Operating System: Windows 7 Professional 64-bit (6.1, Build 7601) Service Pack 1 (7601.win7sp1_gdr.120503-2030) Processor: Intel(R) Core(TM) i7 CPU 950 @ 3.07GHz (8 CPUs), ~3.1GHz Memory: 12288MB RAM Card name: NVIDIA GeForce 9800 GT Manufacturer: NVIDIA Chip type: GeForce 9800 GT Display Memory: 4069 MB Dedicated Memory: 997 MB Shared Memory: 3071 MB Current Mode: 1600 x 1024 (32 bit) (59Hz)
My GeForce 9800 has served me well and still does. Though trying Guild Wars 2, it's a little laggy in some areas if I have settings at high even with HD avatar textures, AA, Shadows and reflections off.
The only thing I can say is that my 5850 is performing much better than I thought it would. People say a toaster can run WOW, but last time I checked (early Cata) I couldn't max the game and hit 60 stable. If I'm not mistaken GW2 actually gives me more FPS on maxed settings.
Originally posted by Sylvarii The 7970 out performs it in most charts though.
If I had to buy a new graphic card to upgrade my 6870, I would definitely go for a 7970 without even thinking twice. Best "single GPU" card of the market right now.
Respect, walk, what did you say? Respect, walk Are you talkin' to me? Are you talkin' to me? - PANTERA at HELLFEST 2023
My 6870 is quite sweet when combained with an i5 3570, set you back about $160-$200 - get a good 60fps at 1080p on Max settings out in PvE but on average 40 in WvW but i normaly turn the gfx down a notch to maintain a 50fps min.
Originally posted by expresso My 6870 is quite sweet when combained with an i5 3570, set you back about $160-$200 - get a good 60fps at 1080p on Max settings out in PvE but on average 40 in WvW but i normaly turn the gfx down a notch to maintain a 50fps min.
That is a lie.
I have an HD 6870 on a Phenom II x4 cranked up to 4.1ghz with 8gb Kingston HyperX running GW2 on an Agility III SSD and I do not get 60fps in PvE at 1080p on MAX settings - not even close. Maybe 40 if there aren't a lot of players around.
Originally posted by expresso My 6870 is quite sweet when combained with an i5 3570, set you back about $160-$200 - get a good 60fps at 1080p on Max settings out in PvE but on average 40 in WvW but i normaly turn the gfx down a notch to maintain a 50fps min.
That is a lie.
I have an HD 6870 on a Phenom II x4 cranked up to 4.1ghz with 8gb Kingston HyperX running GW2 on an Agility III SSD and I do not get 60fps in PvE at 1080p on MAX settings - not even close. Maybe 40 if there aren't a lot of players around.
either of you using s SSD? also many other factors could be coming into play as well.. like how clean your OS is.. drivers you are using.. what you mean by MAX settings.. ect
aww saw you are using a SSD Spock hmm couple tweaks you should be able to hit 60 fps on that rig
I angered the clerk in a clothing shop today. She asked me what size I was and I said actual, because I am not to scale. I like vending machines 'cause snacks are better when they fall. If I buy a candy bar at a store, oftentimes, I will drop it... so that it achieves its maximum flavor potential. --Mitch Hedberg
Originally posted by expresso My 6870 is quite sweet when combained with an i5 3570, set you back about $160-$200 - get a good 60fps at 1080p on Max settings out in PvE but on average 40 in WvW but i normaly turn the gfx down a notch to maintain a 50fps min.
That is a lie.
I have an HD 6870 on a Phenom II x4 cranked up to 4.1ghz with 8gb Kingston HyperX running GW2 on an Agility III SSD and I do not get 60fps in PvE at 1080p on MAX settings - not even close. Maybe 40 if there aren't a lot of players around.
either of you using s SSD? also many other factors could be coming into play as well.. like how clean your OS is.. drivers you are using.. what you mean by MAX settings.. ect
Using SSD - Agility III OCX w/ Win 7 Pro x64 fresh install as of 3 months ago and I work in IT so I kind of know what I'm doing. Latest and greatest 12.8 drivers.
To me MAX settings means setting the preset to "Best Appearance" which turns every option to the max.
Unless he's got a very serious OC going on with his 6870, I call Shennanigans!
Originally posted by expresso My 6870 is quite sweet when combained with an i5 3570, set you back about $160-$200 - get a good 60fps at 1080p on Max settings out in PvE but on average 40 in WvW but i normaly turn the gfx down a notch to maintain a 50fps min.
That is a lie.
