• 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.

GTX670 upgrade

Guest2

Guest2

Guest2

Soldato
Joined
6 May 2009
Posts
20,376
I am thinking of selling my EVGA GTX670 2gb because I game at 1440p and 2gb cannot handle 1440p (at least I think its this, all games work perfect at lower res)

It looks like I could get £150-£170 for my card. Should I then just go for a similar card with 3gb (seems to mainly be ATI that have 3gb) or maybe a 4gb GTX670 for a bit more money

Saying this, I dont game much but Titanfall and Metro last light are seems to be coping OK with 1440p

Rest of system;
P55-UD5
i5@4ghz
8gb ram
 
Have you tried a monitoring tool sitting in the bachground while you game? Would show where the problem is to save you guessing. Titanfall does appear to be one that is pretty resource heavy though. Have you tried tweaking the dynamic lighting / rag doll settings?
 
A single GTX 670 2gb won't let you run ultra settings in some games as you have found out.

You want at least a GPU with 3GB OF Vrm, you'll be pushed to find a 670 4GB.

To get the best out of 1440p 2 GPU'S is a must if you want to run Ultra settings.

As a single card has not got enough horse power to do the job alone.

I'm running 2x 670 4GB with my 1440p monitor to get the best out of games.
 
I'm surprised because my gtx670 plays all my games at quite reasonably well at 1920, with high details, including Metro. Not ultra granted.. but with some decent AA etc..

I would run plenty of comparisons benchmarks, then if there;s a major discrepancy and the the card is still in warranty, i would contact EVGA.

I would also try the card in another system too.. May be the're a problem with the CPU that's causing a serious bottleneck.
 
OLDPHART said:
A single GTX 670 2gb won't let you run ultra settings in some games as you have found out.

You want at least a GPU with 3GB OF Vrm, you'll be pushed to find a 670 4GB.

To get the best out of 1440p 2 GPU'S is a must if you want to run Ultra settings.

As a single card has not got enough horse power to do the job alone.

I'm running 2x 670 4GB with my 1440p monitor to get the best out of games.
Click to expand...


What make are your 670`s oldphart
 
I totally disagree that you need at least 2 cards to play at 1440p. Yes if you never want to drop below 60fps with AA and AF on full a gtx 670 isn't good enough.

I am thinking of changing mine but now decided to wait till maxwell's come out. I play BF4, SWTOR, Dayz as well as others and only Dayz struggles with max settings.

I get around 50fps in BF4 and SWTOR over 100 in most places. Personally after a lot of thinking I don't think it's worth spending almost £400 on current cards and maxwell would be the best option.
 
Titanfall actually works fine in 1440p in highest settings (no AA)
40-60fps usually in multiplayer

On this basis I also disagree you need 2 cards to play. Titanfall is a recent game

Metro Last light also plays fine (30fps+) in 1440p Ultra.

Crysis 3 suffers in all highest settings 1440p - lowering shadows and object details sorts this though

Ultra textures load a bit slow in Trials evolution gold
 
If you really want to get another card, there are Radeon 280x's out there for around £220, with 3GB of RAM. Doing a quick scan on Ebay, a 670 would be around £180.

I agree with MowyTone in that you should first run a monitoring tool, to see how much of your memory gets filled while gaming, to make sure the memory buffer is the problem. Also, you should get an average/min/max FPS reading.
 
Im running MSI afterburner with MSI on screen display server

In monitoring I have FPS, core clock, gpu temp, memory usage, memory clock, gpu usage.

I take it the memory usage refers just to GPU mem usage not system memory? The max limit in MSI Afterburner is 3072mb

edit - max the Mem usage goes to in Metro last light benchmark is 1134mb? Metro LL is not vram limited then I presume
 
Last edited:
Take a look at this test: http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Powercolor/R9_290X_PCS_Plus/17.html

So a top of the line overclocked R9 290x achieves an average of 50 FPS on Metro Last Light, at 1600p. The guys at TPU use a 4770k @4.2 GHz too, so this might have an impact on their results.

Looking at the same graph, a 680 is barely at the limit of "playability"(>30 FPS average) at that resolution. So a 670 (with a 4770k @4.2 GHz) would be under that threshold.
2x GTX 670 would get you somewhere around the performance of a 780 or 290, assuming no driver dodgy business.

I guess it comes down to the graphics horsepower...
 
Ghost, So what you are saying is that the 670 isn't really coping at 1440p and due to the fact that the 800 series seems to be pushed back till 2015, that it would be better to upgrade now to a 780 or 290?

I want to wait myself and I got that in my head but I am worried that my 670 wont handle watch dogs and I might be forced to pick it up on the PS4.
 
ghost.florian said:
Take a look at this test: http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Powercolor/R9_290X_PCS_Plus/17.html

So a top of the line overclocked R9 290x achieves an average of 50 FPS on Metro Last Light, at 1600p. The guys at TPU use a 4770k @4.2 GHz too, so this might have an impact on their results.

Looking at the same graph, a 680 is barely at the limit of "playability"(>30 FPS average) at that resolution. So a 670 (with a 4770k @4.2 GHz) would be under that threshold.
2x GTX 670 would get you somewhere around the performance of a 780 or 290, assuming no driver dodgy business.

I guess it comes down to the graphics horsepower...
Click to expand...

Basicly Yes but the extra Vram helps as well something to do with running out off memory for caching and using the the PC's memory to help solve the problem.

GHazy said:
Ghost, So what you are saying is that the 670 isn't really coping at 1440p and due to the fact that the 800 series seems to be pushed back till 2015, that it would be better to upgrade now to a 780 or 290?

I want to wait myself and I got that in my head but I am worried that my 670 wont handle watch dogs and I might be forced to pick it up on the PS4.
Click to expand...

Wait and see how Watch Dog runs and decide then thats what l would do, as l stuck up the Watch Dog Thread a couple of weeks back.

As for Titanfall l wouldn't say it was graphiclly demanding and its locked at 60 FPS + number of players. Most games lately have been console imports and don't make use of the of the PC's far better spec.
 
Cool. Good advise as it's probably the only game coming out the next few months for the pc I want to buy.

Just not sure if my 670 will last till the 800 series decides to show its ugly mug!
 
Been doing a bit more digging and looking at games with rivatuner stats. Apart from Titanfall, nothing is maxing out VRAM at 1440p, even Crysis 3. Titanfall works fine (by that I mean 40pfs+ in highest settings no AA) however Titanfall never uses 100% GPU

I think my best move is just get another EVGA GTX670 for around £130.

I'm sure this will be able to run Watch Dogs in 1440p / 0AA. With a few games I have tried 1080p with highest AA and compared to 1440p without it looks terrible

edit - the only other thing I thought about was buying a 2nd hand EVGA GTX780 superclocked for £300 and selling my 670 for ~150. However its not as fast as 670 SLI, so wont.

The first benchmark I used was Guru 3d's EVGA GTX 780 SC ACX Far Cry 3 results (http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/evga_geforce_gtx_7...).
Since Far Cry 3 has no in game or standalone benchmark I played the game for 20 minutes noting my Max, Min, and best guess Avg FPS. I used EVGA Precision X. They only noted the avg FPS in their test.
EVGA GTX 780 SC ACX 780 - 52
Titan - 53
my SLi 670's - Min 66 Max 107 Avg 78

Tomb Raider (http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/evga_geforce_gtx_7...)
EVGA GTX 780 SC ACX 780 - 79
Titan - 80
my SLi 670's - Min 92 Max 126.5 Avg 108.2

BF3 (http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/evga_geforce_gtx_7...)
EVGA GTX 780 SC ACX 780 - 57
Titan - 59
my SLi 670's - Min 70 Max 130 Avg 100

I used the same exact game settings Guru noted for each benchmark and ran all at 2560x1440
Click to expand...

source - http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/answers/id-1683691/gtx-780-gtx-670-sli.html
 
Last edited:
GHazy said:
Cool. Good advise as it's probably the only game coming out the next few months for the pc I want to buy.

Just not sure if my 670 will last till the 800 series decides to show its ugly mug!
Click to expand...

Pssh, your 670 will handle WD fine, even if you have to lower a few settings it'll still play countless times better than PS4 and still look better ;)
 
I actually did it this weekend! I sold my GTX 670 for £140 and managed to get a Zotac 780 OC with Watchdogs for £330 (i wanted watch dogs so basically got the gpu for £300).

I have to say I think it was worth it in the end, in games like BF4 with max settings it is using 2.2gb memory so clearly some games are above the 2gb already. I know sli can give better performance than a single 780 but heat, not all games use sli well etc I think I am happy overall!

I wanted to hold off till the 880's come out but the £160 to upgrade I am getting in most cases between 50-60% more fps :)
 
Lets not go there!!!! I had to remove the black metal shield as it was too big for my case... (I fogot to check lol). It's fine to be honest, 3 fans and I have an CM Scout 1 case which isn't the best but the card hasn't gone about 67 degress whilst gaming and the fans are at about 55%

5 Year warranty too, first time I have had Zotac always been MSI or evga but happy so far
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom