Need advice on a graphics card.

[CASO]

These are my system specs:
Windows 10 pro 64 bit
Processor-AMD Phenom{tm} II x4 960T Processor, overclocked to 3.4ghz
12 gig ram

My max price for the card is 400 dollars Canadian. Just need some advice on what might get TS2016 running better, given my current specs.


Thanks in advance.

[peterhayes]

It will depend on your monitor size and resolution.
Rule of thumb anything over 24" get a 4GB card - under 24" then 2GB will work
A GTX 950/960 with 2 or 4 GB VRAM would match that rig.
Can't comment on AMD cards as I do not use them.
pH

[GaryG]

Hi

A suggested change of thought regarding the amount of RAM on a video card.

This info is assuming 3D rendering, not simple text or 2D pictures.

It's not the physical size of the monitor that determines the required amount of RAM, it's much more related to the resolution of the monitor. Example: two 1920x1080 monitors, one is 24" and another is 48", as far as the video card processing is concerned there is no difference.

A 1920x1080 monitor can work quite well with 2GB of video RAM. Here, I get 'reasonable' gaming resolution with a 2 GB video card and display resolution set at 2560x1440; if I try the full 3840x2160 resolution that the monitor can handle, the frame rate becomes snail paced unless I disable most of the 'good stuff' the video card is capable of. (It's a nVidia GTX960 card.)

GaryG

[trev123]

If you play games and buy an Nvidia based card you will get the latest version of Tomb Raider free. http://www.geforce.com/games-applicatio ... der/bundle

[BoostedFridge]

I have a very similar system to yours, except my Phenom II processor is still at its native 2.8GHZ. I had an old Radeon HD 6850 card, and upgraded to a R9 270X card 2 years ago. The card was ~$300 Cdn at the time.

The FPS displayed in game did not jump that much between the new and old cards, only 3-7fps depending on the route. However the 'smoothness' and fluidity of the game improved much more than the minimal fps gains would lead you to believe.

With the 6850 card, scenarios in the area of Delta yard on Stevens Pass would display 15FPS in game, but would look like a slide show with how choppy it appeared on my monitor. With the R9 270X, the same scenarios only show 18-19fps in game, but the actual output to the monitor is fluid, and only lags when panning.

This is the extreme example, as the new card usually gives between 40-45 fps on Marias and donner, and 30-35 fps on Stevens, Surf liner, or Racetrack on high settings.

I hope that helps.

[bpetit]

This game doesn't like AMD cards that much.

[peterhayes]

Gary
I tend to agree with your comments re resolution wrt VRAM but I would hate to see the picture as you describe here, if you are displaying the same number of pixels on a 24" as you are on a 48" monitor that would be pretty ugly!! Plus usually with top end monitors screen size is equated to higher resolution.

It's not the physical size of the monitor that determines the required amount of RAM, it's much more related to the resolution of the monitor. Example: two 1920x1080 monitors, one is 24" and another is 48", as far as the video card processing is concerned there is no difference.

Here I disagree, my recommendations were "rule of thumb"

A 1920x1080 monitor can work quite well with 2GB of video RAM. Here, I get 'reasonable' gaming resolution with a 2 GB video card and display resolution set at 2560x1440; if I try the full 3840x2160 resolution that the monitor can handle, the frame rate becomes snail paced unless I disable most of the 'good stuff' the video card is capable of. (It's a nVidia GTX960 card.)

Sure you can run many games with 2GB VRAM on large monitors but you have no "wiggle room" to render any more complex frames if needed (other games etc) On my 27" 1440P GSYNC monitor I see with all settings maxed in TS2016, NVCP and NVI tweaked, peaks of 2.8 GB of VRAM being used at smooth frame rates. On my other 27" GSYNC 1080P monitor I see around 2.4GB VRAM being used. If I had a 2Gb card I would be throttling the output from the cpu. TS2016 can really use large amounts of VRAM as well as bandwidth and IMO if you want to run it optimally you need balanced hardware. The cost of the extra 2GB VRAM is nominal and a worthwhile investment IMO.
Regards
pH

[jjmcray]

If you play games and buy an Nvidia based card you will get the latest version of Tomb Raider free. http://www.geforce.com/games-applicatio ... der/bundle

Thanks for the heads up on that!

[trev123]

[Haystack]

I was looking at GTX960s the other day and it was only about $30 extra for the 4GB over the 2GB.

On a side note, can gpu ram (say 2GB vs 4GB) cause any bottle-necking depending on the rest of the systems specs?

[peterhayes]

Haystack
if you have large monitor or TV and you are trying display high end graphics then the 4GB VRAM would be better.
On my rigs TS2016 on a Dell, 24", 1920 x 1200 it uses around 1.8GB VRAM.
On a 27" 2560 x 1440 around 2.8GB VRAM, on another 27" 1920 x 1080 around 2.2 GB VRAM
Having the 4GB gives you wiggle room to whatever display settings you want to use - provided you have the hardware, mobo, cpu, RAM and psu to deliver the display. The GTX 960 runs great on a cpu capable of running between 3.4 - 4.2GHz.
For $30 extra its a no brainer.
Regards
pH

[Haystack]

Haystack
if you have large monitor or TV and you are trying display high end graphics then the 4GB VRAM would be better.
On my rigs TS2016 on a Dell, 24", 1920 x 1200 it uses around 1.8GB VRAM.
On a 27" 2560 x 1440 around 2.8GB VRAM, on another 27" 1920 x 1080 around 2.2 GB VRAM
Having the 4GB gives you wiggle room to whatever display settings you want to use - provided you have the hardware, mobo, cpu, RAM and psu to deliver the display. The GTX 960 runs great on a cpu capable of running between 3.4 - 4.2GHz.
For $30 extra its a no brainer.
Regards
pH

Thank you Peter

[CASO]

Another vital question is that i have found that newer Nvidia cards have a 8 pin power connector. Silly question, perhaps, but would a 6 pin connector work okay? Or would I have to upgrade my power supply? Also would an eight pin power supply be okay with my mainboard wish is ASUSTeK Computer INC. M4A88T-V EVO/USB3 MT7012009400256 Rev X.0x?

[peterhayes]

Caso
It will depend on your psu (which sounds very old or small). You do need a modern psu so that the it can deliver the correct voltages to all the components. It must have a capable 12 volt rail to deliver power to the card.
http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/like/1720169 ... ue&viphx=1
You can buy adapters that go from 2 Molex to 4 molex (or 4 to 8 etc), and the newer cards definitely need an 8 pin connector (not 6) and some need one 8 pin connection and one 6 pin and others even use a supplementary power from the mobo.
Google power connections cables to video card.
Is your psu good enough: http://outervision.com/power-supply-calculator
Regards
pH

[CASO]

Well it's not small, it's 500watts, though i cannot recall the name of it off hand. I'd have to open the case. This is the card I was thinking of getting. http://www.amazon.ca/EVGA-GeForce-Whisp ... tx-960+4gb And I was thinking of getting this power supply. http://www.amazon.ca/EVGA-Certified-ATX ... M1ZZKY40NJ