Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Solved

Triple Monitors - GTX 760 vs GTX 760 4GB vs GTX 770 vs GTX 770 4GB

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
August 9, 2013 2:45:28 AM

Hello!

I'm currently picking out a new GPU for my system to replace my aging 9800GT. I plan to have three monitors. However, I don't expect to game much (as I'm currently a student); I'll be programming (involving "intensive" 3D graphics), doing homework (i.e. MS Office), CAD work, occasional video editing for school projects, and in my spare time, gaming (BF3, TF2, Portal, FSX, etc.). I don't expect to use all three monitors for gaming (except for FSX).

Given this, would it be more wise to get a GTX 760, a 760 with 4GB RAM, a 770, or a 770 with 4GB RAM?

I've read online that the 4GB doesn't really matter because of the bandwidth of the cards.

Here are some cards I've been eyeing:


Thanks!
a b Î Nvidia
August 9, 2013 2:52:22 AM

If you don't expect to be gaming on ultra settings, then any of those are overkill, to be honest.

Just grab a normal 760 - I'd go with EVGA for the warranty. The 760 represents insane value, and is honestly plenty for what you're looking for.
m
0
l
August 9, 2013 3:38:34 AM

I'd go 770 just for longevity and that little bit of extra grunt is always good!
m
0
l
Related resources
a b Î Nvidia
August 9, 2013 11:07:38 AM

ThermalV said:
I'd go 770 just for longevity and that little bit of extra grunt is always good!


You can buy a 760 for $250. A 770 is $400. The longevity isn't even close to an issue; they're both built on GK 104 cores; good ones. The "little bit of extra grunt" seriously isn't worth $150, especially when he's not going to be gaming that much and even then isn't going to be gaming on three monitors the majority of the time.

byogamingpc said:
A 4GB 760 doesn't even have the bandwidth to utilize 4GB so even the idea of that card makes no sense. The best option would be to get a Gigabyte GTX 770 WF 4GB which would be an even better option.

First of all... come on man, use links. They aren't that hard to put in. Second of all... while I agree that a 4GB 760 is pointless, why in the world are you recommending a $650 video card when a $250 one will be more than sufficient for the OP's needs? Read what he's doing again - he does not want to be gaming on triple monitors with ultra settings - there's no need for a 780.
m
0
l
August 9, 2013 11:20:10 AM

If the OP is doing intensive 3d, why not the GTX 650 Ti boost? From what I've read, most applications that utilize CUDA work on the 6xx series, and have not yet been ported to use the 7xx series. Plus it it only around $170 IIRC.
m
0
l
August 9, 2013 2:04:55 PM

byogamingpc said:
A 4GB 760 doesn't even have the bandwidth to utilize 4GB so even the idea of that card makes no sense. The best option would be to get a Gigabyte GTX 770 WF 4GB which would be an even better option.


Doesn't the 770 also not have enough bandwidth for the 4GB?

DarkSable said:

First of all... come on man, use links. They aren't that hard to put in. Second of all... while I agree that a 4GB 760 is pointless, why in the world are you recommending a $650 video card when a $250 one will be more than sufficient for the OP's needs? Read what he's doing again - he does not want to be gaming on triple monitors with ultra settings - there's no need for a 780.

So a GTX 760 2GB is enough?

teddymines said:
If the OP is doing intensive 3d, why not the GTX 650 Ti boost? From what I've read, most applications that utilize CUDA work on the 6xx series, and have not yet been ported to use the 7xx series. Plus it it only around $170 IIRC.


In my programming, the GPU won't be used for computing, but just for rendering.

I also forgot to mention that I'll be using the GPU for CAD. Is the GTX 760 still enough? Also, is the 770 worth the extra money? I'm not "afraid", per se, of spending extra for the 770, but it's whether or not it's really worth the extra price (in terms of power, not what my current usage goals are, for future-proofing reasons)?
m
0
l
a b Î Nvidia
August 9, 2013 4:38:53 PM

^ Which is what I've been saying, yes.

OP, the 770 isn't really worth it, since all it will do is shave a little bit of time (not all that much) off your renders. As for future proofing, there is no such thing - you're better off buying the budget option now and then selling it and buying another budget option further down the road - you'll end up with a more powerful card in the end and will have spent the exact same amount of money.

As for 2GB vs 4GB, the only thing that's talking about is the amount of video ram the card has. 2GB should be more than enough unless you want to render at 4k resolution or something silly like that.
m
0
l
August 9, 2013 8:23:17 PM

DarkSable said:
^ Which is what I've been saying, yes.

OP, the 770 isn't really worth it, since all it will do is shave a little bit of time (not all that much) off your renders. As for future proofing, there is no such thing - you're better off buying the budget option now and then selling it and buying another budget option further down the road - you'll end up with a more powerful card in the end and will have spent the exact same amount of money.

