• 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.

Post any 690 news here please.

Cleeecooo said:
I'm fairly certain Gregster is actually wrong in this one :p

BF3 was using 1.8 GB earlier today on my 570 at 1080p.

4gbish sounds perfectly plausible for 1600p x3
Click to expand...

If he has a 4GB card then yeah it can, I'm just presuming SLi set up with 2GB cards. :p

Which card(s) do you have? :)
 
I am looking for the proof of this but on my iphone at work it is hard to find it sorry. I will be able to find it when I get home at 6am though.
 
2GB? Then it is definitely shared, it shows as 3.8GB because that is technically what is being used but the data is mirrored between the two. So 1.8GB like gregster said is unique data.

Edit - And now cleeco too. :p
 
LeJosh said:
2GB? Then it is definitely shared, it shows as 3.8GB because that is technically what is being used but the data is mirrored between the two. So 1.8GB like gregster said is unique data.

Edit - And now cleeco too. :p
Click to expand...

Must be shared because at 19x12 I'm always seeing 1.8GB usage with 2GB 5970 - 1GB per GPU - yet average 62fps on high-settings, x2 MSAA (12.4 drivers) on 64-man servers with smooth framerates using a custom user.cfg. BF3 RAM usage is a bit high at 2.5GB, check your RAM to see if this has any relevance to your increased VRAM usage.
 
different subject but why do people think getting 690 for £800 is expensive considering if i went and got 2x 2gb 680 reference card for sli thats would cost me £840-860 (cheapest on say ocuk currently)?

i mean they achieved close to 2 single in GTX680 in SLI with an awesome cooler...:)

i also have looked on a few review sites that are saying people (must be beta testers) are having a lot of luck hitting 1300mhz core which is better than most reference cards out at the minute.

A/..This maybe due to chip binning which nvidia stated they were doing for the 690
B/..10 power phases
C/..Better cooling design
D/..Due to lower power requirments (TDP to 300W) there more power on tap for OC (2x 8pin = 375W)

oh and would tempt me to get a 3rd screen too :D


i think it could be a brilliant card and am very tempted as im upgrading but ill see what the reviews say on the 3rd or sooner....£750 would have been better price tho :p
 
Last edited:
HornyRhino said:
different subject but why do people think getting 690 for £800 is expensive considering if i went and got 2x 2gb 680 reference card for sli thats would cost me £840-860 (cheapest on say ocuk currently)?

i mean they achieved close to 2 single in GTX680 in SLI with an awesome cooler...:)

i also have looked on a few review sites that are saying people (must be beta testers) are having a lot of luck hitting 1300mhz core which is better than most reference cards out at the minute.

A/..This maybe due to chip binning which nvidia stated they were doing for the 690
B/..10 power phases
C/..Better cooling design
D/..Due to lower power requirments (TDP to 300W) there more power on tap for OC (2x 8pin = 375W)

oh and would tempt me to get a 3rd screen too :D


i think it could be a brilliant card and am very tempted as im upgrading but ill see what the reviews say on the 3rd or sooner....£750 would have been better price tho :p
Click to expand...

Firstly, lack of VRAM on a card designed for multi monitors, secondly, the idea is the cheapest 680's in SLI should cost more than the cheapest 690

The 680's will OC further (often)
Run cooler (with good case airflow)
 
but then isnt the standard reference 2gb 680 designed for multiple screen out the box?

just thought it looked like a winner compared to the 590 which failed in a lot of areas hardware wise.
 
It can handle multi monitor gaming now but it's approaching its limit on its own. GPU power more than VRAM but still going to be near the VRAM limit leaving you not much headroom.
 
HornyRhino said:
but then isnt the standard reference 2gb 680 designed for multiple screen out the box?

just thought it looked like a winner compared to the 590 which failed in a lot of areas hardware wise.
Click to expand...

yes, but not properly :p

You run into GPU limitations before VRAM. However, having so much power on a single card, in this one case, you run into VRAM before GPU limitations.
 
Cleeecooo said:
yes, but not properly :p

You run into GPU limitations before VRAM. However, having so much power on a single card, in this one case, you run into VRAM before GPU limitations.
Click to expand...

I agree Cleee, multi monitor setups will show the lack of VRAM when settings on BF3 are bumped up. Frame returns were still good until it ran out of VRAM. This has been proved with quad SLI already by vega in the monitor section.

What would be a very tempting card for any tri monitor setup is a 690 with 4+4GB of VRAM and it wouldn't surprise me to see one of these at some stage.

Wishful thinking maybe but you never know.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom