So I have a single 970 right now, and I've never had an issue with it. I haven't even reached 3gb VRAM even while playing Witcher 3 maxed out. However thats only playing at 1080p. I want to go dual monitors, 1440p @ 144hz. So I initially wanted to go with SLI 970s.. but would I run into the vram issue in games doing this? Is it a better investment to just go with the new 980 TI over 970 SLI?
Not worth going 970 SLI due to vram issue?
- Thread starter Sians
- Start date
Dark Lord of Tech
Retired Moderator
- Aug 18, 2009
- 128,614
- 1,778
- 159,590
Whateverworks_19
Distinguished
- Dec 31, 2001
- 868
- 7
- 19,665
I use triple monitors with 970SLI. My main monitor is the ROG SWIFT 1440p and there are no problems. I can thoroughly recommend playing on 1440p with 970SLI.
When DX12 releases, it seems possible or even likely, that we can add our VRAM together, and have 8GB of VRAM, which makes it even better.
When DX12 releases, it seems possible or even likely, that we can add our VRAM together, and have 8GB of VRAM, which makes it even better.
geofelt
Titan
- Oct 9, 2006
- 54,307
- 4,149
- 174,240
My suggestion is to get your monitors first and see how you do.
Most likely, you will have no issue.
A second side monitor adds no load to a graphics card while gaming on the main monitor.
I used a GTX780 with 3gb vram and 2560 x 1600 monitors with no issue.
Vram is a performance issue, not a functional issue.
Here is a older report on the performance difference between 2gb and 4gb of vram.
Hint... no difference.
https://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/articles/Video-Card-Performance-2GB-vs-4GB-Memory-154/
Most likely, you will have no issue.
A second side monitor adds no load to a graphics card while gaming on the main monitor.
I used a GTX780 with 3gb vram and 2560 x 1600 monitors with no issue.
Vram is a performance issue, not a functional issue.
Here is a older report on the performance difference between 2gb and 4gb of vram.
Hint... no difference.
https://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/articles/Video-Card-Performance-2GB-vs-4GB-Memory-154/
MarkW
Judicious
- Dec 7, 2009
- 6,308
- 0
- 32,960
Math Class is now in session!
Standard 1080p System
1920x1080 = 2,073,600 pixels per frame.
Dual monitors @ 1080p = 4,147,200 pixels per frame.
Dual monitors @ 1080p @ 60 Hz = 248,832,000 pixels per second
Standard 1440p System
2560x1440p = 3,686,400 pixels per frame
Dual monitors @ 1440p = 7,372,800 pixels per frame
Dual monitors @ 1440p @ 144 Hz = 1,061,683,200 pixels per second.
Standard 4K System
3840x2160p = 8,294,400 pixels per frame
Dual monitors @ 2160 =16,588,800 pixels per frame
Dual monitors @ 2160p @ 60 Hz = 995,328,000 pixels per second.
It seems that your dream system of dual monitors at 1440p and 144 Hz, would require a stronger system than even a dual monitor 4K system would need. Not by a lot, but still, asking for a BILLION PIXELS PER SECOND just seems like pure insanity. But I guess we are reaching those numbers, since 4K is only 6% less pixels than this.
Math class is now over! Enjoy!
Standard 1080p System
1920x1080 = 2,073,600 pixels per frame.
Dual monitors @ 1080p = 4,147,200 pixels per frame.
Dual monitors @ 1080p @ 60 Hz = 248,832,000 pixels per second
Standard 1440p System
2560x1440p = 3,686,400 pixels per frame
Dual monitors @ 1440p = 7,372,800 pixels per frame
Dual monitors @ 1440p @ 144 Hz = 1,061,683,200 pixels per second.
Standard 4K System
3840x2160p = 8,294,400 pixels per frame
Dual monitors @ 2160 =16,588,800 pixels per frame
Dual monitors @ 2160p @ 60 Hz = 995,328,000 pixels per second.
It seems that your dream system of dual monitors at 1440p and 144 Hz, would require a stronger system than even a dual monitor 4K system would need. Not by a lot, but still, asking for a BILLION PIXELS PER SECOND just seems like pure insanity. But I guess we are reaching those numbers, since 4K is only 6% less pixels than this.
Math class is now over! Enjoy!
@MarkW Haha okay well maybe two of those monitors would have to wait.
Aside from my (possibly unwarranted?) concern over the vram, I'm also looking way down the line if/when I want to upgrade. If I get the 970 SLI setup, I'd only be downgrading if I got anything less than a Titan X, right? Or am I wrong there? So would it make more sense to spend the extra $$ and go for the 980 TI in order to future proof the build better? Don't get me wrong I'm not saying I think two 970s will become outdated anytime soon, but still.
Aside from my (possibly unwarranted?) concern over the vram, I'm also looking way down the line if/when I want to upgrade. If I get the 970 SLI setup, I'd only be downgrading if I got anything less than a Titan X, right? Or am I wrong there? So would it make more sense to spend the extra $$ and go for the 980 TI in order to future proof the build better? Don't get me wrong I'm not saying I think two 970s will become outdated anytime soon, but still.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram