Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Solved

AMD and Nvidia cards in the same system?

Tags:
  • Nvidia
  • Physx
  • AMD
  • Graphics
Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
September 16, 2013 9:33:26 AM

My quest is I want to get the 7990 and run it as the main card, because it seems to be the better of the high end cards, and I love playing Games in eyefinity, but also I would like to use physx at the same time, but there is a performance loss when i let my cpu do the physx with an amd card. So I was thinking that I run a 7990, and a lower end nvidia card and dedicate it to doing just the physx if this is even possible, Is this possible to do?

More about : amd nvidia cards system

September 16, 2013 9:39:16 AM

I would expect a driver conflict if nothing else.
m
0
l
September 16, 2013 9:43:10 AM

ram1009 said:
I would expect a driver conflict if nothing else.


All of the monitors would be connected to the 7990 and everything comes out of it, but the nvidia card would just do the physx number crunching.
m
0
l
Related resources
September 16, 2013 9:45:48 AM

physx is outdated, you won't gain much even from games that utilize it considering you're already running a 7990. You can get a dedicated physx card, somewhat expensive for a paperweight now and run that, but again you wont see much of anything.
m
0
l
September 16, 2013 9:47:30 AM

HillBillyAsian said:
physx is outdated, you won't gain much even from games that utilize it considering you're already running a 7990. You can get a dedicated physx card, somewhat expensive for a paperweight now and run that, but again you wont see much of anything.


So is physx more or less pointless now days? Because i looked at some comparison videos and it looked pretty much the same
m
0
l
September 16, 2013 9:47:51 AM

the money for 7990 plus the money for another card for physx... = GTX 690 price.
375W TDP + another 100+W physx is higher 300 W for GTX 690 ... you probably gonna need a strong PSU.
I never heard of an individiual with this type of config... and I don't know how much performance will be, or if it's really working.
m
0
l
September 16, 2013 9:49:17 AM

I would just get the 690 or 2x 780's and be done with it. The 7990 has some issues.
m
0
l
September 16, 2013 9:54:19 AM

JD88 said:
I would just get the 690 or 2x 780's and be done with it. The 7990 has some issues.


I honestly dont need the physx I would rather have eyefinity than nvidia surround. Also what issues does the 7990 currently have, and by the time I go to buying it the next gen will be out and hopefully the new 8990/9990 will be available
m
0
l
September 16, 2013 9:54:24 AM

7990 has multi screen issues, look at a single 780 or a couple 770's
m
0
l
September 16, 2013 9:59:31 AM

what is this BS about getting a 770 or 780, he asked a plain and simple question to get a dedicated physx card or not, the answer is yes he can, but unless he has a mid range nvidia card lying around or gets one for free, its not justified to waste 130+ dollars to run something that he won't see much of anything from even with games that support physx. Newer amd cards can run older physx installations just fyi try it
m
0
l
September 16, 2013 10:04:04 AM

u_gonna_squeal_b4_we_cookya said:
It would work, but you would be better off using your CPU for Physx. And if it slows it down then instead of getting an Nvidia card, use that money to get better CPU. What CPU & motherboard do you have?


The card is going into a new build with the intel 4770k and i think the ASUS Z87-EXPERT LGA or something comparable.
m
0
l
September 16, 2013 10:05:48 AM

HillBillyAsian said:
what is this BS about getting a 770 or 780, he asked a plain and simple question to get a dedicated physx card or not, the answer is yes he can, but unless he has a mid range nvidia card lying around or gets one for free, its not justified to waste 130+ dollars to run something that he won't see much of anything from even with games that support physx. Newer amd cards can run older physx installations just fyi try it


Thats good to know, if I wanted the physx i imagine the the I7 4770k could be okay with picking up the load, and not worry about the extra nvidia card.
m
0
l
a c 85 Î Nvidia
a b À AMD
September 16, 2013 10:11:17 AM

If you want PhysX for the few games that support GPU PhysX, I'd recommend getting an Nvidia setup. Crossfire has issues, and has only been made better on single monitor setups (no Eyefinity) and only with DX11 and DX10, not DX9.

The only place where Eyefinity beats Surround is with special setups, such as 5 monitors, or mixing portrait and landscape setups. If you plan to just use standard landscape, the reviews I've been seeing, show Surround doing better than Eyefinity, though it does depend on the game.

It can be done. I have done it a couple years back, but ultimately, I removed the dedicated card, as it made my Crossfire setup run hotter and louder, which is a real problem considering how hot the 7990 gets.
m
0
l
a c 85 Î Nvidia
a b À AMD
September 16, 2013 10:18:26 AM

u_gonna_squeal_b4_we_cookya said:
lancery78 said:
u_gonna_squeal_b4_we_cookya said:
It would work, but you would be better off using your CPU for Physx. And if it slows it down then instead of getting an Nvidia card, use that money to get better CPU. What CPU & motherboard do you have?


The card is going into a new build with the intel 4770k and i think the ASUS Z87-EXPERT LGA or something comparable.


You should have no problems running physx off the CPU with a 4770k. Even in the future if you had some kind of performance lag, you could always overclock it as you have the right motherboard. Right now, there will be no performance loss from your CPU. You have nothing to worry about. If you had an old CPU like a Core2 or a low end CPU like an i3 then maybe a dedicated Nvidia card would help. But there is no game that uses 100% of a 4770k. Getting a dedicated Nvidia card for physx on that PC would be a complete waste of money.


That isn't really true. There are a lot of games which either bring performance to a crawl (Batman AC, Sacred 2, etc.) or run ok at times, and runs very poorly at other times (Metro 2033, Borderlands 2, etc.).

Of course a PhysX card only helps on games which support GPU accelerated PhysX, which is a pretty small list.
m
0
l
September 16, 2013 10:19:57 AM

u_gonna_squeal_b4_we_cookya said:
lancery78 said:
u_gonna_squeal_b4_we_cookya said:
It would work, but you would be better off using your CPU for Physx. And if it slows it down then instead of getting an Nvidia card, use that money to get better CPU. What CPU & motherboard do you have?


The card is going into a new build with the intel 4770k and i think the ASUS Z87-EXPERT LGA or something comparable.


You should have no problems running physx off the CPU with a 4770k. Even in the future if you had some kind of performance lag, you could always overclock it as you have the right motherboard. Right now, there will be no performance loss from your CPU. You have nothing to worry about. If you had an old CPU like a Core2 or a low end CPU like an i3 then maybe a dedicated Nvidia card would help. But there is no game that uses 100% of a 4770k. Getting a dedicated Nvidia card for physx on that PC would be a complete waste of money.



Okay with all of that in mind, The most key thing i want to do with my new computer is plan on at least 3 monitors and 1 monitor as a multitasing screen, i currently run the amd fx 8350 and the 7950 with boost, and i play games in eyefinifty on three 23 inch asus montiors and a single 20 inch monitor sitting above the other three so that i can brows the web and other stuff while the other screens on in eyefinity and playing a game.

Can i do that with an nvidia card?
m
0
l
a c 85 Î Nvidia
a b À AMD
September 16, 2013 10:31:45 AM

lancery78 said:
bystander said:
Assuming the 3 monitors in Eyefinity are in landscape, yes.
http://www.geforce.com/whats-new/guides/how-to-correctl...

Look at the last images on the setup screen. It shows your exact setup.


if it was portirate it would not work? why would that make a difference


As I mentioned before, Eyefnity's advantage is they offer more configuration options. Though I'm think Surround supports portrait mode as well, just not a mix of portrait and landscape, which Eyefinity does support.
m
0
l
September 16, 2013 10:35:56 AM

bystander said:
lancery78 said:
bystander said:
Assuming the 3 monitors in Eyefinity are in landscape, yes.
http://www.geforce.com/whats-new/guides/how-to-correctl...

Look at the last images on the setup screen. It shows your exact setup.


if it was portirate it would not work? why would that make a difference


As I mentioned before, Eyefnity's advantage is they offer more configuration options. Though I'm think Surround supports portrait mode as well, just not a mix of portrait and landscape, which Eyefinity does support.


ah i see, this is good information changing my question then. Should i get the 780 or wait and see Amd next gen that comes out soon?
m
0
l
a c 85 Î Nvidia
a b À AMD
September 16, 2013 10:38:57 AM

lancery78 said:
bystander said:
lancery78 said:
bystander said:
Assuming the 3 monitors in Eyefinity are in landscape, yes.
http://www.geforce.com/whats-new/guides/how-to-correctl...

Look at the last images on the setup screen. It shows your exact setup.


if it was portirate it would not work? why would that make a difference


As I mentioned before, Eyefnity's advantage is they offer more configuration options. Though I'm think Surround supports portrait mode as well, just not a mix of portrait and landscape, which Eyefinity does support.


ah i see, this is good information changing my question then. Should i get the 780 or wait and see Amd next gen that comes out soon?


Do you feel a need for improved performance now, or are you trying to prepare for something coming in the near future?

If you are doing ok now, then waiting makes sense. If you need an upgrade now, then I'd go for the upgrade now.

I have heard that AMD has something comparable to a 780 coming next month, though it may be a paper launch deal, in which case it may be a couple months before you can purchase it.
m
0
l
September 16, 2013 10:41:36 AM

bystander said:
lancery78 said:
bystander said:
lancery78 said:
bystander said:
Assuming the 3 monitors in Eyefinity are in landscape, yes.
http://www.geforce.com/whats-new/guides/how-to-correctl...

Look at the last images on the setup screen. It shows your exact setup.


if it was portirate it would not work? why would that make a difference


As I mentioned before, Eyefnity's advantage is they offer more configuration options. Though I'm think Surround supports portrait mode as well, just not a mix of portrait and landscape, which Eyefinity does support.


ah i see, this is good information changing my question then. Should i get the 780 or wait and see Amd next gen that comes out soon?


Do you feel a need for improved performance now, or are you trying to prepare for something coming in the near future?

If you are doing ok now, then waiting makes sense. If you need an upgrade now, then I'd go for the upgrade now.

I have heard that AMD has something comparable to a 780 coming next month, though it may be a paper launch deal, in which case it may be a couple months before you can purchase it.


Just looking to crank everything to closer to max than what i can get now, because with 4 monitors it puts a bit of a strain on the card, and i cant get the playable fps and quality i want together. so i wanted to step my game up and find the best card with all the features i need
m
0
l
a c 85 Î Nvidia
a b À AMD
September 16, 2013 10:55:27 AM

That I can understand. One card for 3 monitors is pushing it. The problem is, Crossfire, which the 7990 uses, has issues in Eyefinity and DX9. They do have a working driver to improve DX10 and DX11, but not on multiple screens. This means you'll likely be disappointed in the performance of a 7990, or 7950 Crossfire.

A single 780 may not be enough of a performance leap to be worth the upgrade, which would leave me to recommend 770 4Gb SLI. The 690 will perform a lot like the 770 2Gb SLI, which may run into vram issues on rare occasion, such as in a game like Crysis 3.

Take a look at this review. Keep in mind, crossfire has been improved on single monitors and DX10 and DX11, this review was before the beta drivers with those improvements, but the 5760x1080 benchmarks are still applicable: http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Graphics-Cards/AMD-Radeon-...
m
0
l
September 16, 2013 11:32:48 AM

bystander said:
That I can understand. One card for 3 monitors is pushing it. The problem is, Crossfire, which the 7990 uses, has issues in Eyefinity and DX9. They do have a working driver to improve DX10 and DX11, but not on multiple screens. This means you'll likely be disappointed in the performance of a 7990, or 7950 Crossfire.

A single 780 may not be enough of a performance leap to be worth the upgrade, which would leave me to recommend 770 4Gb SLI. The 690 will perform a lot like the 770 2Gb SLI, which may run into vram issues on rare occasion, such as in a game like Crysis 3.

Take a look at this review. Keep in mind, crossfire has been improved on single monitors and DX10 and DX11, this review was before the beta drivers with those improvements, but the 5760x1080 benchmarks are still applicable: http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Graphics-Cards/AMD-Radeon-...


i dont like the sound of vram issues, so the choice would be sli 780 or wait for a release of the 790, because right now i have 4 monitors, and maybe i would like 8 so sli 780 would let that happen correct?
p.s. i play crysis 3 this is why i bring vram as being important
m
0
l
a c 85 Î Nvidia
a b À AMD
September 16, 2013 11:41:51 AM

lancery78 said:
bystander said:
That I can understand. One card for 3 monitors is pushing it. The problem is, Crossfire, which the 7990 uses, has issues in Eyefinity and DX9. They do have a working driver to improve DX10 and DX11, but not on multiple screens. This means you'll likely be disappointed in the performance of a 7990, or 7950 Crossfire.

A single 780 may not be enough of a performance leap to be worth the upgrade, which would leave me to recommend 770 4Gb SLI. The 690 will perform a lot like the 770 2Gb SLI, which may run into vram issues on rare occasion, such as in a game like Crysis 3.

Take a look at this review. Keep in mind, crossfire has been improved on single monitors and DX10 and DX11, this review was before the beta drivers with those improvements, but the 5760x1080 benchmarks are still applicable: http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Graphics-Cards/AMD-Radeon-...


i dont like the sound of vram issues, so the choice would be sli 780 or wait for a release of the 790, because right now i have 4 monitors, and maybe i would like 8 so sli 780 would let that happen correct?
p.s. i play crysis 3 this is why i bring vram as being important


The 780's would work, they are just more expensive. They have 3Gb's. The 770 4Gb cards would also work, though not as fast, would save you money.
m
0
l
a c 85 Î Nvidia
a b À AMD
September 16, 2013 11:43:42 AM

u_gonna_squeal_b4_we_cookya said:
bystander said:
u_gonna_squeal_b4_we_cookya said:
lancery78 said:
u_gonna_squeal_b4_we_cookya said:
It would work, but you would be better off using your CPU for Physx. And if it slows it down then instead of getting an Nvidia card, use that money to get better CPU. What CPU & motherboard do you have?