I have an HD 6870 on a Phenom II x4 cranked up to 4.1ghz with 8gb Kingston HyperX running GW2 on an Agility III SSD and I do not get 60fps in PvE at 1080p on MAX settings - not even close. Maybe 40 if there aren't a lot of players around.
Why would I lie? Maybe GW2 likes Intel more than AMD, I also got 8GB DDR3 and an SSD. I literatly built the system a few weeks ago so it's all new stuff and new install of Windows etc.
Originally posted by expresso My 6870 is quite sweet when combained with an i5 3570, set you back about $160-$200 - get a good 60fps at 1080p on Max settings out in PvE but on average 40 in WvW but i normaly turn the gfx down a notch to maintain a 50fps min.
That is a lie.
I have an HD 6870 on a Phenom II x4 cranked up to 4.1ghz with 8gb Kingston HyperX running GW2 on an Agility III SSD and I do not get 60fps in PvE at 1080p on MAX settings - not even close. Maybe 40 if there aren't a lot of players around.
Why would I lie? Maybe GW2 likes Intel more than AMD, I also got 8GB DDR3 and an SSD. I literatly built the system a few weeks ago so it's all new stuff and new install of Windows etc.
Both on Stock though I believe my 6870 is factory overclocked.
And just to clarify I am not saying my FPS never drop below 60 but they do hover around the 55-60 (vsync on) when out doing PvE stuff. More often than not when I check it's on 60.
Originally posted by expresso My 6870 is quite sweet when combained with an i5 3570, set you back about $160-$200 - get a good 60fps at 1080p on Max settings out in PvE but on average 40 in WvW but i normaly turn the gfx down a notch to maintain a 50fps min.
That is a lie.
I have an HD 6870 on a Phenom II x4 cranked up to 4.1ghz with 8gb Kingston HyperX running GW2 on an Agility III SSD and I do not get 60fps in PvE at 1080p on MAX settings - not even close. Maybe 40 if there aren't a lot of players around.
either of you using s SSD? also many other factors could be coming into play as well.. like how clean your OS is.. drivers you are using.. what you mean by MAX settings.. ect
Using SSD - Agility III OCX w/ Win 7 Pro x64 fresh install as of 3 months ago and I work in IT so I kind of know what I'm doing. Latest and greatest 12.8 drivers.
To me MAX settings means setting the preset to "Best Appearance" which turns every option to the max.
Unless he's got a very serious OC going on with his 6870, I call Shennanigans!
Mine's an XFX.
i see well not sure what graphics settings you normally play with but I'd leave that at Best Appearance. Then go down an change Reflections to Terrain & Sky, Change Shadows to High, Turn post processing Off(unless you need the bloom/DoF), Tick off the new distance blur option. Oh also make sure you aren't using supersampling. Doing those should get you into the 60 fps range in many areas
I angered the clerk in a clothing shop today. She asked me what size I was and I said actual, because I am not to scale. I like vending machines 'cause snacks are better when they fall. If I buy a candy bar at a store, oftentimes, I will drop it... so that it achieves its maximum flavor potential. --Mitch Hedberg
Originally posted by expresso My 6870 is quite sweet when combained with an i5 3570, set you back about $160-$200 - get a good 60fps at 1080p on Max settings out in PvE but on average 40 in WvW but i normaly turn the gfx down a notch to maintain a 50fps min.
That is a lie.
I have an HD 6870 on a Phenom II x4 cranked up to 4.1ghz with 8gb Kingston HyperX running GW2 on an Agility III SSD and I do not get 60fps in PvE at 1080p on MAX settings - not even close. Maybe 40 if there aren't a lot of players around.
During the last test (yesterday) I was getting 40 fps on average too. What has always been surprising me with GW2 though is that the number of players didn't seem to affect frame rates that much at all. In "some" games I won't name (even recent ones), you get uber 60+ fps everywhere, but as soon as you have a couple of players around, the FPS nosedive to 20 or less. In GW2, th frame rates seem to be way more stable overall, no matter if you are alone or have a dozen of other players around.
Respect, walk, what did you say? Respect, walk Are you talkin' to me? Are you talkin' to me? - PANTERA at HELLFEST 2023
Originally posted by expresso My 6870 is quite sweet when combained with an i5 3570, set you back about $160-$200 - get a good 60fps at 1080p on Max settings out in PvE but on average 40 in WvW but i normaly turn the gfx down a notch to maintain a 50fps min.
That is a lie.
I have an HD 6870 on a Phenom II x4 cranked up to 4.1ghz with 8gb Kingston HyperX running GW2 on an Agility III SSD and I do not get 60fps in PvE at 1080p on MAX settings - not even close. Maybe 40 if there aren't a lot of players around.
