Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Solved

GTX 760 in SLI vs 7970 GHz Edition vs GTX 770 OC vs 7950 in Xfire

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
July 23, 2013 3:43:07 PM

I JUST DON"T KNOW.

I'll be gaming on a 1080p monitor.

Want to keep the system for 3 years at least preferably.

Any thoughts are greatly appreciated.
July 23, 2013 3:48:25 PM

The GTX 760 SLI is by far faster than either of those single cards. Most games usually average 80% improvement with SLI if you keep up with the latest driver updates. I've been using dual Nvidia cards for years in my main systems. Ever since the 8800 series. Never any issues.
m
0
l
July 23, 2013 3:55:04 PM

do you not think that the 2gb of VRAM is going to be an issue for next gen titles?
m
0
l
Related resources

Best solution

July 23, 2013 7:06:18 PM

3gb vram is an issue for me at 1440p running ultra modded skyrim. after about an hour of play certain textures stop loading and framerates drop through the floor, forcing me to restart my computer, not really a big deal though, i can take a 2 minute break.

but, moral for my story, before i got my 7950 i was on the fence with it and the 670, but i wanted to 670 4gb model. many users FLAT OUT told me that 2gb vram would not be an issue and wasn't worth the money. soon after we found out that crysis 3 indeed pushes well over 2.6gb vram @ 1440p.

skyrim is an anomaly though, as there are sli titan users over at the nexus forums with death modded skryim running triple 1440p/single 4k monitor setups and they vram crash as well once the 6gb limit is hit. last i knew, crysis 3 on a 4k with dual titans cannot run smooth on ultra, high settings are the sweet spot with that setup and will use about 4gb vram.
Share
July 24, 2013 10:31:52 AM

+1
I was playing Crisis 3 with 2 x GTX 570 1.25GB VRAM. Never had an issue with nearly everything maxed out at 1080p.
m
0
l
July 30, 2013 6:27:30 AM

By the time you're going to see a noticeable difference in games with the 760 SLI over the 770, the 770 is going to be cheap enough that you can buy another one at the cost of a single 760 now.

So a single 770 is far better value for your money right now. You can SLI it later if and when you feel the need. But if you go with two 760s now, you have no such upgrade option later. In the meantime the 770 is plenty fast enough and the extra price of two 760s is in my opinion really hard to justify.

Over the long term, 770 with the option to SLI it later is far better value for your money and doesn't commit as much of your money (or your second PCI-e port) right away.

The single 770 is going to be good for at least a year, more likely two to three years. By then you can evaluate if you want to SLI or if some entirely new card is a better option for the same money. 760 SLI will certainly last you for three years as well, but it obviously costs more and doesn't have the upgrade options that a single 770 has.

In short, if you go with one 770 and decide to SLI 1-2 years down the line, the 770 SLI might end up costing the same as the 760 SLI. If you had that choice now, there would probably be little choice about which one you would want to get, right?

Well, that's actually the choice you do have, right now.
m
0
l
July 30, 2013 10:04:25 AM

BigMack70 said:
ekseli said:
By the time you're going to see a noticeable difference in games with the 760 SLI over the 770, the 770 is going to be cheap enough that you can buy another one at the cost of a single 760 now.

So a single 770 is far better value for your money right now. You can SLI it later if and when you feel the need. But if you go with two 760s now, you have no such upgrade option later. In the meantime the 770 is plenty fast enough and the extra price of two 760s is in my opinion really hard to justify.

Over the long term, 770 with the option to SLI it later is far better value for your money and doesn't commit as much of your money (or your second PCI-e port) right away.

The single 770 is going to be good for at least a year, more likely two to three years. By then you can evaluate if you want to SLI or if some entirely new card is a better option for the same money. 760 SLI will certainly last you for three years as well, but it obviously costs more and doesn't have the upgrade options that a single 770 has.

In short, if you go with one 770 and decide to SLI 1-2 years down the line, the 770 SLI might end up costing the same as the 760 SLI. If you had that choice now, there would probably be little choice about which one you would want to get, right?

Well, that's actually the choice you do have, right now.


Gotta disagree with you here. For one thing, demanding games like Crysis 3 already will benefit considerably from 760 SLI over a 770, which indicates upcoming next gen games will too. Also, you seem to be underestimating the cost difference between 760 and 770 SLI. 770 SLI is about $300 more expensive, and by the time a 770 has dropped enough in price to drop that, 770 SLI will no longer be a very good option in light of newer GPUs.


760 SLI is faster than a single 770, no argument there. Whether it is noticeable in any other game besides Crysis 3, I doubt it. Even Crysis 3 is playable at highest settings with a single 770, non-OC. And I honestly don't see many games more demanding than Crysis 3 coming out in the near future. In almost every other (if not indeed every) title, both now and in the near future, the difference is either marginal or irrelevant. Yet the 760 SLI costs around 25% more than a single 770 today. That's not a very good bang for the buck.

The 770 gives you more choice when you eventually really do need more speed. You can either go SLI, or indeed as you said it, spend that money on a new card instead. SLI at that point might not make sense as you say, but contrary to your argument that's actually a good thing; it means you got an even better outcome by not committing yourself to an SLI solution from the beginning. And if SLI is still attractive, a dual 770 is going to be one powerful card combo even two or three years from now. It may cost more than a 760 SLI bought now, but it's also going to be a lot faster.

