1080P under $300

[dlevy129]

1 hour ago, KaitouX said:

5600XT, the 1660 Super still worse value than the 5600XT. In case you need a cheaper GPU then yeah probably the 1660 Super would be the best GPU under $250, but for more than $250 you should probably go with the 5600XT.

 

1 hour ago, Streetguru said:

The 5600 XT is as fast as the 2060 in games

 

though you missed the $250 sales by a few weeks

 

Otherwise the best value in the nvidia stack is like the 1660 Super, but whichever has 2 fans and/or looks like it has the biggest cooler for the lowest price

The 5600XT being like 10-15% faster than the 1660 super.
 

 

Thoughts which one? Value wise 

[Streetguru]

1 minute ago, dlevy129 said:

 

For only $30 I'd just get the 5600 Xt

 

but the extended warranties are a scam, either a GPU will break in the first month and the manufacturer will replace it, or it will run fine for years.

[dlevy129]

15 minutes ago, Streetguru said:

For only $30 I'd just get the 5600 Xt

 

but the extended warranties are a scam, either a GPU will break in the first month and the manufacturer will replace it, or it will run fine for years.

What about this one if I can get it for 289 by price matching? It's local

[Streetguru]

Just now, dlevy129 said:

 

The ASrock one is fine/average

Can just skip to the graphs, but they reviewed almost every card.
 

 

[KaitouX]

1 hour ago, KaitouX said:

5600XT Sapphire Pulse or the Gigabyte Gaming OC(the model names are links to the respective PCPP pages)

If you/your nephew value a cooler and quieter operation I recommend the models that I linked. Otherwise go with the cheapest 5600XT(which is the Asrock one), for most people the Asrock would probably be good enough. I would avoid the Mech OC unless it was cheaper than the Asrock, for that price go for the Pulse or Gaming OC linked in the quote.

[dlevy129]

22 minutes ago, KaitouX said:

If you/your nephew value a cooler and quieter operation I recommend the models that I linked. Otherwise go with the cheapest 5600XT(which is the Asrock one), for most people the Asrock would probably be good enough.

Yeah I'll probably just go with the sapphire and go pick it up from Microcenter for 289 even if I pay 269 and get a different one online I'll be dealing with it not being here on time. Thank you guys so much for your input.

[Streetguru]

35 minutes ago, dlevy129 said:

Yeah I'll probably just go with the sapphire and go pick it up from Microcenter for 289 even if I pay 269 and get a different one online I'll be dealing with it not being here on time. Thank you guys so much for your input.

Sapphire typically makes some of the best AMD cards.

[IdealPC]

3 hours ago, KaitouX said:

Maybe you're confusing something because the cheapest dual fan 1660 Super is $230 on PCPP and the cheapest 1660 Ti is $280. Also the performance difference seems to be around 5% at best. If anything the 1660 Ti is the overpriced one.

 

On topic: I personally would recommend the 5600XT Sapphire Pulse or the Gigabyte Gaming OC(the model names are links to the respective PCPP pages) if the intention is to stay between $250 and $300.

Agreed...he must get himself confused with 1660S and 1660TI, 1660TI is the worst choice considering cost performance...1660S is the best card for 1080P, only around 200USD

[IdealPC]

3 hours ago, dlevy129 said:

so super?

You won't regret buying a 1660s, only 2-3% slower than 1660ti but 50$ cheaper.

[5x5]

2 hours ago, dlevy129 said:

Yeah I'll probably just go with the sapphire and go pick it up from Microcenter for 289 even if I pay 269 and get a different one online I'll be dealing with it not being here on time. Thank you guys so much for your input.

Get thh Sapphire Pulse, it's by far the best value for what you get. The ASrock Model is mediocre. I would avoid that one.

[5x5]

1 hour ago, IdealPC said:

You won't regret buying a 1660s, only 2-3% slower than 1660ti but 50$ cheaper.

Nobody is confused. The 1660 Ti is upward of 10% faster than The 1660 Super. The 1660S is much closer to a regular 1660 and not worth the asking price considering it's barely faster than a decent 590.

[SteveGrabowski0]

5 hours ago, 5x5 said:

The 1660 Super is also a bad choice. It's nowhere near as good as the 1660 Ti and it's almost the same price. The 1660 Super is basically a 1660 with G6 memory. Avoid it. It's overpriced.

??? The 1660 Ti is like 2% faster than the 1660 Super in techpowerup's testsuite. Maybe 1660 Super prices are terrible where you're at but in the US it's a $230 card while the 1660 Ti is $280 and up. No way that 2% difference in performance is worth a more than 20% bump in price.

[SteveGrabowski0]

1 hour ago, IdealPC said:

Agreed...he must get himself confused with 1660S and 1660TI, 1660TI is the worst choice considering cost performance...1660S is the best card for 1080P, only around 200USD

More like $230.

[SteveGrabowski0]

27 minutes ago, 5x5 said:

Nobody is confused. The 1660 Ti is upward of 10% faster than The 1660 Super. The 1660S is much closer to a regular 1660 and not worth the asking price considering it's barely faster than a decent 590.

Where are you getting this from? It's like 2% in techpowerup's benchmarks/

 

https://www.techpowerup.com/review/msi-geforce-gtx-1660-super-gaming-x/29.html

[dlevy129]

31 minutes ago, 5x5 said:

Nobody is confused. The 1660 Ti is upward of 10% faster than The 1660 Super. The 1660S is much closer to a regular 1660 and not worth the asking price considering it's barely faster than a decent 590.

Dude? what are you talkin to yourself. No one said anything about being confused. Lol

[5x5]

3 minutes ago, SteveGrabowski0 said:

Where are you getting this from? It's like 2% in techpowerup's benchmarks/

 

https://www.techpowerup.com/review/msi-geforce-gtx-1660-super-gaming-x/29.html

I have access to both. In some games it's 3-4%, in others it's upward of 15%. That's why I average it out.

[i_build_nanosuits]

32 minutes ago, 5x5 said:

Nobody is confused. The 1660 Ti is upward of 10% faster than The 1660 Super. The 1660S is much closer to a regular 1660 and not worth the asking price considering it's barely faster than a decent 590.

The GTX 1660 Super has a launch price of just $230 USD with comparable performance to the $280 USD 1660 Ti. The 1660 Super has 14 Gbps GDDR6 (versus 12Gbps GDDR6 for the 1660 Ti and 8Gbps GDDR5 for the 1660). The 1660 range of cards sit in the sweet spot for many gamers because they offer superb 1080p EFps in popular titles and they are relatively hassle free in terms of noise, compatibility and stability. The 1660S also features Turing NVENC which is far more efficient than CPU encoding and alleviates the need for casual streamers to use a dedicated stream PC. Shop prices will determine which 1660 series card represents the best value over time but at today's prices the 1660 Super effectively undercuts the 1660 Ti by $50 USD thus challenging the RX 590 in terms of overall value at 1080p.

[i_build_nanosuits]

2 hours ago, Streetguru said:

Sapphire typically makes some of the best AMD cards.

The 6GB AMD 5600 XT is a slightly cheaper, BIOS restricted, version of the 8GB 5700. The majority of 5600 XT’s should operate reasonably quietly as the single fan reference design was skipped for this release. Although the reference design is absent there are, however, several variants which range in performance between the GTX 1660S and the RTX 2060. Performance is more varied than usual because of last minute BIOS changes. The best versions of the 5600 XT (Sapphire Pulse) were distributed to reviewers (good luck finding one of these at MSRP). These models are capable, with BIOS updates, of performance that almost matches the RTX 2060. At $280 USD the higher performing SKUs could make sense for users that are happy to tinker with or return faulty hardware. During our GTAV testing reflection MSAA resulted in very poor, almost matt, reflection fidelity (the same bug appears on several Navi and Vega cards). Whilst playing Project Cars 2 our 5600 XT PC crashed several times. Given the vast number of software (and hardware) problems since day one of the 5000 series launch, it’s ironic that AMD’s latest 20.1.3 driver does not even offer an option to skip the installation of a boatload of new system shortcuts, gimmicks and other bloatware.

 

 

[dlevy129]

Guys.... I'm getting the 5600xt

[i_build_nanosuits]

2 minutes ago, dlevy129 said:

Guys.... I'm getting the 5600xt

Good luck

[SteveGrabowski0]

15 minutes ago, dlevy129 said:

Guys.... I'm getting the 5600xt

If you do I'd definitely go with Sapphire Pulse as others have been recommending, since you know you're getting 14Gbps GDDR6 on it. I don't know if this is still the situation, but the 5600 XT launch was a giant clusterfuck where AMD had to release a new BIOS to compete with the newly price cut $300 RTX 2060 (sadly those $300 reference RTX 2060 have been gone a couple of weeks and won't come back in stock). Not all 5600 XT were able to run the new BIOS though. Sapphire Pulse is one of the few that was (not is now sadly) reasonably priced and actually guaranteed it could run the new BIOS and guaranteed it had 14GBps GDDR6.

 

EDIT: Nevermind, didn't see the only Pulse 5600 XT available was $294.

[SteveGrabowski0]

7 minutes ago, i_build_nanosuits said:

Good luck

I thought their drivers have been greatly improved the last month or two? No? Still a pain in the ass?

[SteveGrabowski0]

18 minutes ago, i_build_nanosuits said:

The best versions of the 5600 XT (Sapphire Pulse) were distributed to reviewers (good luck finding one of these at MSRP).

Blech $294 for a Sapphire Pulse 5600 XT? I'd pay the extra $6 and get the EVGA KO 2060 no doubt from EVGA's store, loud cooler or not, DLSS + RTX would definitely be worth $6 to me. Especially with DLSS2.0 now in Control, allowing for 1080p60 fps RTX high gaming with it turned on.

[Streetguru]

18 minutes ago, i_build_nanosuits said:

 

?

think all of them got 14GB/s memory now

 

18 minutes ago, dlevy129 said:

Guys.... I'm getting the 5600xt

ya, just don't pay more than like ~$270 for it

[i_build_nanosuits]

8 minutes ago, SteveGrabowski0 said:

I thought their drivers have been greatly improved the last month or two? No? Still a pain in the ass?

not sure...couldn't tell...but for the very little performance increase it offers over the 1660 Super i'd rather play it safe and stick with the nvidia echosystem...since most developers (therefore most softwares and game engines) are still to this day designed with and for nvidia hardware.