no gpu is future proof

Originally posted by _I_:

no gpu is future proof

laughs with a 4090......

as for OP.....future proofing the system would be a 870 motherboard and dropping to a 9700x CPU......at 1440p or above many games see no gain from going with a 9800x3d.....at 4K there is no reason to even buy a X3D chip......

9070 XT or 5070 Ti.
7900 XTX is older tech with significantly worse ray tracing.

Originally posted by smokerob79:

Originally posted by _I_:

no gpu is future proof

laughs with a 4090......

as for OP.....future proofing the system would be a 870 motherboard and dropping to a 9700x CPU......at 1440p or above many games see no gain from going with a 9800x3d.....at 4K there is no reason to even buy a X3D chip......

waits 50 years

Originally posted by smokerob79:

Originally posted by _I_:

no gpu is future proof

laughs with a 4090......

as for OP.....future proofing the system would be a 870 motherboard and dropping to a 9700x CPU......at 1440p or above many games see no gain from going with a 9800x3d.....at 4K there is no reason to even buy a X3D chip......

Ahh I see. Makes sense to better future proof MOBO, since right now thats a major issue and cause for me needing to do a total refresh (currently have 450-F

Micro Center has some combos for 870 motherboards w/ the 98003DX for only $50 more. Other combos swap the X3D chips for a Ryzen 9 9950X or 9 series 3DX (but very expensive) which both seem very overkill for my needs

Future proof is a myth. There is no such as older gpu still in using for today video games.

You cannot 'future proof', you can buy smart-ish though.

First I'd ignore the old cards, like it or not, ray tracing, upscaling and frame gen are the future, so there is no point buying a card for 4 or 5 years that cannot do it well now.

As gir the rest if the system, it doesn't sound like you are chasing crazy high fps, so I'd drop down from a 9800x3d to a 9700x or even look at Intel offerings, there are some very good deals to be had on either side, though and will likely work out a bit cheaper.

Look for a budget entry level-ish B series mobo for AMD, no need gir the X boards, doesn't sound like you need the features (Intel always go Z series with a K series cpu as overclocking can extend the life a decent chunk).

With those savings I'd look to push towards a 5080 or look at second hand 4080 supers or try low balling some 4090's even, you may get lucky.

With that said, there are 50 series super cards coming out towards the end of the year (likely October) so current card abd used prices should drop a bit more and some will be upgrading their 5080 to 5080 supers, so that could be a good option if you are prepared to wait, but would give you better long term performance.

With all of that said, ideally, if you can budget to upgrade the gpu every generation it can be a fairly 'cheap' upgrade to keep it upto date with a lower tier card than pushing to a higher one every 2 or 3 generations.

Why do so many people hate on the X3Ds? They are made for gaming and are the fastest gaming chips and the 7800/9800X3D are reasonably priced. Stick with the 9800X3D.

For raw power that 7900xtx is tempting at that price. However if you care about ray tracing and frame gen then yes a newer card is better for that. For pure power though that xtx is close to the 4080/5080 for hundreds less. It depends on what you want to play.

Originally posted by bossman150:

Why do so many people hate on the X3Ds? They are made for gaming and are the fastest gaming chips and the 7800/9800X3D are reasonably priced. Stick with the 9800X3D.

For raw power that 7900xtx is tempting at that price. However if you care about ray tracing and frame gen then yes a newer card is better for that. For pure power though that xtx is close to the 4080/5080 for hundreds less. It depends on what you want to play.

I'm not hating on it, but it's a notable ammount more money abd fir what the OP mentioned, won't be if any real bebefitg to them.

The x3d chips shine in smaller games where everything sits nicely in the cache and for pushing to very high fps, for big open world stuff, where you often are going to be happy with 120, there simply is no real benefit from spending the extra money.

I'd even make an argument for 13th or 14th gen intel.

The money saved dropping to a 9700x (100 to 200 bucks) from a 9800x3d could push the OP towards a better gpu, which will have a larger impact overall.

It's about the best performance for what people are after, not just max fps even if its it needed.

Originally posted by Disco Turtle:

Hey all,

Currently Micro Center has some strong deals for their members and I was considering on bringing my PC to the next era. However, Im having some issues picking the best GPU pair up and was curious on public opinion. Im really wanting to future proof my system for a while (4-5 years) game around 1440p Ultra, and have room for heavily modded Bethesda tittles :D

Im leaning between:
- AMD's 7900 XTX (Currently around $780 discounted),
or AMD 9070 XT (~Around 710)
or Nvidea 5070 TI ($750+, harder to find at price)

The 7900 looks appealing for better raw performance + more VRAM, but new architecture w/ FSR4 or DLSS also look promising for dollar to performance. ChatGBT flip flops between all 3 cards as its suggestion lol

Thoughts? Better to wait for 2026 gen cards and push current system longer? Does Micro Center have better deals around Holidays?


______________________________________

(GPU also likley paired with AMD Ryzen™ 7 9800X3D,
ASUS B650-E TUF Gaming WiFi,
G.Skill Flare X5 Series 32GB DDR5,)

(Current Specs, Ryzen 5 3600 + 2070 Super, 32 gigs ram DDR4)

With that, go with one of the AMD offerings. The 7900XTX can't do path tracing all that well and it won't get FSR 4 so only pick that one if the 9070 is out of stock everywhere or considerably more expensive.
Point in the 7900XTX's favour is it's got 24GB of VRAM, which is considerably more future proof than the 16GB of the other two.

Don't even bother with the 5070 ti. 16GB ram is not future proof. I use 15gb on Cyberpunk with just Ray active (@4k) on my 7900XTX. 16GB barely cuts it *now*. Imagine what it will be like when TeS VI launches...

Pick the 9070xt, or take a punt on the 7900XTX for the extra VRAM. Both are solid cards. The Nvidia is overpriced for what it is. If it came with 24GB VRAM, that would have been a very strong contender. 16GB simply isn't enough to make that worth what they're asking for it.

Originally posted by DefinitelyNotMonk:

Originally posted by bossman150:

Why do so many people hate on the X3Ds? They are made for gaming and are the fastest gaming chips and the 7800/9800X3D are reasonably priced. Stick with the 9800X3D.

For raw power that 7900xtx is tempting at that price. However if you care about ray tracing and frame gen then yes a newer card is better for that. For pure power though that xtx is close to the 4080/5080 for hundreds less. It depends on what you want to play.

I'm not hating on it, but it's a notable ammount more money abd fir what the OP mentioned, won't be if any real bebefitg to them.

The x3d chips shine in smaller games where everything sits nicely in the cache and for pushing to very high fps, for big open world stuff, where you often are going to be happy with 120, there simply is no real benefit from spending the extra money.

I'd even make an argument for 13th or 14th gen intel.

The money saved dropping to a 9700x (100 to 200 bucks) from a 9800x3d could push the OP towards a better gpu, which will have a larger impact overall.

It's about the best performance for what people are after, not just max fps even if its it needed.

But he also is wanting to future proof as well as he can, the 9800x3d will still be relevant for several generations if the am4 X3Ds are proof of anything it's that. Though he did say future proof GPU so yes I see your point too.

But for the games they are looking at (open world big rpg's), the x3d chips don't help.

If they were playing competitive e sport games or racing games where they want hundreds of fps at 1080p, it would be a different story.

Plus, that saving could push them towards the next tier of gpu.

Originally posted by bossman150:

Originally posted by DefinitelyNotMonk:

I'm not hating on it, but it's a notable ammount more money abd fir what the OP mentioned, won't be if any real bebefitg to them.

The x3d chips shine in smaller games where everything sits nicely in the cache and for pushing to very high fps, for big open world stuff, where you often are going to be happy with 120, there simply is no real benefit from spending the extra money.

I'd even make an argument for 13th or 14th gen intel.

The money saved dropping to a 9700x (100 to 200 bucks) from a 9800x3d could push the OP towards a better gpu, which will have a larger impact overall.

It's about the best performance for what people are after, not just max fps even if its it needed.

But he also is wanting to future proof as well as he can, the 9800x3d will still be relevant for several generations if the am4 X3Ds are proof of anything it's that. Though he did say future proof GPU so yes I see your point too.

As said before, future-proof is a marketing method and does not actually exist.

It depends on what you mean by future proofing. No, you can't truly have a build that will handle everything the future holds. However you can keep your PC relevant longer.

9070 XT is the best option at the moment, if you can find it as MSRP, which you can't.

It already has decent performance and the access to FSR4 future proofs it a bit. The lower price makes it desirable as well.

The issue is that even the original sellers are jacking up the prices, let alone scalpers, so you can't find it at a price that makes sense.

If you are a "price is no barrier" person, then a 4090 is the best investment.