What GPU should I buy to run GTA V on max settings?

[tential]

980 isn't worth it. The only cards worth buying are 290, 290x and 970.

I don't even think the 290x is that great. I really think the R9 290 is the amazing sweet spot. The GTX 970 isn't even that great unless you're a gameworks freak. The R9 290 is just leagues above the competition in price to performance.

But I expect the OP to go with the GTX 970. It's what people always pick.
Personally, I take the R9 290. R9 290 CF. Or the GTX 970 if I play Gameworks games, or if I play games on day 1 of release when they're poorly optimized because I enjoy paying $60+ to beta test.

 

[Maveee]

The EVGA GeForce GTX 970 FTW seems to be coming out as the best option on http://www.anandtech.com/bench/GPU14/931
but a lot of topics here and on reddit suggest MSI as best brand.

Which one do I choose?

 

[the unknown]

Brands don't matter for performance as much as they matter for warranties IMO. You're going to want an non-reference design obviously, but cost is going to be the most important. Even the overclocked versions that are + €10-20 typically are not worth it in the value department. Personally, I'd go for EVGA for their warranty, the lowest cost ACX 2.0 cooler GTX 970, as long as the price is within €10 the competition. You can always OC a card yourself to gain value if you're so inclined.

 

[Yuriman]

770 -> 970 performance isn't worth that kind of money, IMO.

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/1037?vs=1355

Looks like roughly 40% on average? In the past, I had a rule where I wouldn't spend that kind of money until performance was twice what I had. I'd hold onto your money for another 6-8 months and just live with a few reduced settings.

 

[the unknown]

I agree with you fully Yuriman, but when certain games come out some people get the upgrade itch real bad . I'm just trying to help him get a card that's at the upper end of the performance without breaking the bank. If he was going pure value, I'd recommend the r9 290 for sure.

 

[psolord]

Was thinking the same thing when I watched psolord's video.
On my GTX 770 when I turn off Vsync, the tearing is insanely annoying.

@psolord thanks for your videos, I'm really close to buying a 970.

You are welcome mate. :thumbsup:

I saw in your follow up posts that you have concluded to get a GTX 970. Excellent choice, if you are aware and have accepted the way the GTX 970 treats its 3.5GB+0.3GB video ram.

I for one, got my 970 after the whole bug/shortcoming info broke out.

Great card. One of the best cards I have ever gotten and I have gotten a lot of them, as most people in these boards! heheh

Although you don't need any more convincing, I would like to inform you that I have just finished sorting out my GTX 970 on various cpus benchmarks.

You will see the GTX 970 on a highly clocked 2500k, but I've been thinking your case and how these tests could help you.

Your 3770 has a turbo boost of 3.9Ghz. Also it has 10% more IPC than my 2500k and give or take another 10% due to hyperthreading.

So 3.9/4.8*1.1*1.1=0.98, which means that you would be getting around 98% of the performance I am getting, which is great!

Also as an owner of a Gigabyte G1 GTX 970, I can suggest it to you, without reservation. Other G1 owners have complained for some coil whine though. Mine is OK thankfully.

 

[skipsneeky2]

No coil period on my 970,only in situations of super high fps like game menus.Asus Strix 970.Have ran this with a i7 3770 non k on both a CX500 and tx 650 psu with no coil whine or other issues.Excellent card i think.

Between MSI,Asus and Gigabyte its just hard to go wrong with their 970 choices.Unless your a uber overclocker,then Gigabyte just appears to be the best choice.

 

[Fox5]

The 295X2 is actually a great deal right now...

I would wait for the 390x and 980ti to drop in a couple months if you can hold off playing for that long though.

 

[Maveee]

You are welcome mate. :thumbsup:

I saw in your follow up posts that you have concluded to get a GTX 970. Excellent choice, if you are aware and have accepted the way the GTX 970 treats its 3.5GB+0.3GB video ram.

I for one, got my 970 after the whole bug/shortcoming info broke out.

Great card. One of the best cards I have ever gotten and I have gotten a lot of them, as most people in these boards! heheh

Although you don't need any more convincing, I would like to inform you that I have just finished sorting out my GTX 970 on various cpus benchmarks.

You will see the GTX 970 on a highly clocked 2500k, but I've been thinking your case and how these tests could help you.

Your 3770 has a turbo boost of 3.9Ghz. Also it has 10% more IPC than my 2500k and give or take another 10% due to hyperthreading.

So 3.9/4.8*1.1*1.1=0.98, which means that you would be getting around 98% of the performance I am getting, which is great!

Also as an owner of a Gigabyte G1 GTX 970, I can suggest it to you, without reservation. Other G1 owners have complained for some coil whine though. Mine is OK thankfully.

Actually as a coincidence I saved a lot of money today and could afford a GPU price in total of €800.
A 970 is ~400 for me, would 2 970's be a good performance? Or would I be better of buying something else (980?)
It also needs to be able to run on a CX750M without problems, since I recently bought that PSU.

 

[Maveee]

The 295X2 is actually a great deal right now...

I would wait for the 390x and 980ti to drop in a couple months if you can hold off playing for that long though.

The thing is: the next couple months I have a ton of free time, in July and August I have 0 free time, so waiting is not really an option :/

 

[futurefields]

Do not buy an AMD GPU for this game.

First of all, you get no temporal aliasing solutions, and this game is rife with temporal aliasing.

Second of all, you can't use MSAA with Post Processing set to anything above 'High' which means you miss out on the depth of field effect if you want MSAA

Third of all, AMD's only Contact Hardening Shadows algorithm is bugged, and does not function correctly.



You definitely want an Nvidia card for this game. TXAA makes all the difference in producing a stable image quality.

 

[Techhog]

Do not buy an AMD GPU for this game.

First of all, you get no temporal aliasing solutions, and this game is rife with temporal aliasing.

Second of all, you can't use MSAA with Post Processing set to anything above 'High' which means you miss out on the depth of field effect if you want MSAA

Third of all, AMD's only Contact Hardening Shadows algorithm is bugged, and does not function correctly.



You definitely want an Nvidia card for this game. TXAA makes all the difference in producing a stable image quality.

You're not going to get a good experience with any AA other than FXAA with anything less than a Titan X (unless my card is defective or something).

 

[Maveee]

I decided I want a 970 from MSI for sure.

But..

Which one to get?

- MSI GeForce GTX 970 4GD5T OC
- MSI GeForce GTX 970 GAMING 4G
- MSI GeForce GTX 970 Gaming 100ME
- MSI GeForce GTX 970 4GD5 OC

Which one is the best of these 4?

 

[lehtv]

Gaming 4G. Gaming 100ME is basically the same thing with pretty leds and green paint.

 

[lehtv]

You're not going to get a good experience with any AA other than FXAA with anything less than a Titan X (unless my card is defective or something).

You can still use SMAA with SweetFX configurator. Better looking than FXAA, practically no performance cost.

 

[Techhog]

You can still use SMAA with SweetFX configurator. Better looking than FXAA, practically no performance cost.

Hm. I haven't tried that. Granted, I've had this card for less than 2 weeks.

 

[Fox5]

Do not buy an AMD GPU for this game.

First of all, you get no temporal aliasing solutions, and this game is rife with temporal aliasing.

Second of all, you can't use MSAA with Post Processing set to anything above 'High' which means you miss out on the depth of field effect if you want MSAA

Third of all, AMD's only Contact Hardening Shadows algorithm is bugged, and does not function correctly.



You definitely want an Nvidia card for this game. TXAA makes all the difference in producing a stable image quality.

TXAA doesn't do much for this game imo, DSR, any level of DSR (or presumably AMD's VSR) works better. The DSR blur actual does wonders, I'm running at 2k resolution at high settings and the game looks and runs great on my geforce gtx 970. I let Geforce Experience autoset my settings and turned on adaptive vsync. I have to deal with some tearing, but it's way better than the widely fluctuating framerate this game normally has.

It sounds like MSAA/TXAA aren't going to be doing much if you turn up post-processing anyway.

If AMD's CHS doesn't work correctly (what makes you think it isn't?) it's not like you can't use the default shadows which look pretty good. Is PCSS unavailable on AMD cards?

 

[futurefields]

They really should have included SMAA T2X to clean up the image, but I suspect Nvidia didnt want their TXAA to have to compete with that (superior IMO) post-AA solution

the Filmic SMAA T2X in advanced warfare would make this game look perfect

 

[Deders]

You can still use SMAA with SweetFX configurator. Better looking than FXAA, practically no performance cost.

I'm playing with 2xAA and 2xaa on reflections perfectly well on a 780. Might try that SweetFX SMAA in the near future though.

 

[Techhog]

I'm playing with 2xAA and 2xaa on reflections perfectly well on a 780. Might try that SweetFX SMAA in the near future though.

With my OCm I should be performing close to stock 980... Maybe I should go back to stock and see if my overclock is somehow broken for this one game. I'm getting minimums in the mid-to-low 40s.

 

[MTDEW]

Do not buy an AMD GPU for this game.

First of all, you get no temporal aliasing solutions, and this game is rife with temporal aliasing.

Second of all, you can't use MSAA with Post Processing set to anything above 'High' which means you miss out on the depth of field effect if you want MSAA

Third of all, AMD's only Contact Hardening Shadows algorithm is bugged, and does not function correctly.



You definitely want an Nvidia card for this game. TXAA makes all the difference in producing a stable image quality.

You can run MSAA along with Post FX on Ultra and DOF enabled with an R9 290/290x.

That "artifact box in bottom right corner of the screen" bug running MSAA along with Post FX above high seems to only effect AMD cards below the R9 290/290x.

ie: My 7950's are effected but my R9 290's can run that "combo" of settings with no issues. (all using the same 15.4 beta drivers)
And I haven't seen anyone with a 290/290x mention having the issue either, so I suspect all 290/290x GPUs are fine with those settings.

 

[Deders]

With my OCm I should be performing close to stock 980... Maybe I should go back to stock and see if my overclock is somehow broken for this one game. I'm getting minimums in the mid-to-low 40s.

Those minimums would be fine in my book, you may have higher framerate standards than me.

 

[Techhog]

Those minimums would be fine in my book, you may have higher framerate standards than me.

They'd be fine if this game weren't so horrendous with screen tearing on my screen. I have to use v-sync. Also, it's more of a problem in that I think the 970 should be faster than this based on some other results.

 

[Deders]

They'd be fine if this game weren't so horrendous with screen tearing on my screen. I have to use v-sync. Also, it's more of a problem in that I think the 970 should be faster than this based on some other results.

Have you tried enabling Triple Buffering and forcing Vsync in the Nvidia control panel? It works but you have to sometimes enable then disable Vsync in the game itself after loading the game or after alt tabbing in and out of the game.

 

[flexy]

Brands don't matter for performance as much as they matter for warranties IMO. You're going to want an non-reference design obviously, but cost is going to be the most important. Even the overclocked versions that are + €10-20 typically are not worth it in the value department. Personally, I'd go for EVGA for their warranty, the lowest cost ACX 2.0 cooler GTX 970, as long as the price is within €10 the competition. You can always OC a card yourself to gain value if you're so inclined.

Don't get me wrong, I love how cool EVGA is when it comes to warranty and I hope my RMA goes all well. But I would not, not in 100 years recommend their "older" SC ACX2.0 cards and for sure not to an enthusiast who might want to overclock a bit. I am entirely frank here, those cards are RANK. I don't know what other word to use.

I could list a good dozen of reasons why NOT to get a SC ACX2.0...so if you go EVGA *definitely* get one of the newer SSC ACX2.0+ or FTW+ which are redesigned and (AFAIK) should cost the same.

It is very obvious to me that EVGA tried to save on most on their older ACX2.0 models, from the only 4 power phases, VRMs, cooler, (whereas they seemed to have fixed THIS issue now since mine was not misaligned at least), memory cooling etc. to rather poor thermals and a fan which is very loud on anything above 38%. For me as a 1st time EVGA buyer I was quite disappointed...seeing other people with Gigabyte G1 etc. whose cards run flawless, overclock to 1560 whatever while not being loud and not even hitting 70C.