What kinds of games will you be playing, at what settings, and with what budget?

Gunna need a little more info here.

Can't really beat the 280x for the price imo

pretty much all the newer games that are gonna come/are out out i guess
settings depent on what my PC could handle paired with a good GFXcard right ?

wanted to keep the price at around 500 i can go up to 800-ish if really needed

If you look on ebay you can score a 7970 ghz for around 110$ if you are lucky. It is the same thing.

Avoid Nvidia like the plague unless you have more money than brains. Nvidia cards age like milk.

If you have a GFX card as a placeholder just wait. The new 14nm HBM2 cards are coming out soon(ish).

I totally disagree about the age thing, but that's just my opinion. One thing I love about newer generation of nvidia cards is the shadowplay software. You can leave it running with next to no effect on frames and record up to 15 minutes of action after it happened into high quality videos. The videos I record with it are 60 fps and can be used on any game that is full screen. Makes capture super easy if that is what you are into and I won't be switching any time soon because of it.

I agree with #5 with the 7970 being a great value card which is true. I own a GTX 680 which compares close to that card, but the price tag is usually +$50 used, at least. I don't agree with the aging aspect, I think both cards (and all gfx cards in general) age the same, it depends on market factors, support, launch price etc that determine value.

You also need to keep in mind what monitor you own/will get, and how the AMD/Nvidia cards affect your display output. e.g. nvidia/lightboost combo

#1
980 Ti for best performance, 390 for best price to performance ratio. 390X and 980 are options if a 980 Ti is overkill, but a 390 doesn't quite cut it.

#3
The 285/380 is a thing.

#5
7950/7970 used probably mining cards.

I have never seen an nvidia card turn sour, but I haven't tried to drink any GPUs so far.

mid 2016 stretches the definition of "soon(ish)" a bit, don't you think?

#7
You know that lightboost works on both AMD and nividia?

Disagree all you want. It doesn't make it less true. The 290x was made to compete with the 780ti and was slightly slower and cheaper at the time. Now the 290x sits in between the 970 and 980 while the 780ti sits close to the 960/970. After the frame time issues, microstuttering, and 3.5gb incident, card killing drivers ruining my 480, lying about async support i will not be purchasing anything else from them for a very long time.

can we agree that nvidia has better software support and super high end cards, and AMD has better price-to-performance cards and less software support

#9
You're the type of guy to buy a 480 or 290X and then complain about the temperatures, right?

Also how fucking delusional do you have to be to think a 970 beats a 780 Ti? Do you actually believe that somehow the 780 Ti became slower than the 290X?

I'm taking any bet that you'll buy an AMD card and come back whining about microstuttering and drivers again.

Are you retarded?

I never complained about temps. Temps are irrelevant so long as you have proper cooling. I complained about Nvidia whql drivers shutting off the fan on my 480 killing the card out of warranty.

Witcher 3

Look at almost all recent benchmarks.

I have had a AMD card for years with no complaints and a ATI card before that.

All dis purchase justification.

But shadow play though! Also don't act like hardware doesn't fail randomly

The card killing drivers where a big deal when it happened.

http://modcrash.com/nvidia-display-driver-damaging-gpus/

http://www.techspot.com/news/38131-nvidia-19675-gpu-driver-burning-up-graphics-cards.html

It happened more than once.

Do I need to remind you that in Witcher 3 the 970 beats the 290X because of hairworks bullshit? If you take Witcher 3 with Hairworks as a benchmark both the 780 Ti and 290X are between the 960 and 970.

Link me all those "recent benchmarks". So far I've never seen the 290X win. Even against the 780 Ti on stock clocks. And I have yet to see a 780 Ti that failed to reach 1250MHz. There's also some 1500MHz 780 Tis out there that beat overclocked 980s quite easily but that wouldn't be a fair comparision.

Also define recent. I need to know wether I should dump 50 or just 10 benchmarks proving you wrong.

lmao this is awful

2015 latest drivers http://s2.postimg.org/kkmssb1p5/gtx780ti_2015_bench.png
http://www.computerbase.de/2015-10/star-wars-battlefront-erste-benchmarks-der-open-beta/

290x was 200$ cheaper.
Also AMD has the option to change tessellation levels usually resulting in 0 loss in quality. Nvidia paid companies to put sub pixel tessellation in games resulting in no image quality boost but crippling AMD cards in benchmark and slowing down the performance of both company's cards.

http://www.pcper.com/files/imagecache/article_max_width/news/2011-08-17/debris-water-mesh-620.jpg

Thanks Nvidia.

http://www.pcgameshardware.de/GTA-5-Grand-Theft-Auto-5-Spiel-4795/Tests/GTA-5-PC-Test-Benchmark-1156215/

Nvidia left Kepler to die after Maxwell.

http://forums.guru3d.com/showthread.php?t=398976

:S

You made my day.
I should probably circle "Shadow of Mordor" in MSPaint but this'll have to do for now: http://i.imgur.com/DWJVGsV.png
Second link is 10/10, neither teh 780 Ti nor the 290X appear in those benchmarks. That means the 290X is faster, right?

Anticompetitives practices? nVidia crippling its own cards to make AMD look worse? See Hairworks. If you can turn it off, turn it off, if it's something you can't turn off let the lawsuits commence. It still doesn't make the 290X any faster, so while we're discussing performance it's not helping your case. I'd use Intel as an example why anticompetitive practices don't mean your product is worse, but you'd start defending your FX-8350 and the FX vs i7 debate has been dead for years, just like the FX series.

Next link I'm counting 2 wins for the 780 Ti, 1 for the 970, the 290X always being slower than either.
Project Cars pre-release 970 wins, 290X still slowest.
1.0.11 780 Ti is now close to 970, 290X barely beats normal 780.
1.0.13 and new drivers 2 for 780 Ti, 1 for 970, 290X still barely above 780, actually loses to 960 and 770 on 1080p.
Same GTA V benchmark as before.
Last GTA V benchmark: With the old drivers the 290X beats a reference 780 Ti on stock clocks. Now you've just got to find an aftermarket 780 Ti with less than a 7% overclock. Because once the boost clock touches 1000MHz that 3fps advantage is gone.

You just linked benchmarks that proved my point and show that nvidia is still updating the drivers for Kepler.

You don't even know which card I'm using. What if I told you I'm using a 7970?
But what is this smell? Could it be ...
http://www.teamfortress.tv/post/127945/how-well-do-amd-cpus-do-in-tf2

BUYER'S REMORSE?!
NOBODY SAW THAT ONE COMING!
Your 480 is Fermi, his 680 is Kepler though, I blame the 8350, but I can smell your salt from here.

interesting
so i think i'm gonna choose one off those then.

Still hanging more towards a nvidia card,
just because i've always had a nvidia card and never ran into trouble before,
still the 390x seems pretty good but after reading about people having a lot off driver issues and bsod's, maybe those where old post's though, not sure about these newer cards and drivers,

but is it true that AMD has better DX12 support?
or is that just like saying mine is better then yours without actual proof ?

-Grim

Crysis 3 is known to have ungodly amounts of pointless tessilation (Nvidia the way its ment to be shilled)

390 and 390x are just OCed 290 and 290x with extra vram that doesn't matter in most games.

http://www.pcper.com/files/imagecache/article_max_width/news/2011-08-17/debris-water-mesh-620.jpg
THE WAY IT'S MEANT TO BE SHILLED

I haven't had a FX-8320 in a LONG time thanks to Valve being total piss at optimization and the FX's lack of single core perf. TF2 DID run fine on my old FX untill Valve ruined TF2's performance even further. I stand by the fact that in most games you will be GPU limited far before you notice the difference between a far more expensive i7 and a FX 8320.

Project cars is known to have issues with AMD cards.
Same GTA V benchmark as before.
[/quote]Last GTA V benchmark: With the old drivers the 290X beats a reference 780 Ti on stock clocks. Now you've just got to find an aftermarket 780 Ti with less than a 7% overclock. Because once the boost clock touches 1000MHz that 3fps advantage is gone.[/quote] The 290x will OC decent on a non reference card. Honestly if you buy reference AMD cards our even bother to bench them you are retarded.

Good card. Turn tessellation down in CCC and watch your FPS go up by 40% in some titles.

Worked fine on my 4890 and shat the bed on my 480 on the same CPU in the same system. Clearly something wasn't right with the 480.

