Best GFX Card for SINGLE 2560x1600 Display

J

johnnysd

Limp Gawd
Joined
Oct 6, 2007
Messages
255
Hi all

I am going to build a new PC and it will have a 30" 2560x1600 display. Used primarily for gaming. I will never go multi-monitor.

What is the best current video card to use for that display? Will be 3570 Ivy Bridge System.

What would be the low end of what could comfortably play games at that resolution.

I did a search but never really saw and answer. All the other discussions starting talking multiple displays and that is not what I want.
 
either a 7950 or 660Ti would be plenty, imo.

Even the 7850/7870 would be plenty fast.
 
Honestly depends on the games you will be playing and at what settings and what you deem acceptable frame rates.

I would be more specific honestly - do you want frames over 30fps or you want them pegged at 60fps? Are you playing mostly BF3 or something like WoW? Would you like to increase the settings to the max in these games?

Honestly, what I would deem "acceptable" at that resolution would require no less than a 670, but mostly around a highly overclocked 680 or dual gpu's.
 
570? LOL! Crysis 2 will drag down even an overclocked 680 with the dx11 + texture pack @ 2560x1600 and an [email protected] -- so it depends on what games OP wants to play. 1920x1080 is only 50.6% of 2560x1600! 2560 is a metric ton of pixels to push natively. Use 1920x1200 if the frame rate drops too much. I wouldn't touch less than 7970/7950/670 at that resolution.
 
xorbe said:
570? LOL! Crysis 2 will drag down even an overclocked 680 with the dx11 + texture pack @ 2560x1600 and an [email protected] -- so it depends on what games OP wants to play. 1920x1080 is only 50.6% of 2560x1600! 2560 is a metric ton of pixels to push natively. Use 1920x1200 if the frame rate drops too much. I wouldn't touch less than 7970/7950/670 at that resolution.
Click to expand...

Downscaling is butt ugly- I tried it with DA2 on a GTX570 (1280MB) at 1200p on a 2560x1600 panel that just couldn't cut it with the official texture pack. Just turned down settings instead.

That being said, I ran an HD4870 1GB for a week inbetween cards, and with lowered settings I was surprised that it could handle 2560x1600 as well as it did with lower settings. Not BF3 mind you (wasn't out), but BF:BC2 did great.

You don't need a beast of a card for a 30", but you will have to be picky about settings.
 
Your best bet would be a 7950 with a hefty overclock. A 660 Ti will just choke at that resolution, especially with AA. That and you do not want to downscale - 2560x1600 is absolutely gorgeous and you should enjoy the monitor in full splendor.
 
With the newest prices, I'd snag either the 7950 or 7970 if you have the funds and the luck or running into another $320 deal.
 
Not going to go tit-for-tat with the fanboi mess, just calling it as it is. He implied that the 660 Ti would be useless at 2560x1600, which is far from the case; hell, trying to put any real AA on in any current intensive game at 2560x1600 with any single GPU will drop you below the 60FPS minimum mark.

The question still not answered revolves around what the OP wants to use the card for; without that information, there really isn't a good recommendation.
 
IdiotInCharge said:
Not going to go tit-for-tat with the fanboi mess, just calling it as it is. He implied that the 660 Ti would be useless at 2560x1600, which is far from the case; hell, trying to put any real AA on in any current intensive game at 2560x1600 with any single GPU will drop you below the 60FPS minimum mark.

The question still not answered revolves around what the OP wants to use the card for; without that information, there really isn't a good recommendation.
Click to expand...
I play at 2560x1600, do you? Maybe you should read up: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/geforce-gtx-660-ti-memory-bandwidth-anti-aliasing,3283-13.html

Also, implying that any card that doesn't get 60FPS makes it useless is ridiculous; try to avoid hypocrisy if you want to be taken seriously.
 
Mr. K6 said:
I play at 2560x1600, do you? Maybe you should read up: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/geforce-gtx-660-ti-memory-bandwidth-anti-aliasing,3283-13.html

Also, implying that any card that doesn't get 60FPS makes it useless is ridiculous; try to avoid hypocrisy if you want to be taken seriously.
Click to expand...

Please stop ignoring the elephant in the room; until we know the needs of the OP, any recommendation is useless.

Coming in screaming 'there's no better card than the HD7950!' or any card is seriously misguided. Screaming that it's better than 'that other card which is useless' is just as misguided. You made a blatantly 'fanboi' statement in the form of a recommendation, and my counter, other than pointing out the obvious, was to remind you that there is no 'perfect' card, which should be obvious.
 
If you want to generally max all games and have them stay above 60fps, you need two current gen high end cards.
 
IdiotInCharge said:
Please stop ignoring the elephant in the room; until we know the needs of the OP, any recommendation is useless.

Coming in screaming 'there's no better card than the HD7950!' or any card is seriously misguided. Screaming that it's better than 'that other card which is useless' is just as misguided. You made a blatantly 'fanboi' statement in the form of a recommendation, and my counter, other than pointing out the obvious, was to remind you that there is no 'perfect' card, which should be obvious.
Click to expand...
No one is screaming, that would be typing in all caps. Cut the hyperbole.

The OP never asked for a "perfect card." If you bothered to read the OP instead of coming in with an agenda to attack me, it clearly states:
johnnysd said:
Hi all

I am going to build a new PC and it will have a 30" 2560x1600 display. Used primarily for gaming. I will never go multi-monitor.

What is the best current video card to use for that display? Will be 3570 Ivy Bridge System.

What would be the low end of what could comfortably play games at that resolution.

I did a search but never really saw and answer. All the other discussions starting talking multiple displays and that is not what I want.
Click to expand...
The 7950 is the low end of what would comfortably play games at that resolution. I even backed up my recommendation with proof that shows a GTX 660Ti (and even the GTX 670) can lack the necessary power for games at that resolution. If you have something useful to add to the thread, then post, otherwise apologize for attacking me and derailing the OP's thread.
 
I didn't attack you- I called you on your BS. He said 'best' and 'low end'; essentially, he doesn't know what he wants, and without both an idea of what he wants to use the card for and a budget, you could list every card that can output to 2560x1600 all the way up to the GTX690 and still be both right and wrong.

The point is that the OP needs to clarify, and stupid crap like 'HD7950 or bust!' needs to find another forum (preferably one for AMD users only).
 
IdiotInCharge said:
I didn't attack you- I called you on your BS. He said 'best' and 'low end'; essentially, he doesn't know what he wants, and without both an idea of what he wants to use the card for and a budget, you could list every card that can output to 2560x1600 all the way up to the GTX690 and still be both right and wrong.

The point is that the OP needs to clarify, and stupid crap like 'HD7950 or bust!' needs to find another forum (preferably one for AMD users only).
Click to expand...
He more than knows what he wants, stop trying to put words into the OP's mouth in some lame attempt to deflect. No one else seems to have had difficulty making recommendations either. Nice try flamebaiting, I'll let the mods deal with that.
 
You realize that while attempting to address performance, you haven't addressed cooling and associated noise, and how those relate to the system in question?

You're missing too much and continue arguing without a peep from the OP, while screaming 'there is only one card!'. Bias called.
 
hi all lots of responses before I got home.

To clarify a little:

Games I would play would mostly be RPGs and MMOs so WOW, GW2, Rift, Skyrim, POE, Grim Dawn, etc...

Don't play much in the way of first person shooters so something like BF3 not much of a concern, though I do play the Borderlands games.

Noise is important I get really annoyed with very noisy cards.

So I would guess that I am not looking for a card in general to run the highest end titles at huge framerates, just want to play the games I like in 2560x1600 splendor at good to very good framerates.
 
Without a solid budget, it's hard to make a specific recommendation, particularly as prices are always in flux.

For low noise, either grab a custom cooled HD7870 2GB/7950 3GB, or a GTX660/660Ti 2GB, and don't overclock. If you plan on sticking mods on Skyrim you'll probably want the HD7950 3GB as people have reported the 2GB cards running low on VRAM (same with Oblivion).
 
You spent a 1000 plus on the monitor to use it right i say at least 7950 crossfire.
 
7970 and undervolt/overclock.


I'm sure I'm starting to sound like a broken record...
 
IdiotInCharge said:
Without a solid budget, it's hard to make a specific recommendation, particularly as prices are always in flux.

For low noise, either grab a custom cooled HD7870 2GB/7950 3GB, or a GTX660/660Ti 2GB, and don't overclock. If you plan on sticking mods on Skyrim you'll probably want the HD7950 3GB as people have reported the 2GB cards running low on VRAM (same with Oblivion).
Click to expand...

I play Skyrim on my 6950 2GB with quite a few mods at 2560x1440. Just don't go overboard. Currently I have few high texture mods installed and Skyrim is still smooth with most settings on high.

OP, it seems like you like the kind of games I like to play, and don't play much BF3. So our preferences are very similar. I only have 2560x1440, but my 6950 is plenty to run PoE, BL2, Skyrim, GW2 on high details. The most demanding out of that list is Skyrim.

The guys who are stating that a 660Ti isn't enough are wrong. I also agree fully with this guy who suggested a 7870 would be enough. After all that is faster than my 6950, and I don't have any problems. The really hardcore gpu guys think that we need to spend $400-$500 minimum to get a playable experience. They may be right for FPS games like BF3. However, RPG type games that don't need ultra fast twitch responses, 35fps is smooth.

Definitely get a card with a custom cooling solution though, as the default cooling can get noisy.

Decide for yourself if you must have every setting on high, or if you can life with turning one or two settings down to medium. That makes the $200 video cards playable at high resolutions.
 
xorbe said:
2560x1600 is about 2x1920x1080 ... can a 192-bit 660Ti really push that at 60+ fps?
Click to expand...

Read the whole post. I didn't claim 60+ fps. Don't take statements out of context.

But yes, I bet that a 660Ti would play PoE, GW2, BL2 with most all settings on high or all settings on high with 60+ fps.
Once again, read the whole post. If OP or gpu zealots aren't so anal about 60+ FPS with all settings on ultra high super de-duper, then yes, the 660Ti would be able to play 2560x1600 with either mostly high settings or a few settings on medium depending on the game.

Mind you that I don't have a 660Ti to test, but I've read enough reviews to know that it's faster than my 6950. I know that my 6950 plays these games on high settings. I know that I don't need 60+ fps to be playable in Skyrim. Read the whole post!

*edit*
Shit, the 660Ti can do 53fps in BF3 on high settings according to anand.
70fps in skyrim on ultra settings.
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/510?vs=647

yeah, I think that's playable
 
Last edited:
I'm using a single Gigabyte GTX 670 2GB overclocked and its running everything great at 2560x1600 at max details. The only game I've seen that won't reach 50-60fps is Metro 2033, but a 7970 won't either at 2560x1600 in that game. If an overclocked 7970 is a few fps faster at that resolution, its fine by me because all 50+ of my games are running V-sync capped at 50-60fps with max details and 4xAA enabled. Just something to think about if you prefer Nvidia driver support over AMD drivers support or prefer a cooler running card like I do.
 
Last edited:
I just had the same decision to make as you a couple weeks back. I was mostly looking at the HD 7950 and GTX 670.

I think for the value you can't beat the HD7950. It's dirt cheap now and you got the sleeping dogs promo going on. That extra VRAM will also help if you mod the crap out of Skyrim.

I went with a GTX 670 though. It plays all my games at max with all the eye candy enabled. 2GB of VRAM is enough for what I play and having PhysX is also nice.

I don't think you can go wrong with either card. Just depends on how much you are willing to spend.
 
if you want to play bf3 with 64 player server, you will need a high end videocard, i play at 1920x1200 at 30 to 60 fps, average 40, guildwars 2 in WVW, all max around 45 fps, i have a 3570k with 16 gig ddr3
 
Darkth said:
if you want to play bf3 with 64 player server, you will need a high end videocard, i play at 1920x1200 at 30 to 60 fps, average 40, guildwars 2 in WVW, all max around 45 fps, i have a 3570k with 16 gig ddr3
Click to expand...

really no interest in BF3 that would not be a gating item
 
LOL at the people recommending a 660ti. i really wouldn't get anything lower then a 680gtx at this rez.

i went from 580 sli to 1 580 and it sucked at that rez for settings i like. now im back with 2 680 classifieds.
 
LOL at people who don't understand that you don't need $1200 in video cards to get over 70fps in Skyrim at 2560x1600.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/6159/the-geforce-gtx-660-ti-review/14

http://www.hardocp.com/article/2012/09/13/asus_geforce_gtx_660_directcu_ii_video_card_review/7
Unlike all the other games, this game was playable at 2560x1600 on the GTX 660. We had to keep the MSAA low though, at 2X MSAA instead of 4X or 8X.
Click to expand...

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/2012/09/13/nvidia-geforce-gtx-660-2gb-review/8

Filter said:
LOL at the people recommending a 660ti.
Click to expand...

All you have is claims. show me proof. The proof is in the pudding. Read some reviews and quit trying to justify wasting so much money.
 
Last edited:
Love it when computer nerds fight.

I have a 30-in Dell with 2500K and (2) 3GB GTX-580's. Plays Skyrim and BF3 at 60+ FPS with native resolution and all the eye candy maxed out. Skyrim with the fan made texture packs will exceed 2 gigs of VRAM, most other games top out around 1.5 gigs.

If money is tight, I recommend starting with (1) GTX 670 or 680, then adding a second one if you think it is necessary. Have fun with your new toys!
 
IdiotInCharge said:
[/B][/I]Coming in screaming 'there's no better card than the HD7950!' or any card is seriously misguided. Screaming that it's better than 'that other card which is useless' is just as misguided. You made a blatantly 'fanboi' statement in the form of a recommendation, and my counter, other than pointing out the obvious, was to remind you that there is no 'perfect' card, which should be obvious.
Click to expand...

No, you made a trolling post which accused another poster of being a fanboy without cause. Making the validity of any of your points highly suspect. Your self-described "impartial, objective, fact-based" position is likely none of those. A 660Ti is complete crap at this resolution, and that is a fact.

OP again: Overclocked 7950 is the minimum I'd recommend. The BEST single card to use at this resolution is pretty much a toss up between 680 and 7970, nudged in AMD's favor when high AA is at play and when both cards are overclocked.
 
WetMacula said:
Love it when computer nerds fight.

I have a 30-in Dell with 2500K and (2) 3GB GTX-580's. Plays Skyrim and BF3 at 60+ FPS with native resolution and all the eye candy maxed out. Skyrim with the fan made texture packs will exceed 2 gigs of VRAM, most other games top out around 1.5 gigs.

If money is tight, I recommend starting with (1) GTX 670 or 680, then adding a second one if you think it is necessary. Have fun with your new toys!
Click to expand...

That's a little lopsided; if he's looking for something inexpensive, and especially quiet, his options have become a bit limited. Dual-GPUs really aren't in the cards as nice as they are, and as noted above in linked reviews the performance isn't really needed for RPGs. Extra VRAM is though- so the custom HD7950's with 3GB (or 660Ti's with 3GB/GTX670's with 4GB?) are about right on the money. More than enough performance for 4MP in RPGs and more than enough VRAM for mods.
 
I addressed the first paragraph in a PM, please keep it there.

wabbitseason said:
OP again: Overclocked 7950 is the minimum I'd recommend. The BEST single card to use at this resolution is pretty much a toss up between 680 and 7970, nudged in AMD's favor when high AA is at play and when both cards are overclocked.
Click to expand...

He said 'best' and 'low end' and 'quiet' and 'RPG'; there's more than one constraint at play, which is part of the reason I responded to Mr. K6's post the way I did. But please, think harder about it- AMD cards are already hot and hotter than Nvidia cards when considering performance/watt. That means care must be taken when selecting one when something quiet is desired. Given that ASUS, Gigabyte and MSI all make custom HD7950's designed for both quiet operation and overclocking, finding a good one shouldn't be hard, but remember to mention that part when you make a recommendation. Blanket recommendations are never good.

Also keep in mind that with AMD cards being hotter for a given level of performance, the OP might be better served by paying a little more for an Nvidia card that uses a blower to exhaust all of that heat. Making that choice will depend on how his enclosure is set up of course, and if he already has decent intake and exhaust it's not really worth considering; but it's also something we don't know yet.

Last, when he clarified what games he wanted to play, the HD7950 became the highest-end card recommendable instead of the lowest. RPGs just don't need the grunt, and he'd be better served by making sure he has enough VRAM to do what he wants to do then stretching for the absolute fastest card he can afford.
 
Enough with the personal attacks, if you have nothing of value to say, say nothing
 
Well, on the lighter side -- if OP doesn't mind a "few" fps slower for cooler operation, and we all know that 2560x1600 needs moar vram, then OP could could go all in for that new 4GB GT640 announced today ... :D

(CH posted right before me, hope my humor is well received haha!)
 
xorbe said:
Well, on the lighter side -- if OP doesn't mind a "few" fps slower for cooler operation, and we all know that 2560x1600 needs moar vram, then OP could could go all in for that new 4GB GT640 announced today ... :D
Click to expand...

As cool as that looks, I'm having a real hard time trying to imagine a purpose for that card. The GT640 is slow as hell.

Still, the OP could easily go with an HD7850/GTX660/660Ti for his uses, and could save a little more if he doesn't see the need for excessive (perspective-dependent, I know) mods in Skyrim and the like.

Edit to xorbe- yep, I thought it was nice!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top