Is the GTX 970 really enough for 1080p?

[Ooxaz]

1080p is just a resolution.  Effects don't become nicer at higher resolution.  What stresses a 1440p monitor will stress a 1080p monitor as well if you crank it up high enough.  Games like GTA V are very CPU dependant as well if you want to push the settings up.  Even a 5930k won't help you there as evidenced by TotalBiscuit's Port Report of GTA V.  GTA V was built for the future, and nothing can run it at a minimum frame rate of 60FPS with EVERYTHING turned up.

Fair Enough, well thank you for educating me. I think a G1 gigabyte 970 will do me good enough, seeing as it's a good overclocker hopefully It will do me good in the long run. And if needed in the near-future I could put another one in there. The only issue is the VRAM though I guess. Any idea how hard GTA V is on VRAM?  

[Comessy]

Can you list down the settings you have applied on the game?

Everything is max except for :

Population Density - 60%

Distance scaling - 90%

Shadows - High

Reflection MSAA - 4x

MSAA - off I think because I use FXAA or that NVIDIA one

All advanced settings are off too

[Samfisher]

GTA V, Shadow of Morder, Battlefield 4, Arma 3, WoW, Far Cry 4.

 

Mostly gpu intensive games.

 

WoW is a CPU-bound game.

 

Well, I thought that game is well optimized, not sure what happened there...

 

This has nothing to do with how well-optimized the game is.  It IS very optimized, but the settings that cause the CPU-bottleneck are the same things that will ALWAYS cause a CPU-bottleneck : draw distance, LOD, NPC density.  And you can turn them all down in GTA V.

[Samfisher]

Fair Enough, well thank you for educating me. I think a G1 gigabyte 970 will do me good enough, seeing as it's a good overclocker hopefully It will do me good in the long run. And if needed in the near-future I could put another one in there. The only issue is the VRAM though I guess. Any idea how hard GTA V is on VRAM?  

 

Mine uses between 3-3.3GB VRAM.

[Ooxaz]

Basically, as long as you don't turn MSAA on above 4x, and don't turn on any wacky supersampling or other hugely demanding options that really don't improve the look/feel of the game beyond what 4x MSAA offers, you'll be fine even in every game with an R9 290 which runs about $250. It's once you start messing with these hugely demanding games like insane draw distances, 16x MSAA, supersampling, and other crazy options that you will struggle.

 

As far as CPU performance goes, you're going to be fine for the most part except in a very small amount of games that demand very high single-threaded performance.

I could upgrade my CPU, but I dont want to have to get a new MOBO, do you know any good CPU's out there that use the 1150 chip?

[Ooxaz]

WoW is a CPU-bound game.

 

 

This has nothing to do with how well-optimized the game is.  It IS very optimized, but the settings that cause the CPU-bottleneck are the same things that will ALWAYS cause a CPU-bottleneck : draw distance, LOD, NPC density.  And you can turn them all down in GTA V.

 

Well, I'm still waiting for the day when a 1500$ PC is enough for everyone's needs....Or maybe I'm just asking too much.

[Ooxaz]

Everything is max except for :

Population Density - 60%

Distance scaling - 90%

Shadows - High

Reflection MSAA - 4x

MSAA - off I think because I use FXAA or that NVIDIA one

All advanced settings are off too

 

Thanks, 

 

Yeah I heard the advanced settings really mess with your GPU hard.

[Lotus]

I could upgrade my CPU, but I dont want to have to get a new MOBO, do you know any good CPU's out there that use the 1150 chip?

I don't think it'll be a problem for you, really. So long as you're running overclocked and you don't turn things up like particle density/physics or NPC density (like traffic) to the max, you'll be fine. Physics simulation with tons of objects hits every CPU hard, and your 2500K is still a very capable CPU. I don't know about you, but I don't think it's worth it spending another $350 ($230 i5-4690k + $120 Z97 MoBo) to turn your traffic density up a notch or two.

[Samfisher]

Thanks, 

 

Yeah I heard the advanced settings really mess with your GPU hard.

 

 

The advanced settings (only ONE of them kills your FPS) is CPU_hogging.  Only Advanced Distance Scaling causes a problem cos it renders LOD to everything you see on screen, no matter how far away they are.

[Lotus]

Well, I'm still waiting for the day when a 1500$ PC is enough for everyone's needs....Or maybe I'm just asking too much.

A $550 PC is enough for everyone's needs, provided everyone doesn't think they need ultra settings maxed out, which let's face it, graphics haven't determined game quality since the '90s when 3D was introduced. Heck, you can get console destroying performance from an R9 270, and that $550 PC build I'm referring to is an i5 + R9 280 build.

[Ooxaz]

 

Dips to 50 sometimes when I'm driving really fast 

 

 

 

I seem to be having this problem too, I'm not really sure what causes it, but mostly in story mode my FPS plummets from 70 FPS to 40-50 while speeding in cars. 

[Comessy]

I seem to be having this problem too, I'm not really sure what causes it, but mostly in story mode my FPS plummets from 70 FPS to 40-50 while speeding in cars.

It's because when you move fast the cpu has to create more pedestrians and cars and you gpu has to draw the buildings

[Ooxaz]

A $550 PC is enough for everyone's needs, provided everyone doesn't think they need ultra settings maxed out, which let's face it, graphics haven't determined game quality since the '90s when 3D was introduced. Heck, you can get console destroying performance from an R9 270, and that $550 PC build I'm referring to is an i5 + R9 280 build.

Graphics is certianly not up in the list of priorities when making a good game I agree, However as I said I'm an FPS junkie and I like my games looking really good. (I'm too frickin spoiled I know, meanwhile people starve half way across the globe.) 

[Ooxaz]

It's because when you move fast the cpu has to create more pedestrians and cars and you gpu has to draw the buildings

Well, my CPU is a good overclocker right? 

[Comessy]

Well, my CPU is a good overclocker right?

Yes the 2500k is still really good

[Samfisher]

It's because when you move fast the cpu has to create more pedestrians and cars and you gpu has to draw the buildings

 

Buildings are draw-call limited.  That's why with the Advanced Distance Scaling option, your FPS tanks and your CPU usage shoots up to 100% while your GPU usage goes down cos it's starved for data.

[Dabombinable]

Buildings are draw-call limited.  That's why with the Advanced Distance Scaling option, your FPS tanks and your CPU usage shoots up to 100% while your GPU usage goes down cos it's starved for data.

So if DX 12 is made an option for GTA V, we might actually see our GPU's getting fully utilized instead of the CPU?

[Ooxaz]

Yes the 2500k is still really good

I'm stuck between the MSI 970 and GIGABYTE G1, not really sure...Any output on this?

[Samfisher]

So if DX 12 is made an option for GTA V, we might actually see our GPU's getting fully utilized instead of the CPU?

 

Probably yeah  That is if GTA V implements DX12.

 

 

 

I don't think it'll be a problem for you, really. So long as you're running overclocked and you don't turn things up like particle density/physics or NPC density (like traffic) to the max, you'll be fine. Physics simulation with tons of objects hits every CPU hard, and your 2500K is still a very capable CPU. I don't know about you, but I don't think it's worth it spending another $350 ($230 i5-4690k + $120 Z97 MoBo) to turn your traffic density up a notch or two.

 

 

Particle effect barely does anything for FPS in GTA V though.  Definitely not worth the price of upgrading from a 2500k especially considering he hasn't even begun to OC it yet

 

 

I'm stuck between the MSI 970 and GIGABYTE G1, not really sure...Any output on this?

 

I personally use the G1.

[Dabombinable]

I'm stuck between the MSI 970 and GIGABYTE G1, not really sure...Any output on this?

The G1 is massive, and at about 50% fan speed it starts getting loud. The MSI card is better for smaller cases.

[Ooxaz]

The G1 is massive, and at about 50% fan speed it starts getting loud. The MSI card is better for smaller cases.

Well, I dont really care about noise when it comes to my PC as mine is already pretty loud, as long as it's not absolutely dreadful, and my case is massive. Also, a bit off topic but do you think since the AMD 300 series cards are right round the corner, that I should wait for those to come out assuming nvdia will drop the prices on the current 900 series by around 15%?

 

( EDIT theoretically, wouldn't the G1 edition have to work less to produce the same amount of air considering that there is an extra fan pushing more air, therefor having to spin less faster = generating the same amount of noise? 

[Dabombinable]

Well, I dont really care about noise when it comes to my PC as mine is already pretty loud, as long as it's not absolutely dreadful, and my case is massive. Also, a bit off topic but do you think since the AMD 300 series cards are right round the corner, that I should wait for those to come out assuming nvdia will drop the prices on the current 900 series by around 15%?

 

( EDIT theoretically, wouldn't the G1 edition have to work less to produce the same amount of air considering that there is an extra fan pushing more air, therefor having to spin less faster = generating the same amount of noise? 

If you wait for 1 new graphics card, you wait for them all. If your gaming at 1080P buy the GTX 970, at 2K buy the R9 290X or GTX 980, at 4K buy a GTX TitanX or GTX 980 SLI (and maybe R9 290X 8GB Crossfire).