I dunno, seems pretty possible to me. I have a 5850 on a i750, both on factory clock, and I get 40+ FPS almost all the time, fully maxed.
And I often get 60 outdoors when there's not a mob-heavy / player-heavy event going on.
Originally posted by expresso My 6870 is quite sweet when combained with an i5 3570, set you back about $160-$200 - get a good 60fps at 1080p on Max settings out in PvE but on average 40 in WvW but i normaly turn the gfx down a notch to maintain a 50fps min.
That is a lie.
I have an HD 6870 on a Phenom II x4 cranked up to 4.1ghz with 8gb Kingston HyperX running GW2 on an Agility III SSD and I do not get 60fps in PvE at 1080p on MAX settings - not even close. Maybe 40 if there aren't a lot of players around.
either of you using s SSD? also many other factors could be coming into play as well.. like how clean your OS is.. drivers you are using.. what you mean by MAX settings.. ect
Using SSD - Agility III OCX w/ Win 7 Pro x64 fresh install as of 3 months ago and I work in IT so I kind of know what I'm doing. Latest and greatest 12.8 drivers.
To me MAX settings means setting the preset to "Best Appearance" which turns every option to the max.
Unless he's got a very serious OC going on with his 6870, I call Shennanigans!
Mine's an XFX.
i see well not sure what graphics settings you normally play with but I'd leave that at Best Appearance. Then go down an change Reflections to Terrain & Sky, Change Shadows to High, Turn post processing Off(unless you need the bloom/DoF), Tick off the new distance blur option. Oh also make sure you aren't using supersampling. Doing those should get you into the 60 fps range in many areas
I am actually sitting less than that in my graphics settings and still don't get 60.
And he says his is factory OC? Hmm.... something funky is going on.
My FPS will sit at like 40-45 when I'm moving around/fighting stuff and only go 50-60+ when I'm perfectly still and there aren't many people around when I'm chilling in Divinity's Reach or something.
Originally posted by expresso My 6870 is quite sweet when combained with an i5 3570, set you back about $160-$200 - get a good 60fps at 1080p on Max settings out in PvE but on average 40 in WvW but i normaly turn the gfx down a notch to maintain a 50fps min.
That is a lie.
I have an HD 6870 on a Phenom II x4 cranked up to 4.1ghz with 8gb Kingston HyperX running GW2 on an Agility III SSD and I do not get 60fps in PvE at 1080p on MAX settings - not even close. Maybe 40 if there aren't a lot of players around.
either of you using s SSD? also many other factors could be coming into play as well.. like how clean your OS is.. drivers you are using.. what you mean by MAX settings.. ect
Using SSD - Agility III OCX w/ Win 7 Pro x64 fresh install as of 3 months ago and I work in IT so I kind of know what I'm doing. Latest and greatest 12.8 drivers.
To me MAX settings means setting the preset to "Best Appearance" which turns every option to the max.
Unless he's got a very serious OC going on with his 6870, I call Shennanigans!
Mine's an XFX.
i see well not sure what graphics settings you normally play with but I'd leave that at Best Appearance. Then go down an change Reflections to Terrain & Sky, Change Shadows to High, Turn post processing Off(unless you need the bloom/DoF), Tick off the new distance blur option. Oh also make sure you aren't using supersampling. Doing those should get you into the 60 fps range in many areas
I am actually sitting less than that in my graphics settings and still don't get 60.
And he says his is factory OC? Hmm.... something funky is going on.
My FPS will set at like 40-45 when I'm moving around/fighting stuff and only go 50-60+ when I'm perfectly still and there aren't many people around when I'm chilling in Divinity's Reach or something.
seems like you do have something going on you should be getting better than that.. i have little bit better system with the gtx 670 but if I use the settings i said above and take off vsync I sit at 90-130 fps
I angered the clerk in a clothing shop today. She asked me what size I was and I said actual, because I am not to scale. I like vending machines 'cause snacks are better when they fall. If I buy a candy bar at a store, oftentimes, I will drop it... so that it achieves its maximum flavor potential. --Mitch Hedberg
The trouble with asking a hardware question like this outside of the hardware forum is that lots of people have opinions, but half of them don't know what they're talking about.
For the original poster, I think a video card upgrade makes sense for you. Your processor is plenty fast enough, and you have plenty of system memory, so those won't hold you back.
On general principle, I ask what power supply and case you have before making a recommendation. You never know when you'll find someone who went with a cheap junk "800 W" power supply because they were impressed with a high nominal wattage and didn't realize that it will explode if you try to pull 500 W from it. So, what power supply and case do you have?
