GTX 970 SLI - 4k?

elmarko · 28 May 2015 at 10:00

Morning guys,

Wanted to find out peoples experience of 4K with SLI 970's & as to if they have the power required to keep the frame rate of at least around 40 for some of the more demanding games (Witcher 3 for example).

At the moment I'm deciding between the

Acer XB280HK 28" 4K2K Ultra HD G Sync 1ms Gaming Monitor

And...

Asus PG278Q ROG Swift 27" G-SYNC 144Hz Gaming Monitor 2560x1440

I currently have 1 GTX 970 & plan on going SLI, or would a single TI in a couple of months be a better choice & sell my 970?.

snips86x · 28 May 2015 at 10:05

I think the consensus has been that the 970 doesn't have the grunt to power 4k.....could be wrong though.

Personally would look at a 980Ti/295x2/390x for the Vram.

Divine Pain · 28 May 2015 at 10:06

Well, 2x980 will give you around 40fps at 4k with aa off and grass density high, everything else max settings so... 2x970 would be behind that unless you want to skimp on a few settings more

elmarko · 28 May 2015 at 10:30

Hmm, that was my thoughts also - cheers.

I wonder what kind of performance X2 980ti's will run at, also if my 850w PSU will be able to handle, the 2500k (4.2ghz) will cause any issues. They should be fine, but if I was to invest 1.5k in hardware (monitor, x2 graphics cards) I'd want decent 4k performance

.

The other option is go for the ROG 1440p g-synce w/ x2 970's - but at this stage I'm unsure as to if moving from 1080p to 1440p is going to yield much difference visually.

faceman123 · 28 May 2015 at 11:07

Go for rog

mahius · 28 May 2015 at 11:13

Big issue is VRAM. I used to harp on about it not mattering, but above 3.5GB usage, the FPS drops. Possible issue with 4k, due to the memory used. If you want to go with 970 SLI, I'd recommend the Asus ROG Swift monitor and run your games at 1440p, since the 970 does well enough there.

Plus it's a better monitor IMO, since it has a high refresh rate. Or... since that monitor is £630 anyway, spend a tad more on the Acer Predator XB270HU at £680. The difference is panel type, The Acer has a better IPS panel, compared to the TN panel of the Asus.

YOUR BASKET
1 x Acer Predator XB270HU 27" G-Sync IPS 144Hz Gaming Widescreen LED Monitor - Black/Red (UM.HB0EE.009) £679.99

My best recommendation is to wait until AMD release their new cards in a few weeks. There might be 970 price drops or there could be a better option for 4k. Especially considering how much you'd save by going for the 4K but 60Hz monitor. Put that extra into a better graphics set-up to handle the 4K.

VincentHanna · 28 May 2015 at 11:13

People will disagree.

But IMO if you want decent 4k gaming you either get a 980Ti/Titan X + G-sync monitor

OR

You get 980Ti/Titan X's in SLI

8GB 290x's are also an option but you would need 3...and AMD's crossfire drivers haven't been up to snuff recently.

Cooper · 28 May 2015 at 11:37

Can someone with actual experience of 970SLI @4K speak?..namely, me

Project Cars 4K, FXAA, mixture of high & ultra settings =60fps, correctly tuned for 'rain' as well.

Battlefield 4 4K, No AA, all settings to ultra = 60fps with 3.8GB of VRAM used and no frame rate issue.

GTAV 4K, FXAA, soft shadows, high-very high mix, =60fps with 3.7GB VRAM used and no frame rate issues

Witcher 3 is the only current game where 4K and 60fps is not possible with decent settings.

..4K 60fps with 970SLI is easier than many people think.

elmarko · 28 May 2015 at 11:41

For the 970 SLI 4k, I was thinking g-synce which should reduce many of the problems related to the lower frame rates I'll experience on some games.

I'm a bit of an 'ultra' freak, so don't want to turn down any settings if I can. Hmm, I'll have to ponder over this for the next couple of days.

VincentHanna · 28 May 2015 at 11:44

G-sync and SLI doesn't always play nice.

passey89 · 28 May 2015 at 11:50

If ur wanting to run ultra your deffo going to hit vram issues on 970's

Cooper · 28 May 2015 at 11:50

elmarko said:
I'm a bit of an 'ultra' freak, so don't want to turn down any settings if I can. Hmm, I'll have to ponder over this for the next couple of days.

Trust me, 4K is so overwhelmingly superior in output that you don't notice the difference between high/v high and ultra.

All i was saying is that 970 SLI is much more capable at 4K than some of the posts in this thread make out.

opethdisciple · 28 May 2015 at 11:54

If one is serious of 4k, then I think go for top of the range cards.

At 1440p I would say SLI 970 is great.

Above that time to go full fat. 980 SLI or better yet a Titan X.

The 980 SLI is more powerful, but the Titan X is asingle card and has more Vram, so thats what i would get.

Cooper · 28 May 2015 at 11:59

opethdisciple said:
The 980 SLI is more powerful, but the Titan X is asingle card and has more Vram, so thats what i would get.

980 SLI @ 4K is not worth the extra cost over the 970 option.

If you want to see a real, tangible jump in 4K performance then you will have to go for 980TI minimum, but that will cost £1200 (pretty much certain they'll cost £599) compared to £500 (970) and £900 (980).

Is the £700 price difference between 970SLI and 980TI SLI worth it? for some it will be i guess, me, I'd rather wait for the Pascal range of cards next year, which truly will be designed with 4K in mind at reasonable prices.

RanxZy · 28 May 2015 at 12:11

Cooper said:
If you want to see a real, tangible jump in 4K performance then you will have to go for 980TI minimum, but that will cost £1200 (pretty much certain they'll cost £599) compared to £500 (970) and £900 (980).

+1 if you're really an Ultra settings freak you'll be doing yourself a disservice to go with 970s imo. The 4GB limit could hold you back quite a bit at 4k. There is talk of using both cards vram in DX12 but we'll have to see how that pans out.

You will probably find the 980Ti performs similar to 970 SLI with a decent OC so that's what I'd be looking at. If you want to go for GSYNC at 1440p the ROG Swift and a single 980Ti would be an amazing match.

Cooper · 28 May 2015 at 12:17

RanxZy said:
You will probably find the 980Ti performs similar to 970 SLI with a decent OC

Well if the specs are to be believed then a single 980Ti will be roughly 50-60% faster than a single 970.

So 970 SLI with scaling inefficiencies in mind, will still be about 20% faster than a single 980TI, which in turn should make 980TI SLI at least 50% faster than 970SLI..i think

passey89 · 28 May 2015 at 12:18

RanxZy said:
+1 if you're really an Ultra settings freak you'll be doing yourself a disservice to go with 970s imo. The 4GB limit could hold you back quite a bit at 4k. There is talk of using both cards vram in DX12 but we'll have to see how that pans out.

You will probably find the 980Ti performs similar to 970 SLI with a decent OC so that's what I'd be looking at. If you want to go for GSYNC at 1440p the ROG Swift and a single 980Ti would be an amazing match.

considering sli 970's are about the same as a titan Z

980 sli are better than a titan z

970 sli will perform better than a 980ti unless it hits its vram limit or sli scaling issues

opethdisciple · 28 May 2015 at 12:19

Cooper said:
980 SLI @ 4K is not worth the extra cost over the 970 option.

If you want to see a real, tangible jump in 4K performance then you will have to go for 980TI minimum, but that will cost £1200 (pretty much certain they'll cost £599) compared to £500 (970) and £900 (980).

Is the £700 price difference between 970SLI and 980TI SLI worth it? for some it will be i guess, me, I'd rather wait for the Pascal range of cards next year, which truly will be designed with 4K in mind at reasonable prices.

I know what your saying. 970 is much more cost effective than the 980.

But 4k is a huge resolution. Nothing really copes with it at the moment. If one is not concerned about full settings then SLI 970's might do a grand job at a cheaper price.

Personally I would get a Titan X.

LoadsaMoney · 28 May 2015 at 12:20

Even Fiji won't have the grunt for 4k, as its only got 4GB ram, its a 1080p card.

elmarko · 28 May 2015 at 12:53

The 980 SLI really isn't a big enough upgrade over getting one 970 (have one already), neither is a single titan worth it as 2 970's outperform it in most benchmarks.

Realistically, it's wait for x2 980ti for 4k
Total cost : £1700 (2 cards @ 600 each & monitor)

Accept poorer performance on 4k /w g-s but perhaps experience issues with 970 SLI & g-synce.
Total cost : £800
Note - this is the future proof option, upgrading next generation w/ the £1000 saved.

970 SLI on ROG 1440 w/ g-s & perhaps experience issues with 970 SLI & g-synce.
Total cost : £800

980ti X1 on ROG 1440 w/ g-s - issue free.
Total cost : £1100

Don't really want to buy a monitor now then replace it next year, or run on poor performance for the next year... the other issue is I don't fancy running the 4k in 1440p due to the issues I've read about (perhaps these are exaggerated?)