-
Competitor rules
Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.
HardOCP 680 Tri-SLI vs 7970 TRIFIRE
- Thread starter straxusii
- Start date
Soldato
- Joined
- 30 Nov 2011
- Posts
- 11,528
interestingly, 2GB is already limiting at 5760x1080... wonder how long it will be till it's a limit at 1600p
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 33,188
Also Nvidia are only doing half the framerate on surround screens, and Kyle himself has said Sli isn't working well multiple times recently.
I forget which game it was, but one of the bigger titles needed to be hacked for 680gtx sli, and was unstable in doing so, might have been mass effect 3 but honestly can't remember, maybe skyrim.
His opinion changes every other day, their testing methods are odd and they keep changing certain things. I still can't believe the "8xmsaa, fxaa, plus some other type of aa" giving silly framerate for AMD(stupid low) and great performance for Nvidia almost as if.... they weren't all working together perfectly but its fine because they along with no other sites did any IQ comparisons to confirm or check these were all working together.
As for adaptive vsync, I like that he's ignoring the fact that most people say its problematic and simply doing nothing to prevent tearing, because its mostly not ruddy on for gods sake.
Is the 680gtx smoother because, its doing 33% less work(with the two outter screens at half frame rate) and when it goes below 60fps its not running vsync while AMD is? SO the game is maybe smooth as anything.... but tearing like a mother?
I forget which game it was, but one of the bigger titles needed to be hacked for 680gtx sli, and was unstable in doing so, might have been mass effect 3 but honestly can't remember, maybe skyrim.
His opinion changes every other day, their testing methods are odd and they keep changing certain things. I still can't believe the "8xmsaa, fxaa, plus some other type of aa" giving silly framerate for AMD(stupid low) and great performance for Nvidia almost as if.... they weren't all working together perfectly but its fine because they along with no other sites did any IQ comparisons to confirm or check these were all working together.
As for adaptive vsync, I like that he's ignoring the fact that most people say its problematic and simply doing nothing to prevent tearing, because its mostly not ruddy on for gods sake.
Is the 680gtx smoother because, its doing 33% less work(with the two outter screens at half frame rate) and when it goes below 60fps its not running vsync while AMD is? SO the game is maybe smooth as anything.... but tearing like a mother?
Soldato
- Joined
- 30 Nov 2011
- Posts
- 11,528
seems like that 3gb Vram helps with AA
yes and no, whilst in BF3 the chart looks better with the 7970 with AA on... the comments say that it actually suffered quite badly with stutter
so basically for BF3, 3 screen, on ultra, neither the 680 2GB, nor the 7970 3GB provided a happy gaming experience
Soldato
- Joined
- 30 Nov 2011
- Posts
- 11,528
they run all the tests with vsync off, so tearing would be present on both cards if it was an issue
to me, I wouldn't be claiming the game was smooth if it had really bad tearing, as to me that would not look smooth
Bearing in mind there was slight issues due to the vram in some games, at 1600p it's going to be ages (2/3 the pixels) before the vram makes a material difference,
while I don't run three screens, I run 1 screen at 1600p, with every single setting maxed out (4xaa etc etc) I don't get one hint of stutter, it's butter smooth. But I can't comment on multi-screen tests tbh.
But I am seeing poor gpu usage in benchmarks and various situations, you know what, as soon at the 690 comes out if it's a duel card, these are gone for sure.
Quad sli for me.
ran 3 screens for quite a while on 560 2gb sli, vram was only as issue in a couple of games. 4xmsaa isn't really an option unless you're playing old games, it drops the fps too low to be worthwhile nevermind the vram impact, always use smaa@ultra personally
I'd love to go surround in the future but I really worry about how good it's going to be for the money stumped up for it.
I'm not going to go hungry or homeless or anything by buying it but I do feel like I need to see a good overall experience for me to spend the extra going SLI and two more monitors.
I'm not going to go hungry or homeless or anything by buying it but I do feel like I need to see a good overall experience for me to spend the extra going SLI and two more monitors.
Do you have a source for this as Nvidia own run down on GTX680 surround only mentions framerate halving when running 3D Vision Surround:
Nvidia said:
http://www.geforce.com/whats-new/articles/nvidia-surround-on-the-geforce-gtx-680/#1
There is no mention of halving of framerates in 2D Surround.
As an aside I run portrait Surround on a single GTX680 and I havn't noticed the side monitors running at a different framerate to the centre monitor - even in games where the mesaured framerate is below 40fps (thus the side monitors should be a stuttery mess at under 20fps). Even splitting an action sequence by my monitor bezels produces no noticable difference.
As I run Portrait surround which has an aspect ratio not that disimilar to a large 16:9 monitor this framerate halving should be very noticable - whereas it might not be in Landscape surround where the side monitors act as your peripheral vision only.
Last edited:
I am kinda thinking the same. I would love to get another 2 27" monitors (maybe even 3D ones) and add another 680 however with current specs, I am less than impressed.
I think I will need to see next year before spending £1500
Soldato
- Joined
- 30 Nov 2011
- Posts
- 11,528
I am either going to go 3 monitor or large screen 1600p later this year... I just can't decide which...
Personally I'm wary of multi GPU, from years on the forums it just seems you may experience issues that you tend not to get with single. Add to that multi screen and I think that adds a heap more potential issues.
I don't think Nvidia or AMD put in the resources needed to make 3+ card GPU and multi monitor setups as stable as single GPU single monitor.
I don't think Nvidia or AMD put in the resources needed to make 3+ card GPU and multi monitor setups as stable as single GPU single monitor.
you cant beat gaming on a comfortable sofa in front of a 55'' screen with the lights turned right down, it's almost as if you're right there in the game, especially with the audio turned right up
You can definitely beat that. Any proper monitor set up is far superior
Agreed. your TV Mal I guess is 1080P? With all those pixels being stretched to cover 55" it must look jagged. I know when I run my PC through my 40" Sony, it looks no where near as good as my 27" monitor.
This also brings me to the question again, is your TV 3D? I ask because a TV puts out at 60hz and will only display a maximum of 60fps, so my question to you is, why do you want a card that can give over 60fps?
Someone please tell me if I am wrong.
