New GPU - Looking for advices.

Hi,

I'm looking for a new Gpu as a replacement for my old but more than reliable GTX 560.

My CPU is an I5 - 3570.

I'm looking for a Nvidia GPU only (no crossfire needed). I know about GTX 960, but it seems to be an overkill for PS2 and is expensive. (I recently got a Sapphire R9 300 which is already dead. I always went through total nightmares with Ati stuff.)

Thank you for your help.

GTX 960 wouldn't be total overkill for PS2... it MIGHT see some drops in FPS in large fights. When I say drops.. I mean from 70-80ish to 45-55ish at the very least.

All assuming ultra settings at 1920x1080

I'd recommend the 960 or 970 if you're on a budget of any kind. They're cheap cards, power/heat efficient, and run really well. Personally I have an EVGA GTX 970, my first one died, but EVGA was really good about replacing it under the warranty.

With that said... your CPU may bottle neck you. I'm not entirely sure about that generation of intel CPUs. Someone else might be able to give insight there. I think you might be alright though.

Your budget determines a lot in this kind of thing. But I strongly recommend the 960 which is in every way better than my 970m and I get the frames described above.

Thank you for your quick answers.

Congrats for your free GPU replacement, Taemien.

Also, did you both choose to get a 2GB or 4GB GPU ?

Depends on your budget however 380,390 are better choices than a 960,970 because they preform better for around the same $$$

i used to have that same i5 and upgraded the GPU to a GTX 970, best money ever spent!

For the GPU 2GB is fine. The 4GB 960GTX hardly gets better results than the 2GB 960GTX, which runs the game fine. The 970GTX is only available in 4GB editions and needs it. The card is several steps up from the 960 if you can spare the money. For PS2 the 960 will be good enough. As said, the FPS will not really drop below 60, and in really big fights it might drop to 40 in worst case scenarios. I have a i7 4790k though, which doesn't bottleneck my computer. So your i5 might lower performance a bit as a bottleneck.

Low configuration will pump mainly on your CPU, High mainly on your card, and GTX 970 is in a very sweet spot. Worth the investment

Gtx 970 currently the best value gpu and a significant performance leap from gtx 960

Avoid radeon r9300 series, they are mostly rebranded from R9200 series

Are people really seeing i5 "bottlenecks" with PS2?

Everything I've ever seen suggests that baring a few % maximum performance increase there isn't a lot of difference, because PS2 itself can't really take advantage of new CPU advancements, but rather relies on raw grunt, which you can still happily get just by overclocking even the oldest i5? (assuming it is OCable anyway).

VRAM isnt really meant to help with fps performance. its more for keeping stuttering away. games like gta v, far cry 4, skyrim even, have all benefited greatly from the 4gb of vram in my gtx 960 (compared to the 1GB 750 i had before) its also meant for high resolution gaming, so if you want to game in 4k, itll still be ****, but the 4gb will certainly help take the load off.

sorry, just had to point that out cuz everywhere all i see is "4gb doesnt perform better than 2gb" and i feel like i need to inform them lol

Citations needed

random nerd talking about it lol
he explains it good though

Of course there are exceptions, but in general the 4GB doesn't help performance much for this card. That's all I'm saying. For PS2 there won't be much difference between the 4GB and the 2GB card. The 4GB comes much better to it's right on better cards.

I would highly recommend the 970, even if it means waiting a bit to save more money.

I have an ancient computer from 2009, with the first gen i7 (much slower than your processor).

I simply added the GTX970 and went from 20 FPS at 1280x1024 in large fights to 60 fps at full 1080P (got a new 27 in widescreen at the same time).

Huge, huge difference.

I have the same CPU (OC'd to 4.2 - If you haven't oc'd your chip then it's worth doing. Just make sure you do it with an aftermarket cooler). I currently have a GTX 780 and it runs PS2 fine @ 1440p with most settings maxed, although I do have shadows off. As others have said the 970 is probably your best bet, will last you a good couple of years at least.

Before I begin AMD-Fanboy here so take cover you greenlings

So, the best price to performance ratio in all price ranges apart from the 980 Ti is on the red side at this moment. I dont understand why noone tried to convince the OP of that already.
When Shadowplay is necessary forget what I said. That still is much more advanced than everything AMD can offer.

So why is your "recent" AMD (ATI is dead. For years now...) card not under warranty? Ever thought about that before getting a slower and more expensive NVidia replacement?

Edit: By the way, what R9 300 card was it? Im curious

Here is an IT Consultant's advice:
If you're looking for a decent GPU for PS2 that won't break the bank, then I would recommend the MSI GTX 960 2Gb Gaming Limited Edition card. Before you ask.... YES, the manufacturer does make a hell of a difference in quality, stability and speed.

Have a read of this review. The results are almost identical to those in similar tests.
http://us.hardware.info/reviews/588...no3d-msi-and-zotac-put-to-the-test-conclusion

Straight out of the box, the Gigabyte GTX 960 is actually a better performing card, but if you like to tinker around with Overclocking, then the MSI card is far superior. Especially if you are running the MSI Afterburn software with it.
If you've never overclocked a GPU before, there are tutorials online on how to do it.
If you do end up going for the MSI, here are my settings to make it easier for you.
Core Voltage +10. Core Clock +150. Memory Clock +180. Temp Limit 70.

I know these settings are almost tiny compared to what this card can do, but it is more than enough to run PS2 on Ultra settings and I still manage to get about 60-70 fps in 96+ enemy population battles.

Of course though, you never did tell us your budget.

I said citations not random links to youtube

whether its a random nerd on youtube or a random nerd from a forum doesnt matter, what matters is the content, and in this case what he said perfectly explains what i was trying to say.