Which GTX 670 for 2560?

Hodge_al · 19 Jul 2012 at 17:11

Im hopefully ordering a GTX 670 tonight, however with the reduced pricing im not sure which to go for.

I play at 2560 x 1600

I plan to upgrade to SLI in the future.

gtx 670 ftw 2gb OR gtx 670 4gb EVGA on both, im a fan of their support

So its either faster or more VRAM, i cant make up my mind.

Im using a QX9650 @ 4.0 with 8gb RAM.

The main game i will play is BF3, i also use the card for CUDA rendering.
I have heard that the 4gb Reference card gets very hot, this could be a concern when doing renders.

Will the 4gb be pointless as at that resolution i wont be able to crank the settings up either way, to be fair at 2560 i dont really use AA much anyway.

Which do you guys reckon is a better card for me?

Mei · 19 Jul 2012 at 17:21

if it was my money the 2gb
you srsly play fps games at 2560 x 1600? thats insane...

Hodge_al · 19 Jul 2012 at 17:25

Thanks for the input

Mei said:
you srsly play fps games at 2560 x 1600? thats insane...

I do, i don't believe it is that uncommon. I only payed £200 for it as well! The screen space is awesome for work, so i might as well use it to game.

Mr. May · 19 Jul 2012 at 17:27

I have 2x 670 FTW in sli and run very cool and quite @2560x1440 max's BF3 with a no drops below 60

Mei · 19 Jul 2012 at 17:36

yeh but you can turn the screen res down you know, doesnt have to be maxed

i always play fps games at lowest res and still be able see what i want, bcos i like winning too much!

i duno what happened to this generation of gamers! FTW use to mean something!

Rusty0611 · 19 Jul 2012 at 17:44

Mei said:
yeh but you can turn the screen res down you know, doesnt have to be maxed
i always play fps games at lowest res and still be able see what i want, bcos i like winning too much!

i duno what happened to this generation of gamers! FTW use to mean something!

What is the point buying a 2560*1600 screen and then turning the resolution down?

Crazy.

Hodge_al · 19 Jul 2012 at 17:47

Mr. May said:
I have 2x 670 FTW in sli and run very cool and quite @2560x1440 max's BF3 with a no drops below 60

Thanks i was concerned that in the future when i added another for SLI i would not have enough Vram to keep up.

That was the problem with my GTX 570 that i have currently, at the time 1.2 vram was great, but a year later because of the low vram now i cannot just add another one. Hopefully i wont run in to that problem with a 2gb 670.

Mei · 19 Jul 2012 at 17:54

Rusty0611 said:
What is the point buying a 2560*1600 screen and then turning the resolution down?

Crazy.

FTW.
if your sig is right you using a 120hz so you must care a little about winning

Hodge_al said:
Thanks i was concerned that in the future when i added another for SLI i would not have enough Vram to keep up.

That was the problem with my GTX 570 that i have currently, at the time 1.2 vram was great, but a year later because of the low vram now i cannot just add another one. Hopefully i wont run in to that problem with a 2gb 670.

i dont think any1 knows the answer to this, a year from now if 4gb will be worth it, right now it isnt...but yeh :confused:

JonnyGLC · 19 Jul 2012 at 17:59

Mei said:
FTW.
if your sig is right you using a 120hz so you must care a little about winning

i dont think any1 knows the answer to this, a year from now if 4gb will be worth it, right now it isnt...but yeh

Stop talking absolute rubbish.

Mei · 19 Jul 2012 at 18:00

JonnyGLC said:
Stop talking absolute rubbish.

lol what did i say untrue?

Gregster · 19 Jul 2012 at 18:38

Mei said:
yeh but you can turn the screen res down you know, doesnt have to be maxed
i always play fps games at lowest res and still be able see what i want, bcos i like winning too much!

i duno what happened to this generation of gamers! FTW use to mean something!

If I had that monitor, I would not 'want' to turn the res down. I got a 120hz monitor for 3D and the higher fps is a bonus. I would say me eyes could not tell the difference between constant 60fps and 120 fps.

Personally if I was the OP and had the cash, I would go for a 4GB or even a 7970 3GB...When the option to SLI is there, it will add more future proofing also.

arc@css · 19 Jul 2012 at 18:39

Each to their own.

JonnyGLC · 19 Jul 2012 at 18:41

Mei said:
lol what did i say untrue?

That to play well you have to turn your resolution down. What utter rubbish.

At low resolutions you can't see anything past the jaggies.

Hodge_al · 19 Jul 2012 at 19:01

I just went and ordered the ftw version, i quick look at my finances made the final decision. Hopefully it will be a worthy upgrade to my 570. Thanks for the advice.

As for the resolution argument, i would rather play at native resolution with the settings turned down any day to achieve decent fps. Playing anything other than native is horrible.

Rusty0611 · 19 Jul 2012 at 19:05

JonnyGLC said:
That to play well you have to turn your resolution down. What utter rubbish.

At low resolutions you can't see anything past the jaggies.

+1.

Everything becomes horrible due to the screen real estate size being too large for the number of pixels displayed.

Mei said:
FTW.
if your sig is right you using a 120hz so you must care a little about winning

I didn't know there was correlation between 'winning' and 120hz. I know it's damn smoother and this is the reason I use a 120hz monitor for gaming.

I don't think you have any real experience of this so perhaps you shouldn't be advising people and then backing up your suggestions by saying it's 'FTW'.

Hodge_al said:
I just went and ordered the ftw version, i quick look at my finances made the final decision. Hopefully it will be a worthy upgrade to my 570. Thanks for the advice.

As for the resolution argument, i would rather play at native resolution with the settings turned down any day to achieve decent fps. Playing anything other than native is horrible.

Absolutely. It's an even stronger argument when the premium for such a good monitor is so large.

I don't think it was even an argument to be fair - it was somebody being completely wrong

.

Enjoy

Mei · 19 Jul 2012 at 19:06

JonnyGLC said:
That to play well you have to turn your resolution down. What utter rubbish.

At low resolutions you can't see anything past the jaggies.

hehe so it wasnt anything else i said, just that i play low res because i enjoy winning?

i thought you might actually have a good point to make

there's a difference between "playing well" and playing to win
how many comp players play above 1900 in any fps? really not many

you took something i said, reworded it and still come out wrong! awesome!

Gregster · 19 Jul 2012 at 19:29

Good call OP and as for the resoloution, like Arc@css said, "Each to their own"

Personally not for me but if Mei is happy like that...Cool

spixelspixel · 19 Jul 2012 at 20:06

garr, why do i always reply in the wrong thread.

Kaapstad · 19 Jul 2012 at 20:58

yeh but you can turn the screen res down you know, doesnt have to be maxed
i always play fps games at lowest res and still be able see what i want, bcos i like winning too much!

i duno what happened to this generation of gamers! FTW use to mean something!

Ah so thats what I am doing wrong.

I am going offline for a few minutes while I fit my old GTX 8800

flinco · 19 Jul 2012 at 21:01

Get a 2gb 670.

Instead of SLI'ing in the future, sell the 670 and get the 770.