Best nvidia card this gaming PC can handle.

Why don't you get an AMD R9 280? It's got a bit better performance for the same price as the 760
Also with the AMD card you will get MANTLE which will help alleviate your CPU worries, it pretty much reduces how much CPU you need.
 
Last edited:
Mantle right now is pretty much a joke, and he asked for the best Nvidia card.

The 280 is simply a rebranded 7950 and it goes back and forth between the 760 in benchmark.
 
I have seen the test (can show you but they are in Polish) that show higher performance with nvidia card compared to the amd equivalent when using multi core phenom, they say that gtx drivers utilize more cpu cores when amd drivers push 2 cores which is no good since i have many weaker cores.
You probably won't be able to read polish but just look at the charts, the cpu used was phenom ii x4
AMD czy Nvidia do czterordzeniowego procesora? :: PCLab.pl
 
Mantle right now is pretty much a joke, and he asked for the best Nvidia card.

The 280 is simply a rebranded 7950 and it goes back and forth between the 760 in benchmark.

how is mantle a joke? It has proven itself in BF4 and tons of other AAA games are implementing it as well as a few smaller companies.

EDIT: Idk what benchmarks I was looking at that told me that that the 280 was better, they are exactly as you said, with the 760 winning in some, and the 280 in others.

I still think the AMD card with mantle would help him though with is CPU worries
 
Last edited:
If by tons you mean like 9 games..... When it has real support it's something I can recommend on. I can't honestly tell people to pair expensive product that'll really need Mantle like a 290 to a weak processor though. It's a great idea, but I have a serious feeling it'll be trumped by DX12 in support within the next 3 or so years.
 
If by tons you mean like 9 games..... When it has real support it's something I can recommend on. I can't honestly tell people to pair expensive product that'll really need Mantle like a 290 to a weak processor though. It's a great idea, but I have a serious feeling it'll be trumped by DX12 in support within the next 3 or so years.

I get what your saying, but the list will be waaay more than 9 games. Most if not all of EA's games they said are going to have mantle, and a bunch more will jump on board.
EA's games alone totals like 10-20 games within the next 3 years, and most of them are AAA and need allot of performance. Why all the mantle hate pp? Do you really think it has no chance???

Well OP if you are going to get a 760 I would get an MSI 760 because its got an awesome cooler that has very low noise and great temps.
 
Did I say I was hating on Mantle? Here, let me put it this way. I called the Trueaudio gimmick. Haven't heard anything about Trueaudio since last year. Mantle isn't perfect either. When they enabled Mantle support for BF4 there were comparisons showing a clear decrease in view distance because there was more "mist". Not saying this is 100% accurate because I haven't tested it myself and honestly don't care. The ideology behind lowering CPU overhead is awesome but if you have the cash to drop on a nice expensive AMD card then you can spend a bit more to get a decent CPU. With Intel's Pentium 3258 there is NO excuse not to take this route besides laziness or excuses.

All that aside, we may have Mantle enabled games "coming" but so far even the official list is slim. It takes years to develop games (looking at Crytek) and a game developed in less than 2 years (cough BF4) always comes out trash. That's why I was basically saying by the time Mantle becomes relevant, it'll be irrelevant because DX12 pretty much aims to do the same thing without limiting your option to graphical horsepower. And I think we both know who will get more support.

All in all we are talking about a dude in this thread who is buying for the now. There are what, 3 games that support Mantle right now? What's the point of buying a card now in anticipation for games that might come out later (not talking confirmed) when the card in question being bought now will be lower mid end when it's time to use it?
 
I have seen the test (can show you but they are in Polish) that show higher performance with nvidia card compared to the amd equivalent when using multi core phenom, they say that gtx drivers utilize more cpu cores when amd drivers push 2 cores which is no good since i have many weaker cores.
You probably won't be able to read polish but just look at the charts, the cpu used was phenom ii x4
AMD czy Nvidia do czterordzeniowego procesora? :: PCLab.pl


got burried becouse of mod accept
 
Last edited:
Translation is very poor, but I call ******** already on one point alone. Assassin's Creed 4 is single threaded and does not utilize HT or other cores. On a stock clocked 3.3GHz SB-E processor and a slower 680 vs their 780 maxed out I get more performance. Giving the PC more cores will not automatically give super performance. Even in games that actually "utilize" more cores (utilize used loosely) there is minimal performance drop going from 6, to 4, to 2 cores with or without HT. I actually demonstrate this in my guide with an Nvidia card. Like I said before, a graphics driver cannot automatically reprogram a game to utilize more threads. Not to mention, the 290x is faster than the 780 in basically everything. They should not be getting similar performance in any game, let alone less performance.

They also don't directly compare 2 and 4 core performance differences with like clock speeds. Another thing not done here is, in BF4 they could have also shown Mantle differences between using 2 and 4 high and low clocked cores.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom