• 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.

Which 680 Brand?

Tephnos

Tephnos

Tephnos

Soldato
Joined
20 May 2011
Posts
6,077
Location
Aberdeen, Scotland
Hey guys,

Mentioned earlier I was getting a 680, but I'm still deliberating on which brand to go for? I heard the best for support in the UK is EVGA, MSI, and Gigabyte.

With EVGA it seems you're paying a premium for the same support as the other two and you still get reference cards.

Then I seen MSI have a 4GB Twin Frozr (I'm guessing the Lightning is just a better OC'd card from the get go? Not much different?)

I think right now my decision is between EVGA and MSI. I know EVGA is better for SLI, which I do plan to do way in the future when prices come down and I can just SLI to keep me going for longer, but I don't plan to tri or quad SLI. In that regard, would I get away with having the aftermarket cooled MSI cards?
 
If you have great case cooling go for one of the aftermarket cooled cards, if not and for SLI go reference cooler.

Just go with the cheapest card with good warranty support, if you go reference most come off the same production line, PNY are often cheap with an excellent warranty and I read somewhere they actually make a lot of the cards for Nvidia ;)
 
My MSI lightning is currently the highest scoring 680 in the Heaven thread and has the highest graphics score in the 3Dmark11 thread. No brainer if you are getting a 680 IMO.
 
To throw another into the mix, the Gainward Phantom 680 has been running great in my rig for the past week or so.

Not had a crack at additional overclocking yet but it boosts to 1150 out of th e box and is silent with cool temps.
 
Why 4GB?

MSI Lightning is the best 680 IMO followed by the Gigabyte Windforce 3x. I can vouch for the latter. Mine overclocks to well over 7 Ghz on the memory and 1300 core which although it is luck based I feel with these two cards you've got a better chance.
 
Rusty0611 said:
Why 4GB?

MSI Lightning is the best 680 IMO followed by the Gigabyte Windforce 3x. I can vouch for the latter. Mine overclocks to well over 7 Ghz on the memory and 1300 core which although it is luck based I feel with these two cards you've got a better chance.
Click to expand...

High resolution, plus modding. I don't plan to upgrade for a few years after this (other than maybe a second down the road for SLI to keep me going) but even if the card can't use the full 4GB, it can use more than 2. I don't want to hit any kind of VRAM bottleneck either on modding or future games.

If only MSI had a 4GB Lightning. :p
 
The thing is currently it's only Skyrim which is VRAM limited as opposed to GPU limited with 2 680's

If you view VRAM usage/GPU power required on a straight line over time it's still extremely likely that you'll be GPU limited as opposed to VRAM limited.
 
Go with warranty and good RMA process (always plan for the worst).

Tend to stick with MSI or Gigabyte :)
 
OptimaLnrg said:
They've previously made lightning extremes with the double memory
Click to expand...

True, but wondering if I can wait anymore.

Lightning looks really tempting but I'm a hardcore modder and don't want to SLI right off the bat, the extra just to not be VRAM limited in even Skyrim seems worth it to me.

If I went with the Frozr, how does it compare to the lightning? Can it OC pretty well? (Obviously not AS well)
 
OptimaLnrg said:
^ pot lock on your ocing either way tbh. The lightning has extra potential and looks a ****load cooler imo.
Click to expand...

True, it's just hard to get decent opinions from both ends of the scale. Some say modding on Skyrim on 2GB is fine, but they don't specify if they're using extremely high res textures (which I'm a sucker for) that kill your VRAM. And then others say modding without 4GB is nigh impossible as the game has to load out textures a lot on 2GB and it causes stutters or something like that when loading a lot.

:p
 
I use 2K HD textures and see VRAM usage around 1.9GB at 5760*1080 resolution.

You will see readings higher than 2GB with a 4GB card but this doesn't mean that the game would hit the VRAM wall on a 2GB card. When excess VRAM is available the application caches more data into the VRAM than is required so readings can skyrocket over what's actually required.

A good example is BF3 which with a 2GB 680 sees about 1.6GB usage on max settings at 1080 whereas with a 3GB 580 sees VRAM usage upto 2.4GB.

The problem with buying a 4GB card, and it is your choice I know, is that it is a large price premium to only really be beneficial in one game. And then later down the line you'll have to buy another 4GB card if you want to SLI. Effectively in this scenario you're paying well over a £100 premium to run Skyrim. It's a good game but is if worth that much for what isn't even a certainty?

As a general rule of thumb: to see the benefit of 4GB over 2GB you need to go tri-SLI and triple screen. There are exceptions (Skyrim) but on other games, without the GPU horsepower of 3 680's you'll be limited by a lack of GPU power and have low frame rates and as such have to lower settings anyway, which will in turn lower the amount of VRAM required in the process.

I would look at the 7970's to calm your VRAM nerves, save money and get a card which matches a 680.
 
Last edited:
I have an EVGA GTX 680 FTW 4gb card and I LOVE it! I have another one waiting round a friends house and it will be SLi'd this weekend!!!!

I play at 2560 x 1440 and play all my games with the visuals maxed. I wasnt too happy with the frame rates in some of my games with one so thats why I have purchased a second.

These cards are good as they vent the hot air out the back of the case... not into the case!
 
Last edited:
Rusty0611 said:
I use 2K HD textures and see VRAM usage around 1.9GB at 5760*1080 resolution.

You will see readings higher than 2GB with a 4GB card but this doesn't mean that the game would hit the VRAM wall on a 2GB card. When excess VRAM is available the application caches more data into the VRAM than is required so readings can skyrocket over what's actually required.

A good example is BF3 which with a 2GB 680 sees about 1.6GB usage on max settings at 1080 whereas with a 3GB 580 sees VRAM usage upto 2.4GB.

The problem with buying a 4GB card, and it is your choice I know, is that it is a large price premium to only really be beneficial in one game. And then later down the line you'll have to buy another 4GB card if you want to SLI. Effectively in this scenario you're paying well over a £100 premium to run Skyrim. It's a good game but is if worth that much for what isn't even a certainty?

As a general rule of thumb: to see the benefit of 4GB over 2GB you need to go tri-SLI and triple screen. There are exceptions (Skyrim) but on other games, without the GPU horsepower of 3 680's you'll be limited by a lack of GPU power and have low frame rates and as such have to lower settings anyway, which will in turn lower the amount of VRAM required in the process.

I would look at the 7970's to calm your VRAM nerves, save money and get a card which matches a 680.
Click to expand...

100 quid premium to run a single game? If I check the amount of time I spent playing a modded oblivion, we'd be in the 1000s of hours. Worth it. :p

But my applications will mostly be single screen gaming at 1400p, with all settings jacked up the whazoo, obviously, and the modern equivalent of Qarl's Texture Pack 3 on Skyrim.

To be honest, I WAS looking at the 7970s, but after trying out the red team for the 6xxx generation I want to go back to the green team. The ATI drivers haven't pleased me.

However, if you could provide me some stats and stuff to the VRAM usage I would be pretty interested in that. For now, it seems I may either go with the 4GB Twin Frozr, or just cave in and grab a Lightning. But, I'm no hardcore benchmarker. If the Frozr can get me near lightning clocks I'll just go with that.
 
http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showthread.php?t=18444958

I don't have your resolution so I can't be entirely accurate but my resolution is more pixels.

To be honest as you play Skyrim so much then it is clearly worth it for you I would go with the 4GB. As you say, you don't want to be VRAM limited and you can even be VRAM limited depending on the mods at 1920*1080 so it would be worthwhile for you personally.

I was just getting the point across that unless you play Skyrim 'a lot' then it probably isn't worth it although to you I would say it is worth it. The problem with being VRAM limited is it's a wall: there's no slight slowdown or mild FPS drops; it's single digit slideshow time and what's worse is it's not even consistently slow. It will hit max FPS and then all of a sudden just freeze. It's not good! :)
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom