Closed Solved

Moving to 2560x1440 Resolution - Upgrade from GTX670 Needed?

Hi Everyone,
This is my first post and I will try to keep it brief:
I recently purchased a MSI GTX 670 OC Power Edition to use on my system which is currently running at 1920x1080. However, I will soon be upgrading my monitor to a 27" Dell Ultrasharp which has a native resolution of 2560x1440.

So my questions are this:
1)will I still achieve adequate performance at the settings I wish to play at(high-ultra) for Battlefield 3 and Planetside 2?
2)If not, will I see a noticeable improvement upgrading to either a GTX680 or RadeonHD 7970?

To my understanding a single monitor setup such as mine would not take advantage of 4GB of VRAM for either of the NVIDIA cards. Also, I am running on a m-ITX build and as such only have 1 PCI 3.0 slot. I might add this card to a water cooling loop, so obviously I will be overclocking whichever card I decide upon.

I only have about 2 weeks left before I can exchange my current card, so hopefully you guys can help me resolve this situation quickly!

Thanks in advance for all your help!
15 answers Last reply Best Answer
More about moving 2560x1440 resolution upgrade gtx670 needed
  1. Yes a single monitor will not take up 4gb of VRAM.

    I think you should be fine running with the GTX 670 for one monitor on 2560x1440
    You might lose some FPS (5-10) I think but you should be fine.

    Good Luck, defiantly get more opinions that one.
  2. Michael31 said:
    Yes a single monitor will not take up 4gb of VRAM.

    I think you should be fine running with the GTX 670 for one monitor on 2560x1440
    You might lose some FPS (5-10) I think but you should be fine.

    Good Luck, defiantly get more opinions that one.


    I just compared a couple different models of EVGA GTX670's and GTX680's and it seems like the only difference is the greater number of CUDA cores on the GTX 680. (The reason I chose EVGA cards is that they use a semi-reference design with 680 backplates on the 670 which all contributes to an easier interface for water-cooling.) Assuming they both can be adequately cooled, is it safe to assume they both overclock to around the same level?

    The Radeon HD7970 on the other hand has the advantage of a larger memory bus and from what I hear is a great overclocker - provided it has adequate cooling.

    I plan on using my spare 1920x1200 24" monitor as well for Teamspeak3, maps, and other utilities while playing games such as Planetside 2 and Battlefield 3.
  3. sluggercz said:
    I just compared a couple different models of EVGA GTX670's and GTX680's and it seems like the only difference is the greater number of CUDA cores on the GTX 680. (The reason I chose EVGA cards is that they use a semi-reference design with 680 backplates on the 670 which all contributes to an easier interface for water-cooling.) Assuming they both can be adequately cooled, is it safe to assume they both overclock to around the same level?

    The Radeon HD7970 on the other hand has the advantage of a larger memory bus and from what I hear is a great overclocker - provided it has adequate cooling.

    I plan on using my spare 1920x1200 24" monitor as well for Teamspeak3, maps, and other utilities while playing games such as Planetside 2 and Battlefield 3.


    The HD 7970 is probably better for 2 monitors because of its memory bus compared to the GTX6 70 or GTX 680
  4. You will be fine with the 670 PE, it would be foolish to upgrade to a 7970 or 680. BF3 on ultra should run smooth and at 2560x1440 you really only need 2X MSAA instead of 4X! That should help your FPS a little. The only thing that will cripple you card is mult-panel setups.
  5. redeemer said:
    You will be fine with the 670 PE, it would be foolish to upgrade to a 7970 or 680. BF3 on ultra should run smooth and at 2560x1440 you really only need 2X MSAA instead of 4X! That should help your FPS a little. The only thing that will cripple you card is mult-panel setups.


    Is there any reason I would only need 2x MSAA at 1440p instead of 4x? I think I have something about the higher resolution having naturally less edges or the like...
  6. Yes, higher pixel density means fewer jaggies naturally.
  7. more higher resolution less anti aliasing required..
  8. redeemer said:
    You will be fine with the 670 PE, it would be foolish to upgrade to a 7970 or 680. BF3 on ultra should run smooth and at 2560x1440 you really only need 2X MSAA instead of 4X! That should help your FPS a little. The only thing that will cripple you card is mult-panel setups.


    all the 670's he has listed are more then this 7970. $354.99 after MIR. i haven't read any reviews on it but a 7970 for $350 is a nice price.

    http://us.ncix.com/products/?sku=67172&vpn=FX797ATDFC

    also if you haven't got the dell yet consider one of the korean 27" monitors for a lot less.

