GTX970/980 vs GTX960: the only benefit is greater resolutions in games?

[swapjim]

If I'm willing to play games in lower resolutions, will the GTX960 give me the same visuals (blur, bloom, lighting, occlusion, drawing distance, etc) with a GTX970 and GTX980?

To give an example, Black Ops 3 needs a GTX970 to get an average of 60fps at 1920x1080, at High detail settings. If I'm willing to lower the resolution further, lets say 720p or 640p, can I hope to use the GTX960 at High settings and still get an average of 60fps?

 

[LTC8K6]

Well, there are lots of reviews of the GTX960 out there with gaming tests. You probably should look a few of them over.

At this point, it doesn't make sense to buy a 2gb 960, so look at the 4gb models.

 

[parvadomus]

No, its not. The only thing that is reduced when you lower the resolution are some buffers, like the final color buffer (the screen you see when the GPU ends drawing everything), and others like depth buffer, normal buffer etc.
But textures and other buffers, like the ones used to calculate shadows remains the same size, and needs more gpu power to get populated.
Other things simply wont change, like GPU accelerated physics, or effects that rely on compute will need higher end GPU to run better.

 

[LTC8K6]

Looks like the 4gb 960 can hang in there at 1080p Max settings, so less than that should be fine.

http://media.gamersnexus.net/images/media/2015/game-bench/cod-blops-3-benchmark-1080-ult.png

http://media.gamersnexus.net/images/media/2015/game-bench/cod-blops-3-benchmark-1080-med.png

You can likely overclock the 960 also, to get a few more FPS out of it.

 

[LTC8K6]

Your CPU could be the deciding factor. Do you have a fast cpu? The above results were with a 4790K and 2133 ram.

 

[Azix]

same can be said about GPUs in general. The more powerful one helps get the same graphics at higher resolutions.

for some games though it won't do well even at lower resolutions. Still a 380/380x should be fine for 1080p maxing and lower res maxing.

not going to recommend a 960 to anyone

 

[Zodiark1593]

I'd recommend looking at the R9 280(x) though if your in the green camp, a 4 GB 960 will do just fine. Overclocked, you lose roughly 30% overall performance compared to a stock 970 though raw compute is actually closer. The bandwidth is about half, which is where high res, AA and >60 fps gaming take a big hit. Certain game engines are also bandwidth hungry, further compounding that bandwidth weakness and making the 960 lose ground against even older gpus like the 270X.

 

[Termie]

The big problem with this approach is that resolution is so much more important for image quality than high settings that you'll end up with worse overall experience. And resolution requires less power than high settings. So all around bad idea. Buy the 4GB GPU you can afford and play at 1080p/medium and actually enjoy your games.

 

[happy medium]

Looks like the 4gb 960 can hang in there at 1080p Max settings, so less than that should be fine.

http://media.gamersnexus.net/images/media/2015/game-bench/cod-blops-3-benchmark-1080-ult.png

http://media.gamersnexus.net/images/media/2015/game-bench/cod-blops-3-benchmark-1080-med.png

You can likely overclock the 960 also, to get a few more FPS out of it.

I play black ops 3 high settings 60 fps plus

 

[RussianSensation]

To give an example, Black Ops 3 needs a GTX970 to get an average of 60fps at 1920x1080, at High detail settings. If I'm willing to lower the resolution further, lets say 720p or 640p, can I hope to use the GTX960 at High settings and still get an average of 60fps?

For Black Ops 3, you should go with an AMD card. $130-$550 AMD cards perform better in this title at every price level.

Here is a video of a guy testing 960 vs. 380 across various sections of the game. The 960 loses in all areas, and its minimum FPS are much worse.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Zvp08R4HLw

Also, it's better to skip all 2GB videocards if you plan to keep your card for 2-3 years:
http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2457597

In that case, the best lower end card for Black Ops 3 is either a $180 R9 380 4GB or an R9 280X.

As far as playing at 720p/640p, it would look horrible on a 1080P monitor since LCDs, unlike CRTs, cannot scale resolution down without major artifacts/blurring. To get sharpness back, and reduce interpolation artifacts, you would need to play in windowed mode.

Buy the 4GB GPU you can afford and play at 1080p/medium and actually enjoy your games.

Seconded, or at minimum the R9 280X which is actually faster than either the R9 380 4GB or the GTX960 4GB. If he is on a budget, he can probably find a used $11-120 HD7970/Ghz.

 

[xorbe]

960 is bandwidth limited with that 128-bit bus. The extra options are going to hurt more, even at a lower resolution. 970 almost doubles the bus (128 -> 224).

 

[Zodiark1593]

not going to recommend a 960 to anyone

Someone asks you for a CUDA capable $200 or less video card. There much of an alternative? You can't simply say save a little more for much better, as the next step up is a whopping 50% more.

Not bashing on you in particular, but this reflects the fact that Nvidia pretty well shat on the mid end. The chasm between the 960 and 970 is quite ridiculous and the supposed 960 ti seems to be MIA.

 

[RussianSensation]

Someone asks you for a CUDA capable $200 or less video card. There much of an alternative?

But why does he need a CUDA capable GPU for games, and especially when in Black Ops 3 the CUDA GPU performs worse than a non-CUDA one? If someone isn't objective to start with, what kinda of an answer are they seeking between 960 vs. 970/980? All the benchmarks are already there for these 3 GPUs.

Current prices on 960 cards are up there at $180+ for 2GB versions, not even 4GB. If the OP is willing to turn down settings to start with, might as well get a $137 GTX950 if he must stay NV and if the performance isn't satisfactory, sell that card and go all the way up to a 970.

960 sits in no man's land.

970 beats the 960 by 73%, but 960 is 15% faster than the 950.

950 2GB = $137
960 2GB = $175 (28% more expensive for 15% more performance)

960 4GB = $190
970 = $290 (53% more expensive for 73% more performance)

The only logical cards in NV's line-up between $100-300 are sub-$140 GTX950 or $290+ GTX970.

The best cards in the $150-250 range are R9 380, R9 280X and R9 380X. These 3 also happen to be much faster than GTX960 in Black Ops 3.

not going to recommend a 960 to anyone

Very unfortunate how such a terrible card sold so well this generation. Easily the worst $180-220 x60 series card from NV in the last 5 generations. NV should have released 960Ti.

 

[Zodiark1593]

The only logical cards in NV's line-up between $100-300 are sub-$140 GTX950 or $290+ GTX970.

Exactly my point. That is a giant Chasm that Nvidia has effectively failed to fill and seems to be biting them now, at lease PR-wise among the techies. On top of that, Maxwell, their current architecture is already beginning to age somewhat in comparison to GCN. I'd be hard pressed to recommend even a 970 if games continue to favor GCN going forward. Like I mentioned though, if you need something like CUDA for a non-gaming task on the side, you don't have much of a choice. (closed standards can go die in a fire now please).

AMD's gamble with GCN seems to be paying off quite handsomely, particularly with those console wins, and soon DX12. Between poor drivers (put out massive GPU, fix drivers much later) and DX11 efficiency, things were looking pretty bleak for awhile. Nvidia's next design will probably have a strong focus in raw compute.

 

[Arachnotronic]

AMD's gamble with GCN seems to be paying off quite handsomely

AMD's market share is in the toilet. I don't think it has been paying off handsomely at all.

 

[Zodiark1593]

AMD's market share is in the toilet. I don't think it has been paying off handsomely at all.

Performance-wise I mean.

 

[swapjim]

Oh man, I was afraid that this was going to happen. Black Ops 3 was only an example. This is not the game I want to build a machine for. I don't know if I'll play this game (it'll depend on the demo).

There are a lot of technical stuff that I don't understand in a lot of posts. But from what I gather, reducing the resolution will not allow me to max out the rest of the settings. I'll keep that mind.

Your CPU could be the deciding factor. Do you have a fast cpu? The above results were with a 4790K and 2133 ram.

i7-6700. And yes, I'll go for DDR4 RAM.

I'd recommend looking at the R9 280(x) though if your in the green camp, a 4 GB 960 will do just fine. Overclocked, you lose roughly 30% overall performance compared to a stock 970 though raw compute is actually closer. The bandwidth is about half, which is where high res, AA and >60 fps gaming take a big hit. Certain game engines are also bandwidth hungry, further compounding that bandwidth weakness and making the 960 lose ground against even older gpus like the 270X.

I haven't checked ATI cards at all. I'm looking for something that doesn't make lots of noise and someone told me that Nvidia cards consume less energy, so less noisy fans. That's my rationalle.

In addition to that, 960 and 970 MSI and Gigabyte cards keep the fans off when the GPU load is low,. which is super nice because: (a) they gather less dust, (b) they make less noise at 60-70% of the time I use my computer (which is spend doing other stuff than games).

As far as playing at 720p/640p, it would look horrible on a 1080P monitor since LCDs, unlike CRTs, cannot scale resolution down without major artifacts/blurring. To get sharpness back, and reduce interpolation artifacts, you would need to play in windowed mode.

Whenever I'll have to play a game at a lower resolution than the native one, I plan to activate this option.

B970 = $290 (53% more expensive for 73% more performance)

Damn, that's cheap! It's 425 EUR over here. That's more than 425 USD. I would definately hit it for 300 EUR. No second thoughts.

Very unfortunate how such a terrible card sold so well this generation. Easily the worst $180-220 x60 series card from NV in the last 5 generations. NV should have released 960Ti

So the 960 doesn't make sense, eh? Ah man.

And one more thing: will the GTX970 allow me to set high settings for the next 3 years?

 

[LTC8K6]

Not just DDR4, but faster DDR4 like DDR4-2800.

 

[RussianSensation]

I haven't checked ATI cards at all. I'm looking for something that doesn't make lots of noise and someone told me that Nvidia cards consume less energy, so less noisy fans. That's my rationalle.

In addition to that, 960 and 970 MSI and Gigabyte cards keep the fans off when the GPU load is low,. which is super nice because: (a) they gather less dust, (b) they make less noise at 60-70% of the time I use my computer (which is spend doing other stuff than games).

Ya, whoever told you this gave you wrong information. Many new AMD cards also run cool, quiet and turn the fans off up to 60-62C. AMD's MSI Gaming, Sapphire Nitro, Asus Strix, PowerColor PCS+, etc. all have this feature.

Damn, that's cheap! It's 425 EUR over here. That's more than 425 USD. I would definately hit it for 300 EUR. No second thoughts.
And one more thing: will the GTX970 allow me to set high settings for the next 3 years?

Please list the prices of these cards in your country so that it's easier to compare the cards in your country. Make sure to include after-market open-air cooled cards like this or this because those are quiet versions:

R9 380 4GB
R9 380X 4GB
GTX960 4GB
GTX970
R9 390

Also, what is the power rating of your power supply and your monitor's resolution, as well as how long do you plan to keep the card?

How expensive is the electricity in your country?

Not just DDR4, but faster DDR4 like DDR4-2800.

This is great advice, although some DDR4 2666 can overclock to DDR4 3000, I wouldn't recommend this route for less experienced builders.

Maybe the OP can list us prices of 16GB DDR4 2133/2400/2666/2800/3000.

 

[idb1rec]

I would go for the gtx 960 4gb as being on amd for years I can tell you drivers are always slow coming and many games are left in the dark with bad optimization. Maybe amd are more focused on dx12 but I guess it's a roll of the dice as to which card would last longer. I'm quite happy with my 960 and every game I've tried plays really well at 1080p shooters play mostly on high/max at over 60fps with v-sync on. With no frame drops, can't say the same for amd's 380. Running a 6500 skylake and ddr4 2400 ram overclocked to 2800. Gtx 960 is running overclocked with boost clock just over 1524mhz and memory speed of 8000mhz and that's with the cheapest gigabyte 4gb card. Hope this helps.

 

[LTC8K6]

I would go for the gtx 960 4gb as being on amd for years I can tell you drivers are always slow coming and many games are left in the dark with bad optimization. Maybe amd are more focused on dx12 but I guess it's a roll of the dice as to which card would last longer. I'm quite happy with my 960 and every game I've tried plays really well at 1080p shooters play mostly on high/max at over 60fps with v-sync on. With no frame drops, can't say the same for amd's 380. Running a 6500 skylake and ddr4 2400 ram overclocked to 2800. Gtx 960 is running overclocked with boost clock just over 1524mhz and memory speed of 8000mhz and that's with the cheapest gigabyte 4gb card. Hope this helps.

What about the 380X?

Which 380 did you try?

 

[idb1rec]

What about the 380X?

Which 380 did you try?

It's all down to drivers again. It might be better in some games but really bad in others. I had the gigabyte g1 gaming but exchanged it after 3 weeks as drivers were well piss poor to put it nice. Was always a amd person before with a few gaming laptops ect. I would suggest either going for the cheapest nvidia card and waiting out till the new gpu's hit the market next year or buy one gtx 960 4gb and save for another if you like the idea of SLI as two will outperform any amd offering and the 970. That's considering you even need anymore power when dx12 boost performance on some new upcoming games. It's a tough time to be buying graphics cards when nobody knows what the future holds in regards to performance. For gaming right now I would say nvidia all the way.

 

[LTC8K6]

The R9-380X is the better card against the GTX960, imo.

Not sure how it could ever be "really bad" in a fair comparison.

 

[RaulF]

If it helps my rig is in my signature.

Black ops 3 all max but no volumetric lighting i am around 90+ fps i see triple digits.

 

[LTC8K6]

Yeah, the 980 makes no sense at all. It would either be the 960 4gb, the 970 or the 980ti if going NV.