What about BF4? It's Crysis 3 and not Crysis 2 btw, but don't let facts get in your way.

http://www.pcgameshardware.de/AMD-Radeon-Grafikkarte-255597/Specials/Radeon-R9-390X-Test-1162303/
10% faster.
If it were the exact same card, which it isn't, and it was just a 10% overclock you'd still be comparing an oc'd card and a card on stock clocks. Also the 780 Ti still doesn't appear in those benchmarks, so you can't compare them anyway.

Are you still trying to invalidate a Crysis 3 benchmark with Crysis 2 and CAPS?

Same can be said for an i3.
http://www.techspot.com/review/991-gta-5-pc-benchmarks/page6.html
Nevermind that the FX 8 cores compete with i5s. They never made sense for games and it won't get any better the older they get.

Sooooooo, you linked Project Cars benchmarks to show the 290X is faster and when the benchmarks don't agree with you anymore AMD cards are suddenly "known to have issues" in Project Cars?

My point exactly. If you compare reference cards the 290X is crippled. But if you want to compare overclocked aftermarket cards then do so, don't compare an overclocked aftermarket 290X and a reference stock clocks 780 Ti.
If this were about price to performanc it'd be difference, but you said the 290X is faster than the 970 and 780 Ti and the 780 Ti is slower than a 970 and both of those statements are false.
Best case for a 290X is about 1200MHz. A 20% OC.
A good 780 Ti will do 1300MHz. A good one, not a great one. That's a 40% OC.
Now tell me which magic will make the 290X 40% faster with a 20% OC so it stays ahead of the 780 Ti. If it even was faster on stock clocks.
If you don't want to compare custom overclocks we can compare factory OCs, but it won't look any better.

Thanks for the validation, I really needed that. Oh wait I don't. I always do my research before I buy anything. That way I always get good cards. I own both AMD and nVidia GPUs. I live on both sides of the fence, my grass is always green, metaphorically speaking.
Please tell me what CCC is. I really don't know. I've never seen a computer in my life. I don't even know what they're supposed to do, I just built and sold them.

I blame the 8350 on the 680 build, since the 680 definitely isn't Fermi. Probably not oc'd and dx9 instead of dx8.
You are awfully upset that the 480 didn't live up to your expectations. If only there was a way to know how a GPU will perform in a certain game before buying it. Oh wait it's called a benchmark.

So small update.

i bought a GTX 980 TI

now up to a new PSU cause card prolly to strong xD
still got one off the early GS600 PSU's

card min requirement is 600w, but tbh i dont wanna risk it
gonna get a 750w PSU before i jam the card in the PC :)

thx for all the responses though verry appreciated

-Grim

PSU requirements are bullshit because of horribly overrated PSUs that fold when you try to pull their rated wattage.
I'm assuming it's a Corsair GS600 which is ok. Not great, but definitely capable of supplying 600W.
A 980 Ti only pulls ~230W. Your total build should be <450W. Overclocked a bit more, but definitely not 600W.
No need for a new PSU. Especially not a 750W one.

yes its a Corsair GS600

:O
they've bin telling me that its best because off multiple HDD's that i'm running, that 600 would probs not be enough

1 SSD and 3 normal HDD's plus the fans and a corsair H100 for the CPU

so i didnt want to risk anything getting dammaged because running out off power or whatever,

PC parts are not really cheap so taking a risk is not really something i want to do :/
wish there was a way off knowing what my PC uses power wise xD

don't get me wrong though, i apreciate the comment i really really do u obviously know a hel of a lot more then me about this stuff, its just that i want to be cautious because off the amount of money it all costs

If you run out of power it'll shut off. There is no risk.

http://pcpartpicker.com/p/3hm96h
http://outervision.com/power-supply-calculator will give you an even more accurate, and even lower number (448W).

installed the card not problems so far :D

another question though probably silly question but imma ask anyways xD
would it be wise to set up a custom fan curve for my 980 ti ?

if so what would be a decent fan curve to use ?

-grim

Which 980 Ti?
If you think it's too loud set a lower fan curve.
If the boost clock is limited by temperature and you don't mind it becoming slightly louder set a more aggressive fan curve.

Screwball silenced lmfao

It's impossible to win an argument with setsul, he's a fucking genius lol