The best graphics cards are the rock star of the best gaming laptops and best gaming PCs for a reason. With the obsession amongst PC gamers, especially enthusiast builders, with having the very best hardware and cutting edge visuals (in large part, we admit, to shame our lowly console brethren), a killer GPU is less luxury and more necessity. While we don't want to discount the importance of building around one of the best CPUs for gaming, video cards will always hog the limelight with the way most games, particularly the latest and hottest triple-A titles, lean heavily into graphics rendering.
But picking the best graphics card is also a largely personal question, and figuring out which part is going to suit your lifestyle comes down to a number of factors. Did you just sink a bunch of cash into a beautiful 4K panel? You're going to need one of the top cards on the market to drive graphics at that resolution, something in the range of an RTX 2080 or 2080 Ti on the Nvidia side of the aisle, or perhaps AMD's top offering, the Radeon VII, if you're not fussed about having dedicated cores to handle ray tracing (or Nvidia's fascinating DLSS anti-aliasing tech).
Best deal today
AMD Radeon RX 590 is $215.99 at Walmart (save $64)
The RX 590 8GB is a powerful card for 1080p gaming and can even dip into the 1440p realm, with performance just ahead of Nvidia's new 1660 in large part due to it's 8 GB of VRAM. Knocking over $60 off the price makes it pretty irresistible, though the sky blue color may not be for everyone. Also, this card still includes game codes for The Division 2 and World War Z, making it an even better value.
Alternately, if you do want to embrace the ray tracing future but don't want to pay a fortune for the privilege, the RTX 2060 is a great choice, the least expensive of Nvidia's RT and Tensor Core powered beasts. Or if you're looking for the best pure value proposition and to push the most frames per dollar, perhaps consider Nvidia's Geforce GTX 1660, which packs Turing architecture in a Pascal card, or AMD's Radeon RX 580
Regardless of which route you choose, you'll want to pair your beautiful new GPU with some suitably powerful peripherals, so take a peek at our best gaming mouse and best gaming keyboard roundups.
Best CPU for gaming | Best DDR4 RAM | Best gaming motherboards
Best SSD for gaming | Best gaming PC | Best gaming monitors
1. Nvidia GeForce RTX 2080 Ti
The fastest graphics card for 4K, ray tracing, and everything else
Autocom delphi 2017 download windows 7. OBD2repair.com Delphi ds150e 2015 r3 software free download: How to Install and Active OBD2repair.com Delphi DS150e 2015 R3 Software? 2.Shut down antivirus software! Step 1: Download 'CARS 2015.R3 ' or 'Trucks 2015.R3' from obd2repair.com Step 2: run main.exe in 'CARS 2015.R3' to activate(if you want to install truck,please run main.exe in 'Trucks 2015.R3') - click start - click yes to save FileActivation on desk - Send FileActivation to email: [email protected] to active - After we send back FileActivation actived,click start again - click no to open the FileActivation actived - wait for install complete! 3.Delete all files about the old version!
GPU Cores: 4,352 | Base Clock: 1,350MHz | Boost Clock: 1,545MHz | GFLOPS: 13,448 | Memory: 11GB GDDR6 | Memory Clock: 14 GT/s | Memory Bandwidth: 616GB/s
Nvidia's GeForce RTX 2080 Ti is the latest and most potent GPU around, and it's also one of the largest consumer GPUs ever produced. The Turing TU102 is 60 percent larger than the Pascal GP102 in the 1080 Ti, with 55 percent more transistors. Those extra transistors went into more CUDA cores, but Nvidia didn't stop there, adding in Tensor cores to help accelerate deep learning algorithms like DLSS, plus RT cores to accelerate ray tracing.
There are plenty of other enhancements in the Turing architecture as well, but if you want the best, be prepared to shell out: the cheapest 2080 Ti cards start at $999, with many selling for $1,199 and up. Technically there's also the Titan RTX, which more than doubles the price of the 2080 Ti, but it's more of a prosumer card that anything we'd recommend for pure gaming purposes.
If you're looking for the best value, forget about the new RTX cards. On the other hand, if you're eyeing a 4k 144Hz HDR G-Sync display and you want the absolute fastest graphics card around, this is the card for you. You could even try adding a second card and using an NVLink connector, assuming you just won the lottery. (Note that the current ray tracing enabled games do not support multi-GPU with DXR (DirectX Raytracing) enabled, so we don't recommend this!) We're unlikely to see anything substantially faster for at least a year, so you'll be able to sit comfortably at the top of the pecking order for a while.
The biggest issue with DXR and RTX hardware right now is that lack of games. There are three major games (Battlefield 5, Metro Exodus, and Shadow of the Tomb Raider), plus a few tech demos (Quake 2 with RT) and some overseas games (Justice). But with Unreal Engine and Unity both supporting DXR, we should start seeing more ray tracing games this year.
2. Nvidia GeForce RTX 2080
GPU Cores: 2,944 | Base Clock: 1,515MHz | Boost Clock: 1,710MHz | GFLOPS: 10,068 | Memory: 8GB GDDR6 | Memory Clock: 14 GT/s | Memory Bandwidth: 448GB/s
Sure, the RTX 2080 Ti is the fastest graphics card and has all sorts of cool and potentially useful features, but at the current prices it's a tough pill to swallow. Dropping down to the RTX 2080 will get you still excellent performance—it's the second fastest consumer GPU, edging out the GTX 1080 Ti—and save over $300. And you still get the same ray tracing and deep learning (eg, DLSS) features, albeit not quite as many of each core type.
The one major caveat right now is the same as above, we're still waiting for more games that enable ray tracing effects and DLSS. We've got Battlefield 5, Metro Exodus, and most recently Shadow of the Tomb Raider. The RTX 2080 can run all of those games with ray tracing .. but not at maximum quality and certainly not at 4K and 60fps. Even with a $700 GPU, 1440p typically works best at slightly reduced ray tracing quality mode and with DLSS enabled.
3. Nvidia GeForce RTX 2070
Fast and more affordable than its big brother RTX models
GPU Cores: 2,304 | Base Clock: 1,410MHz | Boost Clock: 1,620MHz | GFLOPS: 7,465 | Memory: 8GB GDDR6 | Memory Clock: 14 GT/s | Memory Bandwidth: 448GB/s
The ray tracing future may sound great, but what if you can't afford $700 or more on a graphics card? That's where Nvidia's RTX 2070 enters the picture, the third Turing GPU and the most affordable of the bunch. More importantly, it's relatively affordable, with cards even falling below the base recommended price of $500. That's still a lot of money for a graphics card, and the 2070 is actually slower than the previous generation 1080 Ti (see below), at least in games that don't support DLSS—which is still most games.
The RTX 2070 effectively takes over where the GTX 1080 left off. It offers slightly better performance for the same price, and like the other RTX cards it features the new Tensor and RT cores. The Founders Edition wasn't particularly impressive, given its $100 price premium, but we liked the EVGA 2070 Black quite a bit and it makes for a fine addition to any new gaming PC. The Gigabyte 2070 Windforce and Asus 2070 Turbo are two more options to consider, and all the 2070 GPUs tend to reach similar maximum overclocks.
Considering the RTX 2070 is a trimmed down version of the RTX 2080, it should come as no surprise that 1440p and 4K are mostly too demanding with ray tracing games. 1440p with DLSS is often viable, but 1080p is a more likely goal.
4. Nvidia GeForce RTX 2060
GPU Cores: 1,920 | Base Clock: 1,410MHz | Boost Clock: 1,680MHz | GFLOPS: 6,451 | Memory: 6GB GDDR6 | Memory Clock: 14 GT/s | Memory Bandwidth: 336GB/s
The best graphics card isn't simply the fastest graphics card, or the cheapest graphics card. Instead, the best graphics card needs to balance performance, price, and features. There are many great graphics cards, but for a great GPU that won't break the bank, Nvidia's RTX 2060 is probably the best option. It delivers performance roughly equal to the outgoing GTX 1070 Ti, with a lower price, plus all the new RTX features.
If you want to play games at 1080p or 1440p on a 144Hz display, the RTX 2060 has the chops to handle most games at close to high to ultra quality. Unless you enable ray tracing in games that support it, at which point it tends to come up short. Still, with a retail price of $350, it's hard not to like the RTX 2060. About the only thing threatening its price/performance ratio is the GTX 1660 Ti.
For DXR and ray tracing games, 1080p with DLSS often works well, and in a few cases 1440p with DLSS. Don't be shy about turning the ray tracing setting down a notch as well, as in most games so far there's not much visual difference between ultra and high quality DXR modes.
5. AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 8GB
Powerful and packing HBM2, the Vega 56 now has a mainstream price
Best Gpu For Rendering
GPU Cores: 3,584 | Base Clock: 1,156MHz | Boost Clock: 1,471MHz | GFLOPS: 10,554 | Memory: 8GB HBM2 | Memory Clock: 1.6 GT/s | Memory Bandwidth: 410GB/s
We had high hopes for Vega prior to its launch, and ultimately it couldn't live up to the hype. Instead of being the Titan-killer we hoped for, the Vega 64 and Vega 56 failed to take down even Nvidia's year-old GTX 1080 / 1070. But they come close, often leading in DirectX 12 games, and at least prices are affordable these days. Plus you can make the argument of supporting the underdog to prevent an Nvidia monopoly.
Out of the Vega offerings, the RX Vega 56 is the better buy at current prices, and it will usually handle modern games at 1440p and maybe even 4k. It can also overclock decently, especially on the HBM2, so that it's only about 5 percent slower than its big brother Vega 64.
Where it comes up short is in efficiency: the Vega 56 often uses as much power as a GTX 1080 Ti, with performance closer to the new RTX 2060. It's not just about power and heat, but noise levels and longevity. More power on the GPU means more power on the PSU, which means both have fans that need to spin faster. We really want an RTX competitor from AMD, and unfortunately the Radeon VII isn't it. Until AMD's Navi ships in 2019, the Vega 56 remains a good upper midrange value.
6. GeForce GTX 1660 Ti 6GB
GPU Cores: 1,536 | Base Clock: 1,500MHz | Boost Clock: 1,770MHz | GFLOPS: 5,437 | Memory: 6GB GDDR6 | Memory Clock: 12 GT/s | Memory Bandwidth: 288GB/s
Vsphere hypervisor download. A more recent GPU from Nvidia, the GTX 1660 Ti is an odd departure for the new Turing architecture as Nvidia removed the ray tracing and deep learning hardware that has so far been the focus of a lot of hype, not to mention a little controversy. But along with dropping those features Nvidia delivers a lower priced and impressively efficient design. It mostly takes over from the previous GTX 1060 cards, with more bandwidth and better performance at a similar price. In fact, it's almost a direct replacement in performance for the GTX 1070.
There are a few minor drawbacks, however, like sticking with 6GB of VRAM. Yes, the GDDR6 memory delivers 50 percent more bandwidth than the 1060 6GB GDDR5, but some newer games are starting to push beyond 6GB at some settings. There's also the missing RTX features. Ray tracing and DLSS might not seem like such a big deal right now, but $70 more gets you the faster and potentially more capable RTX 2060. But if you don't want to go above $300, the GTX 1660 Ti is a great graphics card.
7. Nvidia GeForce GTX 1660 6GB
Great 1080p performance just become more affordable
GPU Cores: 1,408 | Base Clock: 1,530MHz | Boost Clock: 1,785MHz | GFLOPS: 5,027 | Memory: 6GB GDDR5 | Memory Clock: 8 GT/s | Memory Bandwidth: 192GB/s
The arrival of Nvidia's new GeForce GTX 1660 has basically ended the era of the GTX 1060 as the most popular mainstream gaming solution. Or at least, the 1060 cards are no longer in contention, as they've been discontinued, though tens of millions were sold.
For roughly the same price as the outgoing 1060 6GB, the new 1660 boosts performance by about 10-15 percent. That puts it ahead of the RX 580 and tied with the RX 590, and it's a more efficient card as well. You'll typically only need a single 6-pin connection to power the GTX 1660.
The loss of 2GB VRAM relative to the RX 590/580 isn't really a concern in most games, especially at 1080p, which is where these cards do best. 1440p is possible, but only at sometimes significantly lower quality settings. But while Nvidia wins on efficiency, the RX 580 and 570 remain exceptional values for budget minded gamers.
8. AMD Radeon RX 590
GPU Cores: 2,304 | Base Clock: 1,469MHz | Boost Clock: 1,545MHz | GFLOPS: 7,120 | Memory: 8GB GDDR5 | Memory Clock: 8 GT/s | Memory Bandwidth: 256GB/s
Originally a $280 graphics card, the RX 590 now routinely sells for $220. That makes a world of difference in value, and performance is still good. The GTX 1660 is roughly tied with the RX 590, at the same price, and it's a more efficient card. However, there are games where the 6GB on the Nvidia card can be a bit limiting. We rate the RX 590 just ahead of the 1660 for performance, though that's splitting hairs.
Compared to the older RX 580 8GB, the new revision has higher clockspeeds that boost performance by 15 percent. That's thanks to a refined '12nm' process, as otherwise the architecture remains effectively the same. The price is also about 20 percent higher, but if you're looking at total system cost and not just the graphics card, we recommend faster GPUs even if they cost more. Just make sure you have a PSU with a the necessary 8-pin and 6-pin power connections that most 590 cards use.
9. AMD Radeon RX 580 8GB
An impressively priced mainstream card
GPU Cores: 2,304 | Base Clock: 1,257MHz | Boost Clock: 1,340MHz | GFLOPS: 6,175 | Memory: 8GB GDDR5 | Memory Clock: 8 GT/s | Memory Bandwidth: 256GB/s
Many gamers are on a budget, and while faster cards might make you envious, if you're running a 1080p display they're often overkill. Mainstream GPUs like the RX 570/580 and GTX 1660/1060 are often on sale now for far below the original MSRP. Nvidia's new 16-series cards are faster, but the RX 580 8GB typically beats the GTX 1060 6GB for around $170.
That hits the sweet spot for mainstream gamers, undercutting both GTX 1660/1060 models as well as AMD's own RX 590. The 590 mentioned above is certainly worth a look, but the 580 8GB remains one of the best values in graphics cards.
10. AMD Radeon RX 570 4GB
GPU Cores: 2,048 | Base Clock: 1,168MHz | Boost Clock: 1,244MHz | GFLOPS: 5,095 | Memory: 4GB GDDR5 | Memory Clock: 7 GT/s | Memory Bandwidth: 224GB/s
AMD's Polaris architecture has been around a while, and while we'll get an updated architecture this summer (Navi, aka Radeon RX 3000), we don't know exactly what to expect yet. In the meantime, the RX 570 4GB has now dropped well below its original $169 target, and if you're looking for a 1080p card you really won't find a better bargain.
Overall, the RX 570 4GB typically comes out slightly ahead of the GTX 1060 3GB, and while it does use a bit more power, it costs less than Nvidia's substantially slower GTX 1050 Ti.
Most desktops are more than capable of running this 150W card without any difficulty, though you'll need at least a 6-pin power connector, or possibly an 8-pin connector. Sales routinely drop the price of RX 570 4GB cards to $120-$130, so as long as your PSU is up to snuff, the RX 570 pretty much kills off the market for anything lower.
11. Nvidia GeForce GTX 1650 6GB
GPU Cores: 896 | Base Clock: 1,485MHz | Boost Clock: 1,665MHz | GFLOPS: 2,984 | Memory: 4GB GDDR5 | Memory Clock: 8 GT/s | Memory Bandwidth: 128GB/s
Nvidia's GeForce GTX 1650 is the latest addition to our GPU results, taking over from the GTX 1050 for the budget segment. It still uses the Turing architecture, now trimmed down about as far as it can reasonably go. Official pricing starts at $150, but don't be surprised if online prices end up lower in the coming months. This is an entry-level GPU, targeting 1080p gaming for lighter fare like eSports, so plan accordingly.