As for 2GB vs 4GB, the only thing that's talking about is the amount of video ram the card has. 2GB should be more than enough unless you want to render at 4k resolution or something silly like that.


Ok, so I've decided to go with a 760. I'm thinking of getting a 4GB card though, since that gives me space for debugging my code.

Which of these would be the best GTX 760 4GB card?
http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=E...
m
0
l
a b Î Nvidia
August 10, 2013 10:04:41 PM

Also, I believe that you're confusing the Video RAM with the system ram.

You can have 1GB, 2GB, or 4GB of VRAM (either GDDR5 or GDDR3) and still have 512MB, 4GB, or 16GB of system RAM (DDR 3) - they're totally separate. All the video ram does is store the image before it's sent to the monitor.
m
0
l
August 11, 2013 9:20:07 PM

DarkSable said:
Also, I believe that you're confusing the Video RAM with the system ram.

You can have 1GB, 2GB, or 4GB of VRAM (either GDDR5 or GDDR3) and still have 512MB, 4GB, or 16GB of system RAM (DDR 3) - they're totally separate. All the video ram does is store the image before it's sent to the monitor.


Yes, I know that the VRAM is separate from the system RAM. My applications can take upwards of 600MB of VRAM and when debugging, and I run multiple instances at a time to test networking code. With only 2GB of VRAM, I can only run ~3 instances at a time. I have a GTX 680M with 4GB of VRAM on my laptop, and I certainly want my desktop to have at least the same usability as my laptop in terms of graphics.

I will admit however, I'm not as experienced with the hardware side of things compared to the software side of computer graphics. Is what byogamingpc saying (bandwidth restriction) completely true, as in I won't even be able to use the extra 2GB?
m
0
l
a b Î Nvidia
August 11, 2013 10:04:47 PM

Ahh, all right - in that case the larger VRAM budget is a decent option.

It's pointless for gaming, where all the ram has to be accessible at once for it to be helpful; it should be just fine for what you're doing.
m
0
l
August 13, 2013 12:57:17 AM

DarkSable said:
Ahh, all right - in that case the larger VRAM budget is a decent option.

It's pointless for gaming, where all the ram has to be accessible at once for it to be helpful; it should be just fine for what you're doing.


Thanks for clearing that up! So should I go with EVGA or Gigabyte? Both are $299.99 on newegg.
m
0
l
a b Î Nvidia
August 13, 2013 9:15:26 AM

I personally would go with EVGA for their outstanding customer service and warranty, especially since I've had a few sour interactions with Gigabyte, but the Gigabyte probably has a better cooler. (Though I'd have to see the exact models to tell you.)
m
0
l
a b Î Nvidia
August 13, 2013 10:51:56 PM

My answer then depends on your case.

The EVGA cooler isn't going to keep the CARD as cool, but will vent all of that heat out of the back of the case. The gigabyte cooler will keep the graphics card slightly cooler, but will recycle that heat back into the case.

On the other hand, EVGA will be a much nicer company to deal with if something goes wrong, and you probably won't be stressing the card that much that often anyways... though I'm not positive on that part.
m
0
l
August 14, 2013 1:46:42 AM

DarkSable said:
My answer then depends on your case.

The EVGA cooler isn't going to keep the CARD as cool, but will vent all of that heat out of the back of the case. The gigabyte cooler will keep the graphics card slightly cooler, but will recycle that heat back into the case.

On the other hand, EVGA will be a much nicer company to deal with if something goes wrong, and you probably won't be stressing the card that much that often anyways... though I'm not positive on that part.


I have an HAF 922. If it matters, I have a Hyper 212 Evo on an i7 4770K, and it current idles at ~40 degrees celsius.
m
0
l
August 14, 2013 1:50:56 AM

4gb card is a must have for multi monitor setup 2gb wont cut it so always go for the most memory available
m
0
l
August 14, 2013 1:50:58 AM

4gb card is a must have for multi monitor setup 2gb wont cut it so always go for the most memory available
m
0
l

Best solution

a b Î Nvidia
August 14, 2013 11:27:42 AM

That's big enough and has good enough cooling that you shouldn't have to worry about having a recycling cooler, but Haswell does run hot.

Ultimately the decision is up to you, but I'd probably take the EVGA due to the warranty and customer service.
Share
August 14, 2013 3:03:32 PM

DarkSable said:
That's big enough and has good enough cooling that you shouldn't have to worry about having a recycling cooler, but Haswell does run hot.

Ultimately the decision is up to you, but I'd probably take the EVGA due to the warranty and customer service.


Going with EVGA! Thanks for all the help.
m
0
l
!