NVIDIA GeForce GT 740

[foon-fork]

This appears to be an underpowered card.

compared it to the gtx 750, and performance test came close to 100%.

For my next build, I'm planning to put in a gtx 970. worth it? 

[Rolling Potatoe]

A 970 is literally 5-6 times faster.....so yeah.

[Aereldor]

A GTX 970 is a good value graphics card, yes, but it isn't worth it, seeing as there's an option that presents better value.

The R9 390 beats the GTX 970 in almost every title in terms of compute performance, and has more than twice the VRAM you'll find on a GTX 970

 

Despite the GTX 970 being advertised as a card with 4GB of memory, only 3.5 GB is usable, and you'll be seeing severe stuttering and terrible performance once it surpasses that, which it will, even at 1080p on titles like Shadow of Mordor and Dying Light, which do use 4GB of VRAM at 1080p at ultra settings.

 

Also, I'm curious- where did you find benchmarks where the GT 740 and GTX 750 perform equally?

[I am an SSD]

Just now, foon-fork said:

This appears to be an underpowered card.

compared it to the gtx 750, and performance test came close to 100%.

For my next build, I'm planning to put in a gtx 970. worth it? 

Luke did a huge rant on that card (or something equivalent) ...saying that it was rubbish....just like the R7 240 Linus destroyed a while back.....Have a look at the video

 

 

 

[foon-fork]

5 minutes ago, Aereldor said:

Also, I'm curious- where did you find benchmarks where the GT 740 and GTX 750 perform equally?

Didn't say that.

Wording was really awkward, but the gt 740, my current gpu, gets the crap kicked out of it by the gtx 750.

http://www.game-debate.com/gpu/index.php?gid=2228&gid2=2060&compare=geforce-gt-740-v2-evga-superclocked-4gb-edition-vs-geforce-gtx-750-ti-zotac-thunderbolt-2gb-edition

[don_svetlio]

Go for a R9 390, it perfroms better than the 970 and has more than double the usable VRAM as well as VASTLY superior DX12 performance

[Aereldor]

1 minute ago, don_svetlio said:

VASTLY superior DX12 performance

Not to mention drivers will continue to help the card age well, rather than cutting off support entirely once a new architecture is announced. My GTX 960 had better be a hell of a paperweight in 4 years.

[foon-fork]

2 minutes ago, don_svetlio said:

Go for a R9 390,

Well it's not like I'll need all that extra horsepower, but i get that the point is more bang for the buck

 

[don_svetlio]

Just now, foon-fork said:

Well it's not like I'll need all that extra horsepower, but i get that the point is more bang for the buck

 

IF you want less power at a lower price, R9 380 is the best value card on the market at 160-170$

[Nacho Marco Segui]

12 minutes ago, Aereldor said:

A GTX 970 is a good value graphics card, yes, but it isn't worth it, seeing as there's an option that presents better value.

The R9 390 beats the GTX 970 in almost every title in terms of compute performance, and has more than twice the VRAM you'll find on a GTX 970

 

Despite the GTX 970 being advertised as a card with 4GB of memory, only 3.5 GB is usable, and you'll be seeing severe stuttering and terrible performance once it surpasses that, which it will, even at 1080p on titles like Shadow of Mordor and Dying Light, which do use 4GB of VRAM at 1080p at ultra settings.

 

Also, I'm curious- where did you find benchmarks where the GT 740 and GTX 750 perform equally?

Have never experienced a hiccup on dying light with my 970, ultra 1080. I agree with the 3,5 gb, but it does not happen in Dying light

[Aereldor]

2 minutes ago, foon-fork said:

Didn't say that.

Yes, you did.

18 minutes ago, foon-fork said:

compared it to the gtx 750, and performance test came close to 100%.

 

[foon-fork]

wording was pretty bad. meant to say 100% more.

my sources came from the game debate

[Aereldor]

1 minute ago, Nacho Marco Segui said:

Have never experienced a hiccup on dying light with my 970, ultra 1080. I agree with the 3,5 gb, but it does not happen in Dying light

This could be an isolated case, but a user here benchmarked the title and had peak VRAM usage readings of 3903 megabytes.

 

https://www.reddit.com/r/buildapc/comments/2vcepp/discussion_4gb_vram_being_used_at_1080p_in_2/

[Nacho Marco Segui]

4 minutes ago, Aereldor said:

This could be an isolated case, but a user here benchmarked the title and had peak VRAM usage readings of 3903 megabytes.

 

https://www.reddit.com/r/buildapc/comments/2vcepp/discussion_4gb_vram_being_used_at_1080p_in_2/

it says it used 4gb, but does not mention stuttering

[Aereldor]

3 hours ago, Nacho Marco Segui said:

it says it used 4gb, but does not mention stuttering

Stuttering is generally what happens when you run out of VRAM. As someone who mods Bethesda titles, I am intimately familiar with running out of VRAM. I've tried it on different computers with different GPUs, and it's always the same. First the stutter, then the enormous FPS drop (if the over-the-top VRAM usage is consistent, textures etc are offloaded to slower system RAM).

 

Also, he doesn't say it was the average VRAM usage- he said it was the peak VRAM usage. Benchmark the title yourself, and check your numbers- you might be surprised.