Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Gtx 590 worth it????i think YES

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
a b U Graphics card
November 23, 2011 8:10:48 AM

hello people!!!
as most of us know that a 590 is two 580s on a single card(512X2 CUDA cores).it is roughly $750.a single 580 is roughly $500 at the moment.
so we can get a $1k graphics setup for less money.i know that it is not as fast as 580 SLI(not much behind).
on the other hand,a 6990 is 6970CF.it still beats gtx 590 in many benches or stays head to head with 590.this means that a 6970CF is faster than
580SLI!!!(on dual gpu cards) i guess it is not if you put two 580s vs two 6970.
i don't know weather you understand my post or not but plz help me understand this thing.
thnx
Hellfire24 :) 

More about : gtx 590 worth

November 23, 2011 8:16:26 AM

what is the question??
m
0
l
November 23, 2011 8:20:02 AM

I'm not sure exactly what your question is.

A GTX 590 is only worth it if you have money to burn. Right now, you can have a system that play everything very well with 2 GTX 560 ti's (about $450, depending on the brand and where you buy).

At the moment, I think the best you can get performance wise is 2 580's. Sure a GTX 590 is cheaper, but when it comes down to it, both are very expensive options.
m
0
l
Related resources
a c 88 U Graphics card
November 23, 2011 8:21:56 AM

A 590 is closer to 2 X 570 in SLI.
2 x 580's in SLI is faster than a 590.
2 x 580's and 2 x 6970's are both fast, depends on the games you play
Yes a 590/6990 is worth it especially for those that want the fastest card for a single pci-e slot motherboard as they cant add any more cards.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
November 23, 2011 8:22:47 AM

sorry my ques. is-
is it worth getting 2x580 instead of a singl 590???
m
0
l
a c 88 U Graphics card
November 23, 2011 8:32:38 AM

Yes!
m
0
l
a c 88 U Graphics card
November 23, 2011 8:36:30 AM

The 2 x 580 are faster
m
0
l
November 23, 2011 8:44:20 AM

yeah it will worth alot of 580x2
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
November 23, 2011 9:03:13 AM

only more fps is not the thing.price also matters.
m
0
l
November 23, 2011 9:57:52 AM

I saw some 580gtx on sale a 439 or you can buy used one wich i think is the best in my opinion at around 300-350$
m
0
l
November 23, 2011 10:41:43 AM

Bang for buck, get a 560 Ti set up. About 30% faster than a single 580, and cheaper. Almost as fast as a single 590, and much cheaper.
m
0
l
November 23, 2011 10:51:39 AM

Yea 580x2 are better choice.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
November 23, 2011 12:32:15 PM

Trying to say 580 SLI, 6970 crossfire, 590, or 6990 are "worth it" or that they are a better choice really just depends on a lot of factors specific to the person making the buy. Here are some of the things that you should think about:

Performance: any of these options are a truckload of graphics horsepower and will allow you to run nearly anything maxed out on a single screen for some time to come. Absolute performance is probably NOT the biggest factor for a lot of people considering these 4 options.

Performance/price: of the 4, the 6970 crossfire is the best "value" (hard to use the word value with the highest end options). It is a solid competitor for 580s in SLI at a lower cost. These two do trade blows depending on the game, etc.

Brand Preference: some folks strongly prefer one camp or the other. Whether it's based in driver reliability, strategy (AMD usees smaller GPUs with an emphasis on multi card scaling, for example), or being burned by one camp in the past- it's ok to prefer one brand to another.

System: if you can only fit one board in your system, the 6990 or 590 are great options for multi GPU into one slot.

If your question boils down to "is 6970 CF better than 6990; is 580 SLI better than 590"? I would have to say "yes" for 6970 CF>6990 (less money for more performance) and "maybe" for 580 SLI> 590 (more money for more performance). That's assuming non of the other factors come into play.
m
0
l
November 23, 2011 1:03:38 PM

When comparing 580 SLI to 590, I don't agree 580 SLI is a better choice.

Let's say a decent GTX 580 SLI setup costs $1050 new.
And a GTX 590 costs $775 new.

That's a 26% difference in cost. However, benchmark comparisons only show a 10-15% increase in performance for the 580 SLI. It's a given that the 590 is more cost-effective.

