Do I need a 970?

[REX.exe]

OMG, I think I may just make a new build log. I have changed the part list SO many times. It's ridiculous.

 

Alright, so I have just been looking at my part list and questioning my need for a 970. 

The most GPU intensive game I'll be playing is Batman: Arkham Knight

 

Some others include BF Hardline and COD: BO3, and MKX (maybe)

 

Please feel free to share your opinions!

[ImBleu]

An R9 280 / R9 280x would be cheaper and most likely more worth your while.

[ADZ_123_!"£]

What resolution will you be playing at?

[1Scotty1]

Don't do a new log, edit your first and please, get a 970 over an AMD card

[WereCat]

¯＼_(ツ)_/¯

 

 

That depends on what settings you want to play.

I think that with 970 you will get prety smooth Ultra, I have 770 and can play prety much everything on Ultra too if I turn down AA a bit. 770 is slightly faster than 960. The thing is that 970 has more VRAM. I would go for it if you can afford it.

[REX.exe]

What resolution will you be playing at?

1080p

 

Don't do a new log, edit your first and please, get a 970 over an AMD card

What's wrong with AMD?

 

An R9 280 / R9 280x would be cheaper and most likely more worth your while.

Lol, you were a part of my old thread regarding the 280X or 960.

[ADZ_123_!"£]

1080p

 

What's wrong with AMD?

 

Lol, you were a part of my old thread regarding the 280X or 960.

1080p 144hz or just 60hz?

[REX.exe]

1080p 144hz or just 60hz?

60hz

[c0d0ps]

OMG, I think I may just make a new build log. I have changed the part list SO many times. It's ridiculous.

 

Alright, so I have just been looking at my part list and questioning my need for a 970. 

The most GPU intensive game I'll be playing is Batman: Arkham Knight

 

Some others include BF Hardline and COD: BO3, and MKX (maybe)

 

Please feel free to share your opinions!

You can play on 1080p 144h if the games are not a whole lot demanding.

After you have maxed out the games and you have reached the 144+ fps mark you can do super resolution, or whatever it's called so you can play on a higher resolution that your monitor actually is.

If they games are not demanding then it will probably no be higher warmth than 50 degrees which means the fans will be off.

The 970 has good V-ram which will also help you max out games easier and for a longer period of times (a couple of years more).

(3.5gb V-ram)

[c0d0ps]

¯＼_(ツ)_/¯

 

 

That depends on what settings you want to play.

I think that with 970 you will get prety smooth Ultra, I have 770 and can play prety much everything on Ultra too if I turn down AA a bit. 770 is slightly faster than 960. The thing is that 970 has more VRAM. I would go for it if you can afford it.

The 770 is slightly faster than a 280x and the 280x is a (slight) bit faster than the gtx 960.

[ADZ_123_!"£]

60hz

for 1080p 60 hz you don't need a 970 you should get a 290 or 280 or a 960 or a titan X

[Not_Sean]

get the 970.. 

[REX.exe]

for 1080p 60 hz you don't need a 970 you should get a 290 or 280 or a 960 or a titan X

I think I'll go with the Titan X

 

Do you think I can run Dora the Explorer Simulator at low settings at 30Fps?

[c0d0ps]

60hz

It will be a bit overkill but you will be able to max out all the games you play for a long period of time (if you also have a good processor that is).

It will also be low temperature and quiet.

[c0d0ps]

for 1080p 60 hz you don't need a 970 you should get a 290 or 280 or a 960 or a titan X

290 is still overkill. 

A 280(x) is enough to max out games.

[1Scotty1]

 

 

What's wrong with AMD?

 

It is AMD... nuff said

[WereCat]

The 770 is slightly faster than a 280x and the 280x is a (slight) bit faster than the gtx 960.

Depends on the game. They are prety much head to head.

[REX.exe]

It is AMD... nuff said

I will hurt you.

 

290 is still overkill. 

A 280(x) is enough to max out games.

Do you think a 290 clocked at 947Mhz will outperform a 280X clocked at 1.0Ghz?

[ADZ_123_!"£]

Do you think a 290 clocked at 947Mhz will outperform a 280X clocked at 1.0Ghz?

The 290 will outperform the 280x.

 

You can't compare 2 gpus with different architectures on there clock speeds. 

[1Scotty1]

I will hurt you.

 

[Kinda Bottlenecked]

Do you think a 290 clocked at 947Mhz will outperform a 280X clocked at 1.0Ghz?

 

Yea, by 20~30%. Even higher in some cases.

[REX.exe]

The 290 will outperform the 280x.

 

You can't compare 2 gpus with different architectures on there clock speeds. 

What's a good 290? The DCU II is red.. Which doesn't match my white and black build.

[ADZ_123_!"£]

What's a good 290? The DCU II is red.. Which doesn't match my white and black build.

The gigabyte version is good and the G1 version has a backplate on it.

[REX.exe]

The gigabyte version is good and the G1 version has a backplate on it.

There isn't a G1 290?

 

The only Gigabyte cad I can find is the Windforce one.

[ADZ_123_!"£]

There isn't a G1 290?

 

The only Gigabyte cad I can find is the Windforce one.

Ok maybe its just the nvidia cards that get the windforce G1 cards, but any way still the gigabyte windforce card is very good and provides a lot of cooling. (You will need it).