Which card to go for?

[Dravenspur]

I'm looking to upgrade my video card. My RX 480 is starting to not be enough for recommended requirements for games. I'm posting this in the "General" area because I want to ask about both companies. I really don't like upgrading to a refresh of an architecture (up to the RX 580, in this case). However, with no real news from AMD about their next gen cards this past year (I've seen that the code name is Navi, but no news on when they might be released...I take that back. I've read early 2019, but nothing real definitive from AMD, just speculation really. I also just read an article that Navi was again going to be mid tier, like Polaris was).


Secondly, as much as I love being on the cutting edge when it comes to computer parts, I agree with a lot of things I have read about ray tracing, that this first iteration won't be great because developers haven't had a chance to develop with the technology yet, so games won't take advantage of the ray tracing technology (even games that come out in the six months or so probably won't take full advantage of ray tracing). Maybe the next cards (or at least new games in a couple years, when ray tracing has been around for a while) can take advantage of it.


So my question is, do I upgrade to the RX 580, move to the GTX 1080 (because they will be cheaper with the release of the RTX 2000 series), or go with the RTX because I know it will be a good card for a while since ray tracing will become more prevelant in the future with games that come out? It's hard though, because what if ray tracing doesn't become a technology that games take advantage of, and then I spent $700 to $1000 for nothing? Last thing I will say is I don't have a 4K monitor, so I know the 1080 will be enough for me (ok, maybe too much) but I still think I may keep it in mind, along with the RX 580 and RTX, because it will be cheaper with the RTX cards releasing. What do you guys think?

 

[Dermen]

What resolution?

RX580 isn't worth it. The main problem with Vega is that it is too expensive, why buy a Vega56 for $400 when you can get a slightly slower 1070 for $300-350 or a slightly faster 1070ti for $350-400. Vega64 is $500 but you can get similar performance from a 1080 for $400-450.

If it were me I would get a 1070ti or 1080, I would also consider getting a used card if it had a few years of warranty left.

 

[Lochekey]

Does your monitor have freesync or gsync? It Mau be worth paying the slight price premium on a vega 64 if you can take advantage of a freesync monitor.

 

[Dravenspur]

@Dermen Thanks for the response. The resolution I have now is 1080p. I think I will wait for actual AIB partner cards for the 2000 series. The cards I have seen (which are of course sold out at Newegg...I haven't checked Amazon yet) from the AIB partners, even though they are not reference cards (they have each company's own cooling solution), are still using the reference PCB. I'm looking at buying Assassins Creed Odyssey when it releases and I looked at a system requirements checker site and the RX 480 still works, it just can't run at optimal settings. I think my choice is between the 1080 and the 2080, but I will wait for actual custom PCB's (unless companies aren't doing that for this generation, but I think they will) before deciding. I really liked ATI/AMD for years but they are just not coming out with enthusiast cards anymore, so I guess I'll make the switch this generation to Nvidia. I was a little worried when I saw that the partner cards were 2.5 and 3 slot cards, but I think I will be fine because my case is the Fractal Design Arc Mini R2, which has four slots. I will do some more research, but I'm pretty sure the 1080 will be good even for 1440p if I upgrade to that. I thought about 4K, but with the cards being expensive ($400 for the 1080 as you mentioned and $800 or more for the RTX cards) I don't know if I want to upgrade both the monitor and the card at the same time, although I could, I guess.

If anyone has recommendations for ok to good 4K panels, that would be appreciated. I will do some of my own research as well, but recommendations would be nice.

@Lochekey, no, my monitor right now has neither g-sync nor freesync. I tried to stay away from one or the other because I wanted the option to buy either companies card and I knew if I went with one panel over the other, it would have been better to go with that company's cards for the life of the monitor. I guess, if I am switching to Nvidia because AMD is not doing enthusiast cards I could get a g sync monitor to go with it. I looked at a lot of Vega cards when they were released, but the temperatures weren't great. The cards seem to run hotter when they were first released. Maybe they've gotten better now, I'm not sure.

 

[EarthDog]

If you are talking 4k, you have little business with a single AMD card. That said, a 1080 Ti can more or less play many titles at 60 FPS 4K (lowered/no AA)... I'd wait to see what the 2080 has in store.

As far as Ray Tracing, who knows if it will really take off, but, frankly, if you are thinking 4K you shouldn't really go less than a 1080ti/2080.

 

[Dolk]

GPU Recommendation list:

1080p:

• Nvidia GTX 1060/Ti
• Radeon RX580 (AIB perfered to be OC'd)
• AMD Vega 56

1440p / Ultra-wide 2K / WQHD:

• Nvidia GTX 1070/Ti
• Nvidia GTX 1080
• AMD Vega 56 / 64

True 4K:

• Nvidia GTX 1080/Ti

AMD Still has one of the best price performance ratio when it comes to the 1080p resolution. However, with recent changes with Nvidia lineup, Nvidia can easily be just as comparable. However do realize a R580 can do just fine up against a 1070 in the 1080p area unless you are talking about 144Hz screens.