-----
For a video card, on a bang for the buck basis, I'd tend to favor a Radeon HD 7770 or 7870, depending on budget. In your case, I think you want something faster than a 7770, so a 7870 fits the bill. For example:
There are a number of cards out there that are faster than a Radeon HD 7870, but performance per dollar declines substantially, so you pay a lot more for only somewhat more performance. If you want to go high end, then you deal with that, I suppose.
A bunch of Nvidia fanboys have been recommending the GeForce GTX 660 Ti lately, perhaps because it launched last week. At launch prices, it was a decent value, but AMD has since slashed prices on the 7870.
The next step up is a Radeon HD 7950, which makes sense if you're looking to do an Eyefinity setup (due to the 3 GB of system memory) or GPGPU (which isn't for gaming). Otherwise, it's too much added cost as compared to a 7870 for not enough more performance.
At the high end, you have the GeForce GTX 670 and Radeon HD 7970. On a large budget, that might be where you want to look. The 7970 tends to be a little faster than the GTX 670, but they're close enough that each will win in some games. The 7970 tends to be a little more expensive than the GTX 670. The 7970 uses quite a bit more power, partially but not entirely due to the 3 GB of video memory. The 7970 also tends to have more overclocking headroom, largely because the GTX 670 is substantially constrained by memory bandwidth, and you can't overclock memory very far from the 1.5 GHz that it ships with.
AMD bins out their best Tahiti dies for the Radeon HD 7970 GHz Edition. This is basically just a 7970 with a higher stock clock speed, and usually a premium cooler. For example:
That's where you'd want to look if you want the fastest card you can get.
Nvidia also offers a GeForce GTX 680, which is more expensive than a Radeon HD 7970 GHz Edition, but also slower. Hardly any of Nvidia's GK104 dies can meet GTX 680 specs, so Nvidia has to price them way too high to keep them from selling out. That's not what you want.
There's also the GeForce GTX 690, which is basically two GTX 680s on a single card. The only reason to get a dual GPU card is if you want to get two of them, for quad SLI. If you want to SLI, then just get two GeForce GTX 670s. That's thoroughly unnecessary for a single monitor, however.
-----
Do you have a good SSD? If not, then you might want to consider getting one. An SSD will greatly reduce your loading times. In Guild Wars 1, this made a huge difference in how the game felt, because of the frequent warping around. I'd expect that to be true in Guild Wars 2, too. Imagine using map travel and reliably having the game ready for you to move around about as quickly as you are.
SSDs don't cost as much as they used to, either. For example:
That's an interesting chart, but it's surely going to be greatly influenced by other factors, most notably the video settings that people choose. A Radeon HD 7970 isn't merely 3 times as fast as Intel HD Graphics 3000. It's easily more than 10 times as fast.
I am actually sitting less than that in my graphics settings and still don't get 60.
And he says his is factory OC? Hmm.... something funky is going on.
My FPS will set at like 40-45 when I'm moving around/fighting stuff and only go 50-60+ when I'm perfectly still and there aren't many people around when I'm chilling in Divinity's Reach or something.
seems like you do have something going on you should be getting better than that.. i have little bit better system with the gtx 670 but if I use the settings i said above and take off vsync I sit at 90-130 fps
Any ideas? I don't think I'd even get 90-130 FPS with everything set to Medium.
The trouble with asking a hardware question like this outside of the hardware forum is that lots of people have opinions, but half of them don't know what they're talking about.
For the original poster, I think a video card upgrade makes sense for you. Your processor is plenty fast enough, and you have plenty of system memory, so those won't hold you back.
On general principle, I ask what power supply and case you have before making a recommendation. You never know when you'll find someone who went with a cheap junk "800 W" power supply because they were impressed with a high nominal wattage and didn't realize that it will explode if you try to pull 500 W from it. So, what power supply and case do you have?
-----
For a video card, on a bang for the buck basis, I'd tend to favor a Radeon HD 7770 or 7870, depending on budget. In your case, I think you want something faster than a 7770, so a 7870 fits the bill. For example:
There are a number of cards out there that are faster than a Radeon HD 7870, but performance per dollar declines substantially, so you pay a lot more for only somewhat more performance. If you want to go high end, then you deal with that, I suppose.
A bunch of Nvidia fanboys have been recommending the GeForce GTX 660 Ti lately, perhaps because it launched last week. At launch prices, it was a decent value, but AMD has since slashed prices on the 7870.
The next step up is a Radeon HD 7950, which makes sense if you're looking to do an Eyefinity setup (due to the 3 GB of system memory) or GPGPU (which isn't for gaming). Otherwise, it's too much added cost as compared to a 7870 for not enough more performance.
