It should last for a very long time. I have a sad gtx 460 on the low end of the chart, but I'm still able to play most stuff.
You can see the top cards have almost double the performance of most of the cards. It's going to be awhile before everyone (including me) is caught up to that level of performance and Devs aren't going to be making games people can't play.
my 4 year old 7870 is getting pretty low on that list. hoping to swap to a new nvidia when they come out
Just bought a gtx 970 at discount best buy ever. Can play all my games at max, my main MMO now is Black desert, my old card i got about 40 fps in the open world 25-30 in towns, now i get 60-75 and 40-50 in towns.
A GTX 970 should last you for a couple years at least, I upgrade about every 4 to 5 years myself and never have issues. Don't go out and buy a next gen card that is suppose to come out in a couple months like some of these people are saying, always wait a while for the bugs to get worked out. Never a good idea to buy hardware right when it releases, especially gpu's.
A GTX 970 should be good till probably 2018 for a normal gamer. Should be able to pick up a 4G one for around $300.
Why not wait for GTX 1070? NVIDIA is supposed to start shipping it in July. After that GTX 970 will become old-gen.
Truthfully...what's the point?
There's no point indeed if someone has a really old GPU and needs one urgently for some game that runs slowly without one.
I'm waiting for GTX 1070 with 8-16 Gb of HBM2 in order to upgrade from 1920x1080 to one of those new fast respone rate, fast refresh rate higher resolution displays. GTX 1070 will be better optimised for higher resolutions than GTX 970. It will also be an upgrade from PCI 2.0 to PCI 3.0 and newer CPU and RAM for me. I presume NVIDIA Pascal might have better optimisations for VR too in case VR becomes interesting enough to try it during the next five years.
A GTX 970 should last you for a couple years at least, I upgrade about every 4 to 5 years myself and never have issues. Don't go out and buy a next gen card that is suppose to come out in a couple months like some of these people are saying, always wait a while for the bugs to get worked out. Never a good idea to buy hardware right when it releases, especially gpu's.
A GTX 970 should be good till probably 2018 for a normal gamer. Should be able to pick up a 4G one for around $300.
it is just a basic card but runs everything out now with no problems.
Generally, that isn't a huge problem (even if it have happened at rare occurances), usually it is the drivers that takes a while to do what they should but you will hopefully patch them anyways.
But it isn't like the new cards will come next week so waiting is only worth it if you have an acceptable card that lets you run the games you want good enough until the next card comes out (which seems to be late autumn or so here).
Also, if OP wanted a 50 or 60 card it would be more worthwhile to wait, those cards ages faster then the 70s and 80s.
Hmm you should really wait. Last I heard the 9xx series have architectural limitation when it comes to DirectX12/Vulkan and most nVidia fans will cry out in horror once these games start to pop out. It was something with AsyncCompute, last I heard they were emulating it and thus lowering FPS. I'm sure there are far more knowledgeable people than me to confirm/deny this but it's literally in almost every nvidia-vs-amd benchmark topic. Currently nVidia has a worse driver.
Drivers are usually updated every few months, and the thing your talking about was very much a 'cherry picked' thing anyway, theres nothing really to say that when Vulkan etc. is eventually in everyday use, that either gpu manufacturer will have an edge over the others, certainly at the moment they don't, and when Dx12 and Vulkan eventually become a thing, and i am really hoping that Vulkan dominates that particular battle, there is nothing to suggest that either card type will be best, it will inevitably be down to how each game is optimised for them, which for the most part, games do seem to be optimised more for Nvidia than they are for AMD, unfair perhaps, but it happens a lot, and it does give Nvidia the edge more often than not, over AMD.
A GTX 970 should be good till probably 2018 for a normal gamer. Should be able to pick up a 4G one for around $300.
With the expected boost in performance around 50ish % some time in 2016 from DX12/Windows10 compatible grafic cards with the significantly improved draw calls, do you think the 970 will be good until 2018?
Do you perhaps run that 970 also on double or triple screens ? Like it is commonly used for space games e.g. EVE Online. Any "field reports" on that ? 1080p gaming is perfectly fine for me w.r.t. that.
Erillion said: With the expected boost in performance around 50ish % some time in 2016 from DX12/Windows10 compatible grafic cards with the significantly improved draw calls, do you think the 970 will be good until 2018?
Do you perhaps run that 970 also on double or triple screens ? Like it is commonly used for space games e.g. EVE Online. Any "field reports" on that ? 1080p gaming is perfectly fine for me w.r.t. that.
Why not wait for GTX 1070? NVIDIA is supposed to start shipping it in July. After that GTX 970 will become old-gen.
Truthfully...what's the point?
There's no point indeed if someone has a really old GPU and needs one urgently for some game that runs slowly without one.
I'm waiting for GTX 1070 with 8-16 Gb of HBM2 in order to upgrade from 1920x1080 to one of those new fast respone rate, fast refresh rate higher resolution displays. GTX 1070 will be better optimised for higher resolutions than GTX 970. It will also be an upgrade from PCI 2.0 to PCI 3.0 and newer CPU and RAM for me. I presume NVIDIA Pascal might have better optimisations for VR too in case VR becomes interesting enough to try it during the next five years.
These cards gonna be on GDDR5 or GDDR5X, not HBM2. This year HBM2 only for professional cards. It's not confirmed of course, but this is what I deduct after reading all the info we have available.
Erillion said: With the expected boost in performance around 50ish % some time in 2016 from DX12/Windows10 compatible grafic cards with the significantly improved draw calls, do you think the 970 will be good until 2018?
Do you perhaps run that 970 also on double or triple screens ? Like it is commonly used for space games e.g. EVE Online. Any "field reports" on that ? 1080p gaming is perfectly fine for me w.r.t. that.
"Before you look at the results from
these tests and assume you're going to see a frickin' 10x free
performance boost from DX12 games later this year, zing, zam, zow! You
won't. So ease off the hype engine.
What's realistic? I'd expect anywhere from Microsoft's claims of
50-percent improvement all the way to the what we're seeing here in
Futuremark's test. This will depend very much on the kind of game and
the coding behind it."
Erillion said: With the expected boost in performance around 50ish % some time in 2016 from DX12/Windows10 compatible grafic cards with the significantly improved draw calls, do you think the 970 will be good until 2018?
Do you perhaps run that 970 also on double or triple screens ? Like it is commonly used for space games e.g. EVE Online. Any "field reports" on that ? 1080p gaming is perfectly fine for me w.r.t. that.
"Before you look at the results from
these tests and assume you're going to see a frickin' 10x free
performance boost from DX12 games later this year, zing, zam, zow! You
won't. So ease off the hype engine.
What's realistic? I'd expect anywhere from Microsoft's claims of
50-percent improvement all the way to the what we're seeing here in
Futuremark's test. This will depend very much on the kind of game and
the coding behind it."
Have fun
I would take a slightly different approach.
I would take the previous generation of video cards as a baseline.
Its really pretty amazing how the pattern in each geneation of video cards and CPUs follow the same pattern
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Do the different models of the GTX 970 mean anything? MSI, EVGA, ect?
Those are different manufacturers. Generally EVGA is stock, or slightly OC, with a few special models, but they are arguably the most reliable as long as it's a dual fan version imo. Then MSI is another company that will offer normally overclocked models with fancier heatsinks etc.
Do the different models of the GTX 970 mean anything? MSI, EVGA, ect?
Those are different manufacturers. Generally EVGA is stock, or slightly OC, with a few special models, but they are arguably the most reliable as long as it's a dual fan version imo. Then MSI is another company that will offer normally overclocked models with fancier heatsinks etc.
Do the different models of the GTX 970 mean anything? MSI, EVGA, ect?
Those are different manufacturers. Generally EVGA is stock, or slightly OC, with a few special models, but they are arguably the most reliable as long as it's a dual fan version imo. Then MSI is another company that will offer normally overclocked models with fancier heatsinks etc.
There's so many different options for the same card lol. What one should I choose?
The 970 ACX 2.0 would be the you'd want, as it's stock clock speed but it's the new version with dual fans and upgraded heatsink. Looks like the second one on the list for 446.99, for 20 more though the SC ACX 2.0 (superclocked) version isn't a bad choice either.
Do the different models of the GTX 970 mean anything? MSI, EVGA, ect?
Those are different manufacturers. Generally EVGA is stock, or slightly OC, with a few special models, but they are arguably the most reliable as long as it's a dual fan version imo. Then MSI is another company that will offer normally overclocked models with fancier heatsinks etc.
There's so many different options for the same card lol. What one should I choose?
The 970 ACX 2.0 would be the you'd want, as it's stock clock speed but it's the new version with dual fans and upgraded heatsink. Looks like the second one on the list for 446.99, for 20 more though the SC ACX 2.0 (superclocked) version isn't a bad choice either.
...an article that is 1 year old and pure theory crafting based on meaningless benchmark.
The first wave of GDDR5X memory chips that Micron has started sampling last month and will be mass producing in the summer are rated at 10Gbps, 11Gbps and 12Gbps. Which means that the fastest GDDR5X configuration will yield up to 50% more bandwidth vs the 8Gbps GDDR5 memory chips pictured above.
Comments
my 4 year old 7870 is getting pretty low on that list. hoping to swap to a new nvidia when they come out
Can play all my games at max, my main MMO now is Black desert, my old card i got about 40 fps in the open world 25-30 in towns, now i get 60-75 and 40-50 in towns.
A GTX 970 should be good till probably 2018 for a normal gamer. Should be able to pick up a 4G one for around $300.
This is the one I am using:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814127832&cm_re=gtx_970-_-14-127-832-_-Product
it is just a basic card but runs everything out now with no problems.
There's no point indeed if someone has a really old GPU and needs one urgently for some game that runs slowly without one.
I'm waiting for GTX 1070 with 8-16 Gb of HBM2 in order to upgrade from 1920x1080 to one of those new fast respone rate, fast refresh rate higher resolution displays. GTX 1070 will be better optimised for higher resolutions than GTX 970. It will also be an upgrade from PCI 2.0 to PCI 3.0 and newer CPU and RAM for me. I presume NVIDIA Pascal might have better optimisations for VR too in case VR becomes interesting enough to try it during the next five years.
* more info, screenshots and videos here
But it isn't like the new cards will come next week so waiting is only worth it if you have an acceptable card that lets you run the games you want good enough until the next card comes out (which seems to be late autumn or so here).
Also, if OP wanted a 50 or 60 card it would be more worthwhile to wait, those cards ages faster then the 70s and 80s.
Do you perhaps run that 970 also on double or triple screens ? Like it is commonly used for space games e.g. EVE Online. Any "field reports" on that ? 1080p gaming is perfectly fine for me w.r.t. that.
Have fun
These cards gonna be on GDDR5 or GDDR5X, not HBM2. This year HBM2 only for professional cards. It's not confirmed of course, but this is what I deduct after reading all the info we have available.
Nvidia Pascal Specs
Read more: http://wccftech.com/rumor-nvidia-pascal-gtx-1080-gddr5x-gtx-1070-f-gddr5/#ixzz45dJA64K5
If you're in the market for a GTX970 now, you might want to wait till June and pick up the GTX1070.
http://www.pcworld.com/article/2900814/tested-directx-12s-potential-performance-leap-is-insane.html
"Before you look at the results from these tests and assume you're going to see a frickin' 10x free performance boost from DX12 games later this year, zing, zam, zow! You won't. So ease off the hype engine.
What's realistic? I'd expect anywhere from Microsoft's claims of 50-percent improvement all the way to the what we're seeing here in Futuremark's test. This will depend very much on the kind of game and the coding behind it."
Have fun
I would take the previous generation of video cards as a baseline.
Its really pretty amazing how the pattern in each geneation of video cards and CPUs follow the same pattern
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
Yup, every single one of those generations followed the same trendlines.
</sarcasim>
you know...
moores law?
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
https://www.amazon.ca/EVGA-GeForce-Quieter-Graphics-04G-P4-2974-KR/dp/B00NVODXR4/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1460493363&sr=8-1&keywords=nvidia+gtx+970
There's so many different options for the same card lol. What one should I choose?
Have fun
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
Read more: http://wccftech.com/rumor-nvidia-pascal-gtx-1080-gddr5x-gtx-1070-f-gddr5/#ixzz45eFVkzyO
Article is 1 day old.