Vram Question On Tri-Sli 780 on 7680x1440 Resolutions?

K

King4x4

n00b
Joined
Jan 21, 2013
Messages
38
Lo [H]! Regular OCNer here (Can't browse [H] at work since Adsense blocks it :eek: but I am holiday so here I am!)

I am currently running a water cooled setup with the following specs:
[email protected]
16GB
3x680 4gb (Had a quad 7950 setup but was a crash galore on Eyefinity).
3xQnix@96hz.

I am currently gaming at 7680x1440 and I started benching my Vram use on the 680s and I only hit 3.4gb once or twice in a whole of gaming.

Forgeting Crysis 3 (Since it ain't playable at any resolution over 2560x1440 with full juice enabled) do you think that the 3GB vram on the 780 will be a hindrance?

Thinking of replacing the tri-680 4GB with tri-780s and just calling it a day :D

Or do suggest I wait? That 384-Bit interface is miiiiiighty fine! :cool:
 
so you already come close or exceed 3gb right now in current games and you want to spend 2000 bucks in gpus that only have 3gb? really?

keep what you have or get 3 Titans for your insane 7860x1440 resolution as that is what they were made for.
 
The Cost of one titan = Cost of my Screen Setup.

Ain't touching the Titan since the price vs performance is just not even good.
 
King4x4 said:
The Cost of one titan = Cost of my Screen Setup.

Ain't touching the Titan since the price vs performance is just not even good.
Click to expand...
well you chose to play at 7680x1440 so that is about your only upgrade option at the moment.
 
King4x4 said:
The Cost of one titan = Cost of my Screen Setup.

Ain't touching the Titan since the price vs performance is just not even good.
Click to expand...

Firstly, kudos for playing @nearly 8K res, must be awesome when it runs well!!! Now that you have the choice, why not wait a bit longer, 6GB 780s :rolleyes::rolleyes:are the natural progression and 'could' be out in a few months, or just wait for, wat is it, Maxwell??...however, NV might decide, if u want a 6GB card, get a Titan, which is what I've been seeing reported...Problem for you is the here and now, I feel your pain:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes: what to do? Why not try AMDs vidcards? I hear great things :D:eek::eek:about Crossfire and tri-fire, AND you will have 3GB @much cheaper?????? I'm not being sarcastic, some people swear by their AMD MGPU setups..
1 other option, that may help your fb issue is to sell the 2GB 680's and buy 4GB 680's, though this option lacks any excitement factor, though you could get something that overclocks really well, make up 15% performance, would be closer to a stock 780...doesn't sound a very fun option to me but then I don't like overclocking vidcards..


PS - TBH, I would suggest 2 Titans, which would probably be enough but since you have already ruled that out, you may have to wait and see what comes 'down the pipe'...gl!!!
 
Last edited:
ivansoze1 said:
1 other option, that may help your fb issue is to sell the 2GB 680's and buy 4GB 680's, though this option lacks any excitement factor, though you could get something that overclocks really well, make up 15% performance, would be closer to a stock 780...doesn't sound a very fun option to me but then I don't like overclocking vidcards..
Click to expand...

he already stated that he have 3x680s 4GB.... so no point on go with a 7970 3GB card...
 
Well lets just say I had a quadfire 7950 setup (Which gave me about 25%-30% more juice then the 680s when they were OCed) but gave it up after nearly pulling my hair out since I am troubleshooting more then gaming.

Also my 680s are 4GB variants and got them on steal deal ($430 each when they were a premium at $570? Yes please!).

As for the 780 6gb according to EVGA rep they aren't any in the pipeline.... Might wait a month or two then check it up.
 
King4x4 said:
Well lets just say I had a quadfire 7950 setup (Which gave me about 25%-30% more juice then the 680s when they were OCed) but gave it up after nearly pulling my hair out since I am troubleshooting more then gaming.

Also my 680s are 4GB variants and got them on steal deal ($430 each when they were a premium at $570? Yes please!).

As for the 780 6gb according to EVGA rep they aren't any in the pipeline.... Might wait a month or two then check it up.
Click to expand...

NVIDIA said many times that will not be any 6GB 780 model maybe to keep certain distance over the GTX TITAN... so I really don't know if really the wait will worth on that matter..
 
Araxie said:
NVIDIA said many times that will not be any 6GB 780 model maybe to keep certain distance over the GTX TITAN... so I really don't know if really the wait will worth on that matter..
Click to expand...

So is Nvidia barring the board partners from doing 6gb cards? If so that pretty lame.
 
Araxie said:
NVIDIA said many times that will not be any 6GB 780 model maybe to keep certain distance over the GTX TITAN... so I really don't know if really the wait will worth on that matter..
Click to expand...

Link? I've only seen an evga rep say he wasn't aware of evga having immediate plans for one, nothing else.
 
Anyone else LOL-ing at the fact that this kid has 3 680 4gb's (easily $1500 worth), 3x1440p monitors (at least $1000), 16gb of RAM (surprised he doesn't have 32gb) and is calling the TITAN too expensive?

troll?
 
GoldenTiger said:
Link? I've only seen an evga rep say he wasn't aware of evga having immediate plans for one, nothing else.
Click to expand...
Yeah. I would probably wait a month to see if there's any updates on a possible 6gb 780. Otherwise, 3gb 780's should be fine.. for now.
Phishy714 said:
Anyone else LOL-ing at the fact that this kid has 3 680 4gb's (easily $1500 worth), 3x1440p monitors (at least $1000), 16gb of RAM (surprised he doesn't have 32gb) and is calling the TITAN too expensive?

troll?
Click to expand...

Nothing funny about it. It's his money. He can decide on what's too expensive and what is the best deal for him.
 
i highly doubt that the 780's will have 6gb of ram. if that were the case then the 780 classified would have it. Since its coming with 3gb thats a very good indication that nvidia wont let board partners compete with titan.


your gaming at big boy resolution's. you will need big boy cards like the titan and its 6gb vram.
 
King4x4 said:
The Cost of one titan = Cost of my Screen Setup.

Ain't touching the Titan since the price vs performance is just not even good.
Click to expand...

Your monitor setup is EXACTLY the reason they built the Titan. You are the perfect customer for that.
I find it funny that you don't see the value in these cards at your resolution.
It's silly to get a titan for 1080p screens, but 3 1440p screen are the ideal candidate for 2 or 3 Titans.

Save your money. Don't bother with the 780s. You will run out of frame buffer fairly quickly with only 3GB.
That kind of pixel count really needs the larger amount of RAM.
 
If you want an "affordable" solution with an adequate amount of VRAM, your only option is to wait, possibly as long as the 800 series.

nVidia has positioned Titan where it's the only viable solution in certain cases, and you fall right into that situation. If they came out with a 780 with 6GB or even 5GB of ram, there would be no reason for a gamer to splurge on Titan.
 
RamonGTP said:
If you want an "affordable" solution with an adequate amount of VRAM, your only option is to wait, possibly as long as the 800 series.

nVidia has positioned Titan where it's the only viable solution in certain cases, and you fall right into that situation. If they came out with a 780 with 6GB or even 5GB of ram, there would be no reason for a gamer to splurge on Titan.
Click to expand...

This is silliness. The Titan's faster, but it wasn't a 'gamer's' card from the beginning (though many took it as that). It's ridiculous price stems from it's value compared to a Tesla card, not a 680GTX. Nvidia pulled the same crap with the 690GTX by limiting it to 2GB per GPU.

The 780GTX is the obvious 'gamer's' card, yet it's still a little ridiculous by most standards; and hell, if AMD could get out of their own way with Crossfire drivers, HD7970 6GB cards would mop the floor, as the GK100/110 series was the GPU that they were designed to compete with.

Sadly, with AMD's Crossfire still a mess and Nvidia refusing to allow VRAM to be topped off on some of their GPUs, everyone above that's telling you to either go Titan or wait is right. And for the money, there's nothing better for your setup than 4GB 680GTXs (except maybe 4GB 670GTXs).
 