Nvidia starts to take over in the 1440p / 2K / Ultra-wide resolution area. This mid tier resolution has a large spectrum starting from 2560 x 1080 on up to 3440 x 1440. Because of this, its hard to really say which GPU would be best. Typically the 1070 or Vega 56 is best matched with low spectrum of the 2K monitors, while the 1080 and Vega 64 is best matched with the upper end of the 2K resolution spectrum. Personally, I find the Vega 64 is excellent for Ultra settings up to 2560 x 1440. However the 3440 x 1440 can really stretch some Vegas in more demanding games, so the 1080 will always win there.

For 4K, there is only one GPU to go to, and that is the 1080Ti. Some people say a 1080 and Vega 64 can get you entry level 4K, but if you want the plug and play, no mess setup than you should go for the 1080Ti.

Now for the second bit for deciding a GPU: Game APIs. Recent influences in the gaming development world has caused some game developers to lean heavily on Nvidia, while others are freely working in DX12 or Vulkan API. Depending on which games you play and which games you may want to play, you should research which API technology is being used to render the game. Typically AMD can hold up against Nvidia when more CPU cores are given when running DX12 games, this is a recent trend seen in the latest generation of games like BF V, and Shadow of Tomb Raider. DX12 is expected to increase CPU core utilization in the future a long with Vulkan, both of which seem to be more friendly with AMD over Nvidia. However, DX11 games will always play more smoothly on Nvidia, so if you don't plan to buy any new games soon, but want to make your older games look amazing on a new monitor, than go Nvidia for sure.

Do your research on what you are targeting as far as games and applications, than make the correct choice. I think its a buyers market right now when you do the right research, but plenty of people will just tell you to buy a 1080. Which I can't also deny, its a great card and excellent price since the GTX2000 series is just coming out. However, we don't know anything about those cards, and any early benchmarks should be taken with heavy salt. New hardware architecture should never be judged off of older hardware.

 

[Dravenspur]

So I've seen a few reviews of the 2080 since the embargo has lifted from Nvidia and they are about what I thought. Most of them say the price to performance ratio is not worth it. Jayztwocents, who I like, says to stay away for now. Paulshardware says the performance increase is what you would expect from a new family of graphics cards. However, the price just isn't worth it. So now I'm left with a Vega 64 from AMD or the 1080 from Nvidia. I would love to stick with team red (as I always have up until now), but from what I have seen those cards run hot and somewhat loud and that's not what I am looking for. Does anyone have a Vega 64 that is pretty quiet (you can't hear it over the other fans in your case, for example), or has that been the experience of people on this forum, that Vega cards run hot, and therefore loud because the fans have to cool them down? I guess I could wait until Q1 next year to see if Navi ever gets closer to release, but then I'm just in an endless cycle of waiting for the next new card to come out. Can someone in this forum tell me what card they are using and if they like the noise and temperature from the AMD side and the Nvidia side (someone using a Vega card and someone using a 1080)? That would help my decision I think. I'm really looking for low noise. The loud fans of a card really bother me. Thanks.

 

[EarthDog]

1080 I had was whisper queit... EVGA GTX 1080 FTW2 iCX.

I wouldn't go AMD over Intel at that level... Vega 64 is just a power hog for similar performance.

 

[Dolk]

I've owned a EVGA FTW3 1080 and a Gigabyte Vega 64 and a Sapphire LE Vega 64. I also have a freesync monitor which is important to mention because I tested the 1080 and Giga Vega 64 specifically to see which did better in games and frame rate. Both cards hit back and forth in terms of FPS crown. Each has its own strength when it comes to specific engines and game developers. In that's still the case to this day. However, the 1080 will always do better with DX11, while the Vega 64 will almost always be better with Vulkan or DX12. So after that discovery, I focused on frame rate pitted the 1080 adaptive-sync tech against the Vega 64 Freesync tech. This is where I think bias takes over, I found that the Freesync did much better than the 1080 adaptive-sync, but only because my monitor is well tuned for Freesync over the DP standard adaptive-sync that the 1080 utilizes when there is no G-sync available.

Power and temperature does not concern me and so I did not really monitor these behaviors. I WC all my hardware and than crank on the OC. The Vega 64 will definitely take more power, its always hungry for more, while the 1080 will limit itself.

In the end I went with the Vega 64 since Freesync won me over.

 

[Dravenspur]

Thanks for all the responses guys. @EarthDog I was looking at the EVGA FTW2 GTX1080 as well. It looks great. I know I said I didn't want to wait for the next great piece of tech, because then I'd just be endlessly waiting and never buy an upgrade. After doing some research and having the RTX cards be so bad as far as price to performance ratio goes, I am going to wait a little longer for the holidays for the GTX1080 to go on sale. If there is no news about Navi by then, I'll go with the EVGA or ASUS 1080 card. I thought Navi would come out toward the end of this year, but it looks like AMD is doing a die shrink of the Vega cards for servers and "compute users" at that time, and Navi would be early 2019.