The card is going into a new build with the intel 4770k and i think the ASUS Z87-EXPERT LGA or something comparable.


You should have no problems running physx off the CPU with a 4770k. Even in the future if you had some kind of performance lag, you could always overclock it as you have the right motherboard. Right now, there will be no performance loss from your CPU. You have nothing to worry about. If you had an old CPU like a Core2 or a low end CPU like an i3 then maybe a dedicated Nvidia card would help. But there is no game that uses 100% of a 4770k. Getting a dedicated Nvidia card for physx on that PC would be a complete waste of money.


That isn't really true. There are a lot of games which either bring performance to a crawl (Batman AC, Sacred 2, etc.) or run ok at times, and runs very poorly at other times (Metro 2033, Borderlands 2, etc.).

Of course a PhysX card only helps on games which support GPU accelerated PhysX, which is a pretty small list.


bystander said:
That I can understand. One card for 3 monitors is pushing it. The problem is, Crossfire, which the 7990 uses, has issues in Eyefinity and DX9. They do have a working driver to improve DX10 and DX11, but not on multiple screens. This means you'll likely be disappointed in the performance of a 7990, or 7950 Crossfire.

A single 780 may not be enough of a performance leap to be worth the upgrade, which would leave me to recommend 770 4Gb SLI. The 690 will perform a lot like the 770 2Gb SLI, which may run into vram issues on rare occasion, such as in a game like Crysis 3.

Take a look at this review. Keep in mind, crossfire has been improved on single monitors and DX10 and DX11, this review was before the beta drivers with those improvements, but the 5760x1080 benchmarks are still applicable: http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Graphics-Cards/AMD-Radeon-...


Hi, I want a Ford, no, I AM BUYING A FORD and I know which one I want. I want to use Chevy rims on it. Is is possible?

^(this guy): buy a Chevy.

(everyone else): Yes.


It is not exactly the same. He wanted PhysX, he wants more performance for 3 monitor gaming. There are lots of reasons to recommend against the 7990, and it would just be easier to go with an Nvidia card to meet all the requirements. His reason for wanting to stick with AMD, was he didn't think Surround supported his monitor configuration, which it does.
m
0
l
September 16, 2013 11:55:04 AM

bystander said:
lancery78 said:
bystander said:
That I can understand. One card for 3 monitors is pushing it. The problem is, Crossfire, which the 7990 uses, has issues in Eyefinity and DX9. They do have a working driver to improve DX10 and DX11, but not on multiple screens. This means you'll likely be disappointed in the performance of a 7990, or 7950 Crossfire.

A single 780 may not be enough of a performance leap to be worth the upgrade, which would leave me to recommend 770 4Gb SLI. The 690 will perform a lot like the 770 2Gb SLI, which may run into vram issues on rare occasion, such as in a game like Crysis 3.

Take a look at this review. Keep in mind, crossfire has been improved on single monitors and DX10 and DX11, this review was before the beta drivers with those improvements, but the 5760x1080 benchmarks are still applicable: http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Graphics-Cards/AMD-Radeon-...


i dont like the sound of vram issues, so the choice would be sli 780 or wait for a release of the 790, because right now i have 4 monitors, and maybe i would like 8 so sli 780 would let that happen correct?
p.s. i play crysis 3 this is why i bring vram as being important


The 780's would work, they are just more expensive. They have 3Gb's. The 770 4Gb cards would also work, though not as fast, would save you money.


ahh i didnt know that there was a 770 with 4gb of ram i thought you were saying with sli two 2 gb one would have 4gb
m
0
l
September 16, 2013 12:21:32 PM

HillBillyAsian said:
what is this BS about getting a 770 or 780, he asked a plain and simple question to get a dedicated physx card or not, the answer is yes he can, but unless he has a mid range nvidia card lying around or gets one for free, its not justified to waste 130+ dollars to run something that he won't see much of anything from even with games that support physx. Newer amd cards can run older physx installations just fyi try it


Multiple issues related to crossfire multiscreen gaming. There are known and admitted issues related to your request.

See this article for details

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/catalyst-13.8-frame...
m
0
l

Best solution

a c 85 Î Nvidia
a b À AMD
September 16, 2013 5:06:14 PM

lancery78 said:
how does 2 sli 770 super clocked 4gb cards sound

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

Should solve my problem of vram, and ill get my surround view, and physx


If I were to buy for your setup, that is what I'd choose, most likely.
Share
!