Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Three gtx 580 or two gtx 590

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
October 10, 2011 10:45:40 PM

three gtx 570
three gtx 580
or
two gtx 590

im building my own system
im getting a 6 core
16gb ram probably at ddr3 2000
a
total of 3 tb in hard drive
and two blue ray burners
dual monitors (will most likely get another in the future)

mother board and power supply will be picked out last to make sure it works with everything

so should i get 3 gtx 570/580 one in physics and the other two normal

or two gtx 590 both normal

More about : gtx 580 gtx 590

a b U Graphics card
a b ) Power supply
October 10, 2011 11:12:10 PM

A 6 core what? Horrible choice, you'd be much better off with a quad core.

You haven't even told us what resolution your running, so no one can make ANY recommendation.
m
0
l
a c 143 U Graphics card
a b ) Power supply
October 10, 2011 11:20:30 PM

Welcome to the forum,
The GTX 570/580/590 SLI has their own strong Physx engine no need for a dedicated physx card.
The only PhysX benefit you will get is in games that use GPU PhysX. Mafia II, Batman AA, so not all the games support Physx.
if you're going for a triple monitor setup to play in 2d/3d surround, i recommend 2 GTX 580 in SLI the 3 GB version, and the GTX 590s SLI also a great idea but the more VRAM in the 580s will help performance when using 3 monitors.
m
0
l
Related resources
October 10, 2011 11:34:32 PM

ilysaml said:
Welcome to the forum,
The GTX 570/580/590 SLI has their own strong Physx engine no need for a dedicated physx card.
The only PhysX benefit you will get is in games that use GPU PhysX. Mafia II, Batman AA, so not all the games support Physx.
if you're going for a triple monitor setup to play in 2d/3d surround, i recommend 2 GTX 580 in SLI the 3 GB version, and the GTX 590s SLI also a great idea but the more VRAM in the 580s will help performance when using 3 monitors.


the main plan with this systum is to make it last 6 + years
i want something that after 6 years games can at lest run on lower seting
so i will eventually get a physx card ether way to help when games that use it more come out

but if it will last i wont buy a physics card for over a year

if you have any othe nvida card combinations you think will be good post them here for me and others
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
October 10, 2011 11:35:51 PM

I'd choose the gtx580 in SLI, there's no really need for a dedicated PhysX card.

PD: Ironically enough, this monster rig comes from a "8bitGamer". That's the class of irony I like :) 
m
0
l
a c 143 U Graphics card
a b ) Power supply
October 10, 2011 11:42:46 PM

6 years ? you're really dreaming. no one can predict what will happen in the gaming industry, nVidia GTX 6K series and AMD HD 7K series on the way.
what i know about the AMD HD 7K series is that they are new XDR2 rambus memory which is twice faster than GDDR5, 28nm process = less power consumption & less heat, equipped with 2 GB VRAM beside the 1 GHz GPU frequency. a high end GPU such as HD 7950 is said to be performing close if not better than HD 6990.

your rig maybe last for 6 years but you definitely won't be able to max out any game after 2 years from now. so my advice is that a single GTX 590 will do the job, and you can upgrade easily when the new series is out
m
0
l
October 10, 2011 11:46:19 PM

geekapproved said:
A 6 core what? Horrible choice, you'd be much better off with a quad core.

You haven't even told us what resolution your running, so no one can make ANY recommendation.


as i said imbuying and building it now

the screens will most likely be both 1080p(1920X1080)

i want the systum to last long so thats why the 6 core....unless there is something wrong with them i dont know of
why did you say im better of with a quad?
m
0
l
a c 105 U Graphics card
a b ) Power supply
October 10, 2011 11:47:13 PM

read this first. this should finally put the "dual cores are all you need and the quads are all you need" BS........... thinking of the future are you ?

http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/114221-13-real-sysyte...

Then I would say 2 580's. any more would be a waste. I'd never use one, let alone 2 590's after seeing what the past generation nvidia dual cards were like.

m
0
l
a c 143 U Graphics card
a b ) Power supply
October 10, 2011 11:52:50 PM

swifty_morgan said:
read this first. this should finally put the "dual cores are all you need and the quads are all you need" BS........... thinking of the future are you ?

http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/114221-13-real-sysyte...

Then I would say 2 580's. any more would be a waste. I'd never use one, let alone 2 590's after seeing what the past generation nvidia dual cards were like.

Excuse me, a dual core what ? all the modern games benefit from a quad core, some games aren't playable via a Dual Core CPU and simple a dual core CPU will bottleneck any strong GPU
m
0
l
a c 253 U Graphics card
a c 80 ) Power supply
October 10, 2011 11:53:59 PM

I would go with the 3 GTX 580's in 3 way sli abd get the 3gb version as well. the 580's are clocked higher than the 590's and you will end up with 3 580 gpu's where the 590's do not have the full 580 gpu and a much lower clock. If you look at some benchmarks you will se that a 3 way 580 gets a higher fps than a quad 590 setup. Also you will need at least a 1200w PSU and a motherboard that supports 3 way SLI. I have a 3-way SLI setup with 3 GTX 580's and you do not dedicate one of them to physix , in the Nvidia control pannel in the physix box you just go with what is recomended and they physix acceleration is run off of one of the cards and that way you still have your 3-way SLI. If you dedicate one to physix then your left with 2-way SLI.
m
0
l
a c 143 U Graphics card
a b ) Power supply
October 10, 2011 11:54:36 PM

geekapproved said:
A 6 core what? Horrible choice, you'd be much better off with a quad core.

yea could you explain please ? and how do you know that he will be only gaming ? not using a multi-threaded applications that benefit from a 6 core CPU and higher
m
0
l
October 10, 2011 11:55:29 PM

BlackHawk91 said:
I'd choose the gtx580 in SLI, there's no really need for a dedicated PhysX card.

PD: Ironically enough, this monster rig comes from a "8bitGamer". That's the class of irony I like :) 


i have played games from the time i was 2 (my parents had a system for them)

granted i did not understand much and lost alot

i love old games and i still play them

i also am a firm believer in the "graphics are not impotent" ideology

i would rather buy a game with outdated graphics but better story or gamplay or nearly any other part.


but i still LOVE a beautiful scenery and hope games continue to look better
m
0
l
October 11, 2011 12:02:11 AM

ilysaml said:
yea could you explain please ? and how do you know that he will be only gaming ? not using a multi-threaded applications that benefit from a 6 core CPU and higher

im in college for game design and rendering and stuff dose use more cores
not all yet but they update these things constantly so it should support the 12(6core threaded) soon

as well im taking film clases and many others so im bond to be able to use them some where
m
0
l
a c 143 U Graphics card
a b ) Power supply
October 11, 2011 12:03:50 AM

i just wanted to know his point of view, if a game doesn't benefit from a six core CPU, an application does
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
a b ) Power supply
October 11, 2011 12:04:38 AM

The problem is 'building for the future', especially 6 years in the future, is that you simply cannot know what is coming around the bend. The current problem is that most games are console ports, which means your rig has to work harder as it tries to emulate a console... but at 4+x the resolution, frame rate, and on multiple monitors. If games are written for PC first in the future, or if the next gen of consoles coming out in 2-3 years have a more PC-like architecture, then your rig will last a good long time. However, if things continue as they have been then the rig may not make it so long.

Either way, the new cards are coming out in just a few months. If you are planning a 6 year rig then you can wait a few months to at least be on top of the game when you start. The new cards from both sides are going to be much less power hungry, and quite a bit more powerful than current gen.

Also, as others have said, if you plan on multi-monitor or 3D anything then it is more important to cram as much vram on the GPU as possible over raw horsepower. You can have all the horse power in the world, but if you are constantly having to access the system RAM then it isn't going to do you any good.

Lastly, if you are not planning it, get an SSD! Even a cheap one is worlds better than a HDD for a system drive! That 0ms access time rocks, and no amount of RAID can make up for it!
m
0
l
a c 143 U Graphics card
a b ) Power supply
October 11, 2011 12:06:42 AM

CaedenV said:
The problem is 'building for the future', especially 6 years in the future, is that you simply cannot know what is coming around the bend. The current problem is that most games are console ports, which means your rig has to work harder as it tries to emulate a console... but at 4+x the resolution, frame rate, and on multiple monitors. If games are written for PC first in the future, or if the next gen of consoles coming out in 2-3 years have a more PC-like architecture, then your rig will last a good long time. However, if things continue as they have been then the rig may not make it so long.

Either way, the new cards are coming out in just a few months. If you are planning a 6 year rig then you can wait a few months to at least be on top of the game when you start. The new cards from both sides are going to be much less power hungry, and quite a bit more powerful than current gen.

Also, as others have said, if you plan on multi-monitor or 3D anything then it is more important to cram as much vram on the GPU as possible over raw horsepower. You can have all the horse power in the world, but if you are constantly having to access the system RAM then it isn't going to do you any good.

Lastly, if you are not planning it, get an SSD! Even a cheap one is worlds better than a HDD for a system drive! That 0ms access time rocks, and no amount of RAID can make up for it!

+1
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
a b ) Power supply
October 11, 2011 12:13:39 AM

Oh! a college student! BE WARNED!!!
Power in most dorm rooms sucks. The dorms I was in was some 40-50 years old, and they simply cannot take the strain that all of the computers, CFLs, and gadgets put on them. Plan on your power being dirty and buy some form of UPC with power line filtering. When I went off to college I spent about $3K in hardware and software (video editing! Woot!), It was only about 8 months in that my mobo blew! I mean literally blew up, it was kinda awesome in a really heartbreaking way. The power supply was fine (I still use it to this day in a media server), but it was expensive to replace all those parts (mobo, GPU, HDDs, RAM).
If you truly want it to last, use protection!

To put this in perspective, about 2 years ago I spent $300 on a netbook which has more ram, more processor power, and more HDD space than that old $3000 machine. Only thing the netbook dosnt have is the real time editing card lol.
m
0
l
October 11, 2011 12:22:32 AM

CaedenV said:
The problem is 'building for the future', especially 6 years in the future, is that you simply cannot know what is coming around the bend. The current problem is that most games are console ports, which means your rig has to work harder as it tries to emulate a console... but at 4+x the resolution, frame rate, and on multiple monitors. If games are written for PC first in the future, or if the next gen of consoles coming out in 2-3 years have a more PC-like architecture, then your rig will last a good long time. However, if things continue as they have been then the rig may not make it so long.

Either way, the new cards are coming out in just a few months. If you are planning a 6 year rig then you can wait a few months to at least be on top of the game when you start. The new cards from both sides are going to be much less power hungry, and quite a bit more powerful than current gen.

Also, as others have said, if you plan on multi-monitor or 3D anything then it is more important to cram as much vram on the GPU as possible over raw horsepower. You can have all the horse power in the world, but if you are constantly having to access the system RAM then it isn't going to do you any good.

Lastly, if you are not planning it, get an SSD! Even a cheap one is worlds better than a HDD for a system drive! That 0ms access time rocks, and no amount of RAID can make up for it!



i feel like waiting for an ssd drive a little longer
this is becuse for the same price i can get a 3tb hard drive
i can only get a 96 gb ssd

so i can get 32 times as much room for the same price

i think that the price will go down

and i know there is a good chance my systum wont last that long
its a hope
my old one lasted till last year...it was running everything at minimum requirements but it still ran until the fan died and half the computer over heated and died

the problum with waiting is usly the first cards out in the new set are not very good
and i do need a working computer
i guss i can get 1 580 with 3gb and then wait and get 2 of somthing in the 6xx series and use the 580 as a physics card
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
a b ) Power supply
October 11, 2011 1:32:22 AM

That is a much better plan. Build a solid core, and then upgrade incrementally. You then don't pay the bleeding edge prices, but you can keep up to date cheaper in the long run.

Don't think for a minute that the system wont last that long, just take precautions. I have built several computers for people over the years, and I must say that it is rare to have a system die (lol usually because I am tinkering with it and don't leave well enough alone). My current system is coming up on 5 years old, and it is still great at what I built it for; multimedia. I recent bought an HD camera and the rig simply cannot keep up with HD editing (though it does better than I thought it would), and my 9800GT can still rock some new games, just not as well as I would like. I am looking to upgrade next spring after IB and the new GPUs come out (and 8GB dimms drop in price! I want a 20GB ram drive for rendering!).

Build for a purpose, and then learn how to work with your system to get it to do what you want it to, that is the joy and fun of building your own system.

Good luck!
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
a b ) Power supply
October 11, 2011 5:34:41 PM

8bitGamer said:
as i said imbuying and building it now

the screens will most likely be both 1080p(1920X1080)

i want the systum to last long so thats why the 6 core....unless there is something wrong with them i dont know of
why did you say im better of with a quad?


Because the quads are faster. You have still failed to mention what 6 core cpu your talking about so I really can't make any sensible comment. I'm trying to read your mind I guess.

Intel 6 core is way overpriced and performs worse in gaming than a quad core at 1/4 the price. Not only that s1366 offers no upgrade to Ivy Bridge next year.

AMD 6 core is horrible for gaming compared to Intel quads. And unless your overclocking the crap out it and would never keep up with 3 high end video cards.
m
0
l
!