All that said, the 760 SLI is a very good solution and has a great value relative to other cards that deliver the same performance. However I would not commit to SLI from the get-go unless I absolutely had to, because it limits your future options and gives, in this case, very little noticeable advantages in the short term. Especially if you don't plan on playing countless of hours of Crysis 3.

I'd go with either a single 760 or 770 and upgrade to SLI when there really was a need for it. With 770 that need is bound to arise later, whereas for 760 the upgrade would be affordable somewhat earlier. But going straight to SLI 760 is a waste of money at this point, in my opinion. If you're a big fan of Crysis it might still make a good investment, but if not, I'd reconsider.
m
0
l
July 30, 2013 5:40:16 PM

After considering the pros and cons of this discussion, my vote is still for GTX 760 SLI. I would just as easily pick the HD 7950 CF if not for the micro-stutter issues AMD can't seem to get a fix for... yet, anyway. I understand the cost issue. That is indeed a consideration. But I usually sell my old cards at price that takes the edge off the purchase of the new cards. And one has to consider the use one has gotten out of the cards as part of the deal too.

I have been running dual cards since the 8800 GTS/GTX days. The only time I ever had issues with dual cards has been with an older AMD CF setup. As a result, there has never been a current game I could not run at max settings with smooth frame rates at my monitor's native resolution; lately that being 1920x1080. That's all one can ask for.
m
0
l
July 31, 2013 7:52:09 AM

While 760 SLI is by no means a bad solution, far from it, I would advise to go with one GTX 760 for now if you're unwilling to pay the premium for the 770. It's enough to run most current games with maximum or near-maximum settings. When it's no longer fast enough for whatever particular game you are playing, then go ahead and buy another card for SLI.

It's more cost-effective since the price of the second 760 will have time to drop and it keeps your upgrade options open. If you don't have a game that requires more than a single 760 right now, then committing to SLI straight away is just throwing money away.
m
0
l
July 31, 2013 8:40:39 AM

@ekseli
That's good advice. I usually end up doing it that way myself. But with some folks, cost isn't the issue it is with most of us.
m
0
l
July 31, 2013 9:03:36 AM

clutchc said:
*snip* But with some folks, cost isn't the issue it is with most of us.


True. But then I'd advise going with the 770 and SLI that later. ;) 

Anyway, going with the Crossfire is a gamble as long as AMD hasn't fixed the driver issue for a fact. Promises are promises and I wouldn't gamble several hundred dollars on AMD being able to keep them. So the two courses of action I would recommend are to buy either a single 760 now and SLI later, or buy a single 770 now and SLI later if it still makes sense to get another one when you can afford it. Which one you choose depends on how much money you have to spare. 760 is the more cost-effective solution, 770 gives you more oomph and may allow you to skip SLI altogether.

Either way, I would hold off from buying SLI straight away unless you have a clear and present need for that level of performance right now. The price of both models are bound to drop at least a bit when the next Radeon generation launches, more after Maxwell hits the stores. That makes either SLI option that much cheaper.
m
0
l
July 31, 2013 2:55:05 PM

760 SLI=$500
770=$400
No way you will get another 770 for $100 in 2-3 years. At least not new and probably not even on ebay. GTX 560 was released Jan 2011 for $250 and the cheapest one on Amazon is $140. So I am guessing a $400 card will still be in the $200 price range 2-3 years from now.

Look at these framrates kickin the Titans butt in BF3:
http://www.vortez.net/articles_pages/nvidia_geforce_gtx...

The only reason I would recommend the 770 is if you are planning on upgrading your GPU in another year or so... A 760 SLI setup will easily last three years on 1080p (probably 4-5 if you think how much more powerful it is then the PS4/XBONE) and at that point you are better off just upgrading to new tech than buying another 770 to SLI...

/rant
m
0
l
August 5, 2013 1:54:26 AM

I'm starting to lean a bit more on the 760 SLI, too. Although for the price it costs you might want to maximize its longevity by picking the 4GB models. That way the awesome performance of the two 760s wont at least be bottlenecked by insufficient VRAM in the future. Especially if you will at some point upgrade to a high-res screen or multiple monitors.

The SLI solution does have the downside that it may make your system run hotter, and thus louder, if your case ventilation is not really good. Whether the cards being audible during gaming bothers you or not is of course a matter of personal taste. A single card might be quieter, but the value of two 760s is hard to beat.

Remember the close the thread if you don't need further advise.
m
0
l
August 5, 2013 8:43:21 AM

I just got a gtx 690 for £400. I think that'll do me!

Thanks for all your input guys and girls.
m
0
l
August 5, 2013 8:49:00 AM

BigMack70 said:
You found a 690 for £400? Wow... you just ripped someone off big time :lol: 


I don't know. He might have used the £400 he got from selling the card towards buying two 760s for even more performance.
m
0
l
August 5, 2013 8:51:06 AM

BigMack70 said:
You found a 690 for £400? Wow... you just ripped someone off big time :lol: 


HURRAAYY
m
0
l
!