When taking that into account with other benefits of a single-card solution, 590 takes the cake.

m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
November 23, 2011 1:09:20 PM

thnx everyone.now i am informed that the gfx(or gfxs) is going to run 3x19" monitors.
this is my uncle's setup infact.he told me that he usually plays-
crysis warhead with ultra graphic mods
crysis 2 DX11
NFS hot pursuit 2010
GTA with ultra graphic mods
and of course BF3.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
November 23, 2011 1:25:45 PM

i just received his email and specs are given below-
HAF 932
i7 965@3.5ghz
G1 Assassin 1366 mobo
12gb 1333
thermaltake frio OCK
enermax 1350w 80+ gold psu
gtx 285
and other components.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
November 23, 2011 1:41:15 PM

- Could you check his monitor's resolutions?

Supposing these 3x19" are 1440x900 each we reach
4320x900 pixels = 3888000 pixels
and, knowing that 2560x1600 = 4096000 pixels

We talking about the same pixels in the screen.
Considering the Tomshardware's Battlefield 3 review we can use the following results:

2560x1600 Ultra Quality:
GTX 590 = 49,01 fps
GTX 580 = 33,25 fps
SLI GTX 580 (considering 80% increase) = 59,85 fps

These results were with an Intel Core i7-2600K, considering this, your uncle's PC should get the same results at maximum. Probably will get lower results (since we don't know his configuration)

Looking this number I would recommend SLI GTX 580 to ensure more consistent gameplay.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
November 23, 2011 1:45:32 PM

thnx for the info but i posted his specs
m
0
l
a c 124 U Graphics card
November 23, 2011 1:50:52 PM

I built a PC with a 2600k @ 4.6ghz and a GTX 590. It had a lot of stuttering in benchmarks. I'd say just go with a single 6970 2gb, since it will run 3 monitors and have no stuttering.

Otherwise SLI 570s would be more worthwhile IMO.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
November 23, 2011 1:51:27 PM

hellfire24 said:
thnx for the info but i posted his specs


You posted while I was writing the post and gathering info from BF3.
But we would still need the monitors resolution.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
November 23, 2011 2:06:34 PM

i asked him and this is what he said-
2x1440 x 900 resolution at the moment but he will order same one more monitor
to setup 3 monitors with the graphic card.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
November 23, 2011 2:13:38 PM

So the calculation I did is indeed correct.
I recommend SLI GTX 580 for a 60 fps average in ultra in this resolution :) 
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
November 23, 2011 2:37:00 PM

590 for 750 is a pretty good deal 250 off sli 580's The performance is Sliightly lower
for 2500 cheaper cant relly complan aout that. lol a 8800gtx ultra used to be more expensive
m
0
l
November 23, 2011 4:53:08 PM

I would probably go for the GTX 590 or 6990 and you can avoid most of the sli or crossfire issues that modern titles experience. You will be cursing your self for getting an SLI setup. Every time you can see nvidia posting new drivers for improving fixes for SLI related issues for each title. Get a single card and p67 mobo to or cough the extra cash on an ssd or 1600 MHz memory sticks.
m
0
l
a c 124 U Graphics card
November 23, 2011 5:25:50 PM

barry_venom said:
I would probably go for the GTX 590 or 6990 and you can avoid most of the sli or crossfire issues that modern titles experience. You will be cursing your self for getting an SLI setup. Every time you can see nvidia posting new drivers for improving fixes for SLI related issues for each title. Get a single card and p67 mobo to or cough the extra cash on an ssd or 1600 MHz memory sticks.


Unfortunately this is entirely false. They are in fact SLI and Crossfire cards, just on a single PCB. If a game is having issues will multi-gpu, you will have those issues on a 590 or 6990.
m
0
l
November 23, 2011 5:27:49 PM

hellfire24 said:
only more fps is not the thing.price also matters.

if you decide to use an sli setup make sure that your motherboard supports native x16 on both cards...most motherboards drop the speed to x8 when in sli
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
November 23, 2011 6:14:17 PM

nebun said:
if you decide to use an sli setup make sure that your motherboard supports native x16 on both cards...most motherboards drop the speed to x8 when in sli


I thought this didn't make too much of a difference. I could be wrong though.
m
0
l
November 23, 2011 6:32:54 PM

wolfram23 said:
Unfortunately this is entirely false. They are in fact SLI and Crossfire cards, just on a single PCB. If a game is having issues will multi-gpu, you will have those issues on a 590 or 6990.



Somewhere I read a great article on this but it's lost to me now. Google searches also are not yielding what I'm looking for..

Apparently there is a difference between Multi-GPU, and SLI/Crossfire. A single multi-GPU card is less likely to encounter micro-stuttering issues associated with SLI & Crossfire. Overall it's preferable to have your GPU's on the same PCI-E slot
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
November 23, 2011 7:23:05 PM

The performance difference is not worth 250 bucks.. IMHO
m
0
l
a c 124 U Graphics card
November 23, 2011 9:53:16 PM

jk47 said:
Somewhere I read a great article on this but it's lost to me now. Google searches also are not yielding what I'm looking for..

Apparently there is a difference between Multi-GPU, and SLI/Crossfire. A single multi-GPU card is less likely to encounter micro-stuttering issues associated with SLI & Crossfire. Overall it's preferable to have your GPU's on the same PCI-E slot


Well I do agree it's better to have a multi-GPU card, but it's still quite possible to get plenty of stuttering. I just built a PC with a 590 and the benchmarks (3DMark Vantage/11, Unigene Heaven) all had some stuttering. Heaven was the worst for it.
m
0
l
November 23, 2011 11:16:37 PM

Warmacblu said:
I thought this didn't make too much of a difference. I could be wrong though.

it makes a very big difference..... instead of both card running at full speed you will have two cards running at half speed....it's like having a 1000hp car but you only use 500hp...just make sure the motherboards have native x16 speed when sli is used, usually x58 motherboards do
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
November 24, 2011 12:46:42 AM

The 590 is two 570s in SLI not two 580s aint it?

m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
November 24, 2011 1:39:51 AM

nebun said:
it makes a very big difference..... instead of both card running at full speed you will have two cards running at half speed....it's like having a 1000hp car but you only use 500hp...just make sure the motherboards have native x16 speed when sli is used, usually x58 motherboards do


After reading over this, I complete disagree with you:

http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?p=32460001

Sorry to go off topic but I don't think the OP should worry about how fast the PCI-e lanes are.
m
0
l
a c 124 U Graphics card
November 24, 2011 4:12:02 AM

It's downclocked 580s. So yeah they have full cores enabled but they are slower, so a 570 is about as fast as a 590 core.
m
0
l
November 24, 2011 4:26:04 AM

Two GTX 570's in SLI will perform similarly to GTX 590.But GTX 590 is good option if you want great performance and you have only one PCIe on MB...
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
November 24, 2011 4:43:41 AM

as far as i know g1 assassin supports 3-wali SLi and 4-way crossfire so PCIe slots are not an issue.i have decided to tell him to go with 570 2.5gb SLI.any other suggestions???
m
0
l
a c 273 U Graphics card
November 24, 2011 8:18:45 AM

nebun said:
it makes a very big difference..... instead of both card running at full speed you will have two cards running at half speed....it's like having a 1000hp car but you only use 500hp...just make sure the motherboards have native x16 speed when sli is used, usually x58 motherboards do


THG had an article on this a while back which showed the difference to be negligible, less than 5% IIRC.
m
0
l
a c 124 U Graphics card
November 24, 2011 1:21:00 PM

Aren't 570s 1280mb? You don't get 2.5gb in SLI, you get 1280. They do not add up. Same goes for the 590 FYI, it's listed as 3gb but you only get 1.5gb same as a 580. There are some models with more RAM, like 3gb 580s and 2gb 560 Tis.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
November 24, 2011 5:13:33 PM

Wolf perhaps he s looking at the 570 with 2.5 GB of vram
m
0
l
a c 124 U Graphics card
November 24, 2011 6:04:26 PM

That's entirely possible! But it's also a very common mistake to think the VRAM adds up. :) 
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
November 25, 2011 9:11:07 AM

wolfram23 said:
That's entirely possible! But it's also a very common mistake to think the VRAM adds up. :) 



i also know that 1.2+1.2=1.2gb.but i am talking about this model-
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
i guess 2gb is enough to play any game at 1080p.
gtx 570 2.5+2.5GB=gtx 570 SLi and 2.5GB of VRAM.
what about this??
m
0
l
November 25, 2011 11:50:16 AM

wolfram23 said:
Aren't 570s 1280mb? You don't get 2.5gb in SLI, you get 1280. They do not add up. Same goes for the 590 FYI, it's listed as 3gb but you only get 1.5gb same as a 580. There are some models with more RAM, like 3gb 580s and 2gb 560 Tis.



How so?

Between two graphics utilities, one shows my GTX 590 memory at 3gb, the other shows it at 2.5gb.. why do you say 1.5
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
November 25, 2011 12:00:36 PM

The GTX 590 has 3GB of VRAM total but while gaming, each processor gets 1.5 of the total 3 to work with.
m
0
l
a c 124 U Graphics card
November 25, 2011 2:16:42 PM

^Yeah, technically all 3gb are there for use, but each GPU needs it's own VRAM so it gets split. Then the data is identical between both sets of VRAM, and each GPU renders alternating frames.
m
0
l
!