Edit: If it's at least as good as a R7 260X 2GB, but with 4GB GDDR5 VRAM, then I'll not fret over wasting money on a few of these. (But the 260X had 896 GCN 1.1 shaders?)
Definitely not as good, Larry. At least 30% slower I reckon, but the extra memory can help in some situations, that's true. Hard to say without a sample on hand.
I believe a GeForce 1030 GDDR5 is faster than a 7770.
1030 is about the worst gaming card one can buy "new" in any shape or form.
2) Nvidia didn't bother to optimize Doom for the Kepler architecture, that's why the results are about ~33% lower than they should be.
I think I've heard any 4th gen GCN card is able to do 4K Netflix, so maybe even the RX550 is able? Maybe someone could weigh on that?
Hard to say. Never had one myself, but
reddit.
EDIT:
For budget gaming, I would consider something like a Geforce
1650 or its
Super variant instead, even though, it only comes with 4 gigs of vram. This card is not meant to run Ultra settings in the first place, anyway. But it also makes A LOT of sense just to wait until fall to see what's new coming. I have high hopes of AMD's upcoming RDNA2 architecture, should be fully DX12 Ultimate compliant, just like Turing is now.
Alongside support for ray tracing and other RDNA 2 features, AMD has already confirmed that RDNA 2 is going to deliver a massive 50% improvement in power efficiency over RDNA, a feat which highlights how much AMD has improved their graphics technology in the run-up to the next console generation.
RDNA 2 will represent a massive leap for AMD in terms of efficiency, performance and hardware features, representing a transformative shift for Radeon's hardware stack. The demo video above showcases the ray tracing capabilities of AMD's early RDNA 2 silicon using Microsoft's DirectX Ray tracing (DXR 1.1) API.
Source.