GPU Buying Guide - (Read first post)

https://www.google.com/search?q=GeForce+GTX+1050+gigabyte

Thanks, I dig it! Just doing a little digging now and I think that might be the one... How risky would it be to just grab a cheaper graphics card instead?

By the way, my PSU is an EVGA 450W, is that enough?...

@steelfox36/">@@steelfox36

It strikes me that FIFA 18 might be somewhat poorly optimized for GeForce graphics cards, or at least for certain models within that lineup. These optimization processes often feel like a murky business where one brand ends up gaining a slight edge over another in specific titles. Usually, that brand tends to be Intel. I have observed that when minimum hardware requirements are listed for a game, the Intel requirement is often significantly more powerful on paper than the Nvidia recommendation, yet in actual practice, they perform similarly or Nvidia takes the lead. Beyond that, it is entirely possible that your drivers aren't quite up to par, or perhaps there are too many background processes taxing your CPU without you realizing it, given how much Windows 10 relies on various background tasks and automations. Your processor seems more than adequate for this particular title, though. This piqued my curiosity, so I decided to run a little test using the FIFA 18 demo on my own laptop. I set everything to maximum settings at 1080p resolution with vSync enabled. After roughly an hour of testing, my frame rate fluctuated between 50 and 60 FPS during active gameplay, dropping to about 47-48 FPS during replays. For about 70% of the time, the numbers stayed mostly in the 53-57 FPS range. Hitting a steady 60 was quite rare, almost negligible. Aside from Steam running in the background, nothing else was active. By the end of the session, my CPU temperature had reached 75°C and the GPU was at 70°C, whereas normally, while playing, temperatures stay between 55-65°C. It feels to me as though the game is quite demanding on the processor, as the CPU was consistently about 5-10 degrees warmer than the GPU and was sitting at 80-85% utilization. When I ran Speccy and Task Manager—my preferred "budget" diagnostic tools—alongside Steam, the lower limit of my frame rate dipped to 47, with an average hovering around 50-54. All things considered, I am left with the impression that the game is rather poorly optimized and ported; I truly felt as though I had seen graphics similar to this, if not better, in older versions of the series from four or five years ago running on much weaker hardware. Honestly, this could have been played on a toaster, and I recall the visuals looking superior in previous installments compared to this 2018 version. For context, my setup consists of an i5 6300HQ and a 960M. It isn't exactly raw power, but on paper, your graphics card is stronger than mine, the 750, or even the 750Ti.

Patrick Phillips94 said:Thanks, I like that idea. I'm doing a bit of digging and I think that might be the one... But how risky would it be to aim for an even cheaper graphics card?

By the way, my power supply is an EVGA 450W. Is that enough?

The next cheapest option is the GT 1030 for $100 less, but it's significantly weaker—barely half the performance of an RX 560.

That power supply could probably handle four of those cards at once.

Samuel Castillo49, nesho095, and Timothy Kim60, thanks a ton for all the advice👍
I'm just waiting on a buddy of mine to swing by with his Professional model so I can see how it actually handles, though
truth be told, I’ll probably just grab the Professional version on a subscription plan and flip it on eBay immediately.
From what I’m seeing, people are moving them for around $2,300 or $2,400, but my buddy just snagged his for $2,500.
I’ve got my eye on a new GPU, so we’ll see if I can move this Professional unit quickly enough to fund it.
Honestly, I’ve already got a PlayStation 3 and a massive library of games, so I don't even really miss the PS4 that much. I put myself to the test
by going cold turkey on it for about ten days, and yeah, life goes on without it. 😁
Look, I know I’m being a bit of a pain, but man, trying to hunt down even a GTX 1050 is a struggle lately, let alone a GTX 1060 6.
Gaming is becoming one expensive hobby, and here I am, over 40 years old, getting more obsessed with gaming by the day. 😁
If I’m going to pull the trigger on a GTX 1060 6, I’m definitely going to need to upgrade my CPU to keep up.
Does anyone know what actually works with this motherboard?

ASUS

steelfox36 said:What can actually run on this motherboard?
ASUS

https://www.asrock.com/MB/Intel/B250M-HDV/index.asp#CPU

Basically, anything from the Skylake or Kaby Lake era will work. However, there's really no point in picking up the "K" series processors (the ones unlocked for overclocking) because this specific motherboard isn't designed for overclocking performance.

In principle, you could look for an i5 down the road (whatever the cheapest option is) or even a Ryzen 7 2700X if you find a good deal.

Ultimately, that Pentium setup offers decent value for very little cash; just pair it with a GTX 1050 Ti if you're committed to the PC route and you'll be set. It could even handle a GTX 1060 6GB in many titles with minimal slowdown, though generally speaking, 2 cores and 4 threads don't have much longevity. That said, they are perfectly fine for demanding titles right now.

Thanks a ton, man, everything makes way more sense to me now after that explanation👍
Basically, I'm looking at grabbing that GTX 1060 6GB as a solid long-term play, mostly just to hold me over until I can swing
a beefier processor, which is definitely on my roadmap for down the line.
It’s honestly not even a huge headache to offload this current motherboard and pick up something compatible with a Ryzen build whenever I'm ready to make that jump.😁
Really appreciate you walking me through this.👍

You might also want to take this particular option into consideration; it offers significantly more power and performance than a 1050Ti, yet it remains quite affordable without necessitating any additional hardware upgrades. Furthermore, I believe your processor should be able to handle it quite effectively: http://www.ebay.com/itm/graphic-card-listing-example

If it lasts for nine to twelve months, I would consider that a success. Of course, if you happen to have some good luck, it could easily serve you for years to come. There are certainly other listings available on eBay—some even cheaper—but in my humble opinion, this represents a very solid choice.

That card's 2GB of RAM is the bottleneck; it doesn't necessarily make it much more powerful, and depending on the title, it might not be better at all.



Based on this guy's testing, the GTX 970 is slightly stronger in Call of Duty: Ghosts, but it's actually a bit weaker than the 1050Ti when playing GTA V or Fallout 4, and it’s basically a tie in BF1.

Over time, that 2GB limit is going to feel like a curse on your FPS. Plus, newer drivers will favor the 1050Ti while this one is already drifting into "legacy" territory. It also pulls about three times less power.

I must admit, I happened to cross paths with that individual as well. It appears that the 1050Ti manages to compensate for the shortcomings found in older architectures and drivers, making them perform quite similarly in practical application. I find myself wondering how things might shift if both components were upgraded simultaneously; perhaps then the GTX 970 would truly shine. Regardless, provided he has a sufficient power supply and can manage to snag a decent GTX 970 for somewhere in the neighborhood of $650-$250, I believe it is a worthwhile endeavor. That represents a $167 savings, which could serve him well in the long run. Having enough RAM won't be an issue either, as he doesn't necessarily need to crank up the most aggressive anti-aliasing or those other superfluous settings that nobody really notices anyway. In practice, one can achieve a visual quality that is just as impressive without the RAM becoming a bottleneck. On the other hand, you can occasionally find a 4GB Palit GTX 970 on eBay for about $333, though that would likely only be a smart move if the price sits around $750-$267. Whatever he manages to save could potentially go toward a new B350 Micro-ATX motherboard, which will be waiting for an AMD Core i5-7600K when the sales hit. Hehe.

You guys clearly know what you're doing, but I'm still figuring it out, so if there's a difference of maybe a couple hundred bucks
I’m leaning toward buying something brand new with a full warranty. Honestly, I think I might
sign my new contract soon, grab a Professional card, and flip it. A buddy of mine would probably just buy it outright, but my whole goal is to
maximize the profit so I can eventually swing a GTX 1060 6GB. Since he’s my
buddy, I’d have to give him a deal, which means I’d end up short on cash for that 1060 6GB.
And who knows when I'll get another shot at upgrading to a better GPU.
It’s kind of a balancing act—my wife has her mobile plan, and then there's my portion for the Professional card,
all while I'm piggybacking off her data plan to browse and game 😁
Back when we first started dating, I told her, "Look, honey, Champions League, La Liga,
gaming, and having two TVs... those are the pillars of a happy marriage. Just stay out of it and
everything will be fine." 😁
Thank God we're actually doing great 😍

Well, if that is indeed the situation, I would personally suggest looking into a GTX 1050 Ti with 4GB of RAM, though I would strongly advise selecting a model with a substantial physical footprint—ideally one featuring dual fans—provided you have enough clearance to fit it onto your motherboard. Ultimately, spending somewhere in the ballpark of $1,250 to $1,300 isn't a massive investment for a card of that caliber. On the other hand, the GTX 1060 carries a rather steep price tag, and in my humble opinion, it simply doesn't offer sufficient value. It will cost you a full $333 more, yet the performance gains aren't nearly as significant as the cost increase suggests. The 1050 Ti remains a much wiser choice, particularly if your intention is to play on a standard 1080p, 60Hz monitor. To put things into perspective, those $333 represent roughly two-thirds of the cost of a Core i5-7600K. If you look at it from that angle, you might consider selling your current processor, motherboard, and graphics card to fund an upgrade to an AMD processor and a compatible motherboard; you could then pair that setup with the 1050 Ti and overclock both components. For the monitor mentioned above, you would achieve excellent performance and visual quality, all while establishing a very solid foundation that would allow you to drop in a high-end graphics card whenever you feel ready in the future.

The GTX 1060 3GB seems worth picking up over a 1050 Ti for about $150 more, since it’s consistently over 50% faster:



https://neutrinomobile.com/gigabyte-g...m_medium=click

I guess the 6GB version (which is maybe 5-10% better) isn't really worth the extra $233 though.

If you're planning on holding onto it for a while, the 6GB version is probably worth the investment—assuming you can actually find one for around $210

https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GTX+1060+6GB

All of that remains valid, but since the ultimate goal is to reach a GTX 1060 6GB, I cannot help but wonder if it might be more prudent to sell the current components for a similar amount and instead build a system around an AMD processor paired with a GTX 1050Ti. For 1080p at 60Hz, that combination would be absolutely ideal, and when the time eventually comes to upgrade, one wouldn't need to worry about much beyond perhaps a new power supply or an extra cooling fan to accommodate a beefier card. If one were to opt for a more expensive graphics card, they would likely run into a bottleneck with the Pentium G4560, which would undoubtedly struggle in certain CPU-intensive titles even on moderate settings. In those specific games, an AMD chip would truly shine and handle everything smoothly alongside the GTX 1050Ti without any undue struggle. It seems to me that such demanding titles are becoming increasingly common. On the other hand, if a more economical route is preferred, then a G4560 paired with a GTX 1060 3GB serves as a solid middle ground, while the G4560 and GTX 1050Ti combo stands as a true budget option that still holds its own quite well. Ultimately, the choice is entirely subjective, but if the target is indeed the GTX 1060 6GB, then in my humble opinion, the AMD plus GTX 1050Ti route is a far superior selection. While this path is roughly 600-$233 more expensive, it offers a much better balance and ensures stable performance in processor-heavy games; furthermore, that higher initial cost is justified by the expectation that this AMD processor likely won't need replacing for a decade, provided it stays functional. Its performance should remain excellent even years down the road, and it will certainly be incomparably better for any task outside of gaming compared to the G4560. It can't even come close to the performance of an i5-6600K, yet the latter costs about $100 more.

Here’s the deal: he’s already running a configuration with a G4560. I really don't think it's worth all the hassle of selling everything off just to jump to an AMD build or trying to upgrade to an i5 on his current motherboard right this second. It’s better to just let the Pentium handle the heavy lifting for now; he can always easily upgrade or swap things out later on.

In this link and this one, you can see that the setup actually has enough juice to handle a GTX 1060 6GB in quite a few games, even if there's a bit of a bottleneck popping up here and there.

I managed to track down the technical details, but I was wondering if anyone might be able to clarify what the maximum physical dimensions would be for a graphics card that could actually fit onto this motherboard? https://www.asrock.com/MB/AMD/AB350M...#Specification

Additionally, I would be quite grateful if someone could suggest a few high-quality Micro-ATX cases that don't come bundled with a power supply. Ideally, I am looking for something relatively spacious within the $150-$$133 range. To be perfectly honest, I find myself feeling a bit overwhelmed by the sheer number of options available; it feels as though there are a billion different cases out there, and I would much rather avoid aimlessly browsing through them all.

Basically, any card will fit on the motherboard; it's the case dimensions that actually matter.

Posting from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Generally speaking, finding high-quality Mini-ITX cases within that specific budget is pretty tough here in the States.

You’re likely looking at somewhere around $133 or maybe just a bit north of that—something like a Fractal Design Case. It comes with two fans, and I’d definitely recommend mounting one of them in the rear for better airflow.

Hello, everyone. I find myself contemplating a new PC case, likely in the $600 range, $233 though I suppose I might even look at international retailers if the right option presents itself. I am under the impression that mid-tower cases tend to be priced higher than their full-size counterparts. Would anyone be willing to suggest a few larger chassis within that budget? I am curious to know if opting for a smaller motherboard might prove somewhat impractical in such a large frame.

Forgive me, I believe this is one of our reasonably decent local options: https://www.newegg.com/zalman-computer-case...m_medium=click

What are your thoughts on this? I must admit, I am usually quite indifferent when it comes to these kinds of technical preferences.