I'm big on tech and analysis, so here's a handy spreadsheet I put together. It shows the relative speeds, value and efficiency. Its ordered based on the value of the cards. I update it whenever I upgrade so I can narrow down the best candidates. G3D Mark: is from the Passmark website and is a synthetic benchmark of overall 3D performance using a battery of tests. Its fairly accurate because each rating is averaged using 100s of samples. Price: This is the current low price on Amazon and Newegg, which is a reliable go-to for legitimate vendors. I need to go through and update it using PC Part Picker, which has a few more good sources. Value: is the price to performance and it gives you an idea if the GPU is a good deal. This is the most important number and anything over 40 is good. High end cards (above 10000 G3D) in the 30's are also a good buy. $ at 40: is what the price of cards would be if they were all a good value. MSRP %: I included this to show how discounted each card is, ie: 60% of MSRP Efficiency: is how fast the GPU is compared the the power it consumes. Higher is better. When purchasing high end cards and older models its good to be sure the speed is worth the power requirements and added size. Here's one that uses the latest eBay prices, since they vairy drastically from other online stores. I only picked new items that were brand name and fairly available. The RX470 is the card of the hour at an unheard of value of nearly 60. Passmark has it listed at a value of 80, but its a glitch. Its a fairly fast mid-range card with 8Gb of GDDR5 memory, but please note that the one on Newegg only has DVI output... You can find this card on eBay too for even cheaper, but it also has only DVI output. The RX570, GTX1060 3GB, GTX1050Ti and RX580 are not as good of a deal at a Value of around 40. They are all decent mid-range cards more than fast enough for this game. The GTX 1060 is the standout, with its price stable around $200 and the best overall of the bunch. Again, the eBay chart wins for prices, but you also have to deal with unauthorized sellers and probably no warranty or support. The chart also shows how much more efficient the Nvidia cards are than the AMD's. Interestingly, the RTX 2070 is relatively cool despite its high specs, unfortunately it's price is still in the unobtanium range even at MSRP. I paid that much for my whole box. When shopping, be aware of counterfeits. Stick with established manufactures and ignore listings for unbranded generic cards. They are almost always very low end cards hacked to register as high end ones. I might make one for CPUs and PSUs next, since they are easy to compare.
That is a good listing! I have heard that difference between 1060 3gb and 6gb would be bit higher in practice, but haven't experienced that card myself. What I know is that 1050Ti is not going to run game on high details at 60fps 1080p, it will not do SSAO at all really. 1080 will almost ever be pushed much at all in this game, single core performance of CPU is bottleneck with any CPU before card gets pushed hard, but that of course depends from many variables. 1070 performance level might be very optimal for BeamNG, probably no difference to 1080. Also before buying any card, worth to check silent pc review and if there is mentioning about coil whine of card one is looking. 1080 and 1050Ti at same fps and graphics settings do differ also, 1080 will generate more heat, so one needs better ventilation and of course when pushed hard that card will create miniature sauna inside the case if there is no good airflow via several fans. That over 105 watts extra power is creating a LOT more heat and all of it is vented to case. So that too is something good to keep in mind when looking for card. Maybe that helps in deciding what kind of card would be that perfect choice.
I have the predecessor to the Vega 64, which was called the R9 Fury X. It handles BeamNG very well. The nice thing with the Fury X is that they are all liquid-cooled and run very quiet (from my experience, and even under heavy load it makes little noise). AMD usually offers better compute power per dollar than Nvidia does, but the tradeoff is higher power consumption and heat (the higher compute does not always translate to higher FPS in all games, GPUs are very complex). That is how has been much of the time, though there was once a point that Nvidia got destroyed in performance (Radeon HD 4000 series with GDDR5... the GTX 200 series did not do all that well against them)
Especially right now, AMD is pricing cards cheap because they probably over produced to keep up with mining demand. Those RX470's are definitely not built for gaming, otherwise they would have at least an extra HDMI port. In the eBay list Ive included some preowned GTX 900 series cards for comparison, but before you buy one make sure to take into account the power requirements and lack of features. They are also only slightly cheaper for the drawbacks. The GTX980 is slightly faster than the 1060 6GB, but its also pulling 2x more wattage. The R9 Fury X still looks pretty competent next to mid-rang cards, but like the 980Ti its very inefficient. I made the mistake of buying a used GTX 580 a few years ago. It was dirt cheap, but I never got it to boot because my PSU couldn't handle it.
It is not really gaming GPU, I think it is more of multimedia use. Not sure what is price difference to 1050, but I would not consider really much slower than 1050Ti, iGPU is not hugely slower than 1030 I guess?
In my comparison, I didn't include anything that low on the scale. Anything less than a 1050 really isn't going to give you a satisfying gaming experience. For example, Ryzen integrated video such as the Radeon Vega 8 has a 3DMark of 1600, while the GT 1030 is just slightly higher at a 3DMark of 2200. Here are a couple cards to consider, along with a comparison to the GT1030, to show you how bad really it is. https://www.videocardbenchmark.net/...deon-RX-470-vs-Radeon-RX-560/3757vs3558vs3708 Ive made this mistake many times, rushing a purchase like this without looking up the performance. Now I have a GT 730 and Gt 710 that are just collecting dust. the price was right but it couldn't play games. They will eventually go to my relatives who only play little 2D games.
That is much better, it can do 1080p on high details without ssao and dynamic reflections on most maps, but WCUSA needs bit lower details or resolution. Also most of the games it can run 1080p on high to ultra settings, for the price and energy consumption/heat that is one of the best options, imo. There are cheaper option from AMD that can get to 1050 (without Ti) level of performance, but late driver issues and the fact 1050Ti is quite at the limit at WCUSA for keeping 60fps, I would say that 1050Ti or faster card. With 1050Ti just make sure it is 4GB model and that will serve you really well. I have one on desk right now as I upgraded to faster and it is nicer to have extra power, but also 1050Ti is nice as it does not heat up much.
I agree, its in that sweet spot of price/performance and as a rule of thumb, its better to go with Nvidia's GPU's. With Radeon cards; since the start of 2018 AMD has really dropped the ball with their drivers and hasn't fixed many issues. You have to dig up drivers from February to get this game working well. Same with My Summer Car. The bundled Relive recording software also started stuttering badly around the same time. I'm going to switch from my Radeon RX 460 to a GTX 1050 Ti soon for this reason, if they don't get their act together.
It is a shame that they don't get the driver issue sorted. 1050Ti is really nice though, no coil whine, at least not in Gigabyte OC model with Windforce fans, also heatsink is so massive in that, that even when gaming fans might stay off for a long periods of time, depends from the game of course. 2nd hand models are free to 100 quite often and at tier which 1050Ti is, cards are not burnt out so easily as higher tier cards can be. gtx1080 is nice, but it is kinda monster, puts out huge amount of heat and it is noisy, electrically noisy too, not exactly coil whine, but buzzing and makes PSU buzz too and when 1060 does almost anything, even 1050Ti manages quite high graphics, I think 1080 was bit of overkill, but if it lasts me 4 years, that time power might have some use already. Generally my hardware tend to last longer than majority, I keep everything quite cool which probably helps. I thought of selling 1050Ti, but actually I might keep it, might build 2nd machine to have some backup just in case.
I'm not sure if this is any help for anyone, but some 3D mark firestrike results I have got: Also Interesting bit for someone looking for upgrades is i7-6700 non k vs i7-8086k, there is huge potential, which is rarely used, 3-5fps improvements in practice, but looks twice as fast in test: i3-6100 is again half of 6700 in physics test and in practice with 1 car in BeamNG between i3-6100 and i7-8086K there are no huge differences, between i7-6700 and i7-8086k there are no huge differences with multiple cars, next big update might change that of course. So graphics score ~22 600 for gtx1080 and around 7500 for gtx1050Ti, these might not be directly comparable to G3Dmark scores on 1st post tables as this is just single firemark result, for 3Dmark score CPU has impact as well for example. Also different test gets different weight. But what I can tell is that 1080 is more than twice as fast as 1050Ti, it is around 38-42% GPU load on gtx1080 what matches 100% GPU load of 1050Ti when playing BeamNG.
