Should i do single 680 or dual 680 sli

[xxcysxx]

hello folks,
i looking to get the 680 for my new built. just for gaming. I'm going to be paying on a flat screen samsung tv at 1080 x 1920 resolution, this tv also does 120 hertz if that mean anything. this machine will be move around to different tv monitors like my house and my shop and my basement, so it does stay at one fix location to one tv panel. but the resolution will be the same on all of them. and i'm just a casual gammer for the summer while i'm out of school. i will not be using it with multi monitor at all. just one tv every time all the time.

i don't mind spending the money for a good setup, but i don't want to waste my money it if it isn't going to be used. so from your experience should i go for two 680 in sli or should i just do one 680 and it would be enough. i want to max out all settings on the games i play with all the pretty eye candy stuff and the rendering to be fluid smooth as possible.

things i have cumulated already are asus maximus V gene z77, i7 2700k, and corsair vengeance 32gb ddr3 1600.
power supply haven't purchase yet, and to be determine according to either sli or single 680 setup.

thanks

 

[foscooter]

With as powerful as that card is suppose to be, I'd say one should be enough. (Especially at $750 a pop.)

 

[ko888]

... but i don't want to waste my money it if it isn't going to be used. ...

All of the GeForce GTX 680 2-way SLI reviews I've seen show a nice benefit to games that take advantage of multiple GPUs at 1920x1080 resolution.

power supply haven't purchase yet, and to be determine according to either sli or single 680 setup.

For a system using a single GeForce GTX 680 graphics card NVIDIA specifies a minimum of a 550 Watt or greater power supply that has a combined +12 Volt continuous current rating of 38 Amps or greater and that has at least two 6-pin PCI Express supplementary power connectors.

For a system using two GeForce GTX 680 graphics cards in 2-way SLI mode NVIDIA specifies a minimum of a 750 Watt or greater power supply that has a combined +12 Volt continuous current rating of 53 Amps or greater and that has at least four 6-pin PCI Express supplementary power connectors.

Total Power Supply Wattage is NOT the crucial factor in power supply selection!!! Total Continuous Amperage Available on the +12V Rail(s) is the most important factor.

 

[baddad]

Two if you can afford it, then you should be good for years.

 

[PCgamer81]

^ +1

I agree. I have dual 6970s (basically a 6990) which is more or less 10%-15% more powerful than a single 680, and I can't fill my refresh rate (75Hz) with a few games totally maxed out with all the graphics mods applied (such as Crysis 2 w/ DX11/High-Res/MaLDo's pack/Blackfire's Mod).

Two 680s will be 80% more powerful if not more than what I have - hell yeah! Go for it! It will immediately pay huge dividends, as well as future proof you for years.

 

[motorneuron]

Since the 680 just came out and is pretty far ahead of the curve, I'd probably just get one, with the intention of buying a second one later. It's hard to see why the prices on the 680 would drop any time in the immediate future--the only performance pressure I can foresee would be from nvidia itself (685 rumors?) or from double GPU setups like the 590/6990--so I don't see any price pressure. But still, prices do eventually drop as more options come out, and as long as you're sticking to 1920x1080, it's pretty hard to argue that you NEED a second card in many games. Will you see a meaningful performance increase? Yes, in some games, especially if your monitor can handle 120 Hz and if you are sensitive to FPS above 60 (varies by the person). But again, the 680 will destroy most games at 1920x1080. So I'd hold off. But get the power supply to back it up.

Your other option, if you're going to go dual card now, would be to crossfire overclocked 7950s (or for $100 more, 7970s; or for $100 less, 7870s), especially after the recent price drops on the 79xx series. Both the 680 and the AMD 7000 series cards have great thermals and power usage, but the AMD cards don't have the same built-in variable clock that the 680 does. So you have more OC headroom on the AMDs right now, and you can get some great results if you tweak them. That's especially true if you plan for a dual-card setup by getting a big case with good air circulation.

 

[PCgamer81]

Since the 680 just came out and is pretty far ahead of the curve, I'd probably just get one, with the intention of buying a second one later. It's hard to see why the prices on the 680 would drop any time in the immediate future--the only performance pressure I can foresee would be from nvidia itself (685 rumors?) or from double GPU setups like the 590/6990--so I don't see any price pressure. But still, prices do eventually drop as more options come out, and as long as you're sticking to 1920x1080, it's pretty hard to argue that you NEED a second card in many games. Will you see a meaningful performance increase? Yes, in some games, especially if your monitor can handle 120 Hz and if you are sensitive to FPS above 60 (varies by the person). But again, the 680 will destroy most games at 1920x1080. So I'd hold off. But get the power supply to back it up.

Your other option, if you're going to go dual card now, would be to crossfire overclocked 7950s (or for $100 more, 7970s; or for $100 less, 7870s), especially after the recent price drops on the 79xx series. Both the 680 and the AMD 7000 series cards have great thermals and power usage, but the AMD cards don't have the same built-in variable clock that the 680 does. So you have more OC headroom on the AMDs right now, and you can get some great results if you tweak them. That's especially true if you plan for a dual-card setup by getting a big case with good air circulation.

You make some very good points.

But I would like to point out that I game at 1080p with a refresh rate of 75Hz and people told me that a single 6970 was plenty for that - not true. Granted, a 680 is far more powerful than the 6970 but I think you get my point. You would be surprised at what is needed once you factor in full AA and graphics mods and all that eye candy that those of us with high-end systems explore.

Also, if he is going to go the AMD route, I don't see how he should get anything other than two 7870s. I had much rather get two 7870s than two 7950s and put that money saved towards an SSD or something. The 7870 and the 7970 pretty much render the 7950 the odd man out, IMO.

 

[venur]

hello folks,
i looking to get the 680 for my new built. just for gaming. I'm going to be paying on a flat screen samsung tv at 1080 x 1920 resolution, this tv also does 120 hertz if that mean anything. this machine will be move around to different tv monitors like my house and my shop and my basement, so it does stay at one fix location to one tv panel. but the resolution will be the same on all of them. and i'm just a casual gammer for the summer while i'm out of school. i will not be using it with multi monitor at all. just one tv every time all the time.

i don't mind spending the money for a good setup, but i don't want to waste my money it if it isn't going to be used. so from your experience should i go for two 680 in sli or should i just do one 680 and it would be enough. i want to max out all settings on the games i play with all the pretty eye candy stuff and the rendering to be fluid smooth as possible.

things i have cumulated already are asus maximus V gene z77, i7 2700k, and corsair vengeance 32gb ddr3 1600.
power supply haven't purchase yet, and to be determine according to either sli or single 680 setup.

thanks

Reccomanding two gtx680 for a 1080p set-up isn,t realy a good advice. You'll see no benefit from it on the current game and I doubt you'll need more power even for the upcomming ones.

If you'd realy need two 680gtx to a 1080p game lets think about what I should need for my 5760x 108p set-up.

When they will release the 700s series then you might check some review an decide if you buy a second 680gtx, sell it to buy the new 700s or just hold on with a single 680gtx till they release the 800s.

As of now poeple max BF3 with a single hd7850 so I don't buy the crap of needing two 680gtx for a low resolution set-up: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/radeon-hd-7870-review-benchmark,3148-6.html

 

[motorneuron]

You make some very good points.

But I would like to point out that I game at 1080p with a refresh rate of 75Hz and people told me that a single 6970 was plenty for that - not true. Granted, a 680 is far more powerful than the 6970 but I think you get my point. You would be surprised at what is needed once you factor in full AA and graphics mods and all that eye candy that those of us with high-end systems explore.

Also, if he is going to go the AMD route, I don't see how he should get anything other than two 7870s. I had much rather get two 7870s than two 7950s and put that money saved towards an SSD or something. The 7870 and the 7970 pretty much render the 7950 the odd man out, IMO.

I think we agree. He'd see a difference between one 680 and two 680s even at 1920x1080, especially if he has a 120 Hz display. I just see it as a question of value. Since he'll max many games with a single 680, he can save a few bucks by waiting until software advances or he gets a higher-res display(s). So it depends on how much he's willing to spend now.

As for the AMD route, I personally think the 7950 is a better value than the 7970, but the 7870 is still a decent choice. Check the benches at stock clocks here: http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/550?vs=508 It's similar to the 6950 and 6970--the biggest difference between the 7970 and 7950 is the clock speed, but since you can OC the lower-end card, you wind up not having too much value in the higher-end card.

By contrast, the real difference between the 7870 and the 7950 is actual differences in the silicon. The 7950 has almost 50% more stream processors and texture units than the 7870. But the 7870 default clock is 1GHz, while the default 7950 clock is 800 MHz. Once you bump that 7950's clock up, it wrecks the 7870.

 

[bystander]

He will not have 120hz with that TV. TV's, unless this is an exception, do not offer connections that allow true 120hz. HDMI will not allow 120hz at 1080p. Unless it offers a DL-DVI connection, it won't help you. TV's usually just generate extra frames between the normal inputted frames. That won't happen for your computer games.

For 60hz gaming, a single GTX 680 is plenty.

 

[ko888]

He will not have 120hz with that TV. TV's, unless this is an exception, do not offer connections that allow true 120hz. HDMI will not allow 120hz at 1080p. Unless it offers a DL-DVI connection, it won't help you. TV's usually just generate extra frames between the normal inputted frames. That won't happen for your computer games.

For 60hz gaming, a single GTX 680 is plenty.

... and the insertion of interpolated frames (i.e. post-processing) introduces lag that you really don't want during gaming.

GeForce GTX 680 2-way SLI will make Metro 2033 more playable at 1920x1080.