At the high end, you have the GeForce GTX 670 and Radeon HD 7970. On a large budget, that might be where you want to look. The 7970 tends to be a little faster than the GTX 670, but they're close enough that each will win in some games. The 7970 tends to be a little more expensive than the GTX 670. The 7970 uses quite a bit more power, partially but not entirely due to the 3 GB of video memory. The 7970 also tends to have more overclocking headroom, largely because the GTX 670 is substantially constrained by memory bandwidth, and you can't overclock memory very far from the 1.5 GHz that it ships with.
AMD bins out their best Tahiti dies for the Radeon HD 7970 GHz Edition. This is basically just a 7970 with a higher stock clock speed, and usually a premium cooler. For example:
That's where you'd want to look if you want the fastest card you can get.
Nvidia also offers a GeForce GTX 680, which is more expensive than a Radeon HD 7970 GHz Edition, but also slower. Hardly any of Nvidia's GK104 dies can meet GTX 680 specs, so Nvidia has to price them way too high to keep them from selling out. That's not what you want.
There's also the GeForce GTX 690, which is basically two GTX 680s on a single card. The only reason to get a dual GPU card is if you want to get two of them, for quad SLI. If you want to SLI, then just get two GeForce GTX 670s. That's thoroughly unnecessary for a single monitor, however.
-----
Do you have a good SSD? If not, then you might want to consider getting one. An SSD will greatly reduce your loading times. In Guild Wars 1, this made a huge difference in how the game felt, because of the frequent warping around. I'd expect that to be true in Guild Wars 2, too. Imagine using map travel and reliably having the game ready for you to move around about as quickly as you are.
SSDs don't cost as much as they used to, either. For example:
just wanted to comment on that I found the 670 the best memory OC card I have had from nvidia in a LONG time.. Using the Gigabyte Windforce and can run the memory at 2.2GHZ no problem. Really no reason to get the 680 over 670.. I'm hitting over 10k p score in 3dmark 11 as well
I angered the clerk in a clothing shop today. She asked me what size I was and I said actual, because I am not to scale. I like vending machines 'cause snacks are better when they fall. If I buy a candy bar at a store, oftentimes, I will drop it... so that it achieves its maximum flavor potential. --Mitch Hedberg
I am actually sitting less than that in my graphics settings and still don't get 60.
And he says his is factory OC? Hmm.... something funky is going on.
My FPS will set at like 40-45 when I'm moving around/fighting stuff and only go 50-60+ when I'm perfectly still and there aren't many people around when I'm chilling in Divinity's Reach or something.
seems like you do have something going on you should be getting better than that.. i have little bit better system with the gtx 670 but if I use the settings i said above and take off vsync I sit at 90-130 fps
Any ideas? I don't think I'd even get 90-130 FPS with everything set to Medium.
not to sure haven't messed with ATI and AMD in awhile now.... you have any benchmarks on your computer like 3dmark11? i'd be curious as to what you are getting on that
I angered the clerk in a clothing shop today. She asked me what size I was and I said actual, because I am not to scale. I like vending machines 'cause snacks are better when they fall. If I buy a candy bar at a store, oftentimes, I will drop it... so that it achieves its maximum flavor potential. --Mitch Hedberg
The 670 OC edition is yielding the same peroformance as a stock 680GTX and in some games as much as 7% more. Not bad for over 100$ off.
Third, that is nvidia new version so comes with a ton of stuff like TXAA, Tessalation perfomance nearly double that of the 500 series. Gives you a lot of leg room for future games and ofcourse expansion packs from GW2 which might have better visuals.
$100 off of a card that is absurdly overpriced doesn't necessarily make it a good deal. If the GTX 680 were $600, you could say that the GTX 670 was $200 off of it. But that wouldn't make it a better deal than it is today.
If you're overclocking a GeForce GTX 670 to match GeForce GTX 680 performance, then you should expect that your overclock will fry the GTX 670 sooner or later. Losing 1 of the 8 SMXes means you need a ~14% overclock in clock speed just to pull even in performance. With the GTX 680 already very specially binned to grab the top chips and aggressively using GPU Turbo to go nearly as fast as is safe, adding 14% to the clock speed is taking a big risk.
The higher end cards in the GeForce 400/500 series already had vastly more tessellation performance than they had any plausible use for. The GeForce GTX 480 had 15 hardware tessellators, while the Radeon HD 5870 has one. And you know why? Because one was enough. Synthetic tessellation benchmarks could see a huge difference, but real games couldn't.
I think TXAA is going to be the new GPU PhysX: a completely stupid idea that gives Nvidia marketing another bullet point no something that their cards can do and AMD's can't, because no one would want to do it. TXAA is basically a motion blur effect, in case you want your games to look blurrier.
Buy the new gtx 660 TI. It performs very well. Im going for that card on the next payday
Don't. You'll pay about a 20% price premium over a Radeon HD 7870 for a performance advantage that is maybe in the single digit percentages on average. The 7870 also lacks the GTX 660 Tis problem that if you use over 1.5 GB of video memory, you lose memory bandwidth. That's a big problem on a card that is already substantially constrained by memory bandwidth.
The 670 OC edition is yielding the same peroformance as a stock 680GTX and in some games as much as 7% more. Not bad for over 100$ off.
Third, that is nvidia new version so comes with a ton of stuff like TXAA, Tessalation perfomance nearly double that of the 500 series. Gives you a lot of leg room for future games and ofcourse expansion packs from GW2 which might have better visuals.
$100 off of a card that is absurdly overpriced doesn't necessarily make it a good deal. If the GTX 680 were $600, you could say that the GTX 670 was $200 off of it. But that wouldn't make it a better deal than it is today.
If you're overclocking a GeForce GTX 670 to match GeForce GTX 680 performance, then you should expect that your overclock will fry the GTX 670 sooner or later. Losing 1 of the 8 SMXes means you need a ~14% overclock in clock speed just to pull even in performance. With the GTX 680 already very specially binned to grab the top chips and aggressively using GPU Turbo to go nearly as fast as is safe, adding 14% to the clock speed is taking a big risk.
The higher end cards in the GeForce 400/500 series already had vastly more tessellation performance than they had any plausible use for. The GeForce GTX 480 had 15 hardware tessellators, while the Radeon HD 5870 has one. And you know why? Because one was enough. Synthetic tessellation benchmarks could see a huge difference, but real games couldn't.
I think TXAA is going to be the new GPU PhysX: a completely stupid idea that gives Nvidia marketing another bullet point no something that their cards can do and AMD's can't, because no one would want to do it. TXAA is basically a motion blur effect, in case you want your games to look blurrier.
been running my 670 at 680 speeds(actually little above) since got this card.. temps are fine no issues at all so far.. great card
I angered the clerk in a clothing shop today. She asked me what size I was and I said actual, because I am not to scale. I like vending machines 'cause snacks are better when they fall. If I buy a candy bar at a store, oftentimes, I will drop it... so that it achieves its maximum flavor potential. --Mitch Hedberg
Comments
If you look at the chart it says Auto Detect - Ok for noobs not ok for people who actually want to tweek graphics.
Had this conversation with Quizz a few days ago and he made sence.
The card you link is one of if not the best 670 on the market today,it really does give you 680 performace for less money but,and it's a big but.
Their is also this card that is the same price but gives even more bang for buck,it's also a gigabyte windforce.
http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=GX-097-GI&groupid=701&catid=56&subcat=938
This is the one you linked,as you can see,the reviews are nothing but great.
http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=GX-095-GI
The 7970 out performs it in most charts though.
The only thing I can say is that my 5850 is performing much better than I thought it would. People say a toaster can run WOW, but last time I checked (early Cata) I couldn't max the game and hit 60 stable. If I'm not mistaken GW2 actually gives me more FPS on maxed settings.
If I had to buy a new graphic card to upgrade my 6870, I would definitely go for a 7970 without even thinking twice. Best "single GPU" card of the market right now.
Respect, walk
Are you talkin' to me? Are you talkin' to me?
- PANTERA at HELLFEST 2023
lol he can run on high with that setup.. Period!
That is a lie.
I have an HD 6870 on a Phenom II x4 cranked up to 4.1ghz with 8gb Kingston HyperX running GW2 on an Agility III SSD and I do not get 60fps in PvE at 1080p on MAX settings - not even close. Maybe 40 if there aren't a lot of players around.
either of you using s SSD? also many other factors could be coming into play as well.. like how clean your OS is.. drivers you are using.. what you mean by MAX settings.. ect
aww saw you are using a SSD Spock hmm couple tweaks you should be able to hit 60 fps on that rig
I angered the clerk in a clothing shop today. She asked me what size I was and I said actual, because I am not to scale. I like vending machines 'cause snacks are better when they fall. If I buy a candy bar at a store, oftentimes, I will drop it... so that it achieves its maximum flavor potential. --Mitch Hedberg
Using SSD - Agility III OCX w/ Win 7 Pro x64 fresh install as of 3 months ago and I work in IT so I kind of know what I'm doing. Latest and greatest 12.8 drivers.
To me MAX settings means setting the preset to "Best Appearance" which turns every option to the max.
Unless he's got a very serious OC going on with his 6870, I call Shennanigans!
Mine's an XFX.
Why would I lie? Maybe GW2 likes Intel more than AMD, I also got 8GB DDR3 and an SSD. I literatly built the system a few weeks ago so it's all new stuff and new install of Windows etc.
Do you have an OC on your 6870? If so how much?
Or OC on your processor?
I too have 8GB DDR and SSD as you read.
Both on Stock though I believe my 6870 is factory overclocked.
And just to clarify I am not saying my FPS never drop below 60 but they do hover around the 55-60 (vsync on) when out doing PvE stuff. More often than not when I check it's on 60.
i see well not sure what graphics settings you normally play with but I'd leave that at Best Appearance. Then go down an change Reflections to Terrain & Sky, Change Shadows to High, Turn post processing Off(unless you need the bloom/DoF), Tick off the new distance blur option. Oh also make sure you aren't using supersampling. Doing those should get you into the 60 fps range in many areas
I angered the clerk in a clothing shop today. She asked me what size I was and I said actual, because I am not to scale. I like vending machines 'cause snacks are better when they fall. If I buy a candy bar at a store, oftentimes, I will drop it... so that it achieves its maximum flavor potential. --Mitch Hedberg
During the last test (yesterday) I was getting 40 fps on average too. What has always been surprising me with GW2 though is that the number of players didn't seem to affect frame rates that much at all. In "some" games I won't name (even recent ones), you get uber 60+ fps everywhere, but as soon as you have a couple of players around, the FPS nosedive to 20 or less. In GW2, th frame rates seem to be way more stable overall, no matter if you are alone or have a dozen of other players around.
Respect, walk
Are you talkin' to me? Are you talkin' to me?
- PANTERA at HELLFEST 2023
I dunno, seems pretty possible to me. I have a 5850 on a i750, both on factory clock, and I get 40+ FPS almost all the time, fully maxed.
And I often get 60 outdoors when there's not a mob-heavy / player-heavy event going on.
I am actually sitting less than that in my graphics settings and still don't get 60.
And he says his is factory OC? Hmm.... something funky is going on.
My FPS will sit at like 40-45 when I'm moving around/fighting stuff and only go 50-60+ when I'm perfectly still and there aren't many people around when I'm chilling in Divinity's Reach or something.
seems like you do have something going on you should be getting better than that.. i have little bit better system with the gtx 670 but if I use the settings i said above and take off vsync I sit at 90-130 fps
I angered the clerk in a clothing shop today. She asked me what size I was and I said actual, because I am not to scale. I like vending machines 'cause snacks are better when they fall. If I buy a candy bar at a store, oftentimes, I will drop it... so that it achieves its maximum flavor potential. --Mitch Hedberg
The trouble with asking a hardware question like this outside of the hardware forum is that lots of people have opinions, but half of them don't know what they're talking about.
For the original poster, I think a video card upgrade makes sense for you. Your processor is plenty fast enough, and you have plenty of system memory, so those won't hold you back.
On general principle, I ask what power supply and case you have before making a recommendation. You never know when you'll find someone who went with a cheap junk "800 W" power supply because they were impressed with a high nominal wattage and didn't realize that it will explode if you try to pull 500 W from it. So, what power supply and case do you have?
-----
For a video card, on a bang for the buck basis, I'd tend to favor a Radeon HD 7770 or 7870, depending on budget. In your case, I think you want something faster than a 7770, so a 7870 fits the bill. For example:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814102981
There are a number of cards out there that are faster than a Radeon HD 7870, but performance per dollar declines substantially, so you pay a lot more for only somewhat more performance. If you want to go high end, then you deal with that, I suppose.
A bunch of Nvidia fanboys have been recommending the GeForce GTX 660 Ti lately, perhaps because it launched last week. At launch prices, it was a decent value, but AMD has since slashed prices on the 7870.
The next step up is a Radeon HD 7950, which makes sense if you're looking to do an Eyefinity setup (due to the 3 GB of system memory) or GPGPU (which isn't for gaming). Otherwise, it's too much added cost as compared to a 7870 for not enough more performance.
At the high end, you have the GeForce GTX 670 and Radeon HD 7970. On a large budget, that might be where you want to look. The 7970 tends to be a little faster than the GTX 670, but they're close enough that each will win in some games. The 7970 tends to be a little more expensive than the GTX 670. The 7970 uses quite a bit more power, partially but not entirely due to the 3 GB of video memory. The 7970 also tends to have more overclocking headroom, largely because the GTX 670 is substantially constrained by memory bandwidth, and you can't overclock memory very far from the 1.5 GHz that it ships with.
