3x 30" Portrait 6970 CF Eyefinity vs 580 SLI Surround Showdown

Good work Vega, I honestly never thought the 6970s would mop the floor with the 580 sli like that, what a shocker ...


I thought the main difference would have been to be able to use 2x to 4x AA when the 580s would crash due to low Vram.

Defenatly going with 6970 now unreal CF scalling!!!
 
Last edited:
xAlex79 said:
Good work Vega, I honestly never thought the 6970s would mop the floor with the 580 sli like that, what a shocker ...


I thought the main difference would have been to be able to use 2x to 4x AA when the 580s would crash due to low Vram.

Defenatly going with 6970 now unreal CF scalling!!!
Click to expand...

Remember... DX9 bug... that was his main point really. With the DX9 bug corrected (and it will be), there is no way the results will come out that way.
 
mlambert890 said:
Remember... DX9 bug... that was his main point really. With the DX9 bug corrected (and it will be), there is no way the results will come out that way.
Click to expand...

Well from the chart it wins hands down in DX11 titles too, except AVP and what is going on there 20 fps?!

Edit :And also the 580 cannot manage 2xAA in some game and probably not 4xAA in any of them because of memory limitation.

Whats interesting is that the 580 isnt a clear winner at super high resolutions at all.
 
R-Type said:
What do you mean about portrait rendering things bigger? Three 16:10 displays in portrait creates a resolution very close to 16:9 so the result is like one enormous widescreen display.
Click to expand...

16:8.5333 repeating to be precise so its actually slightly wider aspect than 16:9
 
magoo said:
Very nice setup and outrageous work.

I can't believe you are keeping the AMD cards after having all that trouble.

I think I would sit tight on the nvidia cards until they fix their problems and have a re-do.
I found AMD cards to be just too frustrating, but...... I use 24" monitors in landscape.
Click to expand...

I think it's mostly his unique setup which caused a lot of the problems he experienced. Like the <6 ft DP cable. I don't think very many people run their PCs in another room with 25 ft cables. Also the 1x DL-DVI is a real crud move by AMD. I mean was it really necessary? Also CCC2 is preview only, and I don't think it supports 69xx cards.
 
Thanks for the comparison. I have 15ft cables and keep my main rig a good 8 feet from where I sit, basically the heat and noise are on the other side of the room, suits my needs.
 
Well. Finally a resolution where the VRAM matters! Very informative, thanks for doing the testing. Looks like AMD's hardware works best in portrait mode and at that resolution. Too bad their drivers are still troublesome though.

Nvidia ignoring the portrait bug is a bit puzzling. They are supposed to have the superior driver team. But even if they fixed the portrait bug I suppose that the lack of VRAM would still be a physical constraint. Yeah I really don't get why AMD cheaped out and made one of the DVIs single link. Obviously it's not a problem for those that run 1080p monitors but it is a big problem in the super high resolution realm. I wonder why AMD doesn't give the option of running one DVI per graphics card like Nvidia does. Then you could go Tri-Fire, plug a monitor into each graphics card, and just dispense with the active adapters.
 
This modivated me to say screw you invidia and get a 6990 ... when them come out and as long as they are very stong and kick some butt! I love my 30 incher i dont have 3 of them but maybe i need to get 3 of them!!!! HAHAH ....
 
So, the ''high-end'' 580 in SLI is not worth it to play true high-end gaming res? What a shocker.

So with this thread, we can now say that the true high-end multi-GPU set-up for high-end gaming (high res + high AA) is from AMD. :) So now the Nvidia flagship is more a ''middle-of-the-line'' gaming GPU. LOL.

Nvidia should definitely price the 580 lower. I can't beleive serious gamers with multiple screens/high res set-up are still even looking at the 580 SLI after reading this thread. Not for the price they ask for. Not worth it.
 
LEVESQUE said:
So, the ''high-end'' 580 in SLI is not worth it to play true high-end gaming res? What a shocker.

So with this thread, we can now say that the true high-end multi-GPU set-up for high-end gaming (high res + high AA) is from AMD. :) So now the Nvidia flagship is more a ''middle-of-the-line'' gaming GPU. LOL.

Nvidia should definitely price the 580 lower. I can't beleive serious gamers with multiple screens/high res set-up are still even looking at the 580 SLI after reading this thread. Not for the price they ask for. Not worth it.
Click to expand...

+1.

At 'lower' (LOL) resolutions like 2560 x 1600, where VRAM doesn't matter, the 580's advantage shows itself in raw performance. We all know this so I won't link it, but in most general usage a single 580 about 10-15% faster. It's only once you factor in multi-GPU scaling, better scaling with resolution, and more VRAM that 6970 CF beats the living shit out of 580 SLI with a frying pan.

And I say all of this without considering the fact that a single/dual 6970 setup costs $150/300 less, has more VRAM, scales better in CrossFire, and supports 3D. But some people are either ignorant, have too much money to spend, or spend it in order to benefit from diminishing returns.
 
DeathsDeath said:
This modivated me to say screw you invidia and get a 6990 ... when them come out and as long as they are very stong and kick some butt! I love my 30 incher i dont have 3 of them but maybe i need to get 3 of them!!!! HAHAH ....
Click to expand...

I think it's better to get two 6950 instead. The 5970 was ignored by AMD for months when it came to drivers.
The two card setups will mesh better with their drivers. It's also easier to resell two cards for $250 than one for $500+. You also have the option to keep one and sell the other.
 
As an owner of a 6970, I'll say this. How many people are going to have graphics setups as extreme as Vega's? His cards are rendering 12mp!
99% of the time, the GTX580 is still going to be faster. Granted, its cost doesn't make up for the performance difference, but looking at Vega's results then proclaiming the GTX580 as vanquished is a bit premature.
All that said, I'll still keep my 6970 for triple monitor support off a single screen! BF:BC2 has never been so fun....too bad nobody plays it online anymore lol.
 
Awesome setup Vega, thanks for this great thread!
Maybe someday I'll be able to afford something similar.
I'll call you as a consultant. :)
 
Some of these numbers have been bothering as benchmarking in portrait mode is flaky at best. I am going to re-do all of the benchmarks and include landscape mode to eliminate the dx9 AFR portrait bug. Maybe toss in a few extra games too.
 
Vega said:
Some of these numbers have been bothering as benchmarking in portrait mode is flaky at best. I am going to re-do all of the benchmarks and include landscape mode to eliminate the dx9 AFR portrait bug. Maybe toss in a few extra games too.
Click to expand...

that would be telling if your willing. but to the naysayers of the 580GTX (and I am no fan of it at its current price) yes the 6970 is likely to stomp the 580GTX at 12mp, I doubt it would do so at 9 or less.
 
Vega, since no review sites have done 5760 x 1200 benches yet for 580 SLI and 6970 CF, I'd really appreciate it if you could toss in a few benchmarks at that resolution. I've been dying to see a side-by-side comparison of the two, and it will be interesting to see how they stack up at a more common multi-monitor resolution.

QFT, I predict that at 76 x 16 the final outcome will be the same, with the 6970s having a smaller 10-20% advantage. At 57 x 12, they will be roughly even, with the 6970s having a slight advantage of at most 10%.
 
Great thread! Finally! Have been looking for this info.

The 2GB seem to help like I was thinking for Real high rez...

My 3 monitors seem so small now though... ;)

Y.
 
XacTactX said:
Vega, since no review sites have done 5760 x 1200 benches yet for 580 SLI and 6970 CF, I'd really appreciate it if you could toss in a few benchmarks at that resolution. I've been dying to see a side-by-side comparison of the two, and it will be interesting to see how they stack up at a more common multi-monitor resolution.

QFT, I predict that at 76 x 16 the final outcome will be the same, with the 6970s having a smaller 10-20% advantage. At 57 x 12, they will be roughly even, with the 6970s having a slight advantage of at most 10%.
Click to expand...

Any particular game at that resolution? I plan on doing: Heaven 2.1, Metro 2033, DCS:A-10C, Rise of Flight, MS FSX, Eve, AvP, Hawx 2, BF:BC2, WoW, Left 4 Dead 2, Batman, Age of Conan. I think that coves a wide base. And all with 2x AA as I don't think I'd every run anything with no AA. If the 580 crashes with 2x AA I will post 0x AA numbers.
 
XacTactX said:
Vega, since no review sites have done 5760 x 1200 benches yet for 580 SLI and 6970 CF, I'd really appreciate it if you could toss in a few benchmarks at that resolution. I've been dying to see a side-by-side comparison of the two, and it will be interesting to see how they stack up at a more common multi-monitor resolution.

QFT, I predict that at 76 x 16 the final outcome will be the same, with the 6970s having a smaller 10-20% advantage. At 57 x 12, they will be roughly even, with the 6970s having a slight advantage of at most 10%.
Click to expand...

I am actually predicting something different. I am thinking that a 12mb the 580GTX will hit a vram limit and that will let you raise the settings quite a bit on the 6970. (I am thinking that in regular landscape mod at 12mp the 6970 will hand the 580 their ass in an H style review) in other words I am thinking that while the 6900 do scale better at higher res it will not end up being a difference in horsepower (I think the 580GTX will still have that there) but in the vram.

then maybe the difference lessening or disappearing at 9mp and so on.

if the OP is willing I would love to see how that turns out. :D

edit, of course the true proof of this will be a 3gb 580GTX. I would LOVE to see what a pair of those would do. and I would imagine that Vega will will probably get those if they become available
 
Last edited:
Vega said:
Any particular game at that resolution? I plan on doing: Heaven 2.1, Metro 2033, DCS:A-10C, Rise of Flight, MS FSX, Eve, AvP, Hawx 2, BF:BC2, WoW, Left 4 Dead 2, Batman, Age of Conan. I think that coves a wide base. And all with 2x AA as I don't think I'd every run anything with no AA. If the 580 crashes with 2x AA I will post 0x AA numbers.
Click to expand...

That is a great assortment of games, plenty for my number-gleaning eyes. Again, thanks for rising to the occasion, seeing as you're one of the few who even has the option of doing this.

Valset said:
I am actually predicting something different. I am thinking that a 12mb the 580GTX will hit a vram limit and that will let you raise the settings quite a bit on the 6970. (I am thinking that in regular landscape mod at 12mp the 6970 will hand the 580 their ass in an H style review) in other words I am thinking that while the 6900 do scale better at higher res it will not end up being a difference in horsepower (I think the 580GTX will still have that there) but in the vram.

then maybe the difference lessening or disappearing at 9mp and so on.

if the OP is willing I would love to see how that turns out. :D
Click to expand...

QFT. We'll make it a gentleman's bet then. :)
 
XacTactX said:
That is a great assortment of games, plenty for my number-gleaning eyes. Again, thanks for rising to the occasion, seeing as you're one of the few who even has the option of doing this.

QFT. We'll make it a gentleman's bet then. :)
Click to expand...

Nice!! I'm gonna say that I think XacTactX is going to come out right here. Vram above 1.5GB doesn't seen to be a factor until above 5760x1200 in 95% of games currently available also most of those games in the list mentioned by op are not in that 5%. It'll be nice to see thanks for being willing to do it Vega. I'll be gaming @ 5760x1080 so I'd imagine the difference will be easier to extrapolate from 5760x1200 numbers say 1-2% at the most.
 
Bad ConNecTioN said:
As an owner of a 6970, I'll say this. How many people are going to have graphics setups as extreme as Vega's? His cards are rendering 12mp!
99% of the time, the GTX580 is still going to be faster. Granted, its cost doesn't make up for the performance difference, but looking at Vega's results then proclaiming the GTX580 as vanquished is a bit premature.
All that said, I'll still keep my 6970 for triple monitor support off a single screen! BF:BC2 has never been so fun....too bad nobody plays it online anymore lol.
Click to expand...

/agree... but the last sentence... I never have any problem finding tons of full/near-full servers any time of the day on BFBC2. :confused:
 
Vega which active display ports adapters are you using? going to be going the same route as you as my 3x20's just aren't cutting it anymore, and going to try and locate a 3rd 3007 wfp-hc
 
Vega said:
Any particular game at that resolution? I plan on doing: Heaven 2.1, Metro 2033, DCS:A-10C, Rise of Flight, MS FSX, Eve, AvP, Hawx 2, BF:BC2, WoW, Left 4 Dead 2, Batman, Age of Conan. I think that coves a wide base. And all with 2x AA as I don't think I'd every run anything with no AA. If the 580 crashes with 2x AA I will post 0x AA numbers.
Click to expand...

Also if you got a bit of time if you could try to run 4xAA as there was very little performance hit by running 2x maybe we can get away with 4x in most games.

Because from 0 to 2 and 2 to 4 there is a significant difference in image quality imo and it would be interesting to see if the 2gb VRAM is enough to pull 4x and if the 580 can manage it at all.
 
Lord_Exodia said:
Nice!! I'm gonna say that I think XacTactX is going to come out right here. Vram above 1.5GB doesn't seen to be a factor until above 5760x1200 in 95% of games currently available also most of those games in the list mentioned by op are not in that 5%. It'll be nice to see thanks for being willing to do it Vega. I'll be gaming @ 5760x1080 so I'd imagine the difference will be easier to extrapolate from 5760x1200 numbers say 1-2% at the most.
Click to expand...

Then again the 2Gb VRAM should enable you to run higher AA than the 1.5GB.

Until 8x AA I think it is a noticable difference in graphic quality 8x to 16x I don't notice much of a difference.

It's also interesting to see the 6970s do not take much of a performance hit from going up in AA levels so at 5760x1200 you could probably get away with playable frames at a much higher AA level.
 
xAlex79 said:
Then again the 2Gb VRAM should enable you to run higher AA than the 1.5GB.

Until 8x AA I think it is a noticable difference in graphic quality 8x to 16x I don't notice much of a difference.

It's also interesting to see the 6970s do not take much of a performance hit from going up in AA levels so at 5760x1200 you could probably get away with playable frames at a much higher AA level.
Click to expand...

Interesting... even at 5040x1050, I dont see any difference in AA level at all really. Even going from like none to like 16. But of course this is very much a personal thing.
 
LEVESQUE said:
So, the ''high-end'' 580 in SLI is not worth it to play true high-end gaming res? What a shocker.

So with this thread, we can now say that the true high-end multi-GPU set-up for high-end gaming (high res + high AA) is from AMD. :) So now the Nvidia flagship is more a ''middle-of-the-line'' gaming GPU. LOL.

Nvidia should definitely price the 580 lower. I can't beleive serious gamers with multiple screens/high res set-up are still even looking at the 580 SLI after reading this thread. Not for the price they ask for. Not worth it.
Click to expand...

Wow... Thats a whole lot of impact from one set of testing in ONE thread! Vega did a great job, but to me, making enormously strong proclamations and deciding a multi-thousand dollar decision on one thread seems pretty extreme.

For me, since I am choosing to run 5040x1050 and the ~$100 difference per card doesnt matter, and I like 3D Vision a lot, the tri-sli 580s were a no brainer. If you want extremely high res *and* high AA, the ATIs are a no brainer thanks to the VRAM limit of the GTX.

Anything in between these two scenarios is *very* much up for debate in my mind.

Of course for anyone ready to buy stock in AMD after one thread, more power to you! Maybe Vega should be requesting commission from them! ;)
 
GoldenTiger said:
/agree... but the last sentence... I never have any problem finding tons of full/near-full servers any time of the day on BFBC2. :confused:
Click to expand...

Where are you located? Because I can't find a full conquest game to save my life...seriously, nothing but empty servers when using a north american filter. I wonder if I'm just not connecting to the masters server list or something...?
I love to hate this game...I dropped $200 on a sound card to bypass a bug with my realtek chipset just so I could play. I even got 3 monitors because this is the only game I have that supports it lol...yet I can't find anyone to play with :(
So sad right now.
 
All of the 580 benchmarks are done but I ran into ATI driver problems again. Big surprise there! Still working on getting the CF balancing issues resolved so I can finish the benchmarks.
 
