# Best possible Graphics card for a Core i3



## councilior (Apr 23, 2014)

Hello, I need some expert opinion about which graphics card to buy.

My current CPU is a Core i3 4330 @ 3.5GHz, I've 16GB of RAM and a 1920x1200 screen.

I know that mine is a mainstream CPU, so I would like to know which is the most powerful graphics card I can use with my system which doesn't get bottlenecked  by my weak CPU.

My guess is a R7 260X, but I'm not sure. Is there any formula to calculate it?

Many thanks.


----------



## brandonwh64 (Apr 23, 2014)

I3's are quite powerful, a 280X or maybe above would do good on it.


----------



## Easy Rhino (Apr 23, 2014)

I do not believe a new i3 will put any limitations on even the most powerful gaming gpu.


----------



## CJCerny (Apr 23, 2014)

Easy Rhino said:


> I do not believe a new i3 will put any limitations on even the most powerful gaming gpu.


 
Agreed. I3 is not going to bottleneck any single graphics card.


----------



## manofthem (Apr 23, 2014)

Right now, my i3 2100 is paired with an R9 290, and it plays very well at 1920.1080. You'll see differences in benches, but for actual gaming, I don't think I have seen any real issue.


----------



## cadaveca (Apr 23, 2014)

councilior said:


> Hello, I need some expert opinion about which graphics card to buy.
> 
> My current CPU is a Core i3 4330 @ 3.5GHz, I've 16GB of RAM and a 1920x1200 screen.
> 
> ...


1920x1200 is R9280X/GTX770 or better territory, to use most games with maxed settings. You can use less GPU for lowered graphical settings.

CPUs don't paly a large role in gaming performance, but in some instances, can be totally critical, for example, with RTS games like Total War, where the extra threads offered by "better" CPUs are fully put to use. So to truly be able to answer your question directly does require more information in order to provide the very best answer. If you want to paly everything...an i3 is definitely going to be a bottleneck for ANY GPU expect for those with the most meager performance.


----------



## MxPhenom 216 (Apr 23, 2014)

cadaveca said:


> 1920x1200 is R9280X/GTX770 or better territory, to use most games with maxed settings. You can use less GPU for lowered graphical settings.
> 
> CPUs don't paly a large role in gaming performance, but in some instances, can be totally critical, for example, with RTS games like Total War, where the extra threads offered by "better" CPUs are fully put to use. So to truly be able to answer your question directly does require more information in order to provide the very best answer. If you want to paly everything...an i3 is definitely going to be a bottleneck for ANY GPU expect for those with the most meager performance.



Id also put a gtx760 in that list. Solid card, at good price point for ~1080p gaming.


----------



## cadaveca (Apr 23, 2014)

MxPhenom 216 said:


> Id also put a gtx760 in that list. Solid card, at good price point for ~1080p gaming.



BF3, Tomb Raider, Assassin's Creed Black Flag, and a few other apps don't agree with that. the ~$30 difference to go 770 over 760 is worth it.

Personally, nothing less than a GTX780 will do.

At the same time, the lack of real threads on the i3 chip also hampers performance a bit too in most modern games, so there's that to consider as well. I pick GPUs based on chosen resolution, and then CPU based on demands in that aspect. To me, the GTX760 is a worthless part simply filling a price gap.

If not gaming, the built-in GPU is all that is needed, anyway.


Of course, I do run GTX780 Ti in Tri-Sli, and have been running multiple cards for years now. I just might be a bit snobbish about hardware performance, and don't settle for "good enough".


----------



## CJCerny (Apr 23, 2014)

Cadaveca makes a good point. OP, you should find and read reviews of the Pentium 3220. That is a low end Haswell processor. In those reviews, they often show the FPS for games on that CPU along with the FPS on the same game with a 4770k using the same video card. In many games, there are no differences in the FPS. In a few games, the 4770k has a big lead. It just depends on how much the game relies on the CPU.


----------



## councilior (Apr 23, 2014)

Thanks to everybody for the fast answer.

I was not aware that my i3 was so capable for gaming, in most benchmarks I've seen high-end card are always paired with i7s so I did conclude that an i3 was not suitable for them.

I think that a R9280X would be a great choice, I've seen lots of people selling them on ebay, I can try to get an used one for cheap. I've read that NVIDIA cards run cooler than AMD ones and are more energy efficient, but they're more expensive as well.

My objective is to be able to play games like Starcraft II, FarCry 3 or BF4 at decent framerates.


