Best card to pair with a Ryzen 5 3600 for 1080p 60fps gaming

[Mister Woof]

13 minutes ago, steelo said:

I agree. I also play AC Unity (a game from 2014) that doesn't exactly seem to be well optimized to run well even on modern hardware.

ACOD actually runs pretty good on my system in a relative sense and I can tune it to be in the 100+fps range at 1080p most of the time.

 

But I got tired of those stupid bounty hunters chasing me the whole time.

[steelo]

4 minutes ago, Mister Woof said:

ACOD actually runs pretty good on my system and I can tune it to be in the 100+fps range at 1080p most of the time.

 

But I got tired of those stupid bounty hunters chasing me the whole time.

I'm right at 60 fps (with a 60hz 1080 monitor) LOL

 

CPU and GPU usage seem quite high though for a 6 year old game and there's a bit of microstuttering at times. I mainly picked up the 5700 for VR gaming because I was tired of running every VR game on low settings (previously had a RX 570)

[Mister Woof]

Just now, steelo said:

That's pretty impressive...are your graphical settings maxed out?

Not at all, but I understand that you have to tune things down appropriately sometimes to get to your fps target. Medium settings for the most part. Some low. This is with a 5700xt and 5ghz 8700k, lol.

 

Honestly the game looks kinda crappy on any setting, so I choose performance.

 

 

[steelo]

Just now, Mister Woof said:

Not at all, but I understand that you have to tune things down appropriately sometimes to get to your fps target. Medium settings for the most part. Some low. This is with a 5700xt and 5ghz 8700k, lol.

 

Honestly the game looks kinda crappy on any setting, so I choose performance.

 

 

I apologize, I edited my prior post before I saw your reply!

[Mister Woof]

2 minutes ago, steelo said:

I apologize, I edited my prior post before I saw your reply!

No need to apologise.

Mine gets some stutters too.

 

But let's be fair if we are running at mostly 60fps then it's already double the performance of consoles.

[steelo]

15 minutes ago, Mister Woof said:

No need to apologise.

Mine gets some stutters too.

 

But let's be fair if we are running at mostly 60fps then it's already double the performance of consoles.

Very true...that is one of the many reasons why my xbox one hasn't been turned on in over a year...LOL

 

I don't know if its just me but my eyes have a difficult time adjusting and getting a sense of bearing when moving around doesn't look natural. I'll be playing a console game, get turned around and be completely confused where I am on the screen.

[Midnitewolf]

4 hours ago, Mister Woof said:

If you read my first post, there's two things you will notice.

 

1. I said "a bit overkill". Not way overkill. But that said, even though some shit optimized games can't run at 60fps perfectly fine at 1080p/60, the vast majority will do over 100 and it's wasted on a 1080p/60 display. If he had a 1080p/144, then definitely a 2060s+ level card is a good choice.

 

2. I also said "immediate gaming environment".

 

If your opinion is that in oder to expect good 1080p/60 performance you need a $400 GPU, I disagree with you because clearly, this sub $250 market exists and every single one of these guys with 1660s and 1660ti would be whining and bitching on these forums they aren't good enough.

 

The truth is, more often then not, these GPU buster games are the exception, not the rule.

 

As far as your RDR2 reference, it doesn't matter what GPU you have over a 1660 if your CPU can't put out anyway.

Honestly it is all relative.  I have a Vega 56 currently which generally reports better performance than a 1660 or 1660 Ti and I can tell you that my experience is already subpar for 1080p gaming but then again I tend to like to run my graphics settings on the higher side.  Also it isn't subpar until it is.  What I mean by that is that my Vega 56 was perfectly fine for me until just a few weeks ago when I picked up a few games where it is struggling.    Immediately, at that point it became not fine.  This is why I think you honestly have to look at all current games, at least the popular ones, and make your recommendations based on that.  I mean you never know what is a person is going to want to play.  Even if 90% of all games can hit 60 fps at 1080p on a given card, what if a month down the road the person asking for advice decides he wants to play a game that is part of the 10% that it can't hit 60 fps with?  

 

As far as needing a $400 GPU for good 1080p/60 fps, yes I do believe that because for the best overall experience your GPU should be able to output probably at least 70 average fps (so that 1% lows don't drop below 60 fps) on all current mainstream games on at least high graphics settings.  Further, since your going to own that card for quite some time, I think you should be purchasing with at least a fairly solid expectation that you will get those same minimum 70 fps on high setting for the vast majority of mainstream games for at least 18 months beyond the initial purchase of the GPU.  

 

As far as why the $250 market exists, well that is because not everyone can afford a $400 GPU, in fact I have been there myself.  Those that can't have to make some sacrifices and I believe most who buy these cards either realize it and accept those sacrifices because they don't have a choice, don't care that they are going to have to reduce setting to medium or maybe lower on some games or just quite frankly don't understand the limitations of those cards because someone told them that all they needed for 1080p gaming was a 1660 Ti. 

[Mister Woof]

20 minutes ago, Midnitewolf said:

Honestly it is all relative.  I have a Vega 56 currently which generally reports better performance than a 1660 or 1660 Ti and I can tell you that my experience is already subpar for 1080p gaming but then again I tend to like to run my graphics settings on the higher side.  Also it isn't subpar until it is.  What I mean by that is that my Vega 56 was perfectly fine for me until just a few weeks ago when I picked up a few games where it is struggling.    Immediately, at that point it became not fine.  This is why I think you honestly have to look at all current games, at least the popular ones, and make your recommendations based on that.  I mean you never know what is a person is going to want to play.  Even if 90% of all games can hit 60 fps at 1080p on a given card, what if a month down the road the person asking for advice decides he wants to play a game that is part of the 10% that it can't hit 60 fps with?  

 

As far as needing a $400 GPU for good 1080p/60 fps, yes I do believe that because for the best overall experience your GPU should be able to output probably at least 70 average fps (so that 1% lows don't drop below 60 fps) on all current mainstream games on at least high graphics settings.  Further, since your going to own that card for quite some time, I think you should be purchasing with at least a fairly solid expectation that you will get those same minimum 70 fps on high setting for the vast majority of mainstream games for at least 18 months beyond the initial purchase of the GPU.  

 

As far as why the $250 market exists, well that is because not everyone can afford a $400 GPU, in fact I have been there myself.  Those that can't have to make some sacrifices and I believe most who buy these cards either realize it and accept those sacrifices because they don't have a choice, don't care that they are going to have to reduce setting to medium or maybe lower on some games or just quite frankly don't understand the limitations of those cards because someone told them that all they needed for 1080p gaming was a 1660 Ti. 

I can respect this response. I don't agree with everything, but that's okay.

 

Personally I choose 1080p as my desired resolution over 1440p because in general your GPU you buy will last longer at 60 or greater fps than at 1440p. At present, I enjoy at minimum of around 80fps in most games I play (even exodus plays very well) and because I have a 144hz display, I enjoy all the benefits this card offers and in a few years it'll still get 60. 

 

In the OPs case, he's only getting half the benefit with going with a more powerful card.

 

I will say that a mindset that "someone told me this is a 1080p card today, so it should still be a 1080p card in three years" is definitely an erroneous philosophy for anyone. Computer hardware obsolesce is a well known thing and obviously nothing lasts forever. 

 

Otherwise, everyone should just buy a 2080 ti and run a 4k display or a 1660 ti and a 1080p/60 display forever.

 

If I were OP i'd look at getting a 1080p/144 display to put this entire discussion at rest. Buying a 2060s class card would get him high fps in most games and 60+ in newer more demanding games, and still run great in years to come. But at only 60hz, half the performance of these cards in most games are just... unutilized.

[RandomKidd]

5 hours ago, steelo said:

I would go for a RX 5700 (Best buy often has deals for just under $300 on the XFX version) and you can pretty much max all settings out at 1080 and get well over 60 fps in most games.\

 

If you're on a budget, get a RX 580 (usually around $140-150 new) but you may need to reduce graphics settings a little bit.

 

Both are excellent 1080 cards.

What about the upcoming 5600? Also I'm from Slovenia so think European Amazons or our local website for deals www.ceneje.si for prices

[RandomKidd]

On 1/16/2020 at 4:50 PM, Mister Woof said:

5700 is about even with a 2060s, 5700xt is slightly behind a 2070s.

 

That said, if you are indeed only aiming for a 1080p/60 target, both cards are a bit overkill for the immediate gaming environment.

 

Something like a 1660 super or a EVGA B-Stock 1660 Ti for $219 might be more reasonable for that performance target.

 

https://www.evga.com/products/productlist.aspx?type=8

I'm looking to have this pc all troughout uni so 4+ years at least, and I'd like it to perform reasonably well meaning that I wont have to lower all settings down to low for a playable experience. With that in mind, would you still recommend that one, the 5700/5700xt or the upcoming 5600/5600xt?

[Mister Woof]

2 minutes ago, RandomKidd said:

I'm looking to have this pc all troughout uni so 4+ years at least, and I'd like it to perform reasonably well meaning that I wont have to lower all settings down to low for a playable experience. With that in mind, would you still recommend that one, the 5700/5700xt or the upcoming 5600/5600xt?

Grab a 1080p/144 display

Get a 5700xt if you don't stream or a 2070s if you do

 

Imo

 

But seriously best thing you can do is drop that 1080p/60 display. 

[RandomKidd]

5 hours ago, Mister Woof said:

If you read my first post, there's two things you will notice.

 

1. I said "a bit overkill". Not way overkill. But that said, even though some shit optimized games can't run at 60fps perfectly fine at 1080p/60, the vast majority will do over 100 and it's wasted on a 1080p/60 display. If he had a 1080p/144, then definitely a 2060s+ level card is a good choice.

 

2. I also said "immediate gaming environment".

 

If your opinion is that in oder to expect good 1080p/60 performance you need a $400 GPU, I disagree with you because clearly, this sub $250 market exists and every single one of these guys with 1660s and 1660ti would be whining and bitching on these forums they aren't good enough.

 

The truth is, more often then not, these GPU buster games are the exception, not the rule.

 

As far as your RDR2 reference, it doesn't matter what GPU you have over a 1660 if your CPU can't put out anyway.

would a ryzen 5 3600 be enough for those?

[Mister Woof]

Just now, RandomKidd said:

would a ryzen 5 3600 be enough for those?

Yes

[RandomKidd]

21 minutes ago, Mister Woof said:

Grab a 1080p/144 display

Get a 5700xt if you don't stream or a 2070s if you do

 

Imo

 

But seriously best thing you can do is drop that 1080p/60 display. 

could you recommend a good 1080/144 display for a good price? A bit of research suggests that the price range is arond 300-350€

[Mister Woof]

6 minutes ago, RandomKidd said:

could you recommend a good 1080/144 display for a good price? A bit of research suggests that the price range is arond 300-350€

Hard to say, all my knowledge is US market.

 

I like my ASUS VG248QE, and I just bought my son an Acer Nitro VG240Y pbiip for Christmas.

 

 

[RandomKidd]

5 minutes ago, RandomKidd said:

Get a 5700xt

From what I gather there isn't a huge difference betwen the xt and non-xt variants, right?

[RandomKidd]

21 minutes ago, RandomKidd said:

Grab a 1080p/144 display

Would a 1080/75 be good enough or is the 144Hz variant significantly better?

[RandomKidd]

10 hours ago, Mister Woof said:

Hard to say, all my knowledge is US market.

 

I like my ASUS VG248QE, and I just bought my son an Acer Nitro VG240Y pbiip for Christmas.

 

 

I'm torn between getting a good m.2 drive or saving up a bit more and getting a 1080/144 monitor 

[Lakobrija]

On 1/16/2020 at 3:42 PM, RandomKidd said:

So I'm looking to buy a new pc and wondering which gpu to pair my future cpu with. So far I've boiled my choices down to either a GTX 1070 or a GTX 1660 Super. the price difference is around 50ish € (1660 is around 230 and 1070 around 280). Which one should I get for 1080p gaming and why? Is there a better one on a budget?

Just get yourself 1660S, don't listen to this people. 5700 isn't card for 1080p gaming and it's a lot more expensive. For that price range you also have 1660Ti, whitch is 2-3 fps faster but 50$ more expensive

Edit: for 144hz don't go bellow 2060s or 5700, take 1 which you prefer 

[Mister Woof]

7 hours ago, RandomKidd said:

I'm torn between getting a good m.2 drive or saving up a bit more and getting a 1080/144 monitor 

Do you already have a SATA SSD?

 

Unless you're using it as a scratch drive for video editing it something there's not a huge difference between an nvme and SATA for regular use

[Mister Woof]

5 hours ago, Lakobrija said:

Just get yourself 1660S, don't listen to this people. 5700 isn't card for 1080p gaming and it's a lot more expensive. For that price range you also have 1660Ti, whitch is 2-3 fps faster but 50$ more expensive

Edit: for 144hz don't go bellow 2060s or 5700, take 1 which you prefer 

Finally someone else who agreed with me lol

[RandomKidd]

11 hours ago, Lakobrija said:

Just get yourself 1660S, don't listen to this people. 5700 isn't card for 1080p gaming and it's a lot more expensive. For that price range you also have 1660Ti, whitch is 2-3 fps faster but 50$ more expensive

Edit: for 144hz don't go bellow 2060s or 5700, take 1 which you prefer 

i was thinking of saving up for a 5700 cuz id still like to have an enjoyable gaming experience 5ish years from now..albeit not ultra settings but still, also not 480p ultra low

[RandomKidd]

6 hours ago, Mister Woof said:

Do you already have a SATA SSD?

 

Unless you're using it as a scratch drive for video editing it something there's not a huge difference between an nvme and SATA for regular use

i do, samsung 1tb 860 evo

[RandomKidd]

6 hours ago, Mister Woof said:

Finally someone else who agreed with me lol

 

11 hours ago, Lakobrija said:

Just get yourself 1660S, don't listen to this people. 5700 isn't card for 1080p gaming and it's a lot more expensive. For that price range you also have 1660Ti, whitch is 2-3 fps faster but 50$ more expensive

Edit: for 144hz don't go bellow 2060s or 5700, take 1 which you prefer 

Also should i wait for the 5600xt and get that one?

[Mister Woof]

5 minutes ago, RandomKidd said:

 

Also should i wait for the 5600xt and get that one?

impossible to tell until it launches