Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Solved

GTX 770 4gb Overclock vs gtx 780 3gb

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
July 1, 2013 1:20:59 PM

GTX 770 4gb Overclock vs gtx 780 3gb who is better
a b K Overclocking
July 1, 2013 1:29:45 PM

First 4GB for any 2560 x 1600 or less monitor is a waste of money. So the questions are for what games and what total resolution?

Here's a pretty good review of a variety of GPUs and resolutions - http://www.legitreviews.com/article/2210/

Personally, I'm facing some similar upgrades and at least so far I've been considering a pair of GTX 770's with a new 2560 x 1080 UltraWide monitor.

Examples:

415.91 ASUS GTX770-DC2OC-2GD5 GTX 770 2GB GPU http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
415.91 ASUS GTX770-DC2OC-2GD5 GTX 770 2GB GPU http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
549.99 Dell U2913WM Black 29" 5 ms IPS 2560 x 1080 MON http://accessories.us.dell.com/sna/productdetail.aspx?c...

1381.81

or alternate monitor:

399.99 AOC q2963Pm Black 29" 5ms IPS 2560 x 1080 MON http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

/edit - prices just since a few days ago the AOC went up $50, damn.
m
0
l
a b K Overclocking
July 1, 2013 2:19:07 PM

GTX 780
m
0
l
Related resources
July 1, 2013 2:50:07 PM

so for 1920x1080 I dont need 4GB it will be same as 2gb?
m
0
l
a b K Overclocking
July 1, 2013 2:56:26 PM

Pretty much...

Ask yourself, 680 or 780. The answer lies therein.
m
0
l
a b K Overclocking
July 2, 2013 6:21:35 AM

kikoano111 said:
so for 1920x1080 I dont need 4GB it will be same as 2gb?


Useless - period; I've never seen a vRAM Bottleneck using 2GB vRAM on 1920 x 1080 yet. However, 2GB can be a problem in some games with uber high details on 30" monitors (2560 x 1600 ) but very rarely. Now if the plan is 3xHD (5760 x 1080) then sure 3GB+ vRAM.

/edit - IF HD 1920 x 1080 then I'd recommend GTX 760 SLI for several AAA games, both the Frame Rates (FPS) and Stuttering for most games is better than a single e.g. GTX 780. However, in some games the stuttering isn't always the case and a lot has to do with the drivers.

Generally, a single GPU is 'better' as long as the FPS target is obtainable. As of today the GTX 700 series is the best choice and your choice is dependent upon your wallet and games you play. The forthcoming HD 8000 series might hold some surprises or be a series of re-badges, OC's and or flops. There's lots of speculation in the rumor mills.
m
0
l
a b K Overclocking
July 2, 2013 6:32:54 AM

jaquith said:
kikoano111 said:
so for 1920x1080 I dont need 4GB it will be same as 2gb?


Useless - period; I've never seen a vRAM Bottleneck using 2GB vRAM on 1920 x 1080 yet. However, 2GB can be a problem in some games with uber high details on 30" monitors (2560 x 1600 ) but very rarely. Now if the plan is 3xHD (5760 x 1080) then sure 3GB+ vRAM.


I agree, 2gb is fine. Even at higher resolutions. High AA is cool for e-peen benchmarks but from my experience it usually makes gameplay less desirable and choppy due to frame rate fluctuations.

I do recommend the 780. Simply because it's a better GPU and a slap away from a Titan.
m
0
l
a b K Overclocking
July 2, 2013 7:07:41 AM

RussK1 said:
I do recommend the 780. Simply because it's a better GPU and a slap away from a Titan.

First, I have no qualms about the GTX 780, that said it depends upon the game and the game's mechanics. I personally prefer muliplayer games like CoD specifically BO2 and BF3, and specific to BO2 the games' mechanics give folks that peg the 200 FPS limit the edge and yep I deal with tearing. So the answer is it depends primarily upon the game. My best 'guess' is future titles like Ghost will quite possibly have that same edge (higher firing rate to FPS and aggressive advantages) and either two GTX 760's or GTX 770's trump a single GTX 780. Further, I prefer a single monitor and the UltraWide gives me a better unobstructed field of view and the 30" (2560 x 1600) are double the cost of 29" UltraWide's 2560 x 1080. Hence my recommendation.

My daughter really likes her nVidia Surround in 3D but it's crazy expensive in comparison. Price 3 to 4 WAY SLI and 120 Hz panels and you'll know.

GTX 760 SLI (note stuttering) - http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/geforce_gtx_760_sl...
GTX 770 SLI (note stuttering) - http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/geforce_gtx_770_sl...

The reason for my decision with SLI GTX 770 is I can probably get by skipping a generation and so far the stuttering seems to be better than a single GTX 780. Ghosts or BF4 = who knows...???
m
0
l
July 2, 2013 11:56:20 AM

I dont have money to get SLI or gtx 780 but the new gen consoles will use 8gb so that means 2gb card wont be good for new games?
m
0
l
July 30, 2013 6:25:03 PM

kikoano111 said:
I dont have money to get SLI or gtx 780 but the new gen consoles will use 8gb so that means 2gb card wont be good for new games?


Next gen consoles will use 8GB RAM, not VRAM. All you need to know, is that the GTX 770 4GB is an overkill for 1080p gaming, but for 2560x1440 monitors, i'd get it, since it's more future proof anyway and it's only $50 more expensive than the 2GB version of the gtx 770. GTX 780 is a waste of money, you'll only get 10% more performance out of the GTX 780 which is not good for $650. It's all up to you, but I'd get the GTX 770 4GB.
m
0
l
August 5, 2013 5:02:58 AM

I think most of the replies here are subjective but I have to disagree with some of the comments regarding 2GB VRAM and 1920x1080

I had GTX 670 2GB (Gainward Phantom) but found that my Skyrim with 2K, 4K and 8K textures and full ENB (DoF, SSAO etc etc) would use as much as 2.5GB VRAM so I took an upgrade to GTX 770 4GB (Inno3D HerculeZ X3 Ultra) - and this is all on 1920x1080 (40" Samsung LCD TV, 6000 series). My game makes it look like your in a multi million dollar CGI film! When it hit the 2GB mark you wouldnt often get a bit of stutter and slow framerates, yuk!

However there are very few games (if any at all) that have such high use of VRAM as my Skyrim config from what I understand. I am a monster on BF3 but even with all the ultra settings it doesn't top 2GB VRAM usage although it does get close to it occasionally.

I wouldn't have needed the upgrade had I not delayed my GTX 670 purchase by a few weeks - when they first hit the stores the 4GB variant of the GTX 670 was in abundance but I noticed they dried up rather quickly (weeks) and most manufacturers and retailers cut the options back to just the 2GB version (when I purchased).

That all said I am absolutely staggered by the performance vs heat/sound that my new card provides - whatever I throw at it (inc the above Skyrim config) the core temperature doesn't go above 56c (and the core can be user overclocked to 1300MHz, memory to 8000MHz) whilst I can not hear the card over my case fans.

I am just starting to play Metro Last Light - some of the graphics settings in this series will punish cards, the settings I have are near the top end and using 1920x1080 it gets up to about 2GB VRAM usage but as I have not yet really started real gameplay (I'm on the 1st mission) I imagine the VRAM usage will be higher once I get into big firefights, busy situations etc.

What I would not want to do at this time is to buy the 2GB card and find it struggles @ 1920x1080 either now (Metro Last Light / Skyrim) or in near future with the next generation of big game titles. I like all the eye candy and nice fluid frame rates.

I got a bargain on the card imo, GBP 395 (half of which was covered by the sale of the GTX 670)
I don't plan to go into multi screen gaming quite yet but I do reckon the card will see me well over the next 2 to 3 years @ 1920x1080

Like everyone else hear I can only talk from my own experiences but I do expect the VRAM to increase in future titles just as it has done over time to date.

Chaz
m
0
l

Best solution

August 5, 2013 6:04:08 AM

GTX 760 in SLI is already powerful enough to allow you to skip two generations of graphics cards if you're gaming on one 1080p screen. Going to GTX 770 in SLI will cost a lot more, but is the benefit really worth it when the 760 SLI can already max out anything you throw at it?

Save yourself $300 and either upgrade sooner or get the 4GB models of 760 for even more longevity (so you wont run out of VRAM in games even 3-4 years from now).

770 SLI is a lot of money going to waste unless you game on three screens or ultra-high resolutions. 780 is even more wasteful as it loses out to 760 SLI by a rather wide margin while being more expensive.
Share
August 5, 2013 8:47:01 AM

Why do you people recommend the 780 when it costs more than a pair of 760s but is much slower? Unless your motherboard or case ventilation doesn't allow for SLI, I just don't see the 780 making sense. Unless you would SLI a pair of 780s, but that's in a whole another price category then.
m
0
l
a b K Overclocking
August 5, 2013 10:14:24 AM

byogamingpc said:
There are a few reasons people recommend it. 1. It uses less power, 2. produces less heat, 3. you can SLI it later, 4. a single card setup is preferable due to stability.


Exactly. The 780 is a better card no matter how you slice it and dice it.

http://us.hardware.info/reviews/4632/37/geforce-gtx-700...

Quote:
Conclusion

The higher the resolution and the higher the quality settings, the more you will benefit from an SLI configuration. For example, the GTX 700 cards in SLI only scale an average of 55%, but in 5760x1080 with maximum settings the average is between 68% and 75%, depending on the card. A third card doesn't add as much as a second card does, and is typically more prone to compatibility issues than two cards.