IdiotInCharge said:
This is silliness. The Titan's faster, but it wasn't a 'gamer's' card from the beginning (though many took it as that). It's ridiculous price stems from it's value compared to a Tesla card, not a 680GTX. Nvidia pulled the same crap with the 690GTX by limiting it to 2GB per GPU.

The 780GTX is the obvious 'gamer's' card, yet it's still a little ridiculous by most standards; and hell, if AMD could get out of their own way with Crossfire drivers, HD7970 6GB cards would mop the floor, as the GK100/110 series was the GPU that they were designed to compete with.

Sadly, with AMD's Crossfire still a mess and Nvidia refusing to allow VRAM to be topped off on some of their GPUs, everyone above that's telling you to either go Titan or wait is right. And for the money, there's nothing better for your setup than 4GB 680GTXs (except maybe 4GB 670GTXs).
Click to expand...

I think you completely misunderstood what I was saying.

Titan has 6GB of VRAM, no other card comes close. For ridiculous resolutions, you need VRAM, TITAN has it

The next closest are the 4GB 680's. Problem here is 4GB is not 6GB and even if 4GB is enough, it has nowhere near the bandwidth of Titan, which is every bit as crucial as VRAM itself at these resolutions. Enter the 780, which has plenty of bandwidth, but less VRAM than a 680.
 
RamonGTP said:
I think you completely misunderstood what I was saying.

Titan has 6GB of VRAM, no other card comes close. For ridiculous resolutions, you need VRAM, TITAN has it

The next closest are the 4GB 680's. Problem here is 4GB is not 6GB and even if 4GB is enough, it has nowhere near the bandwidth of Titan, which is every bit as crucial as VRAM itself at these resolutions. Enter the 780, which has plenty of bandwidth, but less VRAM than a 680.
Click to expand...

No, I got it- but I was mostly ragging on Nvidia. Also, I don't think bandwidth has as much to do with it- you need fillrate, which means SP's and clockspeeds. The bandwidth just has to be there to match it; the 680GTX/GK104/half-Kepler just doesn't have the fillrate. If you could overclock it's GPU and RAM 50% together, you'd be in 780GTX/Titan range.
 
Well hopefully once they've milked everyone who's willing/able to pay for their cards, they'll introduce another "8800GT"
 
RamonGTP said:
Well hopefully once they've milked everyone who's willing/able to pay for their cards, they'll introduce another "8800GT"
Click to expand...

That would be nice; though the fact that they left the GTX690 at 4GB/2GB per GPU is a negative omen. I'm still surprised that they didn't upgrade that card.
 
Your in a rough spot. Only other thing I can think of is the sapphire 7970 6gb cards, but not really an options since you have 3x 4gb 680s already
 
IdiotInCharge said:
This is silliness. The Titan's faster, but it wasn't a 'gamer's' card from the beginning (though many took it as that). It's ridiculous price stems from it's value compared to a Tesla card, not a 680GTX. Nvidia pulled the same crap with the 690GTX by limiting it to 2GB per GPU.
Click to expand...

Of course the Titan is a gamer's card. That's what it does. renders game graphics.
It is not a "Value" compared to the tesla cards. Tesla's don't do games.
Despite being based on the same core (newsflash: all workstation cards from nvidia use that generation's core, except the 6 series).
The Titan was specifically built to be the Ultimate single GPU card. Plain and simple. It was built with setup's like the OP's, where the extra power is needed, and the extra VRAM is needed.
Super high resolution gaming is exactly what the Titan was always for. It's not the average gamer's card, but it most certainly is for gamer's.
 
S[H]ady;1039916700 said:
Of course the Titan is a gamer's card. That's what it does. renders game graphics.
It is not a "Value" compared to the tesla cards. Tesla's don't do games.
Despite being based on the same core (newsflash: all workstation cards from nvidia use that generation's core, except the 6 series).
The Titan was specifically built to be the Ultimate single GPU card. Plain and simple. It was built with setup's like the OP's, where the extra power is needed, and the extra VRAM is needed.
Super high resolution gaming is exactly what the Titan was always for. It's not the average gamer's card, but it most certainly is for gamer's.
Click to expand...

Actually, nVidia has specifically said it was positioned price-wise because it can function as a "starter Tesla" card for compute. That is not gaming. It does do well at gaming too, but that's not why the price is so much higher than the 780's, nor is the VRAM amount.
 
GoldenTiger said:
Actually, nVidia has specifically said it was positioned price-wise because it can function as a "starter Tesla" card for compute. That is not gaming. It does do well at gaming too, but that's not why the price is so much higher than the 780's, nor is the VRAM amount.
Click to expand...

Yup- some people :D.
 
GoldenTiger said:
Actually, nVidia has specifically said it was positioned price-wise because it can function as a "starter Tesla" card for compute. That is not gaming. It does do well at gaming too, but that's not why the price is so much higher than the 780's, nor is the VRAM amount.
Click to expand...

Here's what their marketing says.

SUPERCOMPUTER TECHNOLOGY.
REVOLUTIONARY GAMING.

The technology that powers the world's fastest
supercomputer is now redefining the PC
gaming experience.

Introducing GeForce® GTX TITAN.
Bring the powerful NVIDIA® Kepler™
architecture technology that drives
the Oak Ridge National Laboratory's
Titan supercomputer to your
next gaming experience.

I also just finished reading the press release about the card directly from nVidia.
Not a single mention of it being a "starter tesla", but quite a few mentions about it being a gaming card.

http://nvidianews.nvidia.com/Releases/NVIDIA-Introduces-GeForce-GTX-TITAN-DNA-of-the-World-s-Fastest-Supercomputer-Powered-by-World-s-Fa-925.aspx


I've never seen any of these so called references to compute or it being a budget tesla outside of this forum.
Do you have any links to back up your claim. I'm not trying to be an ass, I'm actually curious if this is true.


The price is high because it is using the core that comes from a Tesla based card.
It's not an entry Tesla, its a gaming card with the power of Tesla. It really doesn't matter what people use them for, nVidia markets them as gaming cards.
 
So you read the marketing and you bought it, and now you're confessing?

I'm not trying to make fun of you (though I wish you'd stop trying to so hard), but we're talking about these cards in absolute sense, grounded in what they actually are and what they can actually do.

Now, that means a lot of things for a lot of people, and we know it's easy to get confused, but just understand that Nvidia made the Titan primarily because they could. They opened up their newest GPU-Compute mojo to the masses, and likely sold nearly every card they made.

And yes, just like their previous full-fat cards, like the GTX580 and GTX280, the Titan just so happens to be very good at gaming. Though, if we wanted to, we could run an exercise to prove that if GK104 were scaled up to the same transistor envelope of GK110 while keeping it's lean architecture that's been pruned of the GPGPU goodies, we'd find out that this hypothetical 'super-sized' consumer Kepler would outperform the Titan in pure gaming tasks, while being mindbogglingly useless for any real compute work.
 
Posting from a phone so bear with me.

The titan is all dandy but I all ready have the juice of two titans (Benchmarks showing 2xTiTanz =~ 3x680) This might increase with the higher resolutions over 1440.

So to get any Significant increase in performance I need to plug in a third titan which literally increases the cost significantly.

Hence comes the 780 into play. Same oomph as the titan with a much lower price point thus opening the door as an upgrade with only a con of 3gb vram.

I don't care about AA since at 27in and 1440p the pixel density is so sweet you don't need it.

1427165





Phishy714 said:
Anyone else LOL-ing at the fact that this kid has 3 680 4gb's (easily $1500 worth), 3x1440p monitors (at least $1000), 16gb of RAM (surprised he doesn't have 32gb) and is calling the TITAN too expensive?

troll?
Click to expand...

Its called Smart Gaming Enthusiasts.

Why take a 3930k when 3770k has higher IPC and when running 4.9ghz it's an equivalent to a 5.4ghz 3930k when the game only uses 4 cores?

Why buy a 32gb worth of Corsair Domimator Ram for $500 when $100 worth of Samsung Wonder Ram clocked at 2133mhz is doing mighty fine?

Why Buy Three Samsung S27B970D for $4200 (Shipping costs $600) when I can have three Qnixs for $930?

Actually the three 680s costed me $1300 giving me the same performance as two titans worth $2000 and the only other upgrade at the time was three titans at $3000.

And for the kiddo remark... Lets just say a 28 year old engineer who still loves the Danger Den cases when he was drooling over them when he was a kid and didn't have the cash to make one.... low and behold My Hydra (G.I. Joe reference lol):

gagaquqa.jpg


yryqujus.jpg


With Four 7950s:
LL


Three 680 4gb with a 690 that failed at 1440p surround:
900x900px-LL-af04256f_e3a6u4ug.jpeg


How to cool them while I waited for Waterblocks:
900x900px-LL-df5f76e7_zunyvusy.jpeg


End Result:
LL


When I buy something I make sure I invest my moneys worth in it and when I sell it I sell it a minimum loss.

All of my cards that I bought I sold at %10 loss... Not likely with a titan... %30 loss is a minimum and in 1 years time it will be worth less while the 680s will be still relevant.
 
Last edited:
You need 4 Titans at that resolution if you want to play recent titles with no AA.
 
No I don't think so.... Cause I am playing BF3 with very decent graphics (no AA) on three 680s.... So please cut it with the sarcasm)
 
King4x4 said:
All of my cards that I bought I sold at %10 loss... Not likely with a titan... %30 loss is a minimum and in 1 years time it will be worth less while the 680s will be still relevant.
Click to expand...

You had me with your post until this statement. 30% loss I could see...which is still within my "investment" parameters (for this hobby) - but I'm not sure why you bring the 680s in here as far as relevancy versus the Titan? If anything, the Titan will be FAR more relevant than 680s in one years time. For all we know, it could still be the top card in one year (with replacement imminent or just happening)...who knows with Maxwell.

fomoz said:
You need 4 Titans at that resolution if you want to play recent titles with no AA.
Click to expand...

Damn dude! You did it! How are those 4 Titans runnin' for ya? I had to stop at tri-SLI for this gen. 4-way was way too problematic for me. How's the scaling? Is the 4th card worth it?? Maybe I'll build a Haswell box and get a 4th card. :)
 
King4x4 said:
No I don't think so.... Cause I am playing BF3 with very decent graphics (no AA) on three 680s.... So please cut it with the sarcasm)
Click to expand...

It wasn't sarcasm. I finished Tomb Raider maxed out with FXAA. It ran at 60 fps most of the time, dipping to ~50 fps in certain areas.

BF3 maxed out? What fps? I'm not talking about medium settings here.

Then again, why would you listen to someone who's running this setup.

sk3tch said:
Damn dude! You did it! How are those 4 Titans runnin' for ya? I had to stop at tri-SLI for this gen. 4-way was way too problematic for me. How's the scaling? Is the 4th card worth it?? Maybe I'll build a Haswell box and get a 4th card. :)
Click to expand...

It's perfect. I love it!
 
Well now I am posting my PC I feel ashamed!

That was posted from my mobile phone. My sincere apologies! :eek:

Whats the Vram usage with the following games if you don't mind:

1.BF3
2. Tomb Raider
3. Crysis
4. Metro LL

Thats the only consideration from going Tri-780s.

Cause from experiance with the AMD 7950s Even if I hit 3gb on the Vram I don't get any frame drops while on the 690 I go into a stutter-fest.
 
I game at 7680x1600. I've used 3x 4GB gtx 670 and now have three Titans.

DO NOT BUY CARDS WITH 3GB FOR THIS RESOLUTION. Literally the dumbest thing you could possibly do, nothing is worse than dropping a lot of cash on GPUs and getting poor performance from maxing your vram.
 
S[H]ady;1039917224 said:
Here's what their marketing says.

SUPERCOMPUTER TECHNOLOGY.
REVOLUTIONARY GAMING.

The technology that powers the world's fastest
supercomputer is now redefining the PC
gaming experience.

Introducing GeForce® GTX TITAN.
Bring the powerful NVIDIA® Kepler™
architecture technology that drives
the Oak Ridge National Laboratory's
Titan supercomputer to your
next gaming experience.

I also just finished reading the press release about the card directly from nVidia.
Not a single mention of it being a "starter tesla", but quite a few mentions about it being a gaming card.

http://nvidianews.nvidia.com/Releases/NVIDIA-Introduces-GeForce-GTX-TITAN-DNA-of-the-World-s-Fastest-Supercomputer-Powered-by-World-s-Fa-925.aspx


I've never seen any of these so called references to compute or it being a budget tesla outside of this forum.
Do you have any links to back up your claim. I'm not trying to be an ass, I'm actually curious if this is true.


The price is high because it is using the core that comes from a Tesla based card.
It's not an entry Tesla, its a gaming card with the power of Tesla. It really doesn't matter what people use them for, nVidia markets them as gaming cards.
Click to expand...

The GK110 was a compute card. Read here

http://www.nvidia.com/content/PDF/kepler/NVIDIA-Kepler-GK110-Architecture-Whitepaper.pdf

If you read the review here Kyle even says it, that the Gk110 was never designed to be a consumer card. Nvidia made it into gaming card all the same for whatever reason. That card is called the Titan, and with a flick of switch in the control panel it turns into a Tesla card.
 
IdiotInCharge said:
This is silliness. The Titan's faster, but it wasn't a 'gamer's' card from the beginning (though many took it as that). It's ridiculous price stems from it's value compared to a Tesla card, not a 680GTX. Nvidia pulled the same crap with the 690GTX by limiting it to 2GB per GPU.

The 780GTX is the obvious 'gamer's' card, yet it's still a little ridiculous by most standards; and hell, if AMD could get out of their own way with Crossfire drivers, HD7970 6GB cards would mop the floor, as the GK100/110 series was the GPU that they were designed to compete with.

Sadly, with AMD's Crossfire still a mess and Nvidia refusing to allow VRAM to be topped off on some of their GPUs, everyone above that's telling you to either go Titan or wait is right. And for the money, there's nothing better for your setup than 4GB 680GTXs (except maybe 4GB 670GTXs).
Click to expand...

Tell that to nvidia. As per an nvidia reps post on the evga forums, titan is now the flagship gaming line. GTX is their "budget" middle of the road line. IMO someone over there has completely lost site of their demographic .
 
reaper12 said:
If you read the review here Kyle even says it, that the Gk110 was never designed to be a consumer card. Nvidia made it into gaming card all the same for whatever reason. That card is called the Titan, and with a flick of switch in the control panel it turns into a Tesla card.
Click to expand...

The only "reason" Nvidia made this into a "gamer's card" was because they had a TON of GK110 dies that did meet the minium (I believe 90-92% IIRC) yield quality..So they decided that while they could sell them as beastly Compute cards for those of use that it, they could also pull a marketing coup by announcing the fastest "Gaming Card" in the world thanks to a simple switch in the Driver Panel which turns off the DP mode (aka Work Station Card mode)...

It was a brilliant idea, since those cores were just stacking up and costing them millions of dollars, so why not sell them off and make some money on them? I know I would have if I had been in their position..Even the most rabid fan-boy from either camp would jump at the chance to have TITAN level performance for $500 if such a card where to come to market. The simple fact that Nvidia sold a ton of TITAN and 780 cards prove that point...
 
I run 7680x1600 on 2x7970's, I've yet to hit a VRAM bottleneck, but that may be because I'm running out of horse power before it becomes an issue. On BF3, I run a mix of settings, with no AA, and no AO with textures maxed. I get anywhere from 50 to 120 FPS depending on the map. I average ~80 most of the time and it's playable.
 
suiken_2mieu said:
I run 7680x1600 on 2x7970's, I've yet to hit a VRAM bottleneck, but that may be because I'm running out of horse power before it becomes an issue. On BF3, I run a mix of settings, with no AA, and no AO with textures maxed. I get anywhere from 50 to 120 FPS depending on the map. I average ~80 most of the time and it's playable.
Click to expand...

You'll have to use a game that actually has textures to hit that VRAM limit- BF3 is a counter-example. If you actually ran out of VRAM, you'd be in the same bucket as anyone else that runs out of RAM. It'd be unplayable.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top