2015 at 00:37

nashathedog said:
I think the Sapphire 390 Nitro is the best buy but it has not got a backplate,

If it's better then it's better by 1-2% at best. On the other hand, MSI customer support is planets ahead of Sapphire, for Europe.

smilertoo · 6 Sep 2015 at 03:04

I always go nvidia just cos i want my pc as quiet as possible, for 1080p any card you buy in that price range is going to run your games at high settings anyway.

RanxZy · 6 Sep 2015 at 12:26

madsin said:
4K is not something im gona be investing in any time soon how ever i may

invest in a 144 Hz monitor in the not to distant future.

390 is a great option in this price range. Especially if you may go 144Hz with 1440p in the future. I think AMD have great options in the midrange, even though I'm not a fan of their high end Fury series.

davewhite04 · 6 Sep 2015 at 13:49

Another thing to bare in mind is that a 390 requires a 600WATT PSU while the 970GTX I recommended, even though it's a special edition just requires 450WATT.

So you save a bit on your electricity bill too, which is a bonus.

davewhite04 · 6 Sep 2015 at 13:53

Another advantage, which I'm going to buy(once I've saved up) is the Nvidia shield tablet, playing my PC games on a tablet will be awesome, and you can have a connection from that straight to the big screen via HDMI.

No brainer it would be for me.

DrBombcrater · 6 Sep 2015 at 14:18

davewhite04 said:
Another thing to bare in mind is that a 390 requires a 600WATT PSU while the 970GTX I recommended, even though it's a special edition just requires 450WATT.

Those numbers are set with a serious amount of headroom to account for poor quality PSUs, the type that weigh about the same as a packet of crisps. In reality any reasonable brand 500W PSU will run a 390 without any trouble at all - my portable gaming box has a slightly overclocked 290 and an i5-2500K running from a 500W Silverstone with no problems at all. The PSU doesn't get more than mildly warm.

davewhite04 · 6 Sep 2015 at 14:30

DrBombcrater said:
Those numbers are set with a serious amount of headroom to account for poor quality PSUs, the type that weigh about the same as a packet of crisps. In reality any reasonable brand 500W PSU will run a 390 without any trouble at all - my portable gaming box has a slightly overclocked 290 and an i5-2500K running from a 500W Silverstone with no problems at all. The PSU doesn't get more than mildly warm.

I guess you could get a good 350WATT PSU for the 970GTX too using that logic? I'm not a fanboy I'm talking from experience. Everything I threw at my 970GTX worked amazing. I would have went for AMD if they were better but the truth is they are not, the drivers remain unstable compared to the Nvidia ones, and Nvidia cards offer so much more than just a graphics card upgrade.

£270 for a special edition 970GTX with a £30-£40 game that the guy wants, means he's paying £240 or £230 for a high end 1080P card, Which runs cooler and has very stable drivers and offers so much flexibly due to it's brilliant cooling system and they are quieter. The R9 390 has a very slight performance increase that he wouldn't notice on his current monitor, and would blow him away on a 144hz G-Sync monitor in the future.

fs123 · 6 Sep 2015 at 14:48

davewhite04 said:
I guess you could get a good 350WATT PSU for the 970GTX too using that logic? I'm not a fanboy I'm talking from experience. Everything I threw at my 970GTX worked amazing. I would have went for AMD if they were better but the truth is they are not, the drivers remain unstable compared to the Nvidia ones, and Nvidia cards offer so much more than just a graphics card upgrade.

£270 for a special edition 970GTX with a £30-£40 game that the guy wants, means he's paying £240 or £230 for a high end 1080P card, Which runs cooler and has very stable drivers and offers so much flexibly due to it's brilliant cooling system and they are quieter. The R9 390 has a very slight performance increase that he wouldn't notice on his current monitor, and would blow him away on a 144hz G-Sync monitor in the future.

Why bother mentioning the psu requirements when the OP has a 750W psu :confused:

Anyway, the 390 is the current best option in the price segments and with DX12 it's a no brainer given the recent controversy over Async Shaders, VR,etc.

I think there are enough posts here for the OP to make a decision but he hasn't posted back so probably a waste of time continuing here.

Scougar · 6 Sep 2015 at 14:53

smilertoo said:
I always go nvidia just cos i want my pc as quiet as possible, for 1080p any card you buy in that price range is going to run your games at high settings anyway.

You always go nvidia for a quiet card? This is bogus info btw and you are limiting yourself.