Nvidia GTX 960 4GB or 970 4GB?

L[Deactivated] on 05/11/2015 - 21:01

Hello everyone, massive lurker here.

Thank you everybody for the great deals I have used in the past 6 months of use, but now I would like some help. I have just ordered NBN - Exetel 100/40 Unlimited (finally, could've got it 4 months ago but have been very busy).

My GTX 570 has finally hit the end of the road, and I am looking for a new graphics card. I am willing to spend $250-350 AUD on this new card. I have been doing some research and I am not sure whether just to settle with a 960 4GB or go all out and get a 970 4GB (yes it is $150 more than what I was planning to spend, but it would be a card that I could carry into a future computer) and with that I hope that it will last a good 5-7 years (which it probably wont). I can't really wait until the 1000 series comes out as I play games quite regularly. Not the heaviest graphic wise all the time (mainly CS:GO, League of Legends or Football Manager 2016) but sometimes I do enjoy to play BF4 or other more graphic intensive games in which I want those games to reach the 120+ fps per second so if I do buy a 1080p 144hz monitor (which I plan on doing in the future) my card will be able to optimise the higher refresh rate of that monitor.

Thanks in advanced, Jack.

Computing

Comments

  • ProspectiveDarkness on 05/11/2015 - 21:09

    You won't be hitting 120+ FPS on Battlefield 4 with a 960 or a 970. From this benchmark, it seems the 960 struggles to pull 60. And that'll only decrease on new releases as time goes by…

    Personally, I'm waiting until next year's 16nm cards (AMD or nVidia) to upgrade.

    • [Deactivated] on 05/11/2015 - 21:37

      I never play BF4 on ultra settings, I always have it on lowest besides 1920x1080 resolution and ultra mesh quality (which is best for performance and competitive compared to visuals)

      • [Deactivated] on 06/11/2015 - 01:58

        I have an ASus GTX 970 Strix and I get around 90-120 fps playing BF4 on Ultra, 1080p. I also have a 144 Hz monitor, but I don't really care about taking advantage of the 144 Hz on BF4. I'm more of an anti-tank type player.

  • [Deactivated] on 05/11/2015 - 21:51
    +1

    I think I am just going to go with a 970, will give me options in the future. Not sure how long or how promising the GTX 1000 series is going to be.

  • oscargamer on 05/11/2015 - 22:10

    what is the rest of your system?
    if you have an older cpu/mb/ram/hdd, then a fast gpu may well be limited by the older item

    • [Deactivated] on 05/11/2015 - 22:18

      CPU: Intel i5-2500k @ 3.5 Ghz
      MOBO: ASUS P8P67 PRO
      RAM: 8GB 1600mhz
      SSD: 250gb Crucial MX100 (games)
      HDD: 2TB Western Digital Blue (storage)
      GPU: N/A

      Nothing will bottle neck the computer (i5-2000 series are still competing on the same level as the i5-4000 series in terms of gaming performance, nothing has really changed in terms of number cores/threads being used for quite some time. Speeds are also around the same as the i5-4000 series)

      • Derekhuang24 on 05/11/2015 - 22:26

        I have the same CPU too, I was wondering whether I should upgrade my HD7850 for a 960 or a 970, or just wait it out. In the same situation two atm.

        • [Deactivated] on 05/11/2015 - 22:35

          Doubt I can wait for Early-Mid 2016 when the GTX 1000 series is coming out.

        • Derekhuang24 on 05/11/2015 - 22:39

          @jackgoat: 120fps+ for bf4 is pretty intensive.. me seeing 60fps and 120fps is no real difference to the naked eye. Save up for now hah

        • [Deactivated] on 05/11/2015 - 22:47

          @Derekhuang24: Once you see CS:GO, BF4 or any other game on your friends computer with a 144hz monitor, 60hz monitors look choppy :/ You can definitely tell the difference in 60hz to 144hz.

        • Derekhuang24 on 05/11/2015 - 22:56

          @jackgoat: Nah I dont really care about monitors cause I bought a new one at the start of the year, and I wont be a pro gamer anytime soon. Also it costs a fair bit…RIP Wallet

        • KaTst3R on 06/11/2015 - 02:34
          +1

          @Derekhuang24:

          144hz monitor is the da bomb ! Once you use 144hz you are never going back to 60hz. If you can afford it, better to use a G-Sync 144hz monitor, it makes everything so bloody smooth like butter…no sh!t…

  • [Deactivated] on 05/11/2015 - 23:09
    +2

    Thanks for the help guys, I have decided to go with a 970 4GB Gigabyte for the time being, got it for $480 inc. shipping, will be here within the week. Next on my agenda will be a new car, then I can change out my old mobo/cpu/ram and get DDR4 compatibility with hopefully a 144hz monitor for my hard efforts at work, week in and week out.

    • the frost on 06/11/2015 - 10:50

      Good choice. I had the same choice earlier this year, ended up with the 970 and have run all games on ultra on 1080p with decent framerates. Enjoy!

  • Jemz on 06/11/2015 - 07:57
    +1

    I had a 970 G1 Gaming, was a beast of a card.

    Had it with a i7 2600 non k. 16gb ram and it was an absolute beast and crushed all games on 1080p easily getting 60fps and much higher. Pretty much have the same mother board as you do.

    Even 1440p it went well.

    The 960 4GB is pointless with a 128 bit bus, it's just a marketing tool where they've made a 4GB version because people will think, 4gb is obviously going to be twice as good as 2GB.

    Then the 960 would be the same as the 970, but it's not due to the bus size.

    If I was waiting at this time of year to buy a card, I would wait for pascal to come out considering that the 900 series is over a year old now. they're still great cards but you don't want to fork out half a grand on a card for it to be smashed when the new cards come out mid next year.

    Just my 2 cents.

    Feel free to personal message me if you have other questions.

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join