----------



## 64K (Apr 23, 2014)

councilior said:


> Hello, I need some expert opinion about which graphics card to buy.
> 
> My current CPU is a Core i3 4330 @ 3.5GHz, I've 16GB of RAM and a 1920x1200 screen.
> 
> ...



What is your budget for a GPU? That sounds like it might be the biggest thing might limit your options based on what people are saying about how well your i3 performs.


----------



## councilior (Apr 23, 2014)

64K said:


> What is your budget for a GPU? That sounds like it might be the biggest thing might limit your options based on what people are saying about how well your i3 performs.


My budget is about 200 Euro, I can spend a little bit more if the card really worth it.

I know that this is a tight budget so I'm looking for a good deal on the pre-owned market.


----------



## eidairaman1 (Apr 23, 2014)

270.270X,280,280X, maybe a 290, or 

6970,6990,7770, 7850,7870,7950,7970,7990


----------



## Devon68 (Apr 23, 2014)

This seems nice:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/NEW-SEALED-...517?pt=PCC_Video_TV_Cards&hash=item27e276691d
Condition: New: A brand-new, unused, unopened, undamaged item in its original packaging
Good luck in your search.


----------



## thebluebumblebee (Apr 23, 2014)

Also, consider that you could, someday, if needed, upgrade your CPU to an i5 or i7, so get the best GPU you can afford.  On the value side, don't overlook the 7950 and GTX 670.


----------



## ruff0r (Apr 23, 2014)

Paired an i3-4330 with an GTX 770 for a costumer, works fine all games are running nice and smooth.


----------



## NationsAnarchy (May 5, 2014)

I'm about on the same road, my family desktop is running a Core i3-2130, and I've been looking for a nice graphics card to run with it. Just moderate 1080P gaming most of the time. So maybe a R9 270/270X ?


----------



## LaytonJnr (May 5, 2014)

NationsAnarchy said:


> I'm about on the same road, my family desktop is running a Core i3-2130, and I've been looking for a nice graphics card to run with it. Just moderate 1080P gaming most of the time. So maybe a R9 270/270X ?



For moderate 1080p gaming, I think you would be better off with a GTX 750 Ti or an R7 260x. I have an R9 270x and it consumes quite a bit of power, so you can save on electricity bills and the such with those lower power cards.

Layton


----------



## NationsAnarchy (May 5, 2014)

Hmm, I thought the R9 270 doesn't consume that much more power comparing to GTX 750 Ti/R7 260X ?
Somehow I feel 750 Ti/260X lacks a bit of power, I just want some more futureproof


----------



## LaytonJnr (May 5, 2014)

NationsAnarchy said:


> Hmm, I thought the R9 270 doesn't consume that much more power comparing to GTX 750 Ti/R7 260X ?
> Somehow I feel 750 Ti/260X lacks a bit of power, I just want a bit more futureproof



Futureproofing is understanding what your current needs are, assessing what money is available, working out how much to spend for the here and now (if any money at all), and then leaving the rest of the money to upgrade in the future when you really need it.

Do you really need the extra performance? Do you play games often enough for it to be worth it? Could you live with not having the highest settings when you play the odd game now and again?

Layton


----------



## Constantine Yevseyev (May 5, 2014)

NationsAnarchy said:


> I'm about on the same road, my family desktop is running a Core i3-2130, and I've been looking for a nice graphics card to run with it. Just moderate 1080P gaming most of the time. So maybe a R9 270/270X ?


Well, there's something you have to think of before you make any decision.
GTX 760 is great for sub 250 USD price tag. Actually, you can find it for something like 220 USD (Gigabyte Windforce 3X goes a bit pricey but it has fantastic OC potential, runs 1200/7400 MHz at friend's machine and unbelievably cool and silent), while R9 270X currently saves you 25 USD and it performs only 3-4% slower in most games. So choose carefully. I've been waging a war with AMD for 6 months now (because of Mobility products support, nothing against their desktop stuff), so I'd personally go with GTX 760.


----------



## NationsAnarchy (May 5, 2014)

LaytonJnr said:


> Futureproofing is understanding what your current needs are, assessing what money is available, working out how much to spend for the here and now (if any money at all), and then leaving the rest of the money to upgrade in the future when you really need it.



Yep, thanks for reminding me that. 



Constantine Yevseyev said:


> Well, there's something you have to think of before you make any decision.
> GTX 760 is great for sub 250 USD price tag. Actually, you can find it for something like 220 USD (Gigabyte Windforce 3X goes a bit pricey but it has fantastic OC potential, runs 1200/7400 MHz at friend's machine and unbelievably cool and silent), while R9 270X currently saves you 25 USD and it performs only 3-4% slower in most games. So choose carefully. I've been waging a war with AMD for 6 months now (because of Mobility products support, nothing against their desktop stuff), so I'd personally go with GTX 760.



Interesting point right there, I'll definitely consider it carefully. Cheers from Viet Nam !


----------



## Constantine Yevseyev (May 5, 2014)

NationsAnarchy said:


> Hmm, I thought the R9 270 doesn't consume that much more power comparing to GTX 750 Ti/R7 260X ?
> Somehow I feel 750 Ti/260X lacks a bit of power, I just want some more futureproof


Well, 750 Ti & 260X DO lack some power because of the silicone design, so it's totally OK for you to consider them just a bunch of budget cards without any "future potential". For example, GTX 750 Ti is desktop packaging of mid-range mobile GPU known as GTX 860M (1500 USD price tag). They won't be able to handle Ultra Settings/1080P preset, the reviews clearly state that they can only give you something like 28 FPS Average, which is not nearly "smooth". Interesting options are R7 265 (3.5 Million VND) and GTX 660 (3.7 Million VND): they're not as power hungry as ones that we were talking about (GTX 760/R9 270X), while they can still perform pretty good in Ultra/1080P. And of course they cost 15-20% less (which is great).


----------



## NationsAnarchy (May 5, 2014)

Unfortunately I don't have the luxury to get that good price, usually it's more expensive than that.
Probably I'll include both R7 265/GTX 660 as well. Thanks anyway !

http://www.hanoicomputer.vn/linh-kien-pc/card-man-hinh/vga-asus-gtx750ti-ph-2gd5-128bits-p16952.html

A quick example here for you, a GTX 750 Ti cost 4.25 Million VND (~ 200 USD). Yeah, pricing is harsh


----------



## LaytonJnr (May 5, 2014)

Constantine Yevseyev said:


> Well, 750 Ti & 260X DO lack some power because of the silicone design, so it's totally OK for you to consider them just a bunch of budget cards without any "future potential". For example, GTX 750 Ti is desktop packaging of mid-range mobile GPU known as GTX 860M (1500 USD price tag). They won't be able to handle Ultra Settings/1080P preset, the reviews clearly state that they can only give you something like 28 FPS Average, which is not nearly "smooth". Interesting options are R7 265 (3.5 Million VND) and GTX 660 (3.7 Million VND): they're not as power hungry as ones that we were talking about (GTX 760/R9 270X), while they can still perform pretty good in Ultra/1080P. And of course they cost 15-20% less (which is great).



Those are quite bold, and perhaps unsupported statements. For example "28 FPS average" at what settings? Which game? At what resolution? My old ATI laptop GPU could do 300FPS on something like Garry's Mod, but that old ATI GPU is outperformed even now by a HD 7750. It would be nice for some context, maybe some links to the websites your getting information from, so a better conclusion can be made. I'm a guy that prefers price to performance, and I think budget options can often be perfect for a large variety of people. I'm perfectly fine with just High rather than Ultra.

Layton


----------



## NationsAnarchy (May 5, 2014)

LaytonJnr said:


> Those are quite bold, and perhaps unsupported statements. For example "28 FPS average" at what settings? Which game? At what resolution? My old ATI laptop GPU could do 300FPS on something like Garry's Mod, but that old ATI GPU is outperformed even now by a HD 7750. It would be nice for some context, maybe some links to the websites your getting information from, so a better conclusion can be made. I'm a guy that prefers price to performance, and I think budget options can often be perfect for a large variety of people. I'm perfectly fine with just High rather than Ultra.
> 
> Layton



He said clearly that: "They won't be able to handle Ultra Settings/1080P preset"


----------



## Constantine Yevseyev (May 5, 2014)

NationsAnarchy said:


> Unfortunately I don't have the luxury to get that good price, usually it's more expensive than that.
> Probably I'll include both R7 265/GTX 660 as well. Thanks anyway !


Come on, don't get upset, the less cash you have, the more fun you can put into planning your possible PC configuration. When you have tons of money, you just go and put anything pricey than 400 USD into your machine and prey for textures to be as good as screenshots told you, LOL.