    http://techreport.com/review/23291/those-27-inch-ips-displays-from-korea-are-for-real
  9. jonjonjon said:
    all the 670's he has listed are more then this 7970. $354.99 after MIR. i haven't read any reviews on it but a 7970 for $350 is a nice price.

    http://us.ncix.com/products/?sku=67172&vpn=FX797ATDFC

    also if you haven't got the dell yet consider one of the korean 27" monitors for a lot less.

    http://techreport.com/review/23291/those-27-inch-ips-displays-from-korea-are-for-real


    It's funny that you mention those Korean monitors. I had been looking at those and was on the cusp of buying one when I started questioning their true durability and lifespan. Thing is, I know they use "reject" panels from LG and that doesn't bother me as much as the general build quality of the whole panel. I went into a MicroCenter close to where I live to look at the Achievia Simian - which I know is not the best Korean panel, but it still gave me an idea of their overall quality...Needless to say I'm willing to pay the $200 premium for a U2713HM (Small Business Discount and Dell eGift Card Discount = Sale Price of ~$600 before Tax{MSRP $800}) which I know will last me a long time, hell I still have an 8 year old Dell 24" 1920x1200 with 0 dead pixels.

    But back to the original question: as someone else mentioned the memory bus and VRAM is significantly higher on the AMD cards, but whether or not this is worth returning my 670GTX (which I'm willing to do, provided I will see a difference) is what I aim to learn from you fine folks.

    Anonymous said:
    Yes, higher pixel density means fewer jaggies naturally.

    Thanks for clarifying!
  10. I can tell you that upgrading to a 680 won't be worth it - the 680 is only about 5% more powerful, and that number drops like a stone after overclocking. Not worth it for the $100 extra.

    I don't have first-hand experience with the 7970, but I know it's one hell of a card. I can tell you this much, however:

    I have a 1080p, 120hz monitor, and a 670 in an itx case, much like you. I also don't have any troubles maxxing out pretty much any game out there at 120 frames a second.

    Sure, I have to be selective about what maxxing means; I can't use triple buffering in MMOs, nor supersampling in the Witcher, nor ultra shadows in BF3... but I don't need them. These are settings that, for the most part, don't make ANY difference to the graphics whatsoever at high resolutions, and are just there to kill framerates.

    (Kinda like how Metro 2033 is a rather ugly game, and only useful because it's so badly coded that it's hard to run well.)
  11. I have the Gigabyte GTX 670 and I game at 2560x1440 with a Shimian monitor. I noticed maybe 5 fps drop compared to 1080p gaming. You will still be able to max out most games without issues with maybe turning a setting or two down to high quality. Take this from a guy that cannot stand a single hint of stuttering. You will be fine with it. I always intended to run a sli setup with this rig, but I have yet to see the need to on one monitor.
  12. Best answer
    Point being, I would not waste money on an AMD card. Sure AMD handles higher resolutions a tad bit better than Nvidia, but it is not enough to warrant changing your graphics card. I know bf3 can eat up a bunch of vram, but most games will not touch the 2gb mark even at 1440p. You will not see a difference between the two cards unless your planning to run two or three monitors together at 1440p gaming then I might be swayed to change my mind towards AMD with the extra vram.

    My final verdict: Keep your gtx 670, get the new monitor for 1440p gaming, and then hook up your old monitor to the right or left of the new monitor. Now you can game on the 1440p monitor and watch youtube videos/facebook/etc without having to tab out of your game. I just blew my own mind with that one. You would have to put the games into windows mode fullscreen for that to work, but it does work work well for me none the less. :P
  13. Plenty of good opinions both ways.

    You said you don't mind returning your current card, so if it isn't too much of a hastle you'd probably be better served with a 7970 (unless you prefer games with physx).

    However, if it's any kind of hastle, stick with the 670; it's a strong card and should meet your needs pretty well.
  14. Best answer selected by sluggercz.
  15. Thanks for all the input guys, I wish I could select more than one best answer, shout out to Redeemer and DarkSable for also providing informative answers!

    I think I will be sticking with the MSI GTX670 and setting up my two monitors side by side.
    Next up....designing a water loop in a SFF case and overclocking the MSI into oblivion :pt1cable:

    If anyone has some helpful links or advice for my next two pursuits ([1] building a water-cooling loop, [2] overclocking a MSI GTX670) I'd be in your debt.

    Cheers!
Ask a new question

Read More

Graphics Cards Resolution Graphics Product