Everyone on the internet is a he. And the worst of them are the ones who say they're girls!





;P

So I've heard. Carry on, then!

Let me jump in.

First of all, here are Dark Souls 3 benchmarks: , [url=http://www.techspot.com/review/1162-dark-souls-3-benchmarks/page5.html]CPU.

From that, it looks like your CPU should be enough for a consistent 40+ fps, and a GTX 950 will be enough, but just barely (at high settings).

I couldn't find a CPU benchmark for XCOX 2, but for the GPU it seems pretty consistent with Dark Souls 2.

The short of it is:

Stay with the CPU, power supply, etc. for now.

Buy a GPU up to 150W. I'd say go for mid range and wait for the new AMD chip which arrives at the end of this month, to see its actual performance.

Be happy.

I said it once, and ill say it again. If you arent willing to do the research yourself to get the best price/performance that your pc can handle right now, im willing to help. People who are recommending you wait for newer cards are failing to understand that in the amd vs nvidia war, they trade blows on game performance based on the developers choices. Directx 12 games will improve performance, but they will be newer games that will require a directx 12 video card, will have newer up to date graphics, and will require windows 10.

So if you have the free upgrade, the moment you upgrade your mb or hard drive, your upgrade is no good anymore. So thats about 120 bucks on the OS just to support directx12. Which im assuming is not a big deal for you right now. The new gtx cards that one guy doesnt even know how powerful they are really going to be. The new 1070 for 379$ will be more powerful than the current gen titanx. And that info is coming straight from nvidia.

I am willing to help you learn and understand what you need and why. I just added you. And I can help you learn, and choose.

The guy who is arguing with me may have some knowledge. But its misguided and he makes so many assumptions its almost not even funny anymore. The 960 is fine, but i wouldnt choose it, cause im willing to spend more, waiting for a new gen you will get more powerful hardware. But buying the older gen right now when the prices are low is also a good option, better option in my opinion.

Again, i please ask once again to disregard answers you get in the forum, unless you are willing to learn for yourself from someone why certain things are better, then you are taking the chance of someone without the know how influencing your decision to buy something based on their bias or their opinion.

That being said. The R7 370 has a 4gb variation for around 150. And the r9 380 has 4gb also and runs about 220. Those are in usd, and both from amazon prices. You will get the 4gb you need for newer more modern games with the increased vram, and wont have to settle for 2gb that way. Their core clocks are lower, and they use more power, and produce more heat, but the trade off for the extra vram in cards that can use it is a good deal. Given its amd you may have to tweak things in certain games, or use d3doverrider to compensate for the drivers being uncooperative. But its still a very solid option. The 960 has a 4gb option, and if you are willing to spend the extra money for it. It is a very solid option, and i highly recommend it.

Ok so i did what i said i wasnt gonna do and tried to help on a forum post full of misinformation, im sorry if i ever sounded pompous and rude about this stuff. I never meant to be, but the misinformation you get from forums is massive. I have spent alot of time on forums about tech, and even in the tech forums they will tell you basically. You will get misinformation, bias, and options. Im not anti amd, but i know its limitations and issues compared to current gen nvidia products. If you can wait till next gen, go for it, but if you buy it brand spankin new you are getting something that is untested for the most part, and will cost more for what you get.

Here is some benchmarks for you to look at that show how big a difference having 4gb over a 2gb card can have. http://www.gamersnexus.net/guides/1888-evga-supersc-4gb-960-benchmark-vs-2gb/Page-2 Those are at high resolutions, and i saw you say you use a 1080p monitor, so you will really need the 4gb card for good games at 1080p.

All the amd options have at or around 1000 or so core clock. The 960 in comparison has about a 1300+ core clock. More core clock=more fps and more smooth gameplay. And nvidia can be overclocked in current gen while amd struggles to overclock because of the hardware being pushed to its limits. Honestly, for the money, the 960 gives you exactly what you need. Its powerful enough to play modern games pretty well, but not brand new intensely graphic games. It has 4gb of vram, high core clock, is power efficient and runs cool. Its a good match for the 6300, and i think you would be very happy with it.

*cough* AMD Bulldozer *cough*

Im just gonna put this here to help. Like i said before, google is your friend. Tech sites all over the web makes lists of top tier/ mid tier components to help non savvy people make a decision. And it does help to know what a little more money will get you, or a little less will deprive you of. http://blazinglist.com/top-10-best-graphics-cards-for-gaming-under-200/
We are talking gpus now cpus. Bulldozer is in its own category. And it begins with S, and ends with T. S**T LOL. No seriously though. Core clock isnt everything, you cant say the 960 with its 30% more core clock will be better than all amd cards with 1000 core clock. Because some have many more streaming processors to compensate for that. Which is why he needs to learn why what is better. If you're gonna build your own pc, you need to either be savvy, or know someone who is savvy.

This is one of the best sites. Probably the highest rated and used. And they are unbiased. http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-gpus,4380.html

Also, here is just an example of what you can find if you actually look. And its an example of why you dont actually need to be 100% savvy, but can still make an informed decision. This is the internet, and having peoples opinions on a forum vs seeing video of performance side by side or back to back is nonsense. https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=gtx+960+vs+r9+380

You know, considering that you earlier on decided to stay out of this discussion, you sure do post an awful lot.

Just let it rest, I'd say at this point OP has all the info they originally wanted ( or a little more than that ). Also, "he" is apparently not a he, which you would have noticed if you were paying more attention to what they're actually posting.

