So using this benchmark list I've been doing a comparison of mid range graphics cards.
(From the looks of the list the midrange ones are 770GTX, 670GTX, 760GTX, 580GTX and 480GTX.
Here are the stats using ebay average for each card right now. The 480 and 580 are front runners for best bang for the buck at the minute.
Card Total Specmark $ ebay avg Specmark per $
480 GTX 4347 150 28.98
580 GTX 4970 200 24.85
760 GTX 5006 270 18.54
670 GTX 5384 280 19.22
770 GTX 6217 370 16.80
Best Bang for the Buck mid range graphics card
Forum rules
Please add your OS and Hardware Configuration in your signature, it makes it easier for us to help you analyze problems. Example: Win 7 64 | Geforce GTX680 | i7 3770 | 16GB
Please add your OS and Hardware Configuration in your signature, it makes it easier for us to help you analyze problems. Example: Win 7 64 | Geforce GTX680 | i7 3770 | 16GB
Without spoiling up You research, think
some info needs to be mentioned here:
1. 480 & 580 are fermi based cards, 6xx & 7xx are keplers.
(the difference is in efficiency/temperatures & texture count)
2. lowest scoring card (in performance) has 4Gb of vRam,
while top scoring 480 has only 1.5GB
Just few points for others to stay educated & not making fast move buying something without clear idea what are the drawbacks. These are nice cards that have high value if You can manage with available Vram. Keep in mind Vram doesn't sum up in system, so You're always limmited by the card with lowest amount of it in action. vRam is used not only for textures & geometry, but also for output resolution : the bigger the image You're rendering, more of vRam is reserved.
cheers
some info needs to be mentioned here:
1. 480 & 580 are fermi based cards, 6xx & 7xx are keplers.
(the difference is in efficiency/temperatures & texture count)
2. lowest scoring card (in performance) has 4Gb of vRam,
while top scoring 480 has only 1.5GB
Just few points for others to stay educated & not making fast move buying something without clear idea what are the drawbacks. These are nice cards that have high value if You can manage with available Vram. Keep in mind Vram doesn't sum up in system, so You're always limmited by the card with lowest amount of it in action. vRam is used not only for textures & geometry, but also for output resolution : the bigger the image You're rendering, more of vRam is reserved.
cheers
-
prehabitat
- Posts: 495
- Joined: Fri Aug 16, 2013 10:30 am
- Location: Victoria, Australia
This was discussed recently, and some nice CUDA tables were made.
I'd prob tend towards GTX580 3gb followed by the cards listed in the thread below - depending on your budget. <200usd for GTX580, ~400usd for GTX770 4gb... check it out
http://render.otoy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=21&t=39394
I'd prob tend towards GTX580 3gb followed by the cards listed in the thread below - depending on your budget. <200usd for GTX580, ~400usd for GTX770 4gb... check it out
http://render.otoy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=21&t=39394
Win10/3770/16gb/K600(display)/GTX780(Octane)/GTX590/372.70
Octane 3.x: GH Lands VARQ Rhino5 -Rhino.io- C4D R16 / Revit17
Octane 3.x: GH Lands VARQ Rhino5 -Rhino.io- C4D R16 / Revit17
I have 2 580s and the only problem with them is that for a single card, they are slow. All that means is that if you want to expand, you are limited. You could get 2 580s, or get 1 780 and have that extra slot for later.
On the plus side, I do think they are the single best power to price card out there. If you are not concerned about future expansion, go for the 580.
On the plus side, I do think they are the single best power to price card out there. If you are not concerned about future expansion, go for the 580.
Intel quad core i5 @ 4.0 ghz | 8 gigs of Ram | Geforce GTX 470 - 1.25 gigs of Ram