Purchasing Mid-range Graphics Card AMD vs. NVIDIA in Q4 2017

Hi all,

I need help, but this will be a little long (TL;DR at bottom)!

I'm in the market for a new card, looking at AMD/NVIDIA (RX570/580/Fury X, GTX1060/1070/1080).

Any of the above cards would be a considerable upgrade, however I've seen several considerations, TL;DR at end:

My Monitor is http://www.lg.com/uk/monitors/lg-29UM68
It's capable of 75Hz, but needs Freesync (AMD), although I have seen claims that it can work on NVIDIA cards (possibly frame skipping)

Is it worth sticking with 60Hz, or should I look to utilise the overclock of 75Hz (possibly 80Hz)?

Is it worth going for AMD for Freesync or should I go for a more powerful NVIDIA card where it can do at least 60FPS consistently, and make Freesync obsolete for most titles? Would the missing 15-20Hz be noticeable? And is adaptive sync (nvidia) able to do similar?

I tend to play older games, Dark Souls III is the latest, but I do plan to get Monster Hunter World.

Current Rig - https://uk.pcpartpicker.com/user/Carbalite/saved/#view=66KNNG

I've seen close prices between RX580s (£250ish) Fury X (£300), Gtx 1070 (£380), 1070Ti (£450) GTX1080 (£490). Would it be worth paying extra and getting a GTX at this stage?

Generally I've seen that 1070 is roughly 30% better than RX580, and normally 30% more, however at the moment it's closer to 40-50% more expensive, making 1080 even more tempting.

I wouldn't mind having to turn the graphics down slightly on some games to play them, but I would be gutted if I found I had to set them at Low just to get 30FPS.

The PSU should be fine, heat shouldn't be too much of a concern, however I have seen that the Fury X draws a lot of power, and a lot of heat. Is that a deal breaker?

My best AMD options are Fury X or RX580. Would I find myself unable to produce the 75FPS that I got an AMD for in future, and should I go for a GTX1070/1080 and delay those issues longer due to increased power?

TL;DR - Between AMD/NVIDIA. Freesync monitor capable of 75Hz, AMD RX580/Fury X roughly on par with GTX1060 for producing 60Hz at 2560x1080 resolution for older games, Freesync should be able to get smooth gameplay between 40-75(maybe 80)FPS depending on title. Would it be worth the extra expense to get a GTX1070/1080 where the card easily puts out 60/75Hz and mean I wouldn't even need Freesync to get smooth gameplay (but possibly sacrifice the extra 15-20FPS).

Thank you all!

M

Edit: Clarity, more concise
Reply to profitmajin
8 answers Last reply
More about purchasing mid range graphics card amd nvidia 2017
  1. go for the AMD , the PC world keeps evolving and you will regret spending all that on an nvidia card
    Reply to timmy_area51
  2. Thanks! I think I'm leaning towards AMD, would going for an old Fury X be better than getting a new RX580?
    Reply to profitmajin
  3. depends , if the fury is water cooled it might ,, be better , but rx 580 has the new stuff i guess
    Reply to timmy_area51
  4. If you want to minimize the amount spent, the 580 with a reduced setting or two is probably a good idea since you'll get to use Freesync.

    If money isn't that big a deal, the the 1070 will crush just about anything at 1080p/ultra and you can use Fast Sync instead of vsync to minimize input lag while still eliminating (or greatly reducing) tearing.

    But, what processor do you have? Even a 1070 with a slow (or low thread) CPU can fall below 60 fps with a game like Battlefield 1 large maps with smoke/rain/etc.
    Reply to J_E_D_70
  5. What res you will be playing at? To be honest don't go for Fury X.
    Reply to renz496
  6. I'll be using an i7 4790k, playing ultra wide 2560x1080.

    Cost is big pro for AMD, I'm hoping I'd get 75hz on games I play most often, but the nvidia cards are so damn strong its hard to ignore the extra investment, could I get 75hz on an nvidia card?

    Apparently Vega was meant to be around £300-350, would have made things much simpler!
    Reply to profitmajin
  7. renz496 said:
    What res you will be playing at? To be honest don't go for Fury X.


    I'll be running 2560x1080, hopefully at 75Hz. Why do you say not to go for Fury X?

    I've seen people mention they run hot and use a lot of power, but I've also seen benchmarks that show it only uses a bit more than an RX580, and is more powerful for it.
    Reply to profitmajin
  8. first the card only have 4GB or VRAM. also the card have utilization issue. it shines the most when running at very high resolution like 4k. but at such high res it's 4GB VRAM start becoming an issue as well. AMD needs specific driver optimization on each game at 4k so the 4GB did not impact it's performance in negative way. AMD recent drivers most often only focusing on RX400 series and above only. this is video mainly for 980ti but you should look at Fury X vs RX580 result that included in the test:

    Reply to renz496
Ask a new question Answer

Read More

Games Monitors Graphics Cards AMD Nvidia