AMD bins out their best Tahiti dies for the Radeon HD 7970 GHz Edition. This is basically just a 7970 with a higher stock clock speed, and usually a premium cooler. For example:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814202001
That's where you'd want to look if you want the fastest card you can get.
Nvidia also offers a GeForce GTX 680, which is more expensive than a Radeon HD 7970 GHz Edition, but also slower. Hardly any of Nvidia's GK104 dies can meet GTX 680 specs, so Nvidia has to price them way too high to keep them from selling out. That's not what you want.
There's also the GeForce GTX 690, which is basically two GTX 680s on a single card. The only reason to get a dual GPU card is if you want to get two of them, for quad SLI. If you want to SLI, then just get two GeForce GTX 670s. That's thoroughly unnecessary for a single monitor, however.
-----
Do you have a good SSD? If not, then you might want to consider getting one. An SSD will greatly reduce your loading times. In Guild Wars 1, this made a huge difference in how the game felt, because of the frequent warping around. I'd expect that to be true in Guild Wars 2, too. Imagine using map travel and reliably having the game ready for you to move around about as quickly as you are.
SSDs don't cost as much as they used to, either. For example:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820171567
That's an interesting chart, but it's surely going to be greatly influenced by other factors, most notably the video settings that people choose. A Radeon HD 7970 isn't merely 3 times as fast as Intel HD Graphics 3000. It's easily more than 10 times as fast.
Any ideas? I don't think I'd even get 90-130 FPS with everything set to Medium.
just wanted to comment on that I found the 670 the best memory OC card I have had from nvidia in a LONG time.. Using the Gigabyte Windforce and can run the memory at 2.2GHZ no problem. Really no reason to get the 680 over 670.. I'm hitting over 10k p score in 3dmark 11 as well
I angered the clerk in a clothing shop today. She asked me what size I was and I said actual, because I am not to scale. I like vending machines 'cause snacks are better when they fall. If I buy a candy bar at a store, oftentimes, I will drop it... so that it achieves its maximum flavor potential. --Mitch Hedberg
not to sure haven't messed with ATI and AMD in awhile now.... you have any benchmarks on your computer like 3dmark11? i'd be curious as to what you are getting on that
I angered the clerk in a clothing shop today. She asked me what size I was and I said actual, because I am not to scale. I like vending machines 'cause snacks are better when they fall. If I buy a candy bar at a store, oftentimes, I will drop it... so that it achieves its maximum flavor potential. --Mitch Hedberg
$100 off of a card that is absurdly overpriced doesn't necessarily make it a good deal. If the GTX 680 were $600, you could say that the GTX 670 was $200 off of it. But that wouldn't make it a better deal than it is today.
If you're overclocking a GeForce GTX 670 to match GeForce GTX 680 performance, then you should expect that your overclock will fry the GTX 670 sooner or later. Losing 1 of the 8 SMXes means you need a ~14% overclock in clock speed just to pull even in performance. With the GTX 680 already very specially binned to grab the top chips and aggressively using GPU Turbo to go nearly as fast as is safe, adding 14% to the clock speed is taking a big risk.
The higher end cards in the GeForce 400/500 series already had vastly more tessellation performance than they had any plausible use for. The GeForce GTX 480 had 15 hardware tessellators, while the Radeon HD 5870 has one. And you know why? Because one was enough. Synthetic tessellation benchmarks could see a huge difference, but real games couldn't.
I think TXAA is going to be the new GPU PhysX: a completely stupid idea that gives Nvidia marketing another bullet point no something that their cards can do and AMD's can't, because no one would want to do it. TXAA is basically a motion blur effect, in case you want your games to look blurrier.
Don't. You'll pay about a 20% price premium over a Radeon HD 7870 for a performance advantage that is maybe in the single digit percentages on average. The 7870 also lacks the GTX 660 Tis problem that if you use over 1.5 GB of video memory, you lose memory bandwidth. That's a big problem on a card that is already substantially constrained by memory bandwidth.
been running my 670 at 680 speeds(actually little above) since got this card.. temps are fine no issues at all so far.. great card
I angered the clerk in a clothing shop today. She asked me what size I was and I said actual, because I am not to scale. I like vending machines 'cause snacks are better when they fall. If I buy a candy bar at a store, oftentimes, I will drop it... so that it achieves its maximum flavor potential. --Mitch Hedberg