LaytonJnr said:


> Those are quite bold, and perhaps unsupported statements. For example "28 FPS average" at what settings? Which game? At what resolution? My old ATI laptop GPU could do 300FPS on something like Garry's Mod, but that old ATI GPU is outperformed even now by a HD 7750. It would be nice for some context, maybe some links to the websites your getting information from, so a better conclusion can be made. I'm a guy that prefers price to performance, and I think budget options can often be perfect for a large variety of people. I'm perfectly fine with just High rather than Ultra.


I think I stated that pretty clear for anyone who's familiar with TechPowerUp reviews. "~28 FPS" means that the card I'm talking about renders the average of 28 FPS in these titles: Titanfall, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4 at Ultra Preset on 1920 x 1080 display. And I also use Anandtech's "Bench" page as my source for comparison (they use i7/i7 Extreme for measurements, just like TPU does).


----------



## NationsAnarchy (May 5, 2014)

Constantine Yevseyev said:


> Come on, don't get upset, the lower price is, the more fun you can put into planning your possible PC configuration. When you have tons of money, you just go and put anything pricey than 400 USD into your machine and prey for textures to be as good as screenshots told you, LOL.



Hope so man, hope so. Can't wait till I can earn my own money and build any sh*t I ever wanted.


----------



## FreedomEclipse (May 5, 2014)

LaytonJnr said:


> Futureproofing is understanding what your current needs are, assessing what money is available, working out how much to spend for the here and now (if any money at all), and then leaving the rest of the money to upgrade in the future when you really need it.
> 
> Do you really need the extra performance? Do you play games often enough for it to be worth it? Could you live with not having the highest settings when you play the odd game now and again?
> 
> Layton



some what irrelevant - enthusiasts gonna enthusiast. my own system would almost be any crunchers, folders or coin miners wet dream - swap out my GPUs for 290s, 780s or Titans and this machine can have some serious output, not to mention the fact that it crushes quite a lot of systems here on TPU when it comes to benchmarks.

full RRP of my system would probably be in the region of £2000 ($3300) give or take a few hundred.

What do you suppose i do with such a machine...?

I surf the net, watch youtube and play LoL, occasionally battlefield 3 or 4 and some DayZ standalone or ARMA III when i have time. Unfortunately i dont really have time for much else given the hours i work and i can only play for an hour or 2 when i get home from work before bed.

Either Way, Its a £2000 system doing mundane tasks that any 2500k could do without even breaking a sweat.


Did i need the extra performance? no i didnt

do i play games often enough for it to be worth it? Probably not

could i live with not having the highest settings when I play the odd game? no i cant - ultra settings or gtfo.

Is my PC futureproof? most definitely! I can certainly say that apart from a GPU upgrade somewhere down the road that my PC will last another 2-3years before i even need to worry about needing a complete overhaul.


Normally i wouldnt of forked out the cash for such a system, its just way beyond my standard budget, but i was given a once in a million chance to trade up to my 3930k from a 2500k and i took it.


----------



## LaytonJnr (May 5, 2014)

Constantine Yevseyev said:


> Come on, don't get upset, the less cash you have, the more fun you can put into planning your possible PC configuration. When you have tons of money, you just go and put anything pricey than 400 USD into your machine and prey for textures to be as good as screenshots told you, LOL.
> 
> I think I stated that pretty clear for anyone who's familiar with TechPowerUp reviews. "~28 FPS" means that the card I'm talking about renders the average of 28 FPS in these titles: Titanfall, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4 at Ultra Preset on 1920 x 1080 display. And I also use Anandtech as my source for comparison.



Okay, good to know for future reference. I wasn't having a go, but sometimes people overhype the benefits of having an expensive graphics card that can play at Ultra settings at 60FPS constant. I guess I've come from a background where I was used to playing at medium settings on my old PC and being happy with just that. But I understand this is an enthusiast website too, and I've become more of a computer enthusiast now.

Layton


----------



## NationsAnarchy (May 5, 2014)

The concept "futureproof" gets so many opinions around. Always interesting to see what people really thinks about it. I would say it's like the most ridiculous term to really call it out correctly in the tech world lol


----------



## NationsAnarchy (May 5, 2014)

LaytonJnr said:


> Okay, good to know for future reference. I wasn't having a go, but sometimes people overhype the benefits of having an expensive graphics card that can play at Ultra settings at 60FPS constant. I guess I've come from a background where I was used to playing at medium settings on my old PC and being happy with just that. But I understand this is an enthusiast website too, and I've become more of a computer enthusiast now.
> 
> Layton



Welcome to the Internet's most enthusiastic PC forum mate ! Dang I miss my times here asking about upgrading my old crappy Pentium 4 PC back in 2010-11


----------



## Subhojit Dey (Jan 23, 2016)

Will an gtx 750ti+i3 4330+8gb ram,run any game for the next 5 years max in medium settings atleast?i need to know...i have a h81m-s motherboard... It would be very helpful if someone can reassure her about the gpu compatibility with the motherboard.. I am a newbie so...


----------



## NdMk2o1o (Jan 23, 2016)

Subhojit Dey said:


> Will an gtx 750ti+i3 4330+8gb ram,run any game for the next 5 years max in medium settings atleast?i need to know...i have a h81m-s motherboard... It would be very helpful if someone can reassure her about the gpu compatibility with the motherboard.. I am a newbie so...



No not at all, you'd probably need at least a 960/70 if you're talking about 5 years! though it will do you fine for the next 2 years with a 750ti save up $50 a year for the next 3 then upgrade the 750ti to whatever the current mid-range card is at that time...


----------



## Kanan (Jan 24, 2016)

councilior said:


> Hello, I need some expert opinion about which graphics card to buy.
> 
> My current CPU is a Core i3 4330 @ 3.5GHz, I've 16GB of RAM and a 1920x1200 screen.
> 
> ...


I'd go with a R9 380 or 380X / 280X / GTX 770 / 680 or if you can find a cheap 290 for 200 take that. But this cards are the best suited for about 200$. CPU is okay, isn't the fastest, but it will run most games fine. i5 / i7 users just have more stable FPS and in some games that need more cores a straight edge over a i3, but you are fine for now.


----------



## [Ion] (Jan 24, 2016)

I'm running my i3 3240 with a GTX260...seven years old, in a similar price bracket to the 750TI, and still doing solid


----------



## Chanki (Jan 24, 2016)

i owned a 4150 it performs pretty well with a HD7870, obviously you can't maxout all games, but for 1080p gaming it will do very well if you dont want to waste much money

IMO GTX750/TI/760/770/960  R9 270/X/280/x  will do the job, more than that is an overkill


----------



## Filip Georgievski (Jan 24, 2016)

Haha, you and your newer i3s.
I run an i5 750, and just did a GPU upgrade to a R9 280x.
Playing Witcher 3, Dying Light, BF3 and 4 on High to Ultra settings as of now.
Get the most powerfull GPU you can, it will help you in the future.


----------



## Chanki (Jan 24, 2016)

Filip Georgievski said:


> Haha, you and your newer i3s.
> I run an i5 750, and just did a GPU upgrade to a R9 280x.
> Playing Witcher 3, Dying Light, BF3 and 4 on High to Ultra settings as of now.
> Get the most powerfull GPU you can, it will help you in the future.



that's right, i changed the 4th gen i3 for a 2dn gen i5 2550k, but he has already the i3..


----------



## trog100 (Jan 25, 2016)

Filip Georgievski said:


> Haha, you and your newer i3s.
> I run an i5 750, and just did a GPU upgrade to a R9 280x.
> Playing Witcher 3, Dying Light, BF3 and 4 on High to Ultra settings as of now.
> Get the most powerfull GPU you can, it will help you in the future.


 
and more importantly it will help you in the present.. he he

trog


----------



## Artas1984 (Jan 27, 2016)

councilior said:


> Hello, I need some expert opinion about which graphics card to buy.
> 
> My current CPU is a Core i3 4330 @ 3.5GHz, I've 16GB of RAM and a 1920x1200 screen.
> 
> ...



I am here to confirm that Core i3 is an excellent gaming CPU. I have compared a Core i3 3250 with a Core i5 3570 extensively in game benchmarks at 1080P, and Core i3 3250 was only 10 % slower on average FPS in 22 games. This is a very strong result, since FX-6300 was about 20 % slower than Core i5 3570 at 1080P when i tested those several years ago.. I think you get the point.


----------



## RCoon (Jan 27, 2016)

Subhojit Dey said:


> Will an gtx 750ti+i3 4330+8gb ram,run any game for the next 5 years max in medium settings atleast?i need to know...i have a h81m-s motherboard... It would be very helpful if someone can reassure her about the gpu compatibility with the motherboard.. I am a newbie so...



Might I recommend making your own thread next time? I understand your question is in some way similar, but members are easily confused and end up replying to somebody (OP) who hasn't visited in 2 years.


----------

