Help choosing a graphics card

[jacobgoblin]

I'm having trouble deciding between the GTX 980TI Hybrid from EVGA ($690 US) and the R9 Fury X ($635 US). Right now I'm running at 1080p but I plan to upgrade with the card to 1440p or 4k. I only want one card so no SLI or Crossfire. Is 4k even worth it with a single one of either of these cards? If not, which seems better for single card 1440. Other considerations are power usage. I have a 500w power supply and am expecting to have to upgrade as well. Any help would be appreciated!

[Hydraxiler32]

looks like the 980 Ti does have better performance, but it is more expensive.

http://gpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Nvidia-GTX-980-Ti-vs-AMD-R9-Fury-X/3439vs3498

[Aereldor]

3 minutes ago, jacobgoblin said:

I'm having trouble deciding between the GTX 980TI Hybrid from EVGA ($690 US) and the R9 Fury X ($635 US). Right now I'm running at 1080p but I plan to upgrade with the card to 1440p or 4k. I only want one card so no SLI or Crossfire. Is 4k even worth it with a single one of either of these cards? If not, which seems better for single card 1440. Other considerations are power usage. I have a 500w power supply and am expecting to have to upgrade as well. Any help would be appreciated!

$500 for an R9 Nano is probably better value, and it's a great 1440p card- essentially a slightly underclocked Fury X that's designed to throttle down on its own boost clock (not as bad as it sounds). However, the 4GB of VRAM might not be ideal for higher-resolution textures and high-polygon objects in the future.I don't think there's a decent single-card solution for 4k yet, and you might be better off waiting for Pascal and Polaris if that's what you want.

[jacobgoblin]

2 minutes ago, Hydraxiler32 said:

looks like the 980 Ti does have better performance, but it is more expensive.

http://gpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Nvidia-GTX-980-Ti-vs-AMD-R9-Fury-X/3439vs3498

That's where I get stumped, trying to decide if the higher performance is enough to justify the higher price.

[Hydraxiler32]

25 minutes ago, jacobgoblin said:

That's where I get stumped, trying to decide if the higher performance is enough to justify the higher price.

I say get the R9 Fury-X

[jacobgoblin]

3 minutes ago, Aereldor said:

$500 for an R9 Nano is probably better value, and it's a great 1440p card- essentially a slightly underclocked Fury X that's designed to throttle down on its own boost clock (not as bad as it sounds). However, the 4GB of VRAM might not be ideal for higher-resolution textures and high-polygon objects in the future.I don't think there's a decent single-card solution for 4k yet, and you might be better off waiting for Pascal and Polaris if that's what you want.

I've been overlooking the Nano because I wanted something water cooled. Maybe I need to get over that and get the Nano. Does the Nano have higher or equal performance to the fury?

[Seminole]

I'm fairly sure you could get 4k 60fps on either of those cards in most games, if you can afford 4k then go for it. Running 1080p might be a waste though to be honest, you would get so much FPS it would probably exceed your refresh rate by a lot.

[jacobgoblin]

1 minute ago, Seminole said:

I'm fairly sure you could get 4k 60fps on either of those cards in most games, if you can afford 4k then go for it. Running 1080p might be a waste though to be honest, you would get so much FPS it would probably exceed your refresh rate by a lot.

I'm either going to 1440 or 4k when I get whatever card, just haven't decided which yet.

[Seminole]

1 minute ago, jacobgoblin said:

I'm either going to 1440 or 4k when I get whatever card, just haven't decided which yet.

Well keep in mind 1440p and 4k are barely comparable. 4k has 4x as many pixels as 1080p. You could bridge the gap at a 2k monitor instead of 1440p so you have less of a major choice lol.

[Trav_X]

22 minutes ago, jacobgoblin said:

I'm either going to 1440 or 4k when I get whatever card, just haven't decided which yet.

Don't forget 21:9 3440x 1440, they make very nice high refresh rate ones, a lot of people like and prefer them unless you are really a fan of the 16:9 standard