I don't even understand what you're trying to say... What "war"? And how are we trading blows on Nvidia's and AMD's choices? Le fuq? Did you ever hear of something called "benchmark". Gaming magazines and tech sites take different GPUs, put them in otherwise identical systems and try how well they perform in different games. Faster cards are faster, slower cards are slower. If a RX 480 beats a GTX 980, it beats the GTX 980. Benchmarks are under a NDA (non-disclosure agreement) until end of this month (29th, if I remember correctly) when the cards will be released. But the leaked 3DMark scores are pretty close to what AMD showed on their presentation.

Your point? RX 480 for $200 (same price as GTX 960, better DX12 support, more efficient) with performance similar to GTX 980 (which is overkill for the FX-6300) comes straight from AMD (well... they say it even beats the 980). I don't see how it's "so many assumptions its almost not even funny anymore" when I say that AMD's cheaper cards will be... well, cheaper. And that there'll be cheaper cards than the RX 480 isn't an assumption. The RX 480 is the fastest of the cards that AMD will release end of this month. Of course their slower cards will be cheaper.

Look, it's easy:
a) Get a GTX 960 for 200 Dollar now
b) Get something that's way more powerful for the same price in 4 weeks
c) Get something that's comparable to the GTX 960 for way less than 200 Dollar in 4 weeks

What you fail to see is that prices aren't low now. 200 Dollar was a good price until a few days ago. But when there'll be a card that'll beat the crap out of the 960 for the same price in 4 weeks, 200 Dollar isn't godd at all. Go to any gaming or hardware board and open a thread where you ask if you should buy a GTX 960 now. No need to tell me the responses... I know them already. They'll be "If you can wait for 4 weeks, don't buy anything now. If you can't wait, try to get a used card on ebay to fill the gap."

What the...? Wait... Are you the same guy who just wrote:
RX 480:
- 20 bucks cheaper than the 380
- consumes less power than the 380
- is a lot faster than the 380
- comes with 4 GB RAM anyway (8 GB version will be $229)

PLEASE, stop telling people to pay more to get less!

The driver thing again... Yes, Catalyst was behind Nvidia's drivers. But it never was THAT horrible that you constantly had to use 3rd party programs to fight your uncooperative drivers. And Crimson (new driver) is a whole 'nother thing than Catalyst.

Misinformation... Well, okay, it's not "misinformation" to tell someone to buy a GTX 960 now instead of waiting 4 weeks for new GPU's that'll be faster, cheaper and more efficient, but... Well... forget it -.-

That's why people don't recommend current gen AMD GPUs (they suck! simple as that), but say to wait for AMD's next generation.

First part of this quote is the only point where I can agree with you: Early buyers will get something that's brand new and thus not tested in reality. But... "will cost more for what you get"? Again:

960 - $200
A card with the roughly the performance of a 980 - $200

You do know that the 980 is almost twice as fast as the 960? So, even if AMD (and the leaked 3DMark scores) lied to us heavily and the RX 480 will only be 1.5 times faster than the 960... How's that "will cost more for what you get"?

Also something you need to take into account is that. If the new 200 dollar gpus are going to be the equivalent of a gtx 980. The current "next gen" games are not even touching the potential that future games will have at their disposal. So a 200 dollar graphics card now, while it will play current games well, when the developers start using the new hardware, it will be equal to the 200 dollar graphics cards now. Its called the industry moving forward.

I know. Otherwise you wouldn't have said this:
I never recommended a "future unreleased undisclosed amd card that will beat a GTX 980", because (and I repeated this a couple of times) it's more than a FX-6300 can handle. I recommended to buy one of the smaller cards that'll be cheaper. And, just by the way: The RX 480 isn't undisclosed or my speculation. It was oficially presented by AMD yesterday. So, it's as speculative as the unreleased 1070, which you just praised for beating the TitanX at a price of $379 (btw, that's what Nvidia thinks is a good price for custom models - Nvidia themselves are going to ask $449!).

Yes, I am. But this doesn't change the fact that you're recommending more expensive cards that have less performance and need more power.

If I were Crackpot, I'd wait 4 weeks and see what AMD releases in the 100 Dollar price segment, because it'll have more performance than the 750 Ti has.

So's the GTX 1070. Didn't stop you from telling us how awesome it'll be.

I know. That's why I said that the 3DMark scores are pretty close to the game benchmark (Ashes of the Singularity) AMD showed on their presentation. It backs up what AMD told us about their new GPU.

I'm out of here now. It doesn't make any sense to talk to someone who doesn't read replies, thinks of AMD's oficial presentation as "speculations about a unreleased and undisclosed" GPU while he takes Nvidia's words as a fact and doesn't stop to talk about some strange GPU war that doesn't even exist (Nvidia new releases are high end, AMD''s releases are entry level to mid range. Nvidia will release mid range later, AMD will release high end later. No. War.)
No, I'm not. I'm telling her to look at the smaller GPUs that AMD will release together with the RX 480. It's just that the RX 480 is the only card where we know performance and price. Assuming that slower cards will be cheaper isn't THAT far off.

Won't get spent ;)

Read my posts or stop replying to them.

That gpu upgrade you are wanting so bad. Would not be a really big increase. You would get the extra 2gb of vram, but it wont be a huge performance increase. If the card is still working, spend the money on other new components to prepare your system for an entire upgrade. 16gb is going to be pretty essential here soon. Even Ark needs more than 8gb and its been around for about a year now.

So, save your money, a 7770 isnt a bad card. You would be better off saving and waiting for prices to drop down lower/new gen gpus. Zen will be out late this year, and hopefully its all that amd says it will be. If it is, then you could upgrade your cpu/mb when they prove themselves.

A gpu upgrade is not sufficient for your system. You honestly need cpu/mb/ram/gpu and possibly psu depending on next gen hardware power efficiency. So saving your money would be the safe thing to do.

Read. My. Posts. Before. You. Reply.