Upgrade from 770 to 970 vs 290x - 1440p monitor

[tangosmango]

I have a 4670k, 8gigs of RAM and a 1440p Korean monitor (DP2710) with a GTX 770 2GB. I was looking at the requirements for Fallout 4 and noticed that a 770 2GB won't cut it at 1440p.

 

My main question is this: If I somehow win the lottery and able to clock the 970 to 1600, will this run better than a 290x/390 on games like Fallout 4/GTAV? My guess would be that the VRAM would bottleneck the 970 so the clockrate would not matter...

 

Also, while researching, I found this: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/sapphire-nitro-r9-390-8g-d5,4245.html

Judging by that, the clear answer would be the 390...unless I'm missing something

 

Recommendations?

[theereal]

What exactly is the question here?

[Curufinwe_wins]

I have a 4670k, 8gigs of RAM and a 1440p Korean monitor (DP2710) with a GTX 770 2GB. I was looking at the requirements for Fallout 4 and noticed that a 770 2GB won't cut it at 1440p.

 

My main question is this: If I somehow win the lottery and able to clock the 970 to 1600, will this run better than a 290x/390 on games like Fallout 4/GTAV? My guess would be that the VRAM would bottleneck the 970 so the clockrate would not matter...

 

Also, while researching, I found this: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/sapphire-nitro-r9-390-8g-d5,4245.html

Judging by that, the clear answer would be the 390...unless I'm missing something

 

Recommendations?

Vram won't bottleneck at all at 1440p and even at 4k memory overclocking with compression allows for basically no notable bottleneck. That said a 390 is a better choice provided you can cool it. It is for now, and it massively will be in the future (NOT BECAUSE OF VRAM)

[KemoKa]

390 is slightly better for now, and down the road will rip the 970 to shreds, because the 970 can't do Async Compute like the 390 can.

[tangosmango]

Vram won't bottleneck at all at 1440p and even at 4k memory overclocking with compression allows for basically no notable bottleneck. That said a 390 is a better choice provided you can cool it. It is for now, and it massively will be in the future (NOT BECAUSE OF VRAM)

 

Someone mentioned Async, what are the other reasons?

[KemoKa]

Someone mentioned Async, what are the other reasons?

OpenCL performance, raw compute performance... I mean, the Async Compute is really where it's going to shine. Performance boosts of 50-70% when the new APIs roll around, perhaps even higher. It's going to wreck faces. That's what everyone is buzzing about.

[tangosmango]

OpenCL performance, raw compute performance... I mean, the Async Compute is really where it's going to shine. Performance boosts of 50-70% when the new APIs roll around, perhaps even higher. It's going to wreck faces. That's what everyone is buzzing about.

 

Could you give me a crash course on why Async Compute is so good? It's the first time I'm hearing this term

[Curufinwe_wins]

OpenCL performance, raw compute performance... I mean, the Async Compute is really where it's going to shine. Performance boosts of 50-70% when the new APIs roll around, perhaps even higher. It's going to wreck faces. That's what everyone is buzzing about.

Even without Async (which GM200 also doesn't have, but it does well compared to the Fury X), something about GM204 and below just fails really hard at DX12. I don't know if its how much Maxwell compressed memory bandwidths and texture units or what it is, but GM200 does well enough compared to its competition yet GM204 and GM206 get #wrek'd .

Could you give me a crash course on why Async Compute is so good? It's the first time I'm hearing this term

Basically it allows higher efficiency for utilization by allowing things to be computed out of order. Maxwell is so bad at scheduling things back into out-of-order that thus far it's just been better to turn it off for Maxwell (but even the two games we have so far don't use it super heavily and the raw power of Hawaii and bus width really seem to be paying off.)

[KemoKa]

Could you give me a crash course on why Async Compute is so good? It's the first time I'm hearing this term

AMD can explain it better than I can. Really it's just allowing the GPU cores to work on multiple things independently. They use the massively parallel compute engines to schedule tasks asynchronously, so that no part of the GPU is waiting on another. It just aggregates the workflow, something that the relatively serialized DX11 API hasn't been able to do.

 

Oxide's Ashes of the Singularity benchmark stacked a 290X against a 980Ti in DX11 and DX12. In DX11 the 290X was predictably far behind the 980Ti, but when put on DX12, the 290X shot up to within 2 fps of the 980Ti, and even pulling ahead at 4K. That's crazy. Of course, not the best example since it's only one game, but it shows the potential of DX12.

[tangosmango]

You guys have been awesome. I'm learning so much!

 

If you could give a date on when Async will come into play, what ETA could you offer? Is it a part of DX12?

[Curufinwe_wins]

AMD can explain it better than I can. Really it's just allowing the GPU cores to work on multiple things independently. They use the massively parallel compute engines to schedule tasks asynchronously, so that no part of the GPU is waiting on another. It just aggregates the workflow, something that the relatively serialized DX11 API hasn't been able to do.

 

Oxide's Ashes of the Singularity benchmark stacked a 290X against a 980Ti in DX11 and DX12. In DX11 the 290X was predictably far behind the 980Ti, but when put on DX12, the 290X shot up to within 2 fps of the 980Ti, and even pulling ahead at 4K. That's crazy. Of course, not the best example since it's only one game, but it shows the potential of DX12.

 

That last comment fails to mention that the 980ti was also seen to be directly on par with a Fury X in DX12 (now that is still a big improvement for the Fury X relative to it's dx 11 performance), but the fact of the matter is Hawaii more than perhaps any other gpu in existence gets insane buffs by the jump to DX12.

 

And that since both API's are in place, obviously nvidia would use the better one for their hardware (which at least at the time of the publication was DX11), resulting in a 10% win across the board for Nvidia (not good, but its something.)

 

Also further details have come out suggesting Nvidia cards have much higher cpu overhead (esp with single threaded speeds) than amd cards have which helps explain the difference between the HT and non-HT results (and why on one benchmark done, a 6700k at stock preformed notably better than a 5960x at stock for nvidia gpu's)

[tangosmango]

How far away is DX12/ASync? If it's down the line, wouldn't you expect Nvidia to release cards that support Async?

[Curufinwe_wins]

How far away is DX12/ASync? If it's down the line, wouldn't you expect Nvidia to release cards that support Async?

I mean technically it's here now. But no current games will use it, and the first games coming out are this year on it (and on a relatively limited scale). It won't be every game (or even a majority of games) likely until late 2016 or early 2017, by then both Nvidia's new lineup and AMD's new lineups will be out.

[tangosmango]

I mean technically it's here now. But no current games will use it, and the first games coming out are this year on it (and on a relatively limited scale). It won't be every game (or even a majority of games) likely until late 2016 or early 2017, by then both Nvidia's new lineup and AMD's new lineups will be out.

 

So by that time, Nvidia could have closed the gap with their new lineup right? And this new lineup could have Async capabilities correct?

 

So back to my initial question, for now, you mentioned 390 is still the superior choice. Why do you say that it is the superior choice over 970?

[Curufinwe_wins]

So by that time, Nvidia could have closed the gap with their new lineup right? And this new lineup could have Async capabilities correct?

 

So back to my initial question, for now, you mentioned 390 is still the superior choice. Why do you say that it is the superior choice over 970?

It does better under demand titles, and esp better with higher resolution/more intense textures (even though personally I wouldn't use it for anything other than 1080p). And games only get more intensive. It does have power drawbacks though sadly.

 

[lxyfutures]

390 should be the best choice. 8GB of VRAM(although maybe you don't need them), performs just like 290X,and better than 970. And it's new