A single GPU will always experience less synchronization problems such as micro-stuttering, for obvious reasons. That's why you really shouldn't spend money on two mid-range cards for an SLI configuration, and instead invest in one powerful high-end card with the same level of performance as two mid-range cards. In this case, better to have one GTX 780 than two GTX 760s. However, if you already own a mid-range card, adding a second one will of course boost performance.

While it's expensive, SLI is the most interesting for the high-end cards. It enables you to play with resolutions and settings that are simply impossible to achieve with a single GPU. The benchmark results were clear, a single GTX 780 often isn't enough for gaming in 5760x1080 with maximum settings and anti-aliasing. The second card is what makes the game playable. Considering the price of a GTX 780 or Titan, this is obviously not a hobby for the average gamer.

The chart on the previous page is very useful for finding out exactly what you need in order to be able to play a certain game in a certain resolution, and be guaranteed 60 fps. Should you buy a second mid-range card, or is it better to hold off and invest in that one high-end card?

m
0
l
August 5, 2013 10:15:15 AM

RussK1 said:
byogamingpc said:
There are a few reasons people recommend it. 1. It uses less power, 2. produces less heat, 3. you can SLI it later, 4. a single card setup is preferable due to stability.


Exactly. The 780 is a better card no matter how you slice it and dice it.



You're still paying more for a slower card.
m
0
l
a b K Overclocking
August 5, 2013 10:23:32 AM

ekseli said:
RussK1 said:
byogamingpc said:
There are a few reasons people recommend it. 1. It uses less power, 2. produces less heat, 3. you can SLI it later, 4. a single card setup is preferable due to stability.


Exactly. The 780 is a better card no matter how you slice it and dice it.



You're still paying more for a slower card.


The problem with people like you... you convolute the question by derailing a thread.. The question was GTX 770 4gb Overclock vs gtx 780 3gb not 760 sli vs 780.

It's simple - GK110 is BETTER than GK104.

...and you keep saying that 760 sli is so much faster than a single 780??
m
0
l
August 5, 2013 8:59:38 PM

RussK1 said:
ekseli said:
RussK1 said:
byogamingpc said:
There are a few reasons people recommend it. 1. It uses less power, 2. produces less heat, 3. you can SLI it later, 4. a single card setup is preferable due to stability.


Exactly. The 780 is a better card no matter how you slice it and dice it.



You're still paying more for a slower card.


The problem with people like you... you convolute the question by derailing a thread.. The question was GTX 770 4gb Overclock vs gtx 780 3gb not 760 sli vs 780.

It's simple - GK110 is BETTER than GK104.

...and you keep saying that 760 sli is so much faster than a single 780??


Define "better". Obviously GK110 (780) is faster than GF104 (770), but it's also less value for money. However, a single GK110 (780) loses in absolute speed and value for money to two GK104s (760 SLI). Thus whether you use absolute performance or cost-efficiency to define better, 780 loses hands down to 760 SLI. If you have some other definition for "better", I'd like to hear it.

(Sure, the GK110 is more technologically advanced than GK104. But if it brings no real-world benefit to the user, what it's worth?)

So yes, answering the original question by OP, it's rather obvious that from a pure performance perspective the 780 is better than a 770. However, if two 760s are even better than that 780, and at a lower cost too, don't you think it's relevant to point it out?
m
0
l
December 4, 2013 10:11:56 AM

jaquith said:
kikoano111 said:
so for 1920x1080 I dont need 4GB it will be same as 2gb?


Useless - period; I've never seen a vRAM Bottleneck using 2GB vRAM on 1920 x 1080 yet. However, 2GB can be a problem in some games with uber high details on 30" monitors (2560 x 1600 ) but very rarely. Now if the plan is 3xHD (5760 x 1080) then sure 3GB+ vRAM.

/edit - IF HD 1920 x 1080 then I'd recommend GTX 760 SLI for several AAA games, both the Frame Rates (FPS) and Stuttering for most games is better than a single e.g. GTX 780. However, in some games the stuttering isn't always the case and a lot has to do with the drivers.

Generally, a single GPU is 'better' as long as the FPS target is obtainable. As of today the GTX 700 series is the best choice and your choice is dependent upon your wallet and games you play. The forthcoming HD 8000 series might hold some surprises or be a series of re-badges, OC's and or flops. There's lots of speculation in the rumor mills.



This is not always true. if you want to play on max settings on a single gpu getting a gtx 770 would be a better way to go. i currently have a gtx 680 2gb evga and with a single gpu it isnt enough to play all games at max. if you are just gonna go play mmo style games then just get a gtx 470 or something cheap. but for the big boy games you get what you pay for
m
0
l
December 4, 2013 10:18:36 AM

if youre playing at 1080p the 680 aka 770 should bring quite ample performance in almost anything this side of crysis3...

so you either have some sort of a bottleneck, or a bad card
m
0
l
!