Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

4GB GTX 680s or Titan for 3-monitor set-up

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
March 3, 2013 2:24:21 AM

The title kinda says it but i am upgrading my system and changing out my GTX 570. I am looking at either picking up 2 4GB GTX 680s or a single GTX Titan. This would be for a 3 monitor set-up.

Also the only worry I have about SLI'ing the 680s is if my PSU could support it. Currently I am using Corsair HX850.

Any help/advice would be great. Also I am ready to spend the $1k for the card/s so I am just concerned about performance on a multi monitor system
a b U Graphics card
a b C Monitor
March 3, 2013 2:33:14 AM

4GB GTX 680's are a gimmick nothing more. For that resolution a pair of 7970's would be optimal. AMD drivers have been excellent as of late and Crossfire is well supported. However if you really want Nvidia I would recommend a GTX 690, as the Titan is way overpriced and I have yet to see its bandwidth utilized.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
March 3, 2013 2:35:53 AM

680 in SLI smoke the Titan. If you want best bang for the buck pick up 2 7970 they beat 680 in SLI.
if you are nvidia fanboy go for 2x680 or get 690 forget the titan even exists unless price drops...
m
0
l
Related resources
March 3, 2013 3:12:09 AM

Thanks for the all the responses, I am a bit of a nvidia fan boy, so going off of that, would I sticking with a single 690 cause any performance issues when using 3 monitors in comparison to going with an SLI setup.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
a b C Monitor
March 3, 2013 3:13:37 AM

maxinexus said:
680 in SLI smoke the Titan. If you want best bang for the buck pick up 2 7970 they beat 680 in SLI.
if you are nvidia fanboy go for 2x680 or get 690 forget the titan even exists unless price drops...



Titan should be $599..but who am I!
m
0
l
March 3, 2013 3:14:48 AM

Also if I were to venture out and just go dual 7970's which version/brand would you recommend.
m
0
l
a c 91 U Graphics card
a b C Monitor
March 3, 2013 3:15:44 AM

a single 690 IS a SLI set up. inside that single card is two SEPARATE 680 cores connected by an SLI bridge, all on board. any and all SLI issues experienced with a 680 SLI will also be experienced with a single 690. therefore, as long as you have room and proper airflow inside the case, a pair of regular, 2GB 680s is the way to go if you want to stick with Nvidia
m
0
l
a c 91 U Graphics card
a b C Monitor
March 3, 2013 3:17:26 AM

Puresilence said:
Also if I were to venture out and just go dual 7970's which version/brand would you recommend.


first, for your 680s, stick with EVGA for their awesome warranty and blower style coolers (which are good for multi-card set ups). otherwise ASUS and MSI have good designs

for 7970s, Sapphire has done some amazing work with their vapor-x design, MSI lightnings are really good as well.
m
0
l
March 3, 2013 3:23:16 AM

vmem said:
a single 690 IS a SLI set up. inside that single card is two SEPARATE 680 cores connected by an SLI bridge, all on board. any and all SLI issues experienced with a 680 SLI will also be experienced with a single 690. therefore, as long as you have room and proper airflow inside the case, a pair of regular, 2GB 680s is the way to go if you want to stick with Nvidia


Alright so you are recommending going with the 2 680s over the single 690. Also