Nvdia GTX 960 How does it handle TW Atilla?

[Garensterz]

Does anyone here uses Nvidia GTX 960? If so, how does it handle your Total war Atilla's performance? The thing here is, I'm planning to buy this Vcard but I'm not sure how can it handle the game on Quality - Max Quality. Any advice?

[craziii]

buy a 290 for 40$ more for 40% more performance. if you are american that is

[Garensterz]

What's the rival of the Radeon R9 290 (is that right?) for Nvidia G-cards?

[SPARTAN VI]

Nvidia has a huge hole between the GTX 960 (~$200) and the GTX 970 (~$300). The GTX 970 is the closest to the R9 290. A bit faster overall, but I can't say if $30 premium is worth it. I'd like to see more R9 290 benchmark results before I make a recommendation either way.

[Garensterz]

I guess I'll just stick with the GTX 960 super jestream. It's much cheaper though, and Iv'e seen a couple of becnhmarks that adds 1 or 2 FPS on other brands.

SPARTAN VI, Would you recommend the 960 palit super jetsream or should I go look for other brands similar to this series? Any advantages or disadvantages that I should know about?

[SPARTAN VI]

In the $200 USD range, it falls between the GTX 960 2GB and the R9 280 3GB. If you want your upgrade to last, Crazii is correct in that games are gobbling up more and more VRAM, so the R9 280 might last a little longer. For Attila specifically, the benchmark results are all over the place; sometimes showing the GTX 960 is faster, sometimes slower, sometimes not mentioned at all. I'd give the edge to the GTX 960 though in Attila.

[Garensterz]

Wow. Your Vcards are much much cheaper in your coutntry, I tell you that. A range of 200 bucks for a 960 and a 280? In my country you can buy a 960 twice the price you have mentioned. Damn!

I hate my country

[Alexios Komnenos]

I have a 960 and, honestly, I don't see much problem. Sometimes FPS drop a bit, especially when there's a lot of fire and smoke, but campaign map works flawlessly, and most battles go well enough. It's not 60 FPS, but I'm content with 20-30, to be honest.

After all, mine is a 6-year-old machine. It's still worth its price.

[Garensterz]

I have a 960 and, honestly, I don't see much problem. Sometimes FPS drop a bit, especially when there's a lot of fire and smoke, but campaign map works flawlessly, and most battles go well enough. It's not 60 FPS, but I'm content with 20-30, to be honest.

After all, mine is a 6-year-old machine. It's still worth its price.

I haven't got any problems on the campaign map also with my 560ti. So your Attila can run on 20-30 fps in battles? On what settings? And what are the rest of your system specs? Because anything below 25 is already unsatisfying to me. Hmm, now I'm having doubts on the 960

[LestaT]

I haven't got any problems on the campaign map also with my 560ti. So your Attila can run on 20-30 fps in battles? On what settings? And what are the rest of your system specs? Because anything below 25 is already unsatisfying to me. Hmm, now I'm having doubts on the 960

Depends more on the CPU for smoother battles involving larger units I think. My low 260X can easily get 20-30 on Quality but will dip on single digit when 2 full stack battles with Ultra unit size on my i3-2100 (on the other hand got offered second hand 2500k cheaply, just wondering if it'll make lots different or minimal.)

[Garensterz]

Just to update you guys, and I'm very thankful for all your advice. I recently bought the gtx 960, it went very smooth on the highest settings however I get FPS drops within 25 - 30 fps when units starts on stacking up especially on siege battles, but everything is tolerable. The 960 is a good buy and didn't regret on doing so.

Thanks again!

[kamtar]

Do you get fps back up if you look away and not seeing units? If not then its not a problem of GPU but CPU.

[A Barbarian]

Do you get fps back up if you look away and not seeing units? If not then its not a problem of GPU but CPU.

Rendering units from close up uses a lot of CPU resources in TW games, that's true. But looking at the sky will always also reduce the GPU load a lot since the GPU simply doesn't have to render much (polygons/textures/particles/...).

[nosuchname]

you should gone with gtx 970 only cost 100 bucks more, and its even better than two gtx 960 in sli

[SPARTAN VI]

you should gone with gtx 970 only cost 100 bucks more, and its even better than two gtx 960 in sli

No doubt it's better, but from a financial standpoint, that's a ridiculous suggestion. He obviously budgeted for mid-range, so "only $100" isn't a marginal difference, it would blow the lid off that budget.

[Garensterz]

On the other hand. G-cards in my country costs twice as much than other countries would sell it, I wouldn't want to spend too much on just a G-card. So for Middle class G-cards, the super jetstream 960 is actually a decent product for handling current gen games such as Attila. All in all, It's a good buy for me.

[Geronimo2006]

My card (see my signature) is 7 years old and I have had no crashes and no lag so far.Edit: I can run the textures on Large and get the shadows (earlier I thought otherwise) but I cant run them on Extreme. I found it ran the game better than my old NVIDIA GT 610 despite being 4 years older, so I took it out of my old PC and put the Radeon in my newer one when the GT 610 died.

[von stoker]

I was looking at upgrading my gpu. Nvidia 970-980 are too expensive ($550-$650) so I was looking for something like a 770-870. Problem is all the parts stores I've seen don't have any higher end 700 series or any 800 series cards. They all tend to jump from 750 to 960. Does any one know why this is? Are there problems with higher 700 series and 800 series cards?

[SPARTAN VI]

I was looking at upgrading my gpu. Nvidia 970-980 are too expensive ($550-$650) so I was looking for something like a 770-870. Problem is all the parts stores I've seen don't have any higher end 700 series or any 800 series cards. They all tend to jump from 750 to 960. Does any one know why this is? Are there problems with higher 700 series and 800 series cards?

The reason you see GTX 750 Ti's then GTX 960, 970, and 980 is because the GTX 800 series is only available for laptops. For desktops, the GTX 750 Ti, GTX 960-980 are all based on the latest "Maxwell" architecture. The rest of the GTX 700 series are from last generation's architecture, which are out of production, AFAIK. The GTX 750 Ti is the entry level graphics card at the $150 USD mark; GTX 960s are the mid-level option at about $200 USD, then the mid-high GTX 970s should actually be in the $300-350 USD range, and finally the enthusiast level GTX 980 rounds out the $500+ range. We're expecting nvidia to fill out their GTX 900 line-up later this year, starting with the GTX 960 Ti and the GTX 980 Ti.

[Dicer]

I have a GTX 660 and with 80 units on the field on large unit size I get about 30-40 FPS