Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Improving the gtx 690

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
December 12, 2012 7:21:08 AM

Hi all.
apart from buying another 690 and having quad sli issues is there anything else i could do to get more performance..tri sli??
Would a dedicated physx card be worthwhile?
Thanks
Daz

More about : improving gtx 690

a b U Graphics card
December 12, 2012 7:38:43 AM

Three GTX680s would just mean tri SLI issues instead of quad SLI issues. It would definitely be faster than a GTX690 in most games though. You're using a multi-monitor setup?
Related resources
December 12, 2012 7:48:15 AM

yes i would be at 5760x1080...would the 680s be much quicker??...also would i benefit from having a dedicated physx card?
thanks for your help
Daz
a c 185 U Graphics card
December 12, 2012 8:07:44 AM

Why would you need more then a 690 are you running three 5760x1080 monitors or something ?
a b U Graphics card
December 12, 2012 8:28:02 AM

He's saying he's running three 1920x1080 monitors for a total of 5760x1080. And as for the performance difference, you wouldn't be looking at a 50% gain, so it depends if you think it's worth it. You probably know the GTX690 is slightly less than two GTX680s (and I do mean slightly - you wouldn't tell the difference). So you're pretty much doing from dual GTX680 to triple GTX680. Obviously you'd need to factor in your motherboard and PSU there - would they be capable? Dual GTX690s might be a better option, and you wouldn't need to worry about the hassle of selling your GTX690.
December 12, 2012 8:28:58 AM

yes im running 3 1080p monitors
December 12, 2012 8:46:36 AM

sam_p_lay said:
He's saying he's running three 1920x1080 monitors for a total of 5760x1080. And as for the performance difference, you wouldn't be looking at a 50% gain, so it depends if you think it's worth it. You probably know the GTX690 is slightly less than two GTX680s (and I do mean slightly - you wouldn't tell the difference). So you're pretty much doing from dual GTX680 to triple GTX680. Obviously you'd need to factor in your motherboard and PSU there - would they be capable? Dual GTX690s might be a better option, and you wouldn't need to worry about the hassle of selling your GTX690.

The MB is a rampage IV....the PSU is 1200w and thu CPU is a 3820 @4.5......What is quad sli like,,,,,are they many issues with it???..I had 2 hd6990 running quadfire and wasnt impressed at all If quad sl is alot better i would go 4 that...Thankd Daz.
a b U Graphics card
December 12, 2012 9:02:23 AM

I honestly couldn't say, but I'm sure somebody will have a benchmark :-) You'll be seeing diminishing returns - the gain moving from 2 GPUs to 4 will be less than the gain going from 1 to 2. As for compatibility issues, I'd guess that any game that's OK with two will be OK with four, and I guess it goes without saying that a game that doesn't work well with two also won't do well with four. Honestly couldn't say though - I've only used one dual-GPU card and it was a bad experience. I'd always stick to a single GPU now or at most two single-GPU cards so you can disable SLI/Crossfire if necessary.
December 12, 2012 9:45:12 AM

sam_p_lay said:
I honestly couldn't say, but I'm sure somebody will have a benchmark :-) You'll be seeing diminishing returns - the gain moving from 2 GPUs to 4 will be less than the gain going from 1 to 2. As for compatibility issues, I'd guess that any game that's OK with two will be OK with four, and I guess it goes without saying that a game that doesn't work well with two also won't do well with four. Honestly couldn't say though - I've only used one dual-GPU card and it was a bad experience. I'd always stick to a single GPU now or at most two single-GPU cards so you can disable SLI/Crossfire if necessary.

Thanks for your help.
a c 185 U Graphics card
December 12, 2012 9:49:59 AM

daz188 said:
yes im running 3 1080p monitors
Oh o.k. well to be honest i don't think it would be worth it.I think you would be better off sticking with what you have is it really that bad ?
a b U Graphics card
December 12, 2012 10:11:32 AM

bigcyco1 said:
Oh o.k. well to be honest i don't think it would be worth it.I think you would be better off sticking with what you have is it really that bad ?


I see where you're coming from with this, but at 5760x1080 there honestly is room for improvement. Take a look at Metro 2033 5760x1080 AA and max settings - it brings the GTX690 to its knees. It's an extreme example I know, but this is a game that's out now (and has been for a while), to say nothing about future-proofing. It's part of the reason I'll stick to one display. Other reasons being bezels ruining the image and all the neck exercise from all the lateral head movement :-D
a c 185 U Graphics card
December 12, 2012 10:17:30 AM

sam_p_lay said:
I see where you're coming from with this, but at 5760x1080 there honestly is room for improvement. Take a look at Metro 2033 5760x1080 AA and max settings - it brings the GTX690 to its knees. It's an extreme example I know, but this is a game that's out now (and has been for a while), to say nothing about future-proofing. It's part of the reason I'll stick to one display. Other reasons being bezels ruining the image and all the neck exercise from all the lateral head movement :-D
:lol:  Yeah i will stick with my BenQ XL2420T three monitors is not for me.
a b U Graphics card
December 12, 2012 10:22:18 AM

bigcyco1 said:
:lol:  Yeah i will stick with my BenQ XL2420T three monitors is not for me.


I honestly can't understand it - if a glitch on the level of two huge black bars was being rendered by the graphics card, it would be a massive deal - people wouldn't accept it! But people are willingly paying hundreds for exactly that. As for these 'bezel-less' displays, well I think somebody needs to explain to these manufacturers what a bezel is. Same goes for that Motorola Razr-i - awesome bit of kit, but it has a bezel. It's very thin but we can still all see it. Anyway getting off-topic, just my thoughts on it :-)
December 12, 2012 10:49:29 AM

sam_p_lay said:
I honestly can't understand it - if a glitch on the level of two huge black bars was being rendered by the graphics card, it would be a massive deal - people wouldn't accept it! But people are willingly paying hundreds for exactly that. As for these 'bezel-less' displays, well I think somebody needs to explain to these manufacturers what a bezel is. Same goes for that Motorola Razr-i - awesome bit of kit, but it has a bezel. It's very thin but we can still all see it. Anyway getting off-topic, just my thoughts on it :-)

the only game i play on 3 screens are project cars ......which will run at about 60 fps on max settings...I honestly would never play a driving game again after using 3 screens.....if you like driving sims and have got the money you cant beat it.
as for the cards....do you think the 4gig 680s would give me more FPS to justify getting them.
a b U Graphics card
December 12, 2012 10:56:21 AM

daz188 said:
the only game i play on 3 screens are project cars ......which will run at about 60 fps on max settings...I honestly would never play a driving game again after using 3 screens.....if you like driving sims and have got the money you cant beat it.
as for the cards....do you think the 4gig 680s would give me more FPS to justify getting them.


Haha pay no attention to my preferences - if you prefer it then that's what counts! And no, I wouldn't bother with 4GB cards unless they're priced almost the same.
!