GTX 600 Series Question

[benceh]

Sup guys,
Got an unopened Asus GTX 670 DCU II (non-top), and i'm about to upgrade it for a Asus GTX 680 Top/OC (worth a bit of money). The seller proposed me to get one of his 3 GTX 690s. Either Zotac, Gigabyte or Asus (Asus being the most expensive and Zotac the cheapest).

Don't know what i should do. I play CoD4, CSS:GO, Crysis 2 and BF3 on a 24inch 60hz monitor.

Rig:
i5 2500k @stock 3.3ghz
Asus P8Z68-V PRO/GEN3 (So obviously since i have the 2500k, it only supports PCIe 2.0 and no 3.0 for the GPU)
Samsung 128GB SSD
1TB WD Black
Seasonic X-660 W

Case: Cooler Master 690 II (GTX 690 Shud fit in there).


So yea, 24inch 60hz monitor, CoD4, Crysis 2, CSS:GO and BF3, i play CoD4 competitivly and the rest just for fun during free time. Would i benefit from having a GTX 690 over a GTX 680??

Zotac GTX 690
or Gigabyte GTX 690
or Asus GTX 690
or Asus GTX 680 OC
or Asus GTX 680 DCU II TOP
or Gigabyte GTX 680
or Zotac GTX 680

Cheers guys.

 

[shamsmu]

for a 60hz monitor anything above 60fps is pointless. Since your eyes can only perceive 60 frames max.

What is your monitor's native resolution? If it is 1920x1080, then keep the gtx 670.

compared to the gtx 670, the gtx 680 isn't an ideal price/performer. The extra 2-5 more fps it gives you over the gtx 670 isn't worth the extra money at all.

if your monitor has 2560x1440/1600 resolution, you are likely to need more than 2gb vram, So then you may consider getting the gtx690.

Again the gtx690 is not worth it for 1920x1080 resolution. You only need the gtx 690 for 120hz 3d vision setup/ higher resolution.

I used to have Asus gtx670 sli set up and I noticed absolutely no difference in the times when I turned off the sli. So I returned the second gtx670.

 

[benceh]

My monitor's native res: 1920x1080 @60hz

I might be upgrading to a BenQ XL2420T, 24". It is an 120hz monitor right??
If i get this monitor the GTX 690 will come more usefull?? or??

By the way, in CoD4 the max fps allowed is 250fps, and we can clearly see the difference when you have 250fps rather than 125 or something.

 

[shamsmu]

yes that monitor is 120hz, so if you want to set up 3d vision on that monitor, then you may consider the gtx690. Otherwise, if you are only going to game in 2d, stick to the gtx670. Maybe, you can upgrade to something like the gtx685 later on if it becomes necessary, the gtx670 would give you decent resell value.

On a 60hz monitor, the maximum fps your eyes can notice is 60. On a 120hz monitor, the amount is doubled. So tbh, I don't see the point of worrying about getting 250fps when none of us can actually notice it with our eyes.

 

[benceh]

You can't notice it with your eyes, but we can notice it by the feeling of it, way smoother feeling to be honest, atleast on CoD4.

Alright well, one last question, if i get a 120hz monitor but stay in 2D gaming, would i benefit from the GTX 690??
I won't go into 3D 100%.

By the way, my i5 2500k at stock speed 3.3Ghz woudn't bottleneck the GTX 680 nor the GTX 690??

 

[Iluv2raceit]

The most correct answers are:

1) If money is NOT an issue/limitation and you plan to use a single monitor, then invest in a single GTX690 and get the BenQ XL2420T (NVidia 3D Vision2 kit not included) or the XL2420TX (NVidia 3D Vision2 kit included). Having SLI on a single card will provide you with a 'near' future proof solution for your system as a single GTX690 performs just as well as two GTX680 cards in SLI, but uses less power and runs quieter. However, I do not recommend using a single GTX690 for running a surround monitor setup as the VRAM becomes a major concern/limitation. For surround setups, I recommend running three separate GTX 600 series 4GB cards - one card per monitor is necessary in order to achieve the highest frame rates.

2) If money is NOT an issue/limitation and you plan to use a surround monitor setup, then invest in three GTX670s or three GTX680s that have 4GB DDR5 each (do not get the 2GB versons - VRAM will become a limitation in surround mode), and get three BenQ XL2420Ts or two XL2420Ts and one XL2420TX (if you don't already have an NVida 3D Vision2 kit.

3) If money IS partially an issue/limitation and you plan to use a single monitor, then invest in a single GTX670 and buy a single BenQ XL2420T.

4) If money IS primariy an issue/limitation and you plan to use a single monitor, then invest in a single GTX670 and keep your current monitor.

The bottomline is that a GTX670 performs 95% as well or equal to a GTX680 (in most games) and for $100 less, and thus is a much better economical choice. Having a 120Hz gaming monitor is very essential if you plan to become competitive in tournaments. The 120Hz and low response time are significant factors when in a high tempo gaming environment, especially when playing FPS games. I own a BenQ XL2420T (center monitor), two Alienware AW2310 OptX monitors (left and right monitors), and three EVGA GTX680 FTW+ 4GB cards and can tell you that the gaming experience in both single and surround modes is second to none. I have no regrets whatsoever in the investment I made into my gaming setup. I can say that if I had invested in three GTX670 4GB cards, that my gaming experience would still be the same - awesome!!

Good luck with your setup and your gaming future!

 

[shamsmu]

You can't notice it with your eyes, but we can notice it by the feeling of it, way smoother feeling to be honest, atleast on CoD4.

Alright well, one last question, if i get a 120hz monitor but stay in 2D gaming, would i benefit from the GTX 690??
I won't go into 3D 100%.

By the way, my i5 2500k at stock speed 3.3Ghz woudn't bottleneck the GTX 680 nor the GTX 690??

Scientifically speaking, your feelings come from your eyes, your eyes transfer the images to your brain and that's how you get the feeling of smoothness/ lag. A 60hz monitor is only capable of processing a maximum of 60 frames per second.. When you see 200fps on fraps and feel ultra sense of smoothness, that is most likely a psychological thing. Upon seeing high number of fps, your mind automatically assumes your getting extra smoothness. But if you turn off fraps and stop worrying about the fps and run the game with/without vsync on(fps capped to 60)....you won't notice any difference at all to be honest. I tried it out personally on my system so I can vouch for it.

Well, a 120hz monitor can process up to 120fps in 2d games. So in games like bf3, crysis2, the extra fps can provide you extra sense of smoothness. So the gtx690 will help you in those games. But it won't really benefit your gaming experience in games like Cod4, CSS etc. cause again the maximum fps your monitor can physically process is 120.
As for the cpu, yes you should definitely overclock it. You can hit up to 4ghz on stock cooler and with a coolermaster hyper 212 evo(costs $39), you can hit up to 4.4-4.6ghz. it'd be a waste not overclocking that cpu, especially since you have an awesome board like the P8Z68V-PRO.

 

[Iluv2raceit]

My monitor's native res: 1920x1080 @60hz

I might be upgrading to a BenQ XL2420T, 24". It is an 120hz monitor right??
If i get this monitor the GTX 690 will come more usefull?? or??

By the way, in CoD4 the max fps allowed is 250fps, and we can clearly see the difference when you have 250fps rather than 125 or something.

shamsmu is correct - let me try to explain it in simple terms:

1Hz = one complete refresh of what the monitor is displaying in one second, which is the same as one frame per second. Therefore,

60Hz = 60 refreshes per second of the monitor display which is same as saying "60 frames per second" (60 FPS)

120Hz = 120 refreshes per second of the monitor display, which is the same as saying "120 frames per second (120 FPS)

If you are using a regular 60Hz monitor, then that means it can only support displaying a maximum of 60 FPS, regardless of how powerful your graphics card is. Your graphics card might be able to achieve 250 FPS, but the 60Hz monitor you are using will only display a maximum of 60 FPS and can not dispay the 250 FPS that your card is capable of producing. The main reason why you want to have a 120Hz monitor is that you are effectively raising the maximum FPS capability in order to achieve smoother game play. Yes, you will be able to tell the difference in games when playing on a 60Hz capable monitor versus a 120Hz capable monitor - as long as your video card is capable of achieving frame rates above 60 FPS, then you will benefit fromthe 120Hz monitors higher display rate (also known as "refresh rate").

Another factor not mentioned by shamsmu is response times. Maximum frame rates are very important, but so is the response time which is the time from when the video signal is sent to the monitor to the time the monitor displays the image to you. Response time is normally measured in units of milliseconds, or "ms". The lower the number, the better the response time. The BenQ XL2420T is one of the very best gaming monitors on the market right now because it has a very low response time. Documentation from several hardware reviews of the XL2420T state it has a gray-to-gray response time of 2ms and black-to-white response time of 5ms. I personally think the black-to-white response times are the most accurate method for measuring a monitor's gaming performance. Either way, these numbers are fantastic. To give you a comparative example, most IPS monitors have slower response times that are 8ms back-to-white or higher. Some folks swear they can actually perceive the input lag once the ms gets higher than 10ms, so keep that number in mind.

