• Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.
  • The forums have been upgraded with support for dark mode. By default it will follow the setting on your system/browser. You may override it by scrolling to the end of the page and clicking the gears icon.

what gpu should i choose for friend old pc upgrade

X

xhtas

New Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2022
Messages
3 (0.00/day)
guys i found a r9 280x used for 50 euros a r9 280x 3gb xfx also i found a gtx 960 for 60 euros and and one gtx 1050 ti for 70 euros last but not least a gtx 970 for 50 euros
so lets give you some of his spects
an i5 4th gen
8gb of ram
 
Gtx 970 would be my choice. It's not bad for a budget 1080p setup, it's only a tad slower than the 3gb variant of the gtx 1060. Even modern AAA games you can get mostly medium settings at 1080p for most games.

280x if I remember correctly is a rebadged 7970 which is over a decade old !
 
tussinman said:
Gtx 970 would be my choice. It's not bad for a budget 1080p setup, it's only a tad slower than the 3gb variant of the gtx 1060. Even modern AAA games you can get mostly medium settings at 1080p for most games.

280x if I remember correctly is a rebadged 7970 which is over a decade old !
Click to expand...
I second this, my brother is still using a GTX 970 and its surprisingly okay for most games at 1080p with moderate settings or playing older titles.
 
None of them
 
970

while the AMD cards themselves were not bad, it's just that they could be BIOS modded by miners and it's rare to find any unmodified these days, or unabused

I have a 970 here with a 3570k in a spare parts rig that does well still, for 1080p gaming
 
I would prefer a Radeon 580 8GB, since the favorite in this thread (gtx 970) was crippled from the get go with the meager 3.5 gb of vram. I struggled like crazy with that one from day one because of that stupid limitation.
 
Neo_Morpheus said:
I would prefer a Radeon 580 8GB, since the favorite in this thread (gtx 970) was crippled from the get go with the meager 3.5 gb of vram. I struggled like crazy with that one from day one because of that stupid limitation.
Click to expand...
Yup and they hid it from the masses
 
Mussels said:
970

while the AMD cards themselves were not bad, it's just that they could be BIOS modded by miners and it's rare to find any unmodified these days, or unabused

I have a 970 here with a 3570k in a spare parts rig that does well still, for 1080p gaming
Click to expand...
what is well?!?!? a 300 dallar pc with a controller came out 2 years ago.. 1080p is like tinder saying u dont own a flip phone now,,, its the lvl being 20-30s saying i dont live with my parents
 
simlife said:
what is well?!?!? a 300 dallar pc with a controller came out 2 years ago.. 1080p is like tinder saying u dont own a flip phone now,,, its the lvl being 20-30s saying i dont live with my parents
Click to expand...
I have no idea what you're trying to say

You haven't been part of this conversation prior to now, so perhaps try that again?
 
Neo_Morpheus said:
I would prefer a Radeon 580 8GB, since the favorite in this thread (gtx 970) was crippled from the get go with the meager 3.5 gb of vram. I struggled like crazy with that one from day one because of that stupid limitation.
Click to expand...
Card wasn't fast enough to push high vram worth of textures so it ended up not being a problem for most people.

RX470 8GB (which I owned) was in the same performance tier as the gtx 970 but saw no additional benefit in having more then double the ram (4gb and 8gb models of the 470 benched nearly identical since cards that old in that price bracket weren't sustainable for high texture loads).
 
tussinman said:
Card wasn't fast enough to push high vram worth of textures so it ended up not being a problem for most people.

RX470 8GB (which I owned) was in the same performance tier as the gtx 970 but saw no additional benefit in having more then double the ram (4gb and 8gb models of the 470 benched nearly identical since cards that old in that price bracket weren't sustainable for high texture loads).
Click to expand...
I still have that GPU (970) and i would get a warning right away that the game (Arkham knight) was using too much memory.

But why would I want to limit myself to a 3.5 gb GPU when i can get one with 8gb?
 
