Upgrading a graphics card noob

• 

  Diji1 on 16/12/2016 - 00:53

  +1

  You have the correct type of PCI-E slot on your motherboard so all you will need to do is swap the cards when you get a new one.

  It's obviously critical that you have room in the case you're putting it in. Measure the internal distance, using your existing card as a guide, from the back of the case to the front of case or hard disks.

  You can find the dimensions of cards on the manufacturers site or review sites just google <card model> dimensions is easiest.

  If you don't have room for a full size card you can either buy a new case that allows cards of the size you want or a "cut down" video card made for ITX machines - these loose nothing in performance but they probably overclock a bit less because they have smaller heatsinks.

• 

  Axelstrife on 16/12/2016 - 01:16

  +2

  RX 480 8gb
  GTX 1060 6gb

  Those are some great value for you money right now especially at 1080p gaming.

  http://staticice.com.au/

  once you decide on a card use this site to find the best price.

• 

  Pub Envelope on 16/12/2016 - 02:07

  Thanks a bunch for your input guys, really appreciate it.

  I did a search on the RX 480 and a billion different results came up.

  MSI, GIGABYTE, ASUS.. I'm assuming that they are just the different brand names of the same product? HDMI ports, OC.. so much to take in. Is there a preferred brand name to go with? From what I've seen, is $300ish a good price for a card that Axelstrife has recommended?

  • 

    Axelstrife on 16/12/2016 - 02:53

    +1

    where about did you find those cards for close to 300?

    The GTX 1060 also has a 3gb version which is not only half the Vram but also slower then the 6GB version.

    http://www.gamersnexus.net/guides/2503-amd-rx-480-4gb-vs-8gb…
    http://www.gamersnexus.net/hwreviews/2604-gtx-1060-3gb-vs-6g…
    scroll down and you will see comparison's between 4GB and 8GB Vram for the RX 480.
    and comparison between 3GB and 6GB GTX 1060.

    https://www.mwave.com.au/product/msi-amd-radeon-rx-480-gamin…
    MSI has lots of good reviews
    Doesn't really matter all that much between the different models of 8GB cards.

    • 

      Kangal on 16/12/2016 - 07:06

      +5

      The GTX 1060 (3GB) is theoretically 5% slower than the GTX 1060 (6GB), and has less memory.
      However, in real-world scenarios it is closer to a 2% difference.
      And the memory difference makes ZERO impact when playing at 60fps (or more), on Ultra Settings, at 1080p.
      The GTX 1060 can do some 1440p gaming but its hit and miss, and many recommend it for 1080p.
      So as a VALUE proposition, the 3GB cards are the better choice.

      Now there's the RX 480 (4GB) and RX 480 (8GB) to consider as well.
      At launch, the GTX 1060 (3GB) was handily beating the RX 480 (8GB) on every* title.
      It was winning by at least 5% to sometimes a 30% extra performance.
      The RX 480 also had power draw issues.

      Now?
      The GTX 1060 (…and all of Nvidia's Pascal cards) got slightly (2%) faster.
      You have to hand it to Nvidia, they really deliver the better products and give great driver support.
      However… AMD's RX 480's newest drivers has seen performance increases to around 40%.
      That's right, the RX 480 (4GB) now handily beats the GTX 1060 (6GB).
      It wins by at least 4% to sometimes as large as 20%.

      And that difference should increase a little bit further in the future, as titles get optimised for Vulkan and Direct X 12.
      So from NOW, the VALUE PROPOSITION is to get the RX 480 (4GB) at $280 - $360.

      Some RX 480 (4GB) cards actually have 8GB memory, and you could unlock that IF YOU'RE LUCKY.
      The RX 470 was plenty fast for what it is, and got a slight increase too (2%), still an awesome card.
      The RX 460 can also unlock some Hidden Processing Units (about 14% extra) IF YOU'RE LUCKY.
      AMD's Freesync technology is okay against G-Sync.
      Also AMD now FINNALLY has a screen capture feature called ReLive to combat Nvidia's Shadowplay.
      So it really looks like that AMD has closed the performance and feature parity with Nvidia for 2017.

      Here's how they stack up:
      $900 - GTX 1080
      $550 - GTX 1070
      $300 - RX 480 (4GB)
      $280 - GTX 1060 (3GB)
      $250 - RX 470
      $200 - GTX 1050 Ti (4GB)
      $170 - RX 460 (4GB)

      (Prices will change, obviously)

      • 

        Diji1 on 16/12/2016 - 18:27

        And the memory difference makes ZERO impact when playing at 60fps (or more), on Ultra Settings, at 1080p.

        I don't know how you can say that when games such as Tomb Raider or GTA V require 4GB video RAM to use highest settings.

      • 

        Kangal on 16/12/2016 - 23:19

        +1

        @Diji1:
        Yeah, Rise of the Tomb Raider is an outlier.
        GTA V is possible as long as you turn some advanced Settings off.

        I shouldn't have been so hasty.
        But instead revise and say at Medium Detail Settings (or higher).
        As future games will serve the low-end just as they do today, but will push the envelope at the high-end.
        Also one thing to note is that today's "Ultra Settings" are not equivalent to "Ultra Settings" two years down the line.

        Just like games from 2011 compared to 2016 today, 5 years down the line.
        One example would be Battlefield 3.
        The "Ultra" graphics settings on it look only about as good as the Medium-High settings on Battlefield 1.
        Not calling BF3 ugly, I think that title aged rather well.
        It's just that graphics have come (incrementally) quite a ways since those years.

        Thanks for the reply though.
        +1

        This guy's opinions echo my own:
        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gNhvmP8yNE4&spfreload=10

• 

  Pub Envelope on 17/12/2016 - 16:06

  Thank you so very much for all your help guys. I've decided to go with a Sapphire AMD NITRO+ RX 470 8GB OC Gaming Video Card - GDDR5,2xDP/2xHDMI2.0/DVI,CF,FreeSync,1121/1260MHz (LS)(pending the physical size is ok)

  While I've got you all here, I was thinking that I might as well upgrade my processor as well. I currently have an i7-950 which I assumed was fairly decent as it's an i7 quad core. Just doing a bit of googling and I see there are now i7's with 4 digits after the dash (i.e. i7-xxxx) and sometimes even with a letter, so I assume my CPU is very outdated?

  If I'm to purchase a new one, do they just swap out easy peasy, or do I need to look at physical dimensions/power needs ?

  • 

    Flibbs on 17/12/2016 - 18:16

    Your i7-950 uses a LGA1366 socket. Newer CPU's use a different socket and won't fit your motherboard.

• 

  Flibbs on 17/12/2016 - 18:15

  Never mind. Posted in error.

  • 

    Pub Envelope on 17/12/2016 - 20:05

    Hey Flibbs, are you sure that was an error? I never even knew about the LGA1366 socket until you posted! Upon further investigation, it looks like you were correct in saying that a newer i7 Processor won't fit my motherboard as the LGA1366 was superseded by the LGA2011, which is what the newer i7's use (i7-6800k, 6850k, 6900k etc)

    • 

      Flibbs on 17/12/2016 - 21:29

      +1

      My reply post about the LGA1366 was correct. The post you replied to was an accidental post. I can see how it was misinterpreted.

      Sorry about that. I should have just put posted in error when I edited it.