Performance is a step down from the GTX 1060 cards, which was expected. At the same time, it's also about 30 percent faster than the outgoing GTX 1050 Ti. Perhaps most importantly, most GTX 1650 cards appear to be going after the market for graphics cards that don't need any extra power. The GTX 1650 is a 75W card capable of drawing everything it needs from the motherboard's x16 PCIe slot. (There are a few models with 6-pin connectors as well, but we'd just as soon avoid those.)
AMD's RX 570 is clearly faster, but it uses twice as much power and always needs at least a 6-pin connector, if not an 8-pin connector. If your PC has a weaker PSU, or if you're going for a media streaming PC, the GTX 1650 may be just what you want. Unfortunately, Nvidia didn't include Turing's updated NVENC engine, so VP9 and HEVC 4K decoding isn't quite as good as on the other Turing chips.
How we test graphics cards and performance
While the CPU is still the 'brain' of your PC, dozens of games every year will push your graphics card to its limits. It's the component you'll want to upgrade most frequently, but if you buy the right card, it should last you at least two years. For gaming systems, it's also likely the most expensive part in your build. On a practical budget, it's critical to find the graphics card with the best ratio of price to performance. That's why we've previously looked at cards in the $300/£250 range, though the best values are currently either above or below that mark.
Recent graphics card reviews
Nvidia GPUs:
RTX 2080 Ti
RTX 2080
RTX 2070
RTX 2060
GTX 1660 Ti
GTX 1660
GTX 1650
GTX 1080 Ti
GTX 1080
GTX 1070 Ti
GTX 1070
GTX 1060 6GB
GTX 1050 Ti
GTX 1050
AMD GPUs:
Radeon VII
RX Vega 56 and 64
RX 590
RX 580 8GB and 570 4GB
RX 560 4GB and integrated GPUs
For raw performance, Nvidia's RTX 2080 Ti is a killer card, easily outperforming all older cards. It's also modestly overclockable, quiet, and reasonably efficient. But it costs an arm and a leg. You can argue about whether you really need ultra quality or what resolution to run, but your wallet will likely end up pointing you at cards in the $200-$350 range. That's why the RTX 2060 is such an impressive card, even if it's not the fastest new kid on the block.
We recommend the RTX 2060, or maybe the RTX 2070, to most—but not all—PC gamers, it's not the only option worth considering. Performance scales with price as you move up the ladder, but near the top you get greatly diminishing returns. The same goes for moving down to the ladder, though: go too low and while the price might look good, performance could leave you wanting. So we factor in all of these elements when reviewing and recommending graphics cards.
Do you need a new graphics card?
If you're doubtful that your current PC is fast enough to warrant purchasing a better graphics card, I have some data for you. Even with the fastest graphics card around, running at a resolution that puts more of the burden on your CPU (1080p ultra), there's often only a minor improvement in gaming performance. Yes, truly old CPUs are going to struggle, but going from a Core i7-4770K to a Core i7-8700K only improves gaming performance by 20 percent on average, at 1080p ultra.
What happens if you use a graphics card that's 20-30 percent slower than an RTX 2080? Your CPU becomes even less of a factor. If you have at least 8GB of system memory and a Core i7-4770K or better CPU, you should be fine with everything up to about the GTX 1070 Ti / RX Vega 56 level of performance. We wouldn't recommend buying an i7-4770K these days, however, so when it comes time to upgrade look at our choice for the best CPU for gaming.
Don't be fooled into thinking VRAM capacity is more important than the GPU, either. It can be a factor, but slower GPUs with 4GB VRAM usually can't handle settings that actually need 4GB VRAM, and games that need 8GB will also tend to favor GPUs closer to the RTX 2080 than the RX 580. There's also very little (if any) discernible difference in most games when switching from 2GB to 4GB textures, never mind 4GB to 8GB. All the cards we've selected have at least 4GB, which is more than sufficient for high quality, and it's usually enough for ultra settings as well.
Testing graphics cards
Our graphics card recommendations are based on our own extensive benchmarks and testing, and then factoring in the price. We have benchmark data for the complete range of Nvidia and AMD graphics cards, including all the RTX 20-series, GTX 10-series and AMD Radeon VII, RX Vega, and RX 500 series. We've previously looked at the R9 Fury/300/200 series and GTX 900/700 series, but due to time constraints and availability we're no longer actively testing most of these cards. However, I've included one or two representatives from each generation as a point of reference.
A word about SLI and CrossFire
If you're looking for maximum performance, you can run two cards in SLI or CrossFire. However, it's become increasingly common for major games to completely ignore multi-GPU users. That includes all DXR games. Still, if you want two GPUs, it's an option, and these days we'd worry less about dual x16 connections (ie, X299) and more about the CPU. Our testing indicates AMD's Ryzen parts don't scale in SLI/CF performance nearly as well as Intel's Core processors, and an i9-9900K or i7-8700K generally beats out the i9-7900X and other X299 CPUs.
Graphics performance isn't the only consideration. The quality of game drivers and other features supported by the card are important. The card's noise level, power draw, and temperature matter, too. Thankfully, nearly all modern cards are fairly quiet, even under load, and temperatures are within the acceptable range as well, though Nvidia still has an advantage when it comes to power.
We test each card on a high-end PC at 1080p medium, 1080p ultra, 1440p ultra, and 4K with ultra/high settings. We take the results from fifteen games, mostly newer releases, using the 'best' API for each GPU on each game. That means low-level APIs are used for AMD cards if they're available, while DX12/Vulkan are only used in certain games for Nvidia cards.
Here's how the cards stack up in terms of average and minimum frame rates across these games. You can see individual game charts including most of these GPUs in our GTX 1650 review.
[Performance charts updated as of May 21, 2019]
Image 1 of 4Swipe left/right for additional charts
Image 2 of 4Swipe left/right for additional charts
Image 3 of 4Swipe left/right for additional charts
Image 4 of 4Swipe left/right for additional charts
Nvidia claims most of the top spots for performance, with the new Radeon VII coming in below the RTX 2080 RTX 2080 and GTX 1080 Ti, but above the RTX 2070. That's how far behind AMD is, unfortunately: its latest $700 graphics card ends up being a hair slower than Nvidia's 2-year-old $700 card. That's probably also a big part of why the RTX cards cost so much more than their 'equivalent' 10-series counterparts.
But you don't need to buy at the top of the chart to get good performance, as mainstream cards like the RX 570/580 and GTX 1060 3GB/6GB are still totally viable, and at lower settings the GTX 970 and R9 390 still plug along nicely. They might not do so well at 1440p ultra, but they're more than capable of running most games at 1080p medium to high quality, sometimes more.
But how do these cards compare in terms of value? Here's a look at fps per monetary unit, for cards that can still be purchased new at reasonable retail prices (eg, only 'current' generation hardware, not the GTX 1080 Ti through GTX 1070 Ti).
[Prices for charts updated as of May 21, 2019]
Image 2 of 3Swipe right/left for dollars/Euros
Image 2 of 3Swipe right/left for dollars/Euros
In terms of best value, we've provided two different looks at what the cards offer. The top charts show the graphics cards in isolation, which can be useful if you have a PC and you're only looking to upgrade your GPU. The bottom charts look at framerates in terms of total system cost, using a decent (about $800, not including the GPU) build as a reference point. Neither approach is a perfect, but the two give a range of how the cards rate in terms of value.
The markets change the picture slightly, but the RX 570 / 580 / 590 / Vega 65 and GTX 1660 / 1060 cards are consistently at the top of the GPU charts, with the more expensive GPUs like the Radeon VII and RTX 2080 Ti falling to the bottom. No other GPU even comes close to the RX 570 4GB right now.