Neo_Morpheus said:
But why would I want to limit myself to a 3.5 gb GPU when i can get one with 8gb?
Click to expand...
Because as far as we know it's not on the table as an option (wasn't listed in the OP and all the prices I saw in the UK used market showed significant higher price then the cards he listed or was listed specifically as a "mining card/bios").

Sure more vram (if price is the exact same) is cool but to be honest these cards could have 16gb of vram and nothing would change ( I go on steam and load up a modern game on a video card from that era and get medium settings regardless if the sticker on my card says 4gb or 8gb).
 
Instead of 970 and whining about the 3.5GB, could go up a few more $ for the full 980.
 
tussinman said:
Because as far as we know it's not on the table as an option
Click to expand...
Because maybe OP is a person that has limited knowledge of the matter and given the rabid cult members of Nvidia church are out in full force everywhere, he/she simply doesn't know that AMD makes GPUs.

Related sample, i know someone that bought his 11 year old kid a 4080 because is what everyone at microcenter told him to buy, even though he stated the kid only plays Fortnite at 1080p and since i was the only one to tell him that was overkill and to consider a cheaper AMD GPU, i was simply outnumbered, just like here.
 
Among these options, my choice would be the GTX 970. The R9 280x is nice but very old and consumes a lot of power. The performance of the 970 is between 290-290x.
 
What kind of games does he play?
 
Neo_Morpheus said:
Because maybe OP is a person that has limited knowledge of the matter and given the rabid cult members of Nvidia church are out in full force everywhere, he/she simply doesn't know that AMD makes GPUs.

Related sample, i know someone that bought his 11 year old kid a 4080 because is what everyone at microcenter told him to buy, even though he stated the kid only plays Fortnite at 1080p and since i was the only one to tell him that was overkill and to consider a cheaper AMD GPU, i was simply outnumbered, just like here.
Click to expand...

He listed a bunch of AMD cards. Where I live used 580s are >=€100, 970s much less and considering the 970s weren't interesting for miners I'd say go for it if strapped for cash which they clearly are.
Slyr7.62 said:
, could go up a few more $ for the full 980.
Click to expand...

That really depends on the local market, but yeah.
 
At those performance levels the extra VRAM doesnt really help
You're GPU limited long before it's an issue


Heres 4K tiny tinas wonderlands with all textures maxed out, almost reaching 12GB
Again, that's at 4K with maximum settings.
Theres no way a weaker GPU would use that much VRAM because you'd be at 5FPS before that happened
1672462009777.png



(I'll actually test 1080p medium and low for reference, gimme a second)

Hell screw what i was saying, i just saved 2GB of VRAM closing edge and steam
If you're out of VRAM, quit some background crap.

3.5GB to 4GB wont matter in tinas, it seems
(Edit: If you insist on DX12)
1672462369534.png


Ooooor i could change to DX11, quit edge, steam and discord and suddenly theres more than enough to go around (Overlays people! They use VRAM!)
1672462527342.png



On the RX580's, you'd need to know what exact model they are, and if they've got the original BIOS

Are they 4GB or 8GB?
Are they 2048 shader or 2304 shaders?

(The 2048 are basically a 570, the performance difference is pretty large)
 
Last edited:
970
 
The OP is asking about mid-range or high-mid range video cards with a certain consumption and purchase price. There was a proposal for a high-end graphics card, which is probably above the purchase budget and consumes more power. In the topic, there was no question about the power supply of the computer that will be upgraded. If, along with the GTX 980 or RX 580, you also have to spend money to replace the current power supply because it is weak or worn out, this can lead to a price that is not foreseen and not accepted.
 
lightning70 said:
Among these options, my choice would be the GTX 970. The R9 280x is nice but very old and consumes a lot of power. The performance of the 970 is between 290-290x.
Click to expand...
In that Instance grab a 7970 6G

Mussels said:
At those performance levels the extra VRAM doesnt really help
You're GPU limited long before it's an issue


Heres 4K tiny tinas wonderlands with all textures maxed out, almost reaching 12GB
Again, that's at 4K with maximum settings.
Theres no way a weaker GPU would use that much VRAM because you'd be at 5FPS before that happened
View attachment 276898


(I'll actually test 1080p medium and low for reference, gimme a second)

Hell screw what i was saying, i just saved 2GB of VRAM closing edge and steam
If you're out of VRAM, quit some background crap.

3.5GB to 4GB wont matter in tinas, it seems
(Edit: If you insist on DX12)
View attachment 276900

Ooooor i could change to DX11, quit edge, steam and discord and suddenly theres more than enough to go around (Overlays people! They use VRAM!)
View attachment 276901


On the RX580's, you'd need to know what exact model they are, and if they've got the original BIOS

Are they 4GB or 8GB?
Are they 2048 shader or 2304 shaders?

(The 2048 are basically a 570, the performance difference is pretty large)
Click to expand...
The 580 2048 and 570 are just a 580 with shaders dyked off.

In this instance instead of risking a used gpu just save some dough and Get a RX 6400
 
Some interesting takes in this thread, overly salty even, I had a 970 from launch as my main card for 2 years and it was great, and kicks on to this day in a 1080p lanbox, until I heard about the issue I wouldn't have even realised it had the 3.5+0.5gb VRAM configuration, and certainly never once felt like it was "cripped". Probably not the optimal second hand choice circa day 1 2023 here but still a solid card that I doubt the vast majority would find fault with.
 
wolf said:
Some interesting takes in this thread, overly salty even, I had a 970 from launch as my main card for 2 years and it was great, and kicks on to this day in a 1080p lanbox, until I heard about the issue I wouldn't have even realised it had the 3.5+0.5gb VRAM configuration, and certainly never once felt like it was "cripped". Probably not the optimal second hand choice circa day 1 2023 here but still a solid card that I doubt the vast majority would find fault with.
Click to expand...
I have one here, so i get why people are salty
But they still perform well enough for 1080p gaming


I think the problem is that some people read GPU reviews and see FPS values at ultra settings and totally ignore that those results are sometimes 1/10th the speed you can achieve at lower settings in those same games

Look at my tiny tinas where you can go from ~4GB to ~12GB of VRAM used, and honestly apart from shadows being flickery on low you can barely tell a difference since the games so console optimised everything's always streaming from potato to higher quality around you all the time anwyay
 
Mussels said:
But they still perform well enough for 1080p gaming


I think the problem is that some people read GPU reviews and see FPS values at ultra settings and totally ignore that those results are sometimes 1/10th the speed you can achieve at lower settings in those same games
Click to expand...
I just had the lanbox up and running after reading this thread, i7 4790, 16gb DDR3 1600 and the 970, there's still games this thing can do high settings 1080p60+, and can stay over 100fps on OW2 on competitive settings, not bad at all for an 8+ year old bit of tech. Honestly this thing is a little 1080p beast. As unaffordable as the highest top end gear is, you really don't need it for 1080p gaming, not even close. Certainly cuts the mustard for a little lanbox / yuzu for switch games for my son.

And I tend to agree, I almost never run ultra everything, I prefer the balance of higher framerate against ultra visuals that you need to compare stills to see. With the caveat of AA/shimmering like I said in that graphics thread, can't stand a jaggy image and shimmer in straight edges.
 
Best bet is usually to default to medium graphics, and then tweak texture and AA values to suit your systems performance
DLSS is a great way to fix the shimmering, ironically

You can also use the FSR2 to DLSS mods to get DLSS working on these older GPU's, i use it on my 1070, 1070ti and 1080

Despite what the mod author says about CP2077 specifically, I've found that using this works better than the native FSR mode in several games
FidelityFx Super Resolution 2.1 - FPS boost mod at Cyberpunk 2077 Nexus - Mods and community (nexusmods.com)


Run reg key
paste DLSS file in required game location
In game, DLSS is now unlocked on all GPU's but uses FSR 2.1
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top