• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

Need help picking new GPU's...

J

jwl24

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jan 1, 2013
Messages
319
Well I'm building basically the top of the line gaming pc available at this time and can't decide what to get, that's the best and will perform the best, etc.. Be it SLI/CF, or just one of the 2 GPU Cards, etc..

Anyway, anyone can help?
Basically running eyefinity on 3 monitors at 1920x1080, have a intel i7 3930k cpu, if any of that is needed.
Hope someone can help me :)
 
Top of the line? Get the 690. cost 1000$ though but its "top of the line".
 
I've read some current benchmarks showing that the CF 7970's are almost the same performance wise as the 690, or the 7990. Is this true? I mean I don't want to just go and buy the most expensive thing out there just because of the price... I'm hoping to get something that is the best proven wise rather than just the brand new largest price tag.
 
A 7950 is as fast as a stock 680 or a 7970 when you start cranking up the frequency... dont waste money on a 680 if you are going for SLI but if you are going with a single card I would suggest a 680 or a 7970 because you should get as much performance as you can from a single chip to run that kinda resolution...... top of the line, get a 690 or Devil13 or an Ares II...
 
I can't find an Ares.. I was considering it, but can't find one for sale anywhere atm. Besides that, I'm either looking for a awesome performing SLI/CF which is the best at this time, or a single card which performs as good as the SLI/CF which I'm assuming would be the 2gpu cards.
 
A question that wasn't asked, what games do you plan on playing? As you can teir your cards towards the games you plan on playing. :)
 
murkris118 said:
.. dont waste money on a 680 if you are going for SLI
Click to expand...

Elaborate? theres nothing wrong with 680's in sli i would take them over a 690 anyday.


i would not get the 690 due to 2gb limit i would get 2 680 4 gigs over a 690 any day.
 
Filter said:
Elaborate? theres nothing wrong with 680's in sli i would take them over a 690 anyday.


i would not get the 690 due to 2gb limit i would get 2 680 4 gigs over a 690 any day.
Click to expand...

It also matters to if you are running single or multiple monitors, as 2GB is plenty for a single 1920x1080, you may run into VRAM issue's if you are running a high resolution in a surround setup.
 
I'm pretty much playing all the big games out, such as battlefield, crysis, far cry, bioshock, Fear, Deus Ex, etc...

I'm running 3x monitors in eyefinity 5760x3240
 
Then I would agree with the above post GTX 680 4GB SLI would be your best solution. :) Have plenty of VRAM head room, and just put a small OC on the GTX 680's.
 
Nexillus said:
It also matters to if you are running single or multiple monitors, as 2GB is plenty for a single 1920x1080, you may run into VRAM issue's if you are running a high resolution in a surround setup.
Click to expand...

At 2560x1600 single monitor I get 3gig vram usage I crysis 3 multiplayer beta. and about 2.7 in farcry3
 
Last edited:
Decide how many monitors you want to run (and resolution) + how many cards you want. AMD powers 2 monitors + 1 with ACTIVE adapter which is $$$. nVidia powers 4 as is.

Multi GPU setup, AMD has more ram normally, unless you go for the 4GB nVidia GPUs.

Then take in account of drivers + control panels. It's mostly personal preference and the occasional swing where one brand has more issues like drivers causing BSOD for example.

Can't really go wrong either way unless you are trying to limit yourself to single GPU powering 4 monitors where nVidia would be the solution to go after.
 
What do you mean AMD powers 2 monitors? You're saying I couldn't use more than 2 monitors without an extra adapter?

I will be gaming on eyefinity... using 3 24' monitors that are 1920x1080 each.

I'm wanting to know what is the best way to go.. be it Crossfire 7970's, or SLI GTX 680's, or step it up to the 2 GPU cards such as 690 or the 7990. What is currently the best performance, etc wise that I should go?
 
Using an AMD solution will require the use of the troublesome display port connection, you also have to factor the cost of reliable DP adapters into your budget.

Using an NV solution means you can use tried and trusted DVI connections, you have better multi GPU support (if you plan on running multi GPU's) and 2gb of vram will be plenty unless you like running BF3 in surround with tonnes of MSAA - I can run all ultra settings, HBAO enabled, FXAA enabled, AF @ 16x and still maintain 60fps in a 64 player server running 2 x overclocked 2gb 670 FTW's @ 5760 x 1080.

....Even with 4gb of vram per card, I'd be surprised if you could run even low levels of MSAA in BF3 in surround.
 
Well I'll probably use display port connections or DL Dvi depending on whatever I get.. as I'm using the 3x Asus VG248QE.

But still don't know what to get..
 
Nvidia. SLI 670/680 4gb or a 690. That is it. AMD is fast and plenty good for the money but they still have more issues than nvidia.

You want the smoothest, most trouble free gameplay, nvidia is it atm.
 
Are you going to be running 120Hz Monitors? If so ... then you need 2 Nvidia Cards with 3 DVI-DL outs or 2 MSI 7970 Lightnings or 2 Asus 7970 matrix cards with 3 or more displayport outs.
 
My personal experience....

I run 3 7970s with eyefinity, something like 6040x1080 @ 120hz. I have also ran 3 670s, 3 680s. I really like the 7970s especially with the latest drivers. Of course at the time I was running the 680s and 670s the drivers were not very mature and I dont like that Nvidia doesnt support PCI 3.0 (minor detail, not terribly important). Also, at the time there were no cards with 4GB of memory only 2GB. If you go Nvidia either 670 or 680 be sure you do what others are saying and get the cards with 4GB of memory else when you play BF3 and probably other games you will need to turn down the settings. 2GB of memory is not enough to run BF3 on Ultra but 3GB is perfect, 4GB would be too much. I probably would have gone with the 690 but the 2GB of memory killed it for me.

I am no fanboy but like I said from experience, the 7970s especially with the current drivers is what I would highly recommend. If you asked me this question a few months ago I would have said run far away from AMD if you want multi gpu setups. I still have BSOD nightmares.

If you are going air cooled I would go with something like the Gigabyte Windforce 7970ghz edition for around 369. The Windforce has a nice cooling solution but so does Sapphire Vapor so its up to you. If you go Nvidia I would personally go with MSI Twin Frozr or the Gigabyte WIndforce, EVGA is great and their warranty is superior but cramming 3 EVGA cards in a hot case with the one fan is no good as I learned. There are other options but remember you need to maintain some space between the cards. If you go water then go reference and save the money from buying the added cooling solution.

The 3930k is a great CPU, I have mine clocked at 4.7ghz on the RIVE.

By the way, no need for 4 cards as the scaling kinda drops off with 4. There are a few reviews out in cyber land. Plus from what I have read across various forums those with 4 cards have issues even with the latest drivers. Also, unless you put them under water be prepared for heat, lots of heat. In the winter its not bad, but in the summer its hot, damn hot. And if you plan to OC your cards at say 1125/1575 (standard OC for AMD cards) be prepared to run your fans at or around 80% or so to keep them cool unless you want to cook em and witness them do their heat protection thing :D. If I remember correctly, the Nvidia cards clock down/limit the speed if they get too hot, it happened to me, maybe they fixed it I dunno but something to consider if you cram 3 Nvidia cards inside a hot case.

Talking about the heat and stuff reminds me that I need to put my stuff under water Ive just been too lazy. :eek:

As for connections, I run my main monitor with Dual Link DVi and my two side monitors with MiniDP to DP. If you plan to run 120hz monitors and you want to run 120hz and not at 60hz then you need to run either dual link DVI or DP either Mini or Regular.

Oh and current release drivers from AMD are 13.1. They seem to more efficiently utilize the cards thereby reducing heat/noise etc. With previous drivers my cards were pegged at 99% utilization across all 3, now with 13.1 they are around 70ish% and move up to 99% when things seem to need it in game.

There is no such thing as trouble free game play with 3 or more GPUs running multiple monitors no matter if its Nvidia or AMD, be prepared for problems. Anyone with multi GPU setups (3 and 4 cards) will tell you the same thing. 2 card setups seem to be fine a majority of the time. You take what you can get and remember, dont rush to upgrade to the latest driver release no matter who you go with. Its okay to stick with older drivers because you KNOW they work.
 
Last edited:
I meant a 670 SLI is plenty enough for that kinda resolution. A 680 SLI is unnecessary unless you want the best hardware out there without noticing a big difference. Single card, go for a 680 or a 690.... You also get 3 or 4 GB versions of the 670 as well...
 
Well from what I've read here a lot of people are saying that Crossfire cards would be better for performance and everything.

Now the decision is what actual cards to go with regarding crossfire, since there's about 10+ different 7970's, all at different prices, etc. They make everything so complicated that it's difficult for me to select what the best dual cards to go.
 
Seems Ares II is in stock on Newegg.... I will also say that spending 1500 bucks on a graphics card for entertainment purposes is the most pathetic thing to do unless you have money and dunno what to do with it or it helps you with your profession :D....
 
Last edited:
AMD can only power 2 monitors straight up. If you want a 3rd one powered off 1 card, you need to buy an ACTIVE adapter, not a regular cable adapter. Say you use 2 DVI cables, and 3rd one requires you to use DisplayPort, but you can't just plug any HDMI or DVI cable into a HDMI/DVI to DisplayPort adapter and have it working. You got to buy an expensive ACTIVE version of the adapter. Usually adapters are "Passive" so it's like a ~$10 vs $25-100+ ACTIVE adapter to factor in costs.

It's easier if you are doing multi GPU because you can bypass this issue. And like I said before, both AMD/nVidia have pros and cons. It depends on what hardware you are trying to run (regular monitors vs 120Hz, 1080p vs 1440/1600p, single vs multi gpu card setup).
 
jwl24 said:
I'm pretty much playing all the big games out, such as battlefield, crysis, far cry, bioshock, Fear, Deus Ex, etc...

I'm running 3x monitors in eyefinity 5760x3240
Click to expand...

Thats not how resolution works. With a 3x1 array, its (1920x3) X 1080. To get the res you stated you would have to be running a 3x3 array or 9 1920x1080 panels.

This kind of brings up another point thats always bothered me. When you're gaining soooo much horizontal landscape, why wouldn't you want to try and offset that with 1200p screens atleast. 5760x1080 just seems so wide and skinny to me. Long live 16x10 I guess is how I feel. Plus I've always thought that 3 1200p screens in portrait looked the best but I have very little experience with 3 screen setups so that could just be my misdirected opinion at the moment.
 
Last edited:
Well I know there's a guy running 2 MSI Lightnings and has all 3 monitors hooked up via display ports on the 144hz VG248QE.

Besides all the discussion about resolutions and everything, I still have yet to decide what 2 cards I should in the end pick up. I hate this shit.
 
JL6speed said:
AMD can only power 2 monitors straight up. If you want a 3rd one powered off 1 card, you need to buy an ACTIVE adapter, not a regular cable adapter. Say you use 2 DVI cables, and 3rd one requires you to use DisplayPort, but you can't just plug any HDMI or DVI cable into a HDMI/DVI to DisplayPort adapter and have it working. You got to buy an expensive ACTIVE version of the adapter. Usually adapters are "Passive" so it's like a ~$10 vs $25-100+ ACTIVE adapter to factor in costs.

It's easier if you are doing multi GPU because you can bypass this issue. And like I said before, both AMD/nVidia have pros and cons. It depends on what hardware you are trying to run (regular monitors vs 120Hz, 1080p vs 1440/1600p, single vs multi gpu card setup).
Click to expand...

Thats not necessarily true. I've got 3 monitors on a single 5870. Although one has to be a DP monitor and you also have to use vga for another. So basically 2 digital signals out and one analog that uses the ramdac on the card. I'm sure its changing since the 5xxx series since ramdac and vga are becoming obselete and hence eyefinity should be even less of a problem with newer cards, although I can't speak from experience.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top