The problem is that while budget and midrange GPUs on their own may look good, combine it with system price, especially on a powerful modern PC, and you're almost always better off putting more money into your graphics card. The RTX 2070 leads in all three markets based on current prices, with the Vega 56 being AMD's best showing (third or fourth place, depending on the market). For our 'mainstream' build (the build is similar to our high-end gaming PC build guide but with less storage capacity), the more expensive cards are at the top, midrange cards are mostly in the middle, and budget cards fall to the bottom.
But whichever chart you look at, keep in mind the types of games you want to play as well as your monitor, because higher resolution displays tend to need more powerful GPUs.
Wrapping it up
Looking forward, computer graphics is a fast-changing field. AMD released the first ever 7nm GPU in February, but it certainly won't be the last. Navi looks like it's coming in June or July. Nvidia has also finished filling out it's GTX 16-series parts, and it may be another year before Nvidia joins the 7nm party. Our recommendations are based off performance combined with current prices, and price cuts or a limited time sale could easily move a card to the top of the list.
If you find your current system isn't keeping up with the gaming times, look at the performance charts and decide how far up the ladder you're looking to climb, then buy accordingly. Those who already own an R9 390 or GTX 970 or better should still be able to run any current game, though not necessarily at 60 fps and maximum quality. Games continue to push for new levels of performance, but tuning a few settings should keep most graphics cards viable for at least a few years.
Some online stores give us a small cut if you buy something through one of our links. Read ouraffiliate policyfor more info.
$begingroup$I am trying to learn Blender , my current system with i5 3230M with 8GB works all right but struggling , So I am planning to build a budget pc. It ll be really helpful if you anyone could help me out on important question . is it best to have a good cpu (like i7 7700) and no graphics or to have mediocre cpu (like Ryzen 3 1200) and a graphics card (like GTX 1050Ti 8GB).
I read cpu can take advantage of copious ram for large scenes and gpu can be faster under normal rendering circumstances.
Any suggestions save for a particular cpu or gpu , Thanks a lot in advance.
closed as primarily opinion-based by Duarte Farrajota Ramos♦, X-27 the fluffy unicorn, cegaton, Scott Milner, p2orMay 6 '18 at 13:26
Many good questions generate some degree of opinion based on expert experience, but answers to this question will tend to be almost entirely based on opinions, rather than facts, references, or specific expertise. If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.
1 Answer
$begingroup$I’d go pure cpu for now, it’s quite easy to max a gpu’s 4-6gb ram cap
Whilst you can upgrade normal system ram
Plus cpu’s Are closing the gap substantially on GPUs in blender
To put it into perspective:Amd’s Threadripper 1950x £800 can render a scene at 90% the speed of a gp100 Nvidia gpu (£4000 card 16gb cap) but if the scene gets over that 16gn limit then and wins hands down
Check this http://download.blender.org/institute/benchmark/latest_snapshot.html
Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged blender-renderhardware or ask your own question.
How to Buy the Best GPU for Gaming
If you're a PC gamer, or a content creator who lives and dies by the speed of your graphics-accelerated software, your video card is the engine that powers what you can do—or how lustily you can brag. And until just a few months ago, that bragging was really expensive.
Over the last two years, at times buying a video card felt like dishing out for a rare flower bulb, not a PC component, amid some 21st-century tulip frenzy. The cryptomining crazes of 2017 and 2018 drove wild demand for graphics horsepower—the kind of computing muscle best suited to amateur and professional digital currency mining—and thus for certain video cards. Prices for even modest mainstream cards flew sky-high. For a time, the market went downright bonkers. Some cards traded for double or more than their list prices, if you could find them in stock at all.
Here in '19, that hubbub has died down—at least for the moment. Our guide will help you sort through the best video-card options for your desktop PC, what you need to know to upgrade a system, and how to evaluate whether a particular card is a good buy. We'll also touch on some upcoming trends—they could affect which card you choose.
Even with cryptomania on the wane for now, you do need to choose with care. After all, consumer video cards range from under $50 to well over $1,000. It's easy to overpay or underbuy. (We won't let you do that, though.)
Who's Who in GPUs
First off, what does a graphics card do? And do you really need one?
If you're looking at any given pre-built desktop PC on the market, unless it's a gaming-oriented machine, PC makers will de-emphasize the graphics card in favor of promoting CPU, RAM, or storage options. Indeed, sometimes that's for good reason; a low-cost PC may not have a graphics card at all, relying instead on the graphics-acceleration silicon built into its CPU (an 'integrated graphics processor,' commonly called an 'IGP'). There's nothing inherently wrong with relying on an IGP—most business laptops, inexpensive consumer laptops, and budget-minded desktops have them—but if you're a gamer or a creator, the right graphics card is crucial.
A modern graphics solution, whether it's a discrete video card or an IGP, handles the display of 2D and 3D content, drawing the desktop, and decoding and encoding video content in programs and games. All of the discrete video cards on the consumer market are built around large graphics processing chips designed by one of two companies: AMD or Nvidia. These processors are referred to as 'GPUs,' for 'graphics processing units,' a term that is also applied, confusingly, to the graphics card itself. (Nothing about graphics cards..ahem, GPUs..is simple!)
The two companies work up what are known as 'reference designs' for their video cards, a standardized version of a card built around a given GPU. Sometimes these reference-design cards are sold directly by Nvidia (or, less often, by AMD) themselves to consumers. More often, though, they are duplicated by third-party card makers (companies referred to in industry lingo as AMD or Nvidia 'board partners'), such as Asus, EVGA, MSI, Gigabyte, Sapphire, XFX, and Zotac.
Depending on the graphics chip in question, these board partners may sell their own self-branded versions of the reference card (adhering to the design and specifications set by AMD or Nvidia), or they will fashion their own custom products, with different cooler designs, slight overclocking done from the factory, or features such as LED mood illumination. Some board partners will do both—that is, sell reference versions of a given GPU, as well as its own, more radical designs.
Who Needs a Discrete GPU?
We mentioned integrated graphics (IGPs) above. IGPs are capable of meeting the needs of most general users today, with three broad exceptions..
Professional Workstation Users. These folks, who work with CAD software or in video and photo editing, will still benefit greatly from a discrete GPU. Some of their key applications can transcode video from one format to another or perform other specialized operations using resources from the GPU instead of (or in addition to) those of the CPU. Whether this is faster will depend on the application in question, which specific GPU and CPU you own, and other factors.
Productivity-Minded Users With Multiple Displays. People who need a large number of displays can also benefit from a discrete GPU. Desktop operating systems can drive displays connected to the IGP and discrete GPUs simultaneously. If you've ever wanted five or six displays hooked up to a single system, you can combine an IGP and a discrete GPU to get there.
That said, you don't necessarily need a high-end graphics card to do that. If you're simply displaying business applications, multiple browser windows, or lots of static windows across multiple displays (i.e., not demanding PC games), all you need is a card that supports the display specifications, resolutions, monitor interfaces, and number of panels you need. If you're showing four web browsers across four display panels, a GeForce RTX 2080 card, say, won't confer any greater benefit than a GeForce GTX 1660 card with the same supported outputs.
Gamers. And of course, there's the gaming market, to whom the GPU is arguably the most important component. RAM and CPU choices both matter, but if you have to pick between a top-end system circa 2016 with a 2019 GPU or a top-end system today using the highest-end GPU you could buy in 2016, you'd want the former.
Graphics cards fall into two distinct classes: consumer cards meant for gaming and light content creation work, and dedicated cards meant for professional workstations and geared toward scientific computing, calculations, and artificial intelligence work. This guide, and our reviews, will focus on the former, but we'll touch on workstation cards a little bit, later on. The key sub-brands you need to know across these two fields are Nvidia's GeForce and AMD's Radeon RX (on the consumer side of things), and Nvidia's Titan and Quadro, as well as AMD's Radeon Pro and Radeon Instinct (in the pro workstation field). As recently as 2017, Nvidia had the very high end of the consumer graphics-card market more or less to itself, and it still dominates there.
We'll focus here on the consumer cards. Nvidia's consumer card line in 2019 is broken into two distinct classes, both united under the long-running GeForce brand: GeForce GTX, and GeForce RTX. AMD's consumer cards, meanwhile, comprise the Radeon RX and Radeon RX Vega families, as well as the new Radeon VII.
Before we get into the individual lines in detail, though, let's outline a very important consideration for any video-card purchase.
Target Resolution: Your First Consideration
Resolution is the horizontal-by-vertical pixel count at which your video card will drive your monitor. This has a huge bearing on which card to buy, and how much you need to spend, when looking at a video card from a gaming perspective.
If you are a PC gamer, a big part of what you'll want to consider is the resolution(s) at which a given video card is best suited for gaming. Nowadays, even low-end cards will display everyday programs at lofty resolutions like 3,840 by 2,160 pixels (a.k.a., 4K). But for strenuous PC games, those cards will not have nearly the power to drive smooth frame rates at high resolutions like those. In games, the video card is what calculates positions, geometry, and lighting, and renders the onscreen image in real time. For that, the higher the in-game detail level and monitor resolution you're running, the more graphics-card muscle is required.
The three most common resolutions at which today's gamers play are 1080p (1,920 by 1,080 pixels), 1440p (2,560 by 1,440 pixels), and 2160p or 4K (3,840 by 2,160 pixels). Generally speaking, you'll want to choose a card suited for your monitor's native resolution. (The 'native' resolution is the highest supported by the panel, and the one at which the display looks the best.) You'll also see ultra-wide-screen monitors with in-between resolutions (3,840 by 1,440 pixels is a common one); you can gauge these versus 1080p, 1440p, and 2160p by calculating the raw number of pixels for each (multiply the vertical number by the horizontal one) and seeing where that screen resolution fits in relative to the common ones. (See our targeted roundup of the best graphics cards for 1080p play.)
Now, of course, you can always dial down the detail levels for a game to make it run acceptably at a higher-than-recommended resolution, or dial back the resolution itself. But to an extent, that defeats the purpose of a graphics card purchase. The highest-end cards are meant for 4K play or for playing at very high refresh rates at 1080p or 1440p; you don't have to spend $1,000 or even $500 to play more than acceptably at 1080p. A secondary consideration nowadays, though, is running games at ultra-high frame rates to take advantage of the extra-fast refresh abilities of some new monitors; more on that later. Let's look at the graphics card makers' lines first, and see which ones are suited for what gaming resolutions.
Meet the Radeon and GeForce Families
The GPU lines of the two big graphics-chip makers are constantly evolving, with low-end models suited to low-resolution gameplay ranging up to elite-priced models for gaming at 4K and/or very high refresh rates. Let's look at Nvidia's first.
Nvidia's Lineup, 2019
The company's current line is split between cards using last-generation (a.k.a. '10-series') GPUs dubbed the 'Pascal' line, and newer GTX 1600- and RTX 2000-series lines, based on GPUs using an architecture called 'Turing.' Its Titan cards are outliers; more on them in a bit.
Here's a quick rundown of the currently relevant card classes in the Pascal and Turing families, their rough pricing, and their usage cases..
If you are a keen observer of the market, you may notice that many of the familiar GeForce GTX Pascal cards are not listed above. They are being allowed to sell through and are largely going off the market in 2019 in favor of their GeForce RTX successors. We expect this to happen soon for the GeForce GTX 1060 due to the release of the GeForce GTX 1660 and 1660 Ti, and eventually, the lesser Pascal cards. We'd class the GT 1030 to GTX 1050 as low-end cards, coming under $100 or a little above. The GTX 1650/1050 Ti to GTX 1660 Ti make up Nvidia's comprehensive midrange, spanning from about $150 to $350, with a few of these cards ranging close to $500. (We expect the GeForce GTX 1050 Ti to be replaced by a possible GeForce GTX 1650 Ti later in the year, if rumors are to be taken at face value.)
With apologies to nu-soul and nu-metal, the end-of-lifing GTX 1080-class cards, as well as the new RTX 2060 and RTX 2070, constitute what we'd call the 'nu-high end,' as they take the place of the old top-end GeForces in the $350 to $700 range. The RTX 2080 and RTX 2080 Ti cards, finally, we'd call a new 'elite class.'
As for the Titan cards, these are essentially stripped-down workstation cards that bridge the pro graphics and high-end/4K gaming worlds. For most gamers, the Titans won't be of interest due to their pricing. But know that the Titan Xp (older, around $1,200) and newer Titan RTX ($2,500) and Titan V ($2,999) cards are options for Powerball-winning gamers, machine-learning pioneers, AI developers, or folks involved in pro/academic GPU-bound calculation work.
AMD's Lineup, 2019
As for AMD's card classes, here in early '19 the company is stronger competing with Nvidia's low-end and mainstream cards than its high-end ones, and it puts up no resistance against the elite class..
The Radeon RX 550 and 560 comprise the low end, while the RX 570 to 590 are the midrange and ideal for 1080p gaming. The RX 580 and RX Vega 56 and Vega 64 cards, the latter good for 1080p and 1440p play, were hit particularly hard by the crypto-craze but have come back down to earth. The Radeon VII is AMD's sole player in the elite bracket; it trades blows with the GeForce RTX 2080 at 4K but generally performed less well at lower resolutions in games.
Graphics Card Basics: Understanding the Core Specs
Now, the charts above should give you a good idea of which card families you should be looking at, based on your monitor and your target resolution. A few key numbers are worth keeping in mind when comparing cards, though: the graphics processor's clock speed, the onboard VRAM (that is, how much video memory it has), and—of course!—the pricing. And then there's adaptive sync.
Clock Speed
When comparing GPUs from the same family, a higher base clock speed (that is, the speed at which the graphics core works) and more cores signify a faster GPU. Again, though: That's only a valid comparison between cards in the same product family. For example, the base clock on the venerable GeForce GTX 1080 is 1,733MHz, while the base clock is 1,759MHz on a (factory overclocked) Republic of Gamers Strix version of the GTX 1080 from Asus in its out-of-the-box Gaming Mode.
Note that this base clock measure is distinct from the graphics chip's boost clock. The boost clock is the speed to which the graphics chip can accelerate temporarily when under load, as thermal conditions allow. This can also vary from card to card in the same family. It depends on the robustness of the cooling hardware on the card and the aggressiveness of the manufacturer in its factory settings. The top-end partner cards with giant multifan coolers will tend to have the highest boost clocks for a given GPU.
Onboard Memory
The amount of onboard video memory (sometimes referred to by the rusty term 'frame buffer') is usually matched to the requirements of the games or programs that the card is designed to run. In a certain sense, from a PC-gaming perspective, you can count on a video card to have enough memory to handle current demanding games at the resolutions and detail levels that the card is suited for. In other words, a card maker generally won't overprovision a card with more memory than it can realistically use; that would inflate the pricing and make the card less competitive. But there are some wrinkles to this.
A card designed for gameplay at 1,920 by 1,080 pixels (1080p) these days will generally be outfitted with 4GB or 6GB of RAM, while cards geared more toward play at 2,560 by 1,440 pixels (1440p) or 3,840 by 2,160 (2160p, or 4K) tend to deploy 8GB or more. Usually, for cards based on a given GPU, all of the cards have a standard amount of memory. The wrinkles: In some isolated but important cases, card makers offer versions of a card with the same GPU but different amounts of VRAM. The key ones to know nowadays: cards based on the GeForce GTX 1060 (some lesser versions offer 3GB, versus the full-fat 6GB), and the Radeon RX 570 and RX 580 (4GB versus 8GB). Both are GPUs you'll find in popular midrange cards a bit above or below $200, so mind the memory amount on these. The cheaper versions will have less.
Now, if you're looking to spend $150 or more on a video card, with the idea of all-out 1080p gameplay, a card with at least 4GB of memory really shouldn't be negotiable. Both AMD and Nvidia now outfit their $200-plus GPUs with more RAM than this. (AMD has stepped up to 8GB on its RX Vega cards, with 16GB on its Radeon VII, while Nvidia is using 6GB or 8GB on most, with 11GB on its elite GeForce RTX 2080 Ti.) Either way, sub-4GB cards should only be used for secondary systems, gaming at low resolutions, or simple or older games that don't need much in the way of hardware resources.
Memory bandwidth is another spec you will see. It refers to how quickly data can move into and out of the GPU. More is generally better, but again, AMD and Nvidia have different architectures and sometimes different memory bandwidth requirements, so numbers are not directly comparable.
Pricing: How Much Should You Spend?
Generations of cards come and go, but the price bands were constant for years—at least, when the market was not distorted by cryptocurrency miners. Now that the rush has abated, AMD and Nvidia both are targeting light 1080p gaming in the $100-to-$180 price range, higher-end 1080p and entry-level 1440p in cards between $200 to $300, and light to high-detail 1440p gaming between $300 and $400.
If you want a card that can handle 4K handily, you'll need to spend more than $400. A GPU that can push 4K gaming at high detail levels will cost $500 to $1,200. Cards in the $150-to-$350 market generally offer performance improvements in line with their additional cost. If a card is a certain amount costlier than another, the increase in performance is usually proportional to the increase in price. In the high-end and elite-level card stacks, though, this rule falls away; spending more money yields diminishing returns.
Once a Religious Issue: FreeSync Vs. G-Sync
Should you buy a card based whether it supports one of these two venerable specs for smoothing gameplay? It depends on the monitor you have.
FreeSync (AMD's solution) and G-Sync (Nvidia's) are two sides to the same coin, a technology called adaptive sync. With adaptive sync, the monitor displays at a variable refresh rate led by the video card; the screen draws at a rate that scales up and down according to the card's output capabilities at any given time in a game. Without it, wobbles in the frame rate can lead to artifacts, staggering/stuttering action, or screen tearing, in which mismatched screen halves display momentarily. Under adaptive sync, the monitor draws a full frame only when the video card can deliver a whole frame.
The monitor you own may support FreeSync or G-Sync, or neither one. FreeSync is much more common, as it doesn't add to a monitor's manufacturing cost; G-Sync requires dedicated hardware inside the display. You may wish to opt for one GPU maker's wares or the other's based on this, but know that the tides are changing on this front. At CES 2019, Nvidia announced a driver tweak that will allow FreeSync-compatible monitors to use adaptive sync with late-model Nvidia GeForce cards, and a small subset of FreeSync monitors have been certified by Nvidia as 'G-Sync Compatible.' So the choice may not be as black and white (or as red or green) as it has been for years.
Upgrading a Pre-Built Desktop With a New Graphics Card
Assuming the chassis is big enough, most pre-built desktops these days have enough cooling capability to accept a new discrete GPU with no problems.
The first thing to do before buying or upgrading a GPU is to measure the inside of your chassis for the available card space. In some cases, you've got a gulf between the far right-hand edge of the motherboard and the hard drive bays. In others, you might have barely an inch. (See our favorite graphics cards for compact PCs.)
Next, check your graphics card's height. The card partners sometimes field their own card coolers that depart from the standard AMD and Nvidia reference designs. Make certain that if your chosen card has an elaborate cooler design, it's not so tall that it keeps your case from closing.
Finally: the power supply unit (PSU). Your system needs to have a PSU that's up to the task of giving a new card enough juice. This is something to be especially wary of if you're putting a high-end video card in a pre-built PC that was equipped with a low-end card, or no card at all. Doubly so if it's a budget-minded or business system; these PCs tend to have underpowered or minimally provisioned PSUs.
The two most important factors to be aware of here are the number of six-pin and eight-pin cables on your PSU, and the maximum wattage the PSU is rated for. Most modern systems, including those sold by OEMs like Dell, HP, and Lenovo, employ power supplies that include at least one six-pin power connector meant for a video card, and some have both a six-pin and an eight-pin connector. Midrange and high-end graphics cards will require a six-pin cable, an eight-pin cable, or some combination of the two to provide working power to the card. (The lowest-end cards draw all the power they need from the PCI Express slot.) Make sure you know what your card needs in terms of connectors.
Nvidia and AMD both outline recommended power supply wattage for each of their graphics-card families. Take these guidelines seriously, but they are just guidelines, and they are generally conservative. If AMD or Nvidia says you need at least a 500-watt PSU to run a given GPU, don't chance it with the 300-watter you may have installed, but know that you don't need an 800-watt PSU to guarantee enough headroom, either.
Ports and Preferences: Understanding Video Card Connections
Three kinds of port are common on the rear edge of a current graphics card: DVI, HDMI, and DisplayPort. Some systems and monitors still use DVI, but it's the oldest of the three standards and is being phased out on many high-end cards here in 2019.
Most cards have several DisplayPorts (often three) and one HDMI port. When it comes to HDMI versus DisplayPort, note some differences. First, if you plan on using a 4K display, now or in the future, your card needs to at least support HDMI 2.0a or DisplayPort 1.2/1.2a. It's fine if the GPU supports anything above those labels, like HDMI 2.0b or DisplayPort 1.4, but that's the minimum you'll want for smooth 4K playback or gaming. (The latest-gen cards from both makers will be fine on this score.)
Also, for now, only DisplayPort 1.4 will support 4K gaming at anything above 60Hz, and DisplayPort is also the only way you'll be able to push 1440p resolution above 60Hz with G-Sync turned on. You should guarantee you're buying a card with at least DisplayPort 1.4-out if you plan to use either of these resolutions above the 60Hz threshold with G-Sync enabled.
Note that some of the very latest cards from Nvidia in its GeForce RTX series employ a new port, called VirtualLink. This port looks like (and can serve as) a USB Type-C port that also supports DisplayPort over USB-C. What the port is really designed for, though: attaching future generations of virtual-reality (VR) headsets, providing power and bandwidth adequate to the needs of VR head-mounted displays (HMDs). It's nice to have, but no VR hardware supports it yet.
Looking Forward: Graphics Card Trends
Nvidia has been in the consumer video card driver's seat for a few years now, but 2019 should see more action than any in recent memory to shake things up between the two big players.
GeForce Vs. Radeon: Looking Ahead
If your goal is a high-end graphics card (we define that, these days, as cards at $500 or more) for playing games at 4K, and you plan to use the card for three to five years, the upper end of the market is mostly Nvidia's game at the moment. But that could shift as 2019 progresses, with AMD's next-generation 'Navi' cards expected later this year. Based on a new 7nm manufacturing process, these cards could change AMD's fortunes in the graphics space. The Radeon VII, its first 7nm-built video card, is a competent offering for 1440p/4K play and content creators, but it doesn't quite topple the RTX 2080 in most respects. (See our face-off AMD Radeon VII vs. Nvidia RTX 2080: Which High-End Gaming Card to Buy?)
VR: New Interfaces, New HMDs?
As we alluded to with VirtualLink, VR is another consideration. VR's requirements are slightly different than those of simple monitors. Both of the mainstream VR HMDs, the HTC Vive and Oculus Rift, have an effective resolution across both eyes of 2,160 by 1,200. That's significantly lower than 4K, and it's the reason why midrange GPUs like AMD's Radeon RX 580 or Nvidia's GeForce GTX 1060 can be used for VR. On the other hand, VR demands higher frame rates than conventional gaming. Low frame rates in VR (anything below 90 frames per second is considered low) can result in a bad gaming experience. Higher-end GPUs in the $300-plus category are going to offer better VR experiences today and more longevity overall, but VR with current-generation headsets can be sustained on a lower-end card than 4K. Coming cards in 2019, we suspect, may push the VR bar lower.
That said, as the year progresses we're going to see at least two new headsets that up the power requirements. The Oculus Rift S, due to hit store shelves in May, will raise the bar to a resolution of 2,560 by 1,440, while the hotly anticipated Valve Index should release shortly after with an increased resolution, as well. No firm details on exactly what kind of pixel density the Index will push, but expect it to at least meet the Rift S, if not exceed it when it hits shelves sometime in Q2.
