Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Solved

7950 vs 760 single card surround?

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
August 17, 2013 1:44:34 PM

I'm looking at buying a new GPU and can't decide between a gtx 760 4gb for ~300 or a 7950 3gb for ~250. I know AMD has better support for multi screen gaming, but has nvidia stepped up its game this generation or would the amd card perform better? I want to do 5760x1080, and I don't NEED ultra high settings (and will probably NOT use AA at all) but want to know what one would be better.
August 17, 2013 1:47:45 PM

The 760 is probably a bit better then the 7950 and more GRam is important for high resolutions for I say 760. However it won't be too significant and if you want to take the $50 and the free games over the somewhat better 760, that's also a reasonable choice. The 760 is better, but I think the 7950 is a better value. I hope this helps!
m
0
l
August 17, 2013 1:56:54 PM

AMD cards are better in Surround Eyefinity hands down. AMD has got it correct with Eyefinity from the get to Nvidia is still dragging its feet and has not got it correct yet. And from what I have seen in driver updates since January it does not look like they are in any hurry to even attempt to fix the problems because none have been addressed in any update at all. Anyone wanting a Surround/Eyefinity setup should go AMD period.

After building my i5 rig had I known the problems Nvidia was having with it I would have put a couple 7970's in this rig to. Most of the problems have to do with the 2D desktop and not games but still they are there. And it is even worse in Windows 8.

Plus there is a specific way you have to plug the monitors into the cards when you are running SLI Surround where with AMD you just plug them all into the primary card. What is worse is if you choose to run three independent monitors you have to unplug the monitor in the second card and plug it into the primary just to get all three running in SLI again. All in all Nvidia did not think any of this though it is like they just threw it all together and hoped it worked in the end Games seem to work fine but whey are not always gaming.
m
0
l
Related resources
August 17, 2013 2:18:34 PM

bryonhowley said:
AMD cards are better in Surround Eyefinity hands down. AMD has got it correct with Eyefinity from the get to Nvidia is still dragging its feet and has not got it correct yet. And from what I have seen in driver updates since January it does not look like they are in any hurry to even attempt to fix the problems because none have been addressed in any update at all. Anyone wanting a Surround/Eyefinity setup should go AMD period.

After building my i5 rig had I known the problems Nvidia was having with it I would have put a couple 7970's in this rig to. Most of the problems have to do with the 2D desktop and not games but still they are there. And it is even worse in Windows 8.

Plus there is a specific way you have to plug the monitors into the cards when you are running SLI Surround where with AMD you just plug them all into the primary card. What is worse is if you choose to run three independent monitors you have to unplug the monitor in the second card and plug it into the primary just to get all three running in SLI again. All in all Nvidia did not think any of this though it is like they just threw it all together and hoped it worked in the end Games seem to work fine but whey are not always gaming.


would you recommend a card by a specific vendor, a cooler that is reliable, not a jet engine, and keeps it under 90c?
m
0
l
August 17, 2013 2:31:52 PM

if you want to run 1080p eyefinity then forget about either card, they will both struggle, even at lower detail settings. a single 1080p monitor is all you want to run with those cards. As far as i have seen there is no real issue with nvidia surround. If you put a couple 7970's in to a rig as suggested by bryonhowley, you would have even more problems of stuttering cause by crossfire, way more problematic than any surround issues. If it were me, i'd get the 760, then later on get a second one for sli to run 3 monitors, a single card wont cut it for 3 1080p monitors, unless you want to run them at a lower resolution, which will give crap image quality.
m
0
l

Best solution

August 17, 2013 2:35:58 PM

1zacster said:
. I know AMD has better support for multi screen gaming, but has nvidia stepped up its game this generation or would the amd card perform better? I want to do 5760x1080, and I don't NEED ultra high settings (and will probably NOT use AA at all) but want to know what one would be better.


3 years ago I and the rest of the world would have agreed with that.....the tables have turned somewhat. Still, AMD's architecture is better optimized for large resolutions. However..... as to advantages / disadvantages

1. Multi screen gaming is relatively equal set up wise in most reviews ....each side has specific advantages / disadvantages on the surface, as it says in this article.....

http://techreport.com/review/23217/triple-screen-gaming...
Quote:
Apart from bezel peeking, which we didn't find necessary in the games we played, there's little practical difference between Nvidia Surround and AMD Eyefinity.


But......

2. AMD can not do 120 / 144 Hz ...HUGE downer, I haven't used anything else in almost 2 years. And 3D w/o 120/144 Hz doesn't cut it.... Actually i was surprised by it....I hate 3D movies and 1st time I played Batman AC I got a headache......tried it again and had a blast.
http://www.tweaktown.com/articles/5227/amd-eyefinity-is...

3. Can't do 3 screens w/o multiple GFX cards .... SLI works and CF, despite the new beta 13.8 drivers still has too many issues. I expect this gap to shrink over time but I don't see them pulling even for a while.
http://hardocp.com/article/2013/08/01/amd_catalyst_138_...

4. nVidia does not require the use of display port.....

5. nVidia has the bezel peeking option....both systems hide the pixels behind the bezels....but when something is obscured that ya wanna see, nVidia lets you use a key combo to see what is behind them......not a biggie but convenient in certain situations.
Share
!