950 vs 960

[zbiggie]

So I am building a new system. For now I am going balls to the wall with everything except the graphics card. Reason being is I want a new widescreen monitor 4K, with the pascal GPU release.

 

So for the time being I will need a graphics card to put into my PC. Eventually this will become a dedicated physics card, that is once I put in the Pascal GPU, which I expect to be spring next year. Earlier if we get lucky.

 

Either way I am wondering if I should go with a 950, 960, or a 960 4G.

 

The prices that I am able to find get me a 950 for around 210-220

a 960 for around 235-250

or a 960 4Gig, for around 280 to 300 range.

 

For the time being I am not needing, nor wanting high graphics. Anything that'll run at 1080p is just find for me. Basically has to run Fallout 4 at a decent rate, as well as Star Citizen (which will be turned down setting hard to run, but I suspect will run on these three). Hell I am still playing games on my Dell 1730m with dual 8700M cards.

 

Here is the build as I have it now

http://ca.pcpartpicker.com/p/zM9GTW

 

Thanks for the suggestions.

[Aytex]

960 ezpz

[PlayStation 2]

Just get an R9 285 and feel good about it.

[Oberon.Smite]

Get the 2GB 960, the 960 4GB is a waste of money. 

 

It's a temporary solution, spend it later on a better Pascal solution. The 950 is OK, but 960 2 GB is much better than it.

[Hunter259]

Get 950. Deal with it. Sell when you get Pascal. Dedicated Physx is the dumbest thing to do with old nvidia cards.

[Zayzo]

Just get an R9 285 and feel good about it.

I'd prefer a 280x over anything else in that price range.

[toogamer]

So I am building a new system. For now I am going balls to the wall with everything except the graphics card. Reason being is I want a new widescreen monitor 4K, with the pascal GPU release.

 

So for the time being I will need a graphics card to put into my PC. Eventually this will become a dedicated physics card, that is once I put in the Pascal GPU, which I expect to be spring next year. Earlier if we get lucky.

 

Either way I am wondering if I should go with a 950, 960, or a 960 4G.

 

The prices that I am able to find get me a 950 for around 210-220

a 960 for around 235-250

or a 960 4Gig, for around 280 to 300 range.

 

For the time being I am not needing, nor wanting high graphics. Anything that'll run at 1080p is just find for me. Basically has to run Fallout 4 at a decent rate, as well as Star Citizen (which will be turned down setting hard to run, but I suspect will run on these three). Hell I am still playing games on my Dell 1730m with dual 8700M cards.

 

Here is the build as I have it now

http://ca.pcpartpicker.com/p/zM9GTW

 

Thanks for the suggestions.

Do you need the i7?

[PlayStation 2]

I'd prefer a 280x over anything else in that price range.

Eh...

The R9 285 is a bit easier on the power supply and much better on the tessellation side of things.

[FuzzyYellow]

an r9 285 performs better for less than a 960. that's what i would get. also, AMD cards at this point are doing a lot better with DX12 than Nvidia. while it isn't a sure thing, AMD's architecture is better for parallel computing which is what DX12 seems to favor.

[Br3tt96]

A dedicated physical card is kinda dumb, any single powerful gpu will handle the game physx. Unless, of course you go amd.

[grayblizzard]

Just get an R9 285 and feel good about it.

NOOO 4GB 380 hype

[Daveeede]

Have you considered going for something secondhand? Like an r9 290? They can be had for about the same price as a 950. 

[Zayzo]

an r9 285 performs better for less than a 960. that's what i would get. also, AMD cards at this point are doing a lot better with DX12 than Nvidia. while it isn't a sure thing, AMD's architecture is better for parallel computing which is what DX12 seems to favor.

People shouldn't bother mentioning DX12 performance til its out in multiple AAA games.

 

Eh...

The R9 285 is a bit easier on the power supply and much better on the tessellation side of things.

Meh, the power draw is pretty irrelevant nowadays if you have at least 400w. The raw performance in most games is what makes it the best in the sub $200 area. I mean it is an old top tier card rebadge.

 

NOOO 4GB 380 hype

ew

[DarkBlade2117]

NOOO 4GB 380 hype

380 or 2Gb 960.

/thread

[manikyath]

People shouldn't bother mentioning DX12 performance til its out in multiple AAA games.

seeing he's still running 8700m just fine, i dont think he'll be coming anywhere near DX12 titles either way...

[zbiggie]

I'm not sure why all the hate for the dedicated physics card, but from what I am reading on high-end graphics processing, depending if the game supports physics, it gives a decent 10-15% fps jump.

 

So when I add a 4k g sync monitor and a new card costing close to 1500$ together, I'll want to bring every bit out I can.

 

seeing he's still running 8700m just fine, i dont think he'll be coming anywhere near DX12 titles either way...

wouldn't call it just fine. Lol. But I am dealing with it. For example Civ 5, on lowest setting will have texture pop in 15 seconds after moving to a new part of the screen.

 

Do you need the i7?

Every so often yes. 90% of time no. But then If I don't have it finding someone who'll actually lend me their system for a week or so is to much of a hassle.

 

380 or 2Gb 960.

 

 

I think that will be it.

960 2G.

 

Thanks for the advice