Widescreen Gaming Forum

[-noun] Web community dedicated to ensuring PC games run properly on your tablet, netbook, personal computer, HDTV and multi-monitor gaming rig.
It is currently 18 Nov 2024, 16:37

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 14 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
Author Message
PostPosted: 27 Dec 2014, 20:20 
Offline

Joined: 25 Oct 2009, 13:55
Posts: 19
anteronoid wrote:
You cant compare a high end card with a low end.. its not fair.


Actually you can, on the basis they're both graphics cards... and reviewers often do, when they advise people to not buy the value cards :D
If they're both anywhere near the same price.. it would be silly not to compare them... from a consumer standpoint.

I understand what you're saying but i agree maybe the alcohol is actually making you overthink it...
...this isn't a boxing-match [weight classes], i'm asking for consumer advice :) It's not helpful to me to compare two equally shite or equally expensive cards that hold no relevance to my setup or question :)


But it might explain why i maybe come across as a 'techo-hipster' with my old 275's...
Really it comes down to the fact that yes, i am still happy with them, they still perform. There's no point in getting something new if it doesn't really improve my current setup...
Which yea, handles Arma3.. battlefield 4... etc.. etc... And you can pick a 275 up for what... starting price a tenner on ebay?

Now you can ridicule and say 'Oh you're only spending £200' but *shakes fist* there was a time when that was considered a lot of money... i still think it's a fairly decent amount.. and just because nvidia decide that '£500 is now our opening price for enthusiasts even though we've not actually improved much except slapped a bigger number on it' doesn't mean i'm going to buy into it...
Nvidia can procreate with themselves :) ..which is why i'm reluctantly considering ATI, dispite nightmarish memories of their first CCC.


..call me old, but I'm also of the mind that, if i'm spending £500 on a card, it should be a shit-ton of an improvement on what i spent £500 on back in 2008.
2-series to 9-series... and there's not a remarkable increase in performance, in terms of pixel-pushing power... But i'm taking that from benchmarks (so id LOVE if someone said 'your wrong' and showed me otherwise )

Quite funny really considering how old the 275's are now... (and how unoptimized that game is)


Top
 Profile  
 


PostPosted: 29 Dec 2014, 08:50 
Offline
I Donated
I Donated
User avatar

Joined: 08 Sep 2009, 04:05
Posts: 68
Sorry bro, but if you think there have been no performance improvements since the GTX 275 you are DEAD WRONG. Hell, it wasn't even the top dog in it's day.

Quote:
GeForce GTX 275 = 1,213
GeForce GTX 980 = 9,733


http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/high_end_gpus.html

That's over an 8 fold increase in performance going from the 275 to a 980.

Also, the 200 series did NOT support DirectX 11. Dx11 came with the 400 series. While you might be able in install the Dx11 software on your computer, games cannot take advantage of any newer Dx11 features. They use what are called "feature levels" to support older cards but will be missing newer, cooler stuff.

Honestly, almost anything modern you buy will be better. I'd recommend to just get the most expensive GPU you can afford, that is the one to buy (always my advice).

_________________
check my blog: cybereality.com


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 31 Dec 2014, 13:32 
Offline

Joined: 25 Oct 2009, 13:55
Posts: 19
I got a 780...
..and it is an increase in performance...

Not astonishing, considering its 4 series' up... [ 50 fps increase on average ]
But i guess it is replacing 2 cards, and at least it didn't go down in performance.



Finally not trying to one-up you but...
I did not say anywhere that the 200 series, or more specifically my card, supported directx11 on a hardware level.. I said [ i could get ] dx11, countering what was originally stated [ you cant do dx11 ].
You can do dx11, clearly.. the games run in directX 11 mode..

Not supporting it on a hardware level is different to not being capable of producing it at all, because my directx dialog and games clearly shows otherwise... :)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 31 Dec 2014, 13:50 
Offline

Joined: 25 Oct 2009, 13:55
Posts: 19
Actually i'm going to say i'm possibly wrong on the directX stuff...
..Because i'm not even sure if i was using the directx11 option in total war shogun2...
Maybe it was directx10.


Although i'm pretty certain i had the option in other games too, like bf4.. and assassins creed 2 i think and... some others.

But to be fair, i can't be sure (as i didnt have something to test against) whether i was seeing different running games in my 'pseudo-dx11' mode, compared to people who apparently had 'real dx11 mode'.




Still i am amazed that in games where i was obviously being bottlenecked by the GPU.. such as batman arkham city... I'm getting, without changing graphics settings, only 50 fps increase -- and that's the most impressive increase...


...I got an 8fps increase in arma3. :D But then that's not really that surprising...


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 14 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  




Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group