I hope this explanation helps. The bottomline, is that for the very best FPS gaming experience get the BenQ XL2420T!

 

[benceh]

@Iluv2raceit Thanks for this full and detailed answer, will take your answer into consideration.
@shamsmu I have a Coolermaster hyper 212 evo that i bought 1month ago, it's already installed onto my i5 2500k. But i'm scared and do not know how to overclock.
Maybe you can tell me the safest overclock to the least i have to get to have a stable and comfortable setup? between 4GHz-4.8GHz? Would love an exact guide :// As i really don't want to *** up my thing and get BSoDs..
Maybe if you have time you can make me a perfect guide to overlock to like 4.5GHz?? Sorry for asking so muchh mate :/

------------------

Here are the two options i am considering:
1/ Keeping my GTX 670 and my 60hz 22inch monitor.
2/ Return my GTX 670 and upgrade it to a GTX 690 aswell as getting the BenQ XL2420T.
As i have no intention in getting a surround setup.

However i would like to know if for option 2 my setup is okay.
i5 2500k currently at 3.3Ghz (stock)
Asus P8Z68-V PRO/GEN3
Corsair Vengeance 2x4GB @1600MHz
Seasonic X-660 Gold

 

[benceh]

The bottomline, is that for the very best FPS gaming experience get the BenQ XL2420T!

2ms GTG and 5ms BTB.
I heard some monitors got 1ms? Is that true?

 

[shamsmu]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_fxXB5iiVS0

Go to the bios and then follow the settings from this video, set BCLK to 100 and as for the multiplier, set either 44 or 45.

That should give you a stable 4.4-4.5ghz. Set the cpu voltage to manual between 1.325-1.345v.(lower the better)

Then test the cpu speed with cpuz/ core temp and run 20 cycles of intel burn test extreme. If it fails then go back to the bios and increase the voltage a little. While running the test, keep running core temp as well to monitor the maximum temp. If the temp stays below 72c at all times, then your good to go.

http://majorgeeks.com/IntelBurnTest_d5987.html

http://www.alcpu.com/CoreTemp/

and you should be set.

 

[benceh]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_fxXB5iiVS0

Go to the bios and then follow the settings from this video, set BCLK to 100 and as for the multiplier, set either 44 or 45.

That should give you a stable 4.4-4.5ghz. Set the cpu voltage to manual between 1.325-1.345v.(lower the better)

Then test the cpu speed with cpuz/ core temp and run 20 cycles of intel burn test extreme. If it fails then go back to the bios and increase the voltage a little. While running the test, keep running core temp as well to monitor the maximum temp. If the temp stays below 72c at all times, then your good to go.

http://majorgeeks.com/IntelBurnTest_d5987.html

http://www.alcpu.com/CoreTemp/

and you should be set.

Wholy ***, that sounds way too hard ^^ theres no 100% stable OC which requires no testing?? I'm sure that a 4.3GHz overclock doesn't require any testing as it isn't a big boost ^^.

 

[shamsmu]

Wholy ***, that sounds way too hard ^^ theres no 100% stable OC which requires no testing?? I'm sure that a 4.3GHz overclock doesn't require any testing as it isn't a big boost ^^.

lol testing is the easiest part of overclocking, you just run those two apps(from the link) for 2hours and sit back n relax. Then just check the temps and results afterwards. Those apps are very user friendly and easy to use.

Each system has its unique stable point. You can't compare it to an identical system. It is important to test it to be 100% certain.

 

[JackNaylorPE]

The price you pay will affect the dollars per frame..... but here's the data at store prices.

Guru3D uses the following games in their test suite: Hard Reset, COD-MW2, Far Cry 2, ANNO 1404, Metro 2033, ANNO 2070, BFBC2, BF3, Crysis 2, AvP, Lost Planet 2. Total fps (summing fps in each game @ 1920 x 1200) for the various options in parenthesis (single card / SL or CF) are tabulated below along with their cost in dollars per frame single card - CF or SLI:

GTX 680 - $ 500 ( 989 / 1578 ) $ 0.51 - $ 0.63
680 DCII Cu TOP - $ 520 ( 1077 / Not Tested ) $ 0.48 - ERR
GTX 670 - $ 400 ( 917 / 1539 ) $ 0.44 - $ 0.52
670 DCII Cu TOP - $ 430 ( 999 / 1679 ) $ 0.43 - $ 0.51