GPUs

Whatever you are trying to ask or to tell us,

check if your PSU is capable of running SLI(NVIDIA)/Crossfire(AMD). (Wattage, PCI-E connectors)
check if your Mainboard is capable of running Crossfire or SLI. (Needs atleast 2x PCI-E X16 ports). Some boards got them, but still just support Crossfire.
And check if your Processor is capable running two GPUs. There is no reason to get two GPU's when the CPU isn't able to handle it and bottlenecks the whole system.

 

There is no reason to get something more than GTX 1060 if you have 1080p screen. I have GTX 1070 and it can run games like GTA 5 at 1440p 60fps with close to max settings.

GTX 1080 is overkill for 1080p

 

I agree, I have an R9 390X and it completely dominates basically every game in 1080p, with the CPU I have, which is severely bottlenecking it, I can only imagine what it will be like with a high end i7. But why not? He has the money, want's it, and it will future proof his PC for 1080p, for years to come. My only concern is the CPU bottleneck that he will undoubtedly encounter, I still recommend a 1070 then also buy a higher end CPU and mobo for a little more money than one single 1080, and it will still be complete overkill for every 1080p game and max out any game on 1440p.

 

Hold up, are you really thinking of getting a GTX 1080 with an i3???

No. Get a GTX 1060 or RX 480 at most, pointless to go any higher than that unless you hate money. If you have GTX 1080 level money to spend then you're 100% better off upgrading the CPU and getting a 1060/480 while you're at it.

 

Besides, this game is CPU-based. Even the lastest i3 will try to end its life by hanging itself before you are even allowed to download the game from steam.

Newer i5 or i7s are a must-have to play this game on high or max settings with no framedrops.

 

I've got an I3-6100, and it runs 2 cars @ 30 FPS on ECA. 60 on Gridmap. I'm using integrated graphics, so I really don't think the CPU is a bottleneck.

 

2 cars at 30 FPS? Yes, it does quite look like a bottleneck. I am running all min with an old 2nd gen i5 (AKA: the roman empire was able to make more advanced stuff) and with an old shitty 6950 AMD i am able to run 3 cars 40-60 FPS on most original maps.

 

Like I said, I was using an iGPU, so I doubt it was the CPU's fault. My proof? 30 @ ECA and 60 @ Gridmap. Only difference there is the amount of trees. So this CPU should last a while. And trust me, 30 FPS is not bad. When I had hyperthreading on, I could run up to 4 cars in realtime.

 

I think that Dr. Death underrates i3 CPUs a bit.

I haven't had one, so that's only an opinion

 

So what you are saying, is I should consider a better CPU than GPU?

 

Yes, but the one you have now will meet your needs for now. I'd put my money into a nice GTX 1060 6gb, and if I've got money left over, I'd upgrade to an I5.

 

Ok, thanks

 

IIRC, there is only ~30% IPC improvement from Sandy Bridge to Skylake. Also, the Radeon 6950 is still a beast of a card, for as old as it is.

 

It works good enough. But let me tell you. The deal with AMD drivers being terrible? well, all memes have some truth to them, and AMD drivers SUCKS.

Also i hate the lack of AMD support while Nvidia gets much better overall support.

 

I don't think you know much about computers, AMD obliterates Nvidia in Vulkan/DX12. Plus, it's on par with Nvidia. Although Nvidia dominates the high end, amd is the king of budget and mid-budget cards.
AMD drivers do not suck, as they keep adding features with every new update. Overclock, recording, game optimization, to name a few.

 

Let me remind you that i have a 6950. Not a new GPU. Vulkan? DX12? talking about FTL shit to me. Game compatibility is lower with AMD GPU in my experience, and AMD drivers DID ended up giving me BSOD a few times. Seriously, fuck their old CCC. No idea about their new driver interface and stuff. My GPU is not supported with that anyways.

 

You can't really say any manufacturer sucks when you're using an old outdated product, I have an R9 390X, and yeah the drivers gave me a little issue at first but it was well worth what I got in reward. AMD gives better or on par performance to Nvidia low and mid range cards for cheaper, some bugs are to be expected. Now, AMD CPU's? Yeah they kinda suck, Intel is light years ahead of them, but still for 250 to 1000 more buckaroos.

 

AMD = low end/cheap/lots of cores. <$500 builds
Intel = Raw speed/lack of cores. >$500 builds
Nvidia = Raw speed/high end. >$500 builds

 

So AMD is for poor people that cant afford good builds. GG good to know fam.

 

Well, their CPUs are definitively low end... until Zen that is. I disagree when it comes to GPUs, as Radeons are great low-end all the way to high-end.
--- Post updated ---

You don't need a GTX 1080 unless you plan to do 4K or 144hz gaming. GTX 1060 or RX 480 is the performance bracket for you. You could get an R9 390X or a GTX 970 too, they're in the same performance bracket. Ultimately the choice is yours, but please don't buy something when you have no idea what you should get.