High-Refresh: A New Frontier for Serious Gamers
Finally, bear in mind a further trend gaining momentum on the monitor side of things: high-refresh gaming monitors. For ages, 60Hz (or 60 screen redraws a second) was the panel-refresh ceiling for most PC monitors. We're seeing the emergence of lots of models now with higher refresh ceilings, designed especially for gamers. These panels may support up to 120Hz, 144Hz, or more for smoother gameplay. (This ability can also be piggybacked with FreeSync or G-Sync adaptive sync to enable smooth frame rates when the card is pushed to its limit.)
What this means: If you have a video card that can consistently push frames in a given game in excess of 60fps, you may be able to see those formerly 'wasted' frames in the form of smoother game motion. Most casual gamers won't care, but the difference is marked if you play fast-action titles, and competitive e-sports hounds will find the fluidity a competitive advantage. (See our picks for the best gaming monitors, including high-refresh models.) In short: Buying a powerful video card that pushes high frame rates can be a boon nowadays even for play at a pedestrian resolution like 1080p, if paired with a high-refresh monitor. High-refresh/high-detail gaming at 4K, though, is still beyond today's cards in the most demanding games.
Ready for Our Recommendations?
The GPUs below span the spectrum of budget to high-end, representing a wide range of the best cards that are available now. We'll update this story as the graphics card landscape changes, so check back often for the latest products and buying advice.
Note that we've factored in just a sampling of third-party cards here; many more fill out the market. You can take our recommendation of a single reference card in a given card class (like the GeForce RTX 2060, or Radeon RX Vega 64) as a similar endorsement of the family as a whole.
Best Graphics Cards Featured in This Roundup:
MSI GeForce RTX 2080 Gaming X Trio Review
MSRP: $849.99Pros: Excellent cooling. Aggressive factory overclock. Dual eight-pin power connectors and higher power rating. Two-zone RGB LED lighting.
Cons: 12.9-inch length means it won't fit in many cases. Cooling design exhausts air into chassis. Ray-tracing and DLSS features remain underutilized, like with all RTX cards.
Bottom Line: A massive air cooler and dual eight-pin power connectors make MSI's GeForce RTX 2080 Gaming X Trio one of the most robust RTX 2080 partner cards we've seen. The only challenge? Fitting it in your PC's case.
Read ReviewZotac GeForce RTX 2060 Amp Review
MSRP: $369.99Pros: Faster than the GeForce GTX 1070 for less money. Compact two-slot design. Quiet fans. Headroom for mild overclocking.
Cons: Unlike Nvidia RTX 2060 Founders Edition, lacks a VirtualLink USB Type-C port. Priced higher than the GeForce GTX 1060 it replaces. 8GB of video memory would have been ideal.
Bottom Line: The best value yet in the GeForce RTX 20-series lineup, the RTX 2060 is a worthy, if more expensive, successor to the venerable GTX 1060.
Read ReviewMSI GeForce RTX 2070 Armor Review
MSRP: $499.00Pros: Quiet, effective cooling. Ample overclocking headroom. Excellent 1080p and 1440p gaming performance.
Cons: Priced higher than GTX 1070 it replaces. Not powerful enough for maxed-out 4K gaming in every game.
Bottom Line: MSI's GeForce RTX 2070 Armor graphics card has great cooling, plus overclocking headroom to spare. It's solid for 1440p play, but it performs much like the outgoing GTX 1080, so step up to an RTX 2080 if you want a generational performance gain.
Read ReviewMSI GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Gaming X 6G Review
MSRP: $309.00Pros: Great price-to-performance ratio for 1080p gaming. Beats previous-generation GTX cards on both sides of its price. Exceptional cooling. Solid overclocking potential.
Cons: Not great for 4K gaming. MSI's upclocked card closer in pricing to RTX 2060 Founders Edition than most GTX 1660 Ti cards.
Bottom Line: MSI's GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Gaming X 6G is exceptional at doing what it's designed to do: deliver a moderate-cost GPU option to gamers in search of high refresh rates in 1080p.
Read ReviewNvidia GeForce RTX 2080 Founders Edition Review
MSRP: $799.00Pros: Offers roughly one-third better gaming performance than the GeForce GTX 1080 Founders Edition it replaces. Runs cool and quiet. Headroom for overclocking. Includes ray tracing and DLSS support for future games.
Cons: Hiked-up price, versus GTX 1080 Founders Edition. Hard to judge value of ray tracing and DLSS until games come to market. Cooling design exhausts most air into case, not out.
Bottom Line: An exceptionally powerful graphics card, the GeForce RTX 2080 Founders Edition is a home run for gaming at 4K or high refresh rates. Only its pricing and the lack of games supporting ray tracing and DLSS keep it from being a grand slam right from launch.
Read ReviewNvidia GeForce RTX 2080 Ti Founders Edition Review
MSRP: $1199.00Pros: Sets a new bar for single-GPU performance. Quiet, cool-running design. Supports ray tracing and DLSS for future games. Easy to attain at least modest overclocks.
Cons: Founders Edition commands a $200 premium over an already expensive base/reference card. Games will take time to adopt ray tracing and DLSS.
Bottom Line: A Ferrari among gaming GPUs, Nvidia's GeForce RTX 2080 Ti Founders Edition represents the fastest class of cards that money can buy. Just be ready to pay a supercar price to enjoy its luxury ride for 4K and high-refresh gaming.
Read ReviewXFX Radeon RX 580 GTS XXX Edition Review
MSRP: $249.99Pros: Edged out Nvidia's competing GTX 1060 in most of our DirectX 12 tests. VR-ready.
Cons: Not much faster than Radeon RX 480, despite being larger, power-hungrier. XFX model we tested is big for a card in this class. XFX card had tricky, recessed eight-pin power connector.
Bottom Line: AMD's 'refined' Polaris card trades blows with Nvidia's competing GTX 1060. It's a solid pick for 1080p gaming at high settings, or 1440p play if 60fps isn't your aim.
Read ReviewXFX Radeon RX 590 Fatboy Review
MSRP: $279.00Pros: Double-digit performance gains over GeForce GTX 1060. Good for high-fps 1080p and 1440p gaming. Quiet cooling. Includes three free AAA games (at this writing). Reasonable overclocking capabilities.
Cons: High power requirements. Physically large for a mid-level graphics card. The Radeon RX 580 is considerably cheaper and not much slower.
Bottom Line: If you ignore power consumption, the Radeon RX 590 is the best-performing midrange card you can buy (as tested in this XFX model), showing double-digit gains over the GeForce GTX 1060. However, the existing Radeon RX 580 has the economic edge.
Read ReviewAMD Radeon RX Vega 64 Review
MSRP: $499.00Pros: Competitive with Nvidia GeForce GTX 1080. Smooth gaming performance at high resolutions.
Cons: High power demands compared with the competition. Frame rates fall behind the GTX 1080, particularly at resolutions below 4K.
Bottom Line: While the Radeon RX Vega 64 can go toe-to-toe with Nvidia's GTX 1080, it's a bit late to the party and has much higher power requirements.
Read ReviewAMD Radeon VII Review
MSRP: $699.00Pros: Comparable to GeForce RTX 2080 in 4K gaming performance. 16GB of video memory adds future-proofing. True two-slot case fitment.
Cons: Generally, falls behind GeForce RTX 2080 for 1080p and 1440p gaming. Priced higher than its predecessor. Loud cooling fans. High board power consumption. No VirtualLink port.
Bottom Line: AMD's new Radeon flagship graphics card, the Radeon VII is a worthwhile if power-hungrier alternative to the GeForce RTX 2080 for 4K gaming, but it generally isn't as fast at 1080p or 1440p resolutions.
Read Review
Developer Mathieu Menuet has released E-Cycles, an optimised version of Blender’s Cycles render engine that he claims can more than double rendering speed when using CUDA GPUs.
It’s a separate commercial product to Blender itself, but Menuet plans to release weekly builds incorporating new optimisations made in the core software.
Up to 2.42x faster than standard Cycles when rendering on Nvidia’s CUDA GPUs
In Menuet’s tests with the standard Cycles benchmark scenes, E-Cycles renders 1.23x to 2.42x faster than the Blender master on a GeForce GTX 1080 Ti GPU.
The speed boost varies from graphics card to graphics card: user results posted in this thread on BlenderArtists.org suggest that it may be larger with more powerful – or at least, more recent – GPUs.
It also works with AMD graphics cards running under OpenCL, although the speed boost is smaller: in Menuet’s tests, the standard scenes render 1.06x to 1.28x faster with a Radeon RX Vega 64.
According to Menuet, CPU rendering using Open Shader Language is also faster, but at the minute, E-Cycles is mainly intended for GPU rendering.
This test scene posted by user Komposthaufen on the BlenderArtists.org thread renders over 1.5x faster in E-Cycles than the Blender master on a Nvidia GeForce GTX 980 GPU.
In the forum thread, Menuet is cagey about revealing exactly how E-Cycles differs from regular Cycles, but the source code is available as part of his commercial Blender programmming course.
He also says that after a year on sale, each new feature will be uploaded for review on the official tracker for possible inclusion within the Blender master.
System requirements and pricing
E-Cycles is available for Blender running on Windows or Linux. It’s built on the still-in-beta Blender 2.8, so until a stable build of 2.8 is released, the usual caveats apply about using it in production.
Updated 5 April 2018: Since we originally covered E-Cycles, Menuet has released a build for Blender 2.7x.
The software currently costs €85 (around $95) for a perpetual licence of the 2.8x edition; €169 for a perpetual licence for 2.7x and 2.8x; or €14/month rental for 2.8x.
Perpetual licences come with free weekly updates until the end of the year.
Read more about E-Cycles for Blender in the product thread on BlenderArtists.org
(Includes links to buy the software)
Related posts:
Tags: Blender, Blender 2.8, CUDA, Cycles, E-Cycles, GPU rendering, Mathieu Menuet, OpenCL, price, renderer, rendering, system requirements
$begingroup$I want to enable GPU rendering, but there is no option in User Preferences > System:
Why is this? How can I get cycles to render using my GPU?
3 Answers
$begingroup$Ensure GPU Support
Currently cycles supports CUDA (Nvidia) devices and has experimental support for OpenCL devices as of 2.75 (added in B7f447
). If you are using an AMD/ATI graphics card, see the OpenCL section below. If you are running an older NVIDIA card, ie the Geforce series, support is extremely limited and these are not officially supported, see How to enable GPU rendering on older Nvidia GPUs?
Cycles only supports CUDA GPUs with a CUDA compute ability of 2.0 or higher. To use CUDA, check to make sure your GPU is on this list of CUDA capable GPUs and has a ranking of at least 2.0.
Install Latest Drivers
If your GPU has a CUDA compute ability greater than or equal to 2.0 and you still don't have the option to enable GPU rendering, you can check a couple more things:
Ensure you are using the proprietary drivers distributed by Nvidia and that your GPU drivers are up to date.
If you are compiling Blender from source, ensure you have the CUDA development toolkit installed.
Below are instructions for various operating systems. If you are still having issues after trying all the steps listed in this post, try asking for support on BlenderArtists.
This site is not well suited to localized troubleshooting discussions often needed to untangle unusual hardware/driver issues.
Run as root
Due to an issue with some versions of the nvidia drivers, you must run blender (or any other program which uses cuda) as root before you can use any cuda features as a normal user. See this thread for more detail.
Ubuntu-based Distributions
Open your driver manager and select the recommended driver and Apply Changes.
You can also use the terminal to install the latest stable driver.
For linux Mint, Ubuntu and Debian variants (and maybe other distributions) you will need to install the package nvidia-modprobe which will detect your nvidia CUDA device and make it available for blender. Read this answer for further instructions
Debian Jesse
Please note that these instructions were put together in June 2015 on Debian Jesse. Although Debian is a very stable distribution, it isn't unlikely that this will be out of date on Debian Stretch. If you have more up to date information, please feel free to edit this.
Before we can install the drivers, we will need to install the kernel headers from the contrib nonfree
repository. If this repository hasn't been added already, open /etc/apt/sources.list
with nano:
And add:
For Debian to recognize the repository, we will need to refresh the package list:
Once this is done, the headers can be installed:
With some sed
magic, this will install the correct headers for your version of the kernel.
Now we need to blacklist (disable) the open source nouveau driver. To do this, we will create an Xorg configuration file:
And reboot the computer.
All that is required afterwards, is to install cuda:
For more in depth information, please see https://wiki.debian.org/NvidiaGraphicsDrivers (only covers the drivers, not cuda). If you are running a GTX 970 or 980 you will need a special build of cuda available here.
Arch Linux
Identifying your GPU:
From the Arch wiki:
If you don't know what GPU you have, you can find out by running:
Drivers and CUDA:
For Arch Linux, installing proprietary Nvidia drivers for your GPU can be as simple as installing the nvidia package and then rebooting:
If you are compiling Blender from source, you will also need the CUDA toolkit. You can get it by installing the cuda package:
Find out what GPU you have in the Device Manager. Go to Start -> Control Panel -> System and Security -> System -> Device Manager), then open the Display adapters tree.
To find out the architecture of your Windows installation, open a command prompt (search for
cmd
in the start menu) and runwmic os get osarchitecture
.Alternatively, you can get this information from a GUI by going to Start -> Control Panel -> System and Security -> System or by using the keyboard shortcut Windows KeyPause.
Go to the Nvidia Website and select your driver.
Finally, download and install the proper driver for your architecture. I am assuming you know how to use installers.
Nvidia Optimus:
If you're running Blender on a notebook with Nvidia Optimus, make sure it uses the dedicated GPU. Either configure Blender to always use the dedicated over the integrated GPU in the Nvidia Control Panel, or right-click Blender.exe
(or a shortcut to Blender) and select the Nvidia GPU in the the Run with graphics processor menu:
Install the latest Nvidia Driver for you graphics card. You can download them from the Nvidia website.
Open the CUDADriver.pkg file by double clicking it.
Go through the installer.
If it installed correctly, there should be a new CUDA option in the System Preferences (the only time you need to go here is to install updates):
Finally after you have installed your drivers:
Restart your computer
Start Blender.
There should now be an option in the Blender's settings allowing you to select CUDA and your GPU:
Then select the GPU in Render settings > Render > Device:
As of blender 2.75, AMD HD 7xxx+ GPUs are officially supported.Other OpenCL devices may work, and can be tested by force-enabling OpenCL with an environment variable:
Also see Is it possible to do OpenCL rendering on Intel processors?
Ubuntu/Debian
On Ubuntu/debian you may need to install ocl-icd-opencl-dev package
ArchLinux
Nvidia OpenCL
To get OpenCL working for nvidia GPUs, ensure that the opencl-nvidia
package is installed:
Then run blender with the environment variable set to 1:
In the User Preferences > System there should now be an OpenCL option:
If it's selected, rendering on the GPU will now use opencl.Note that the first time you try to render, blender will have to first compile the necessary kernels which may some time.
Also note that you need to change 2 settings to enable GPU rendering. The obvious one is in the User Preferences, System. You also need to set it for the blender file (scene) by clicking on the camera icon (on the left) in the Properties window and under the Render section is a setting for Device.
The huge answer above was solution to some of my problems for enabling GPU for Blender with NVIDIA drivers in Ubuntu or Ubuntu-based distros, but it didn't always work on some cases.
So, I wrote an article for myself that has always worked since. It has a lot of the info mentioned here, but for me it's a simple straightforward way to go:
I hope it could be of help for someone in addition to this whole thread :)
protected by CharlesLJun 5 '14 at 19:51
Thank you for your interest in this question. Because it has attracted low-quality or spam answers that had to be removed, posting an answer now requires 10 reputation on this site (the association bonus does not count).
Would you like to answer one of these unanswered questions instead?