 

[bystander]

... and the insertion of interpolated frames (i.e. post-processing) introduces lag that you really don't want during gaming.

GeForce GTX 680 2-way SLI will make Metro 2033 more playable at 1920x1080.

Those insertions are done by the monitor, not by the graphics card, so more graphics power would not help. He will be limited to 60hz.

edit: but I do agree that with Metro 2033, you will get to a more comfortable FPS range, but I guess the question is, "is a couple games ability to play slight smoother worth $500?" (I'd say no, but that's his decision).

 

[ko888]

Those insertions are done by the monitor, not by the graphics card, so more graphics power would not help. He will be limited to 60hz.

edit: but I do agree that with Metro 2033, you will get to a more comfortable FPS range, but I guess the question is, "is a couple games ability to play slight smoother worth $500?" (I'd say no, but that's his decision).

I never said that those extra frames are generated by the graphics card(s). I know that the term Post-Processing means that the frames are inserted by the TV's own processing chip.

The extra lag introduced by the TV processor's insertion of interpolated frames is not necessarily conducive to smooth game play.

The OP also hasn't said which games are being played.

 

[xunicronx]

I suppose you can try out one GTX680 and if you feel you aboslutely need more fps, then you could grab another, rather than getting GTX680SLI right off the bat and discovering that the price/performance ratio isn't that great, then you feel like you wasted $500.

 

[bystander]

That's probably the best idea. It also let's you see the difference if you do by a 2nd.

 

[ilysaml]

I suppose you can try out one GTX680 and if you feel you aboslutely need more fps, then you could grab another, rather than getting GTX680SLI right off the bat and discovering that the price/performance ratio isn't that great, then you feel like you wasted $500.

It really depends on the game title, for a smooth gameplay in Metro 2033 you need to SLI or CF, and i guess the same scenario will happen When playing Metro Last night the next year.

Some game titles require that power, and some else are just a bottleneck for GTX 680.

 

[PCgamer81]

2 680's is beyond overkill for todays games at 1080p.
2 4xx series cards will give you similar and better performance for less.

Last I checked, the 490 never came. So...

Two 480s vs two 680s, well...

Seeing as how he doesn't live in the north pole where all that extra heat would come in handy, I recommend two 680s (although two 480s would make the house so cozy) .

Seriously, no chance that two 480s will even come close to giving him the performance of two 680s. That would be like me telling someone to snag a couple of 6970s (like I have) instead of two 7970s. They are beast cards (the 480s), but not quite on par with two 680s. No offense.

 

[PCgamer81]

Never said performance would be the same or better.
I was talking price vs a single 680.

I thought when you said, "similar and better performance for less", you meant it literally. I guess now I see what you mean - you meant it in respect to 1080p gaming. My bad.

 

[bystander]

I thought when you said, "similar and better performance for less", you meant it literally. I guess now I see what you mean - you meant it in respect to 1080p gaming. My bad.

I believe he meant it literally. Two 480's will out perform a single 680 and cost less.

 

[PCgamer81]

I believe he meant it literally. Two 480's will out perform a single 680 and cost less.

2 680's is beyond overkill for todays games at 1080p.
2 4xx series cards will give you similar and better performance for less.

It doesn't look that way to me...

Edit: ^

I guess he did mean that.

 

[PCgamer81]

LOL i meant vs the single 680 seeing as though it costs 500+.
In SLi obviously 680's will rape 2 480's

They beat it pretty good, but I don't know about raping it. The 480 is still very beastly.

Can they really be had for $500? Makes my mouth water just thinking about a second build with dual 480s...

 

[bystander]

They beat it pretty good, but I don't know about raping it. The 480 is still very beastly.

Can they really be had for $500? Makes my mouth water just thinking about a second build with dual 480s...

Be be sure you are ready to deal with the noise levels, or get them with really good cooling systems.

 

[PCgamer81]

Yes agreed.
However once those hurdles are dealt with, they are a dream.

If I could get $300 ($150 and $150) for my two gently used 6970s (had one for 6 months and the other 3 months and never overclocked past 930/1440 on both), I would gladly pay $200 to upgrade (yes, I said upgrade) to two 480s. I would throw down on a couple of those nifty coolers and be good to go.

It would be worth it just to get PhysX not to mention better performance in all the "Nvidia games" - which is most, truth be told.

 

[PCgamer81]

Unfortunatly yes you are right.
Drivers are solid too.

In terms of performance, 6970s have always reminded me of midgets, anyway (I don't mean little people). They are stunted. They are supposed to be AMD's answer to the 580 and don't even compete with the 570 - even the 560Ti beats it in some games and that's just sad. It has all the attributes of a high-end beast card, but it's just...stunted. Midgetized.

 

[PCgamer81]

Thanks a lot!

I am seriously considering this. Who knows, maybe my sig will be changed in a month or two.