Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Solved

Crossfire or SLI for three monitor gaming

Tags:
  • Gaming
  • Crossfire
  • SLI
  • Monitors
Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
September 29, 2013 9:25:10 PM

I am building my first computer and something I can not decide is the correct GPU. I have three 21.5" monitors at 1920x1080, so at 5760x1080 when put together. I want game on all three obviously. A single 7990 will be $100 cheaper roughly but less effective to my understanding. I would love to save the $100 but if I can't game at ultra settings then I will gladly buy the two 7970 GE's. For about the price of the 7990 I can get two GTX 760 4GB in SLI. Power is not an issue either, I have the Corsair AX1200i. Or maybe a single GTX model around $600-$700. Any ideas?

Let's use Battlefield 3 as the standard for ultra setting gaming.

Update after a long talk about what is best I went with the Matrix 280x. This thread turned into a discussion/debate of which is better, AMD or Nvidia if you would like to read on.

More about : crossfire sli monitor gaming

a c 683 4 Gaming
a c 88 C Monitor
September 29, 2013 10:46:26 PM

The 7990 and the 760 SLI would be roughly the same, so think I'd go the 7990, keep the heat down some
m
0
l
September 29, 2013 11:34:25 PM

Would it work fine?
m
0
l
Related resources
September 30, 2013 4:53:12 AM

Wait, AMD's new cards are coming in two weeks.
m
0
l
September 30, 2013 5:42:21 AM

RussK1 said:
Wait, AMD's new cards are coming in two weeks.


Do you have a reference to them releasing in two weeks?
m
0
l

Best solution

a b 4 Gaming
a b C Monitor
September 30, 2013 5:46:51 AM

well amd announced their r9 290x GPU and the NDA for the specifics are to be taken down on the 14th soo, its going to be released in 2 weeks no?

either way, thats what id get. the 7990 has issues with heat dissipation and the power limitations due to the 2 8pins and coil while. 2 760s will not have enough vram to drive the extra panels (4gb editions arent of any help when the GPU core itself isnt powerful enough)
Share
September 30, 2013 5:51:37 AM

TheBigTroll said:
well amd announced their r9 290x GPU and the NDA for the specifics are to be taken down on the 14th soo, its going to be released in 2 weeks no?

either way, thats what id get. the 7990 has issues with heat dissipation and the power limitations due to the 2 8pins and coil while. 2 760s will not have enough vram to drive the extra panels (4gb editions arent of any help when the GPU core itself isnt powerful enough)


Exactly. And pricing according to research is going to be around $600usd.
m
0
l
a b 4 Gaming
a b C Monitor
September 30, 2013 6:00:57 AM

its either going to be 549.99 like when the 7970 was originally launched or 599.99. either way, a steal compared to a ttitan
m
0
l
September 30, 2013 6:30:37 AM

TheBigTroll said:
its either going to be 549.99 like when the 7970 was originally launched or 599.99. either way, a steal compared to a ttitan


Once again, how do we know this?
m
0
l
a b 4 Gaming
a b C Monitor
September 30, 2013 6:35:49 AM

If you are going multimonitor avoid AMD, the new driver doesn't fix Crossfire issues outside of one monitor and DX11.
m
0
l
a b 4 Gaming
a b C Monitor
September 30, 2013 6:44:29 AM

amd has better multi-monitor support than nvidia. if you want my real opinion, i wouldnt even bother with multi-monitor
m
0
l
September 30, 2013 7:51:18 AM

TheBigTroll said:
amd has better multi-monitor support than nvidia. if you want my real opinion, i wouldnt even bother with multi-monitor


I would ask but its too late, having the monitors already. I really don't want to return them.
m
0
l
a b 4 Gaming
a b C Monitor
September 30, 2013 7:56:54 AM

have you tried out multi-monitor before purchasing even and actually liked it and performed better? if you havent and it turns out you dont like multi-montior, you just wasted 400 bucks.
m
0
l
September 30, 2013 8:45:36 AM

I've been there and done that. It's cool but grew tired of game compatibility and having to use widescreenfixer... And how annoyingly bright it is at night. I ditched the eyefinity setup in favor of a single larger format display and higher resolution.
m
0
l
a b 4 Gaming
a c 135 C Monitor
September 30, 2013 8:53:10 AM

TheBigTroll said:
amd has better multi-monitor support than nvidia. if you want my real opinion, i wouldnt even bother with multi-monitor


Eyefinity allows for more monitor configurations, such as landscape and portrait mixes. However, if you do a traditional Portrait or Landscape setup, Surround is equally good, and has better SLI support. The idea that the 760 can't drive 4Gb is just as much non-sense as a 7970 not being able to drive 3Gb. If a game needs that much vram, and the card is able to handle the settings then it will use the extra vram without issue. The problem is that it is rare for a game to use more than 2Gb at playable FPS.

Anyways, it is extremely rare for a 2-way SLI setup to need more than 2Gb even at 5760x1080. The settings needed to need more vram is beyond the cards ability to deliver good FPS anyways. In the exceptions, you can reduce AA and fix it in all cases I've seen, that or get a 4Gb card. The only thing true about a 760 not being able to drive 4gb, is that the settings needed to need more than 2Gb is higher than most any card can handle in the extremely rare cases that settings even exist to need more than 2Gb, even at 5760x1080.

Given Eyefinity lacking frame pacing, and even Dx9, I'd stick with SLI for now.
m
0
l
a c 683 4 Gaming
a c 88 C Monitor
September 30, 2013 9:07:11 AM

bystander said:
TheBigTroll said:
amd has better multi-monitor support than nvidia. if you want my real opinion, i wouldnt even bother with multi-monitor


Eyefinity allows for more monitor configurations, such as landscape and portrait mixes. However, if you do a traditional Portrait or Landscape setup, Surround is equally good, and has better SLI support. The idea that the 760 can't drive 4Gb is just as much non-sense as a 7970 not being able to drive 3Gb. If a game needs that much vram, and the card is able to handle the settings then it will use the extra vram without issue. The problem is that it is rare for a game to use more than 2Gb at playable FPS.

Anyways, it is extremely rare for a 2-way SLI setup to need more than 2Gb even at 5760x1080. The settings needed to need more vram is beyond the cards ability to deliver good FPS anyways. In the exceptions, you can reduce AA and fix it in all cases I've seen, that or get a 4Gb card. The only thing true about a 760 not being able to drive 4gb, is that the settings needed to need more than 2Gb is higher than most any card can handle in the extremely rare cases that settings even exist to need more than 2Gb, even at 5760x1080.

Given Eyefinity lacking frame pacing, and even Dx9, I'd stick with SLI for now.

_________________

+1
m
0
l
a b 4 Gaming
a c 135 C Monitor
September 30, 2013 9:12:43 AM

Btw, the AMD frame pacing weaknesses are being worked on, so in a few months this may all change, but for now, Crossfire has issues with multi-monitor, 4k monitors and Dx9.
m
0
l
a c 683 4 Gaming
a c 88 C Monitor
September 30, 2013 9:20:20 AM

XFire has had problems since it came out, and they have promised to fix things for years, yet it just hasn't happened, so when it will be (if ever) is up in the air
m
0
l
a b 4 Gaming
a b C Monitor
September 30, 2013 9:27:17 AM

if a 680 4gb does not perform noticeably better than the 2gb edition at 5760x1080,what makes the 760 capable of making use of its extended vram?
m
0
l
a b 4 Gaming
a c 135 C Monitor
September 30, 2013 9:28:32 AM

TheBigTroll said:
if a 680 4gb does not perform noticeably better than the 2gb edition at 5760x1080,what makes the 760 capable of making use of its extended vram?


Neither perform better in 99% of the games because games just don't use more than 2Gb except in rare occasion.
m
0
l
September 30, 2013 6:06:32 PM

RussK1 said:
I've been there and done that. It's cool but grew tired of game compatibility and having to use widescreenfixer... And how annoyingly bright it is at night. I ditched the eyefinity setup in favor of a single larger format display and higher resolution.


since you have been there, what card(s) did you use effectively? That is what kind of answer I'm looking for.
m
0
l
October 1, 2013 10:15:26 AM

Cyler12 said:
RussK1 said:
I've been there and done that. It's cool but grew tired of game compatibility and having to use widescreenfixer... And how annoyingly bright it is at night. I ditched the eyefinity setup in favor of a single larger format display and higher resolution.


since you have been there, what card(s) did you use effectively? That is what kind of answer I'm looking for.


6990's.

Worked well despite a few hicups being quad. Overall th experience was good contrary to what people say or "think".

My last two gen of cards have been nVidia but that's not saying I won't go AMD (and I might).

m
0
l
a b 4 Gaming
a b C Monitor
October 3, 2013 5:13:27 PM

when released for sure its going to be expensive. probably want to wait a week or later to let things settle down
m
0
l
a c 683 4 Gaming
a c 88 C Monitor
October 3, 2013 5:21:40 PM

The 290X some are saying around $700
m
0
l
October 3, 2013 5:28:19 PM

we can all hope its $600, if its $700 the performance better make it worth it
m
0
l
a c 683 4 Gaming
a c 88 C Monitor
October 3, 2013 5:51:02 PM

Yep, it depends on what and where you read about it, based on AMD's previous promotional blurbs, think expectations may be a bit high
m
0
l
October 4, 2013 5:03:38 AM

Cyler12 said:


that's awesome, thanks. Hopefully the price isn't going to be $730


You're welcome.

Looks like pricing is going to be around $699. On the high side sure, but if it competes with a Titan I'd say that's a good price...

m
0
l
a b 4 Gaming
a c 149 C Monitor
October 8, 2013 1:00:40 AM

Just some specs for all you on the AMD R9 290x

The R9 290x will be fitted with the first 512-bit memory interface and the fastest speed at 300GB/s+ (Around 320GB/s) stock. Rumors are roaming Asus are working on a ROG R9 290x as well as 280x with the 290x expected to be at a mighty speed of 370GB/s! The 290x will have a 300 Watt TDP.

Specs:
-11 CUs (compute units)
-44 SMIDs (11 per CU)
-2,816 stream processors
-176 TMUs (Texture Mapping Units)
-44 ROPs (Raster Operating Units)
-4GB GDDR5 VRAM (6GB models will come later)
-5+1+1 phase design (5 Phase Core and 1 Phase memory)

AMD cards will need no more CFX Bridge hopefully bringing down the price, AMD are now looking into "Sideport" technology. Prices have been confirmed with the battlefield 4 bundle at $729.99 on Newegg found by Techpowerup on the site and without the bundle is unknown but some sources are saying that it could be from $599-699. Either way this card will be a Titan killer and should be in a reasonable price range after a few weeks after launch.

If the 7990 is your fancy, then get it, AMD's new drivers have almost stopped it's micro-stutter and since AMD's price cut, It is really good value and will be exceptional on three 1080p displays. I also had a look online and the 7990 does better on most games (FPS) than GTX 690 and Titan with multi-monitor and high resolution settings, to name one game is Battlefield 3, Techpowerup did a review which showed the 7990 came out on top with the highest FPS on multi-monitor setup. The 7990 is defiantly faster than the R9 290x and i personally think that the 7990 is the better option considering the price.

The facts are true that the 7990 does have a slight cooling issue, But it isn't that bad at all which most of the time it idles at 42 degrees Celsius. If cooling becomes a problem if you get the 7990, then you can get a block water cooler for the card which will help keep the temperature down a lot. Someone earlier mentioned this on this thread but the 4GB GTX 760 is pointless, Firstly the Core isn't powerful enough to use all that and secondly, it is ultimately being limited by the 760's 256-bit memory bus, and the bandwidth to utilize the 4GB of Vram. That is what sucks about the GTX titan, 384-bit 6GB card, the 7990 is 2x 384 bit (just call it 768-bit because it's on the same card) with 6GB Vram which works much better as the bandwidth is able to utilize all the Vram on the card. Since the 7990 is dual GPU, the workload is distributed evenly amongst the cores and therefore the GPU's are under less strain and can work more efficiently and you will get greater performance.

All in all, Just get the 7990 as it is the best performance on multi-monitor setups and a price that is excellent and not to bypass. Since power isn't an issue, The 7990 will be an excellent fit in your build. Hope all my typing on this answer has given you help on your question.
m
0
l
a b 4 Gaming
a c 149 C Monitor
October 8, 2013 5:39:42 AM

For Game performance of the 7990, go here:
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/HD_7990/7.html

The 7990 is a monster at 5760x1080 on Battlefield 3, that is why I recommend it. The link I put up is the game on maximum settings. The 7990 does outperform Nvidia's GTX 690, Titan and most other Dual SLI's on higher resolutions. Also The 7990 on BF3 on max is achieving over 63fps and the high end GTX 690 is only getting 56.9 FPS, And to think about it the GTX 690 over here is $1499 and the 7990 is $679, My choice is obvious and the extra money on the GTX 690, 760 SLI and most other cards just isn't actually worth the extra money. If you do choose SLI, Your machine will be quite noisy.
m
0
l
October 8, 2013 8:02:03 AM

looks like I'm going with a single R9-280x for now and getting a second later
m
0
l
a b 4 Gaming
a b C Monitor
October 8, 2013 8:47:49 AM

the 280x is a 7970. i dont see a major advantage going for it
m
0
l
October 8, 2013 8:55:19 AM

TheBigTroll said:
the 280x is a 7970. i dont see a major advantage going for it


I've heard this too many times already. Its a 7970 GE, would you rather pay around $400 or around $300 for the "same" card. And with the Asus 280x you get OC software and streaming software. Not saying that those are game changing but extra for a lower price still.
m
0
l
a b 4 Gaming
a b C Monitor
October 8, 2013 9:20:48 AM

most 7970 out there are 280 300 bucks already. oc software is free
m
0
l
October 8, 2013 9:29:40 AM

TheBigTroll said:
most 7970 out there are 280 300 bucks already. oc software is free


You are correct but the 7970 GE's are not that cheap, you can get the HIS for $310 though.
m
0
l
a b 4 Gaming
a c 149 C Monitor
October 9, 2013 1:56:39 AM

OK, the 280x isn't worth the extra cash as all OC software is free by the company you bought the card from as someone earlier mentioned. The 280x is just the same Tahiti XT chip which the 7990 has two of them with a total of 576GB/s. If you are using three monitors why not get the Asus 7970 ROG Matrix. It is clocked at 316GB/s and has really good performance for the price, Obviously the speed doesn't tell all it's performance, A 780 can still beat it but I don't really think that it is worth the extra cash.

-Just Remember don't buy the card as It just comes out as in just a few days/weeks later it will be a lot cheaper as they try to get rid of all remaining older series stock!
m
0
l
a b 4 Gaming
a c 149 C Monitor
October 9, 2013 2:33:31 AM

Since you are abandoning the expensive options how about the R9 290 not the X version, get that as it has the new Hawaii XT Chip, It could be a really good card compared to the 7970.
m
0
l
a b 4 Gaming
a b C Monitor
October 9, 2013 3:47:13 AM

that would be superior to the 7970 and probably is what i would recommend
m
0
l
October 9, 2013 8:37:40 AM

TheBigTroll said:
that would be superior to the 7970 and probably is what i would recommend


I agree but the price is superior too. I think the 280x is my sweet spot for cards. i will be getting a second one later.
m
0
l
a b 4 Gaming
a c 149 C Monitor
October 9, 2013 9:51:14 PM

Cyler12 said:
TheBigTroll said:
that would be superior to the 7970 and probably is what i would recommend


I agree but the price is superior too. I think the 280x is my sweet spot for cards. i will be getting a second one later.


The price of the 280x will probably be the same as the 7970 ROG Matrix and that is a waste. The 7970 to 280x is the same but the 280x will just be overclocked a little to make it seem better. This is why I would recommend Asus ROG 7970 matrix which has a really good cooler and really good Asus ROG overclock settings. This is what I hate about Nvidia and AMD, they always rename their chips to make them seem better by changing the clock speeds when you can by the same previous card for less then overclock that to the same performance. Well all in all it is your decision.
m
0
l
October 9, 2013 10:05:47 PM

unknownofprob said:
Go here for more info: http://www.asus.com/Graphics_Cards/MATRIXHD7970P3GD5/


Two reasons why I don't want that card are 1. the size, I want to crossfire and the top card will be hot as the sun. 2. the price right now its $409 and the new Asus 280x is going to be $310.
m
0
l
a b 4 Gaming
a c 149 C Monitor
October 10, 2013 12:18:08 AM

Cyler12 said:
unknownofprob said:
Go here for more info: http://www.asus.com/Graphics_Cards/MATRIXHD7970P3GD5/


Two reasons why I don't want that card are 1. the size, I want to crossfire and the top card will be hot as the sun. 2. the price right now its $409 and the new Asus 280x is going to be $310.


The top card won't be hot as the sun but since it has really good cooling it will beat most other 280x's at cooling and will do much better on triple monitor displays.
m
3
l
a b 4 Gaming
a c 149 C Monitor
October 10, 2013 12:20:34 AM

Cyler12 said:
unknownofprob said:
Go here for more info: http://www.asus.com/Graphics_Cards/MATRIXHD7970P3GD5/


Two reasons why I don't want that card are 1. the size, I want to crossfire and the top card will be hot as the sun. 2. the price right now its $409 and the new Asus 280x is going to be $310.


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

I hope you realise that on all the sites it says that the 280x is 3GB 256-bit. The 7970 is 3GB 384-bit, that is why I recommend the 7970 look at the specs!!!! What is AMD trying to do here? That 3GB of Vram is going to be limited by that 256-bit memory bus, you have 3 screens so I would strongly recommend getting the 7970 384-bit version, if you wish to ignore then so it be....
m
0
l
October 10, 2013 1:31:38 AM

unknownofprob said:
Cyler12 said:
unknownofprob said:
Go here for more info: http://www.asus.com/Graphics_Cards/MATRIXHD7970P3GD5/


Two reasons why I don't want that card are 1. the size, I want to crossfire and the top card will be hot as the sun. 2. the price right now its $409 and the new Asus 280x is going to be $310.


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

I hope you realise that on all the sites it says that the 280x is 3GB 256-bit. The 7970 is 3GB 384-bit, that is why I recommend the 7970 look at the specs!!!! What is AMD trying to do here? That 3GB of Vram is going to be limited by that 256-bit memory bus, you have 3 screens so I would strongly recommend getting the 7970 384-bit version, if you wish to ignore then so it be....


I won't ignore that fact at all. That's a good point too. Just another factor for when Friday comes. Video card judgement day as I like to call it

http://www.anandtech.com/show/7400/the-radeon-r9-280x-r...

Here it says they have 384-bit memory bus
m
0
l
October 10, 2013 6:19:23 AM

The R9 280X is a rebadged 7970GHz with a few extra features... that's all. It's like what the GTX 770 is to the GTX 680.

Pricing is the deciding factor.

Good luck.
m
0
l
October 10, 2013 8:01:55 AM

RussK1 said:
The R9 280X is a rebadged 7970GHz with a few extra features... that's all. It's like what the GTX 770 is to the GTX 680.

Pricing is the deciding factor.

Good luck.


Thank you.

I'm pretty sure the 280x's are 384-bit
m
0
l
      • 1 / 2
      • 2
      • Newest
!