freak180 Posted March 7, 2015 Share Posted March 7, 2015 I'm planing on picking out this card (hopefully I can find it online thats in stock) http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/SearchTools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=3755051 But in the specs sheet it says Maximum Analog Resolution 2048 x 1536 Maximum Digital Resolution 2560 x 1600 The monitor I'm trying to buy supports up to Display Resolution Maximum 3440 x 1440 I figured if I used the DP port I would be able to use the monitor's resolution but if I cant then why bother with the graphic card. Let me know If I'm missing anything Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
farmeunit Posted March 7, 2015 Share Posted March 7, 2015 http://www.geforce.com/hardware/desktop-gpus/geforce-gtx-660ti/specifications http://www.cnet.com/news/hdmi-vs-displayport-vs-dvi-vs-vga-which-connection-to-choose/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anibal P Posted March 7, 2015 Share Posted March 7, 2015 Having a 660 I can tell you it's a bit long in the tooth, you would be better off with something much newer Open Minded 1 Share Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
freak180 Posted March 7, 2015 Author Share Posted March 7, 2015 Having a 660 I can tell you it's a bit long in the tooth, you would be better off with something much newer I know but Im moving up from a XFX Radeon HD 6790 Which i believe is a 1GB model Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anibal P Posted March 7, 2015 Share Posted March 7, 2015 I know but Im moving up from a XFX Radeon HD 6790 Which i believe is a 1GB model Save up some more money and get a better card, heck I'm trying to save up for a replacement also, makes no sense to gimp yourself if it can be avoided Open Minded and Jose_49 2 Share Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andre S. Veteran Posted March 8, 2015 Veteran Share Posted March 8, 2015 How much money are you paying for that 660Ti? It's 2 generations old, chances are you can find something more powerful in current-generation cards. Read http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gaming-graphics-card-review,3107.html Looks like some people are running that resolution on the 660 Ti, but obviously it's not going to be very playable. It's a very high resolution and you'd need something along the lines of a Radeon R9 290. You can find some well below 300$ currently. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eddman Posted March 8, 2015 Share Posted March 8, 2015 A 660 Ti for 3440 x 1440 resolution?! Forget it, unless you're prepared to dial the graphical settings way down, which still might not help much and then you'd have to play at a lower resolution, if you're ok with scaling. That card isn't even recommended for latest and upcoming games at 1920 x 1080, let alone higher resolutions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sinetheo Posted March 8, 2015 Share Posted March 8, 2015 This card is about as old as what you have and is similar speced. It is not 2k ready unless you do not game. Get a 960 as that is brand new and similar class. That will be match faster and can do 4k at low to medium settings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
freak180 Posted March 8, 2015 Author Share Posted March 8, 2015 This card is about as old as what you have and is similar speced. It is not 2k ready unless you do not game. Get a 960 as that is brand new and similar class. That will be match faster and can do 4k at low to medium settings. http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814487091 this would be something I should go with ? I'm just concern that its 2GB or that doesnt really matter? Jose_49 1 Share Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sinetheo Posted March 8, 2015 Share Posted March 8, 2015 For medium settings you should be fine with 2 gigs. Keep in mind even with 4 gigs of ram the most powerful cards will still have trouble in ultra. 4k is still early and many monitors suck and are ultra expensive too. Make sure it's not 30 hz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jose_49 Posted March 8, 2015 Share Posted March 8, 2015 4k is still early and many monitors suck and are ultra expensive too. Make sure it's not 30 hz So true. Beware also of TN Panels. They often come with poor yellows; they look ultra-sharp, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DevTech Posted March 8, 2015 Share Posted March 8, 2015 Both NVIDIA and AMD have specified the GPU chips that will be able to implement the full DirectX-12 feature set and as I recall it is a very limited choice ATM. I personally would be quite irritated if I was purchasing a new video card at this point in time using real dollars and it was instantly missing support for all of DX-12. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andre S. Veteran Posted March 9, 2015 Veteran Share Posted March 9, 2015 http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814487091 this would be something I should go with ? I'm just concern that its 2GB or that doesnt really matter? In that price range and for high resolutions, the R9 280X (like this one) is much more powerful than the GTX 960. It's really the minimum you'd want; and again I would recommend going for the R9 290, if you can afford it. There's one at 250$ after mail-in rebate on newegg currently http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814150697&cm_re=R9_290-_-14-150-697-_-Product. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mando Posted March 16, 2015 Share Posted March 16, 2015 I know but Im moving up from a XFX Radeon HD 6790 Which i believe is a 1GB model My sc 3gb 660ti model games happily sub 1080 at ultra say in bf4@60fps. 1080 p however the card slows requiring dropping to high for the same perf, at that res your aiming for, id be content for low to run smooth enough to use tbh m8. My cpu helps core i7 26k @4.4ghz As others have said if u want decent perf post 1080p only the 970 onwards is sufficient single card option, not sure of amd ooption. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swylen Posted March 16, 2015 Share Posted March 16, 2015 I have r9 290 and paid about $400 when it first came out. The card kicks ass and compares to top end Nvidia stuff. Play everything maxed much cheaper than I got it. http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814202080&nm_mc=KNC-GoogleAdwords-PC&cm_mmc=KNC-GoogleAdwords-PC-_-pla-_-Desktop+Graphics+Cards-_-N82E16814202080&gclid=CLanq774rcQCFYQ8aQodF1MALQ&gclsrc=aw.ds Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yorak Posted March 16, 2015 Share Posted March 16, 2015 I have r9 290 and paid about $400 when it first came out. The card kicks ass and compares to top end Nvidia stuff. Play everything maxed much cheaper than I got it. http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814202080&nm_mc=KNC-GoogleAdwords-PC&cm_mmc=KNC-GoogleAdwords-PC-_-pla-_-Desktop+Graphics+Cards-_-N82E16814202080&gclid=CLanq774rcQCFYQ8aQodF1MALQ&gclsrc=aw.ds Not sure which top end NVIDIA cards you are talking about, but it does not compare to the Titan, 780, Titan Z, 970, Titan Black, 780 Ti or the 980. max22 1 Share Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andre S. Veteran Posted March 17, 2015 Veteran Share Posted March 17, 2015 Not sure which top end NVIDIA cards you are talking about, but it does not compare to the Titan, 780, Titan Z, 970, Titan Black, 780 Ti or the 980. What? The R9 290 is way faster than a GTX 780 and it trades blows with the GTX 970 and even the Titan. I don't know where you get your data from but see http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/1068?vs=1036 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yorak Posted March 17, 2015 Share Posted March 17, 2015 What? The R9 290 is way faster than a GTX 780 and it trades blows with the GTX 970 and even the Titan. I don't know where you get your data from but see http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/1068?vs=1036 PassMark. But regardless, the others still blow it away. max22 1 Share Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andre S. Veteran Posted March 17, 2015 Veteran Share Posted March 17, 2015 PassMark. But regardless, the others still blow it away. PassMark is a synthetic benchmark, as as you can see by looking at real benchmarks, not necessarily representative of game performance. And yeah it's slower than video cards many times its price, I'll give you that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swylen Posted March 19, 2015 Share Posted March 19, 2015 Take a look at this deal. Tough to beat the performance for this price. Asus Radeon R9 290 OC 4GB DirectCU II Video Card $239.69 (was $339.99) after $30 rebate and Coupon Code: "EMCAPKX25" (Exp 3/25) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LaP Posted March 19, 2015 Share Posted March 19, 2015 http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814487091 this would be something I should go with ? I'm just concern that its 2GB or that doesnt really matter? 960 is not very powerful. It's barely better than a 670 in a lot of games. It's maybe 3-5% better something like that. It's really not that great of a card and not as awesome as the 970 and 980. Do you want to play games at that resolution or just display the desktop? If you want to play games i'm sad to say you'll need something better than a 960. A GTX 970 or R9 290 are your best options for a resonable price. 970 is better but the difference is not that big at high resolution. You'll still need to turn lot of things off even with those cards at that resolution but most of the current games should be playable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts