Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

3 6950's or 1 7970

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
January 30, 2012 6:13:23 PM

hi im buildin a pc and im gonna have three 23" 3d monitors and i was wondering if a amd radeon hd 7970 can handle 3 monitors. i was also wondering if one 7970 or three 6950 would be faster

More about : 6950 7970

a b U Graphics card
January 30, 2012 6:17:41 PM

Everyone here is going to tell you to get the 7970. My 6990 has a hard time with bf3 at 5760x1080 in ultra. Only about 50FPS with AA off.The 7970 falls a bit short of the 6990 in just about every benchmark and most games. I am sure there will be some contradicting benchmark reviews posted in regards to this since no one wants to hear this. Trifire 6970 will get you about 75FPS at 5760x1080 so trifire 6950 will get you close to this. For all out power I say 3x6950. For future upgrading, the 7970 since crossire 7970 will beat out trifire 6950.

I edited this while you were posting a reply.
January 30, 2012 6:20:13 PM

alright so ill put 1 6950 to each monitor
Related resources
January 30, 2012 6:31:44 PM

the 7970 is just at the point where im going to say its twice as powerful as the 6970. however three 6950's are still more powerful especially if your running three monitors. the 7970 will get just under 30fps while the tree 6950's should get 40-60
a b U Graphics card
January 30, 2012 6:31:46 PM

You will also need to purchase one active dongle for monitor number 3. The DVI port and one passive DVI dongle is enough to power 2 monitors but you need the active dongle for number 3. They are less than $30 at newegg. You can read about this on the AMD site in the eyefinity setup section.
a b U Graphics card
January 30, 2012 6:38:55 PM

xtremegamer2da-max said:
hi im buildin a pc and im gonna have three 23" 3d monitors and i was wondering if a amd radeon hd 7970 can handle 3 monitors. i was also wondering if one 7970 or three 6950 would be faster



I should know better than to link any benchmark tests here but this backs up what I was saying. Sorry but it is only the 6970. The 6950 is pretty close in specs.

a c 92 U Graphics card
a b À AMD
January 30, 2012 7:04:30 PM

3 6950 is going to be more powerful and cost more. I think if you can do it, get 2 7950 which will give you much better performance and not have to deal with tri crossfire.

3 6950 2 gb is $750 minimal
7970 is $600 about
7950 is suppose to launch at $400 or $450 and it will be within 15% of the 7970 which would make it a good choice if you can get 2 of them for about $800-$900.
January 30, 2012 7:21:39 PM

im not using crossfire im having 3 monitors and am putting 1 to each and ive found a great deal where i can get 3 6950 for only 615 dollars
January 30, 2012 7:28:48 PM

If you're not crossfiring or doing Eyefinity, then you don't need any of those cards. You can get a much cheaper card. Everyone's recommendation so far has been under the assumption that you'll be gaming at very high resolution: 5760x1080: Eyefinity 3 monitor continuous desktop setup.

What are you planning on doing with these three monitors?
a b U Graphics card
January 30, 2012 7:57:14 PM

xtremegamer2da-max said:
im not using crossfire im having 3 monitors and am putting 1 to each and ive found a great deal where i can get 3 6950 for only 615 dollars


I am confused. What purpose will that serve? Also, can you plug a monitor into each card? I thought that was how nvidia does their 3dsurround.
January 30, 2012 8:02:20 PM

yes im plugging one monitor into each graphics card im using 3 23" 3d monitors
a c 92 U Graphics card
a b À AMD
January 30, 2012 8:06:09 PM

why would you want to do that???
a b U Graphics card
a b C Monitor
a b À AMD
January 30, 2012 8:36:41 PM

+1 there no point in having 3 cards not in crossfire for 3 monitors
a c 229 U Graphics card
a c 78 C Monitor
a b À AMD
January 30, 2012 8:53:26 PM

I don't know if things have changed with the 69xx an 79xx series but historically, I have just never had much luck w/ tri-fire....neither have the guys over at Guru3D

http://www.guru3d.com/article/radeon-hd-6850-6870-cross...

Quote:
The one recommendation we always gave you guys is to keep it simple at 2 GPUs maximum, as after 2 GPUs in a CrossfireX setup you quickly run into weird anomalies that can be irritating.....

So over the years Multi-GPU support has improved quite a bit, AMD still isn't up-to snuff at the level of NVIDIA though, multi-GPU supports still literally and directly remains the Achilles heel of ATI's Catalyst drivers. ....

So let's round things up, personally we always say stick to one or maybe two high-end cards as there is so much less driver fuzz to worry about. It's like this with ATI, once you pass 2 GPUs you'll often find yourself compromising a lot with new game titles versus multi-GPU support.


January 30, 2012 9:49:00 PM

Can you wait? If you're willing to spend the money on 3 6950s, you might just be better off getting one 7990, I'd say at least wait for it to come out and it get some benches
January 30, 2012 10:40:06 PM

well im not getting it til june or july but a 3 6950's would only be 615 dollars and a 1990 would be like 900 dollars so sry but listen i want 3 monitors so wouldnt it be better to have 1 6950 per monitor than 1 7970 4 all???
a c 106 U Graphics card
a b C Monitor
January 30, 2012 11:06:49 PM

You can run all three monitors off one 6950. If you aren't going to game then you can run three monitors off a cheaper card like a Radeon 6770. You will need either to get an active display adapter to connect to at least one monitor or you can get the sapphire 6770 FLEX card.
a c 92 U Graphics card
a b À AMD
January 30, 2012 11:07:16 PM

xtremegamer2da-max said:
well im not getting it til june or july but a 3 6950's would only be 615 dollars and a 1990 would be like 900 dollars so sry but listen i want 3 monitors so wouldnt it be better to have 1 6950 per monitor than 1 7970 4 all???

why would you want to spend extra money getting a card for each monitor for no reason? 1 6950 per monitor is retarded. If you want to game with eyefinity then you need to crossfire with the setup. If you want to run anything but gaming on those monitors you are wasting your money.

Tell us what you want to do with this setup and we will give you recommendations but as of right now, you seem to not know a thing about what you are doing while not giving enough info for us to help you.

you only need 1 card for all the monitors, if you aren't gaming, then a cheap $100 card will be able to be used for all the monitors and you'd not even notice the difference. However it is your money, if you choose to buy a 6950 for each monitor, then you can go ahead and do it.
a c 106 U Graphics card
a b C Monitor
January 30, 2012 11:07:21 PM

If you're going to game, then get a 7970, just do it. It will be easier for you.
January 31, 2012 1:10:21 AM

would i get more power if i got 1 6950 for each monitor or if i got a 7970 for all???
January 31, 2012 1:10:51 AM

and would i get better power if i put 1 6950 for each screen
a c 92 U Graphics card
a b À AMD
January 31, 2012 1:12:32 AM

no no no to all your questions.
a b U Graphics card
January 31, 2012 1:30:44 AM

i would say wait a few days more and go with 7950 crossfire.hopefully they will priced for less then $400.
a c 217 U Graphics card
a c 132 C Monitor
a b À AMD
January 31, 2012 1:33:27 AM

xtremegamer2da-max said:
would i get more power if i got 1 6950 for each monitor or if i got a 7970 for all???


If you plan to use this for gaming, you cannot run 1 monitor per card. All you can do with that setup is game on a single monitor while the other two are extended desktop cards.

To use all 3 at once with a game requires that you run them in crossfire and hook all 3 monitors to 1 card with eyefinity.
a c 106 U Graphics card
a b C Monitor
January 31, 2012 2:48:42 AM

If you hook up one monitor to each 6950 you will only be able to game on one monitor. If you're using a windowed 3d application its only going to use the resources on the GPU it's connected to, not all three of them. A 7970 is more powerful than one 6950. To use all three 6950s at once all three monitors must be connected to one card.
a c 106 U Graphics card
a b C Monitor
January 31, 2012 2:49:11 AM

Wait a minute, this has to be a troll................ ohgoddangit
January 31, 2012 12:53:50 PM

so i have to use tricrossfire and then use eyefinity on 1 card
January 31, 2012 8:00:26 PM

yes. two 6850's are about the same as a 7970. the 7950 is only a little less powerful than the 7970 and when overclocked is as powerful as a stock 7970. Also with two cards the scaling is much better (close to 99% in most games) where as when you add a third card in crossfire you usually get ~ 30-40% increase. i say get two 7950's. overall they will be almost twice as powerful as 2 6950's giving them an estimated 30-50% gaming advantage over 6850x3 crossfire.
a b U Graphics card
January 31, 2012 10:50:26 PM

nagol567 said:
yes. two 6850's are about the same as a 7970. the 7950 is only a little less powerful than the 7970 and when overclocked is as powerful as a stock 7970. Also with two cards the scaling is much better (close to 99% in most games) where as when you add a third card in crossfire you usually get ~ 30-40% increase. i say get two 7950's. overall they will be almost twice as powerful as 2 6950's giving them an estimated 30-50% gaming advantage over 6850x3 crossfire.



Where did you get your info on trifire only adding 30-50%? This is only a synthetic benchmark but I have found very similar results in games such as bf3 and dirt3. I actually spent a few hours with bf3 doing the exact thing over and over again and with FRAPS also came up with scaling in the high 90's. Dirt 3 also scales high in trifire. I admit games like Deus EX or F.E.A.R 3 don't scale too well in trifire but crossfire 6970's are a bit of overkill already.

This is 6990 which shows as crossfire 6970


This is trifire 6970



a c 217 U Graphics card
a c 132 C Monitor
a b À AMD
January 31, 2012 11:00:51 PM

Is that not almost exactly 50% increase, which fits the 30-50% he talked about?

In games where the CPU might bottleneck you some, it'll be less, but 50% increase is about perfect scaling.
a b U Graphics card
February 1, 2012 9:27:40 AM

bystander said:
Is that not almost exactly 50% increase, which fits the 30-50% he talked about?




No. First, I guess I was being a bit harsh on nagol567. He is right in that scaling on some games, more so on lower resolutions like 1920x1080, is not great from crossfire to trifire. At high resolutions, on really demanding games such as bf3 the scaling is great up to trifire. Quadfire also scales well also in bf3 but there is a bug that causes the game to crash after 1-10minutes of play and is a topic for another discussion.


bystander said:

Also with two cards the scaling is much better (close to 99% in most games) where as when you add a third card in crossfire you usually get ~ 30-40% increase.


I said No because what he said is referring to the third gpu only adding 30-50% of what it is capable of. For example, crossfire 6970 give 40fps at 5760x1080 in heaven 2.5. For arguments sake, let's just say each 6970 gives 20FPS. So based on what he said, adding a third gpu would only increase the FPS by up to 50% which would mean 40FPS+10FPS(50% of 20) for a total of 50FPS. Based on this, going from crossfire to trifire would only take you from 40FPS to 50FPS. If he meant it to be the way you are reading it, there would be no point in posting that. My reasoning is because if you have two crossfire 6970's and you add a third one and your FPS increases by nearly 50% then the third card is scaling nearly perfectly since the first 100% is made up of two 6970's each adding 50% to make the 100%.
a c 217 U Graphics card
a c 132 C Monitor
a b À AMD
February 1, 2012 1:29:35 PM

alrobichaud said:

I said No because what he said is referring to the third gpu only adding 30-50% of what it is capable of. For example, crossfire 6970 give 40fps at 5760x1080 in heaven 2.5. For arguments sake, let's just say each 6970 gives 20FPS. So based on what he said, adding a third gpu would only increase the FPS by up to 50% which would mean 40FPS+10FPS(50% of 20) for a total of 50FPS. Based on this, going from crossfire to trifire would only take you from 40FPS to 50FPS. If he meant it to be the way you are reading it, there would be no point in posting that. My reasoning is because if you have two crossfire 6970's and you add a third one and your FPS increases by nearly 50% then the third card is scaling nearly perfectly since the first 100% is made up of two 6970's each adding 50% to make the 100%.


Reread what you quoted again. I did not see anything indicating that he meant it added 50% of what it should, but rather, adding a 3rd would add 30-40% increase. (very few games get perfect scaling).
a b U Graphics card
February 1, 2012 2:00:23 PM

You are right. I did missread that. :( 
!