Bad ConNecTioN said:
Where are you located? Because I can't find a full conquest game to save my life...seriously, nothing but empty servers when using a north american filter. I wonder if I'm just not connecting to the masters server list or something...?
I love to hate this game...I dropped $200 on a sound card to bypass a bug with my realtek chipset just so I could play. I even got 3 monitors because this is the only game I have that supports it lol...yet I can't find anyone to play with :(
So sad right now.
Click to expand...


check your filters. because i'm on right now and theres at least 6 servers full and another 10 with 28 or more players on 32 player servers.

you might have only show empty servers selected instead of dont show empty servers.

mlambert890 said:
Wow... Thats a whole lot of impact from one set of testing in ONE thread! Vega did a great job, but to me, making enormously strong proclamations and deciding a multi-thousand dollar decision on one thread seems pretty extreme.

For me, since I am choosing to run 5040x1050 and the ~$100 difference per card doesnt matter, and I like 3D Vision a lot, the tri-sli 580s were a no brainer. If you want extremely high res *and* high AA, the ATIs are a no brainer thanks to the VRAM limit of the GTX.

Anything in between these two scenarios is *very* much up for debate in my mind.

Of course for anyone ready to buy stock in AMD after one thread, more power to you! Maybe Vega should be requesting commission from them! ;)
Click to expand...

true, but quite frankly the only selling point the GTX 580's have for surround is 3D vision. AMD owns the performance to price crown again even though it doesn't beat the GTX 580 and fills in that "between those two scenario's" where as nvidia doesn't. now when prices go up on the HD6970 series this month that might change. especially since they are now losing money thanks to some one finding out the 6950's can be unlocked to 6970's. for the price AMD cant be beat and honestly while i think the 3D vision thing looks cool and all its not worth the 150 dollars more per card plus the cost for all the crap required to use it. obviously if you already own the cards then theres no reason to sell them if you like the 3D vision but i dont think its something the average person is going to drive to the store and buy just for the 3D vision. cost is far more important to the average person and if they can save money while getting the same performance or better performance they will sacrifice things like 3D vision for it.
 
Last edited:
Dam thats a nice setup, and nice numbers, not surprising that the 6970's pull ahead.



Bad ConNecTioN said:
Where are you located? Because I can't find a full conquest game to save my life...seriously, nothing but empty servers when using a north american filter. I wonder if I'm just not connecting to the masters server list or something...?
I love to hate this game...I dropped $200 on a sound card to bypass a bug with my realtek chipset just so I could play. I even got 3 monitors because this is the only game I have that supports it lol...yet I can't find anyone to play with :(
So sad right now.
Click to expand...

My server quite often when i had it on non vietnam had 10-30 players on it for conquest.....several other of the regular ones I go on are typically 20-32 players all the time.....i am located in the US(though i go by ping not location, yet most are still Dallas based servers or Atlanta based)
 
mlambert890 said:
Wow... Thats a whole lot of impact from one set of testing in ONE thread! Vega did a great job, but to me, making enormously strong proclamations and deciding a multi-thousand dollar decision on one thread seems pretty extreme.

For me, since I am choosing to run 5040x1050 and the ~$100 difference per card doesnt matter, and I like 3D Vision a lot, the tri-sli 580s were a no brainer. If you want extremely high res *and* high AA, the ATIs are a no brainer thanks to the VRAM limit of the GTX.

Anything in between these two scenarios is *very* much up for debate in my mind.

Of course for anyone ready to buy stock in AMD after one thread, more power to you! Maybe Vega should be requesting commission from them! ;)
Click to expand...

I can't speak for him but for me the 580GTX is simply priced beyond reason. and BTW the 580GTX is currently running 200 dollars more then a 570GTX. a hundred bucks I could handle, but its double that. sorry but Nvidia's own card makes it kinda suck.

having said that it does looking like for a 12mp setup that the 500 series is out of balance. more horsepower (I don't think anyone thinks the 6970 has more). now all nvidia needs to do is double up their ram and drop prices on the others and all will be good :D
 
The effects of Crossfire in DCS : A-10 might just be enough of the convincing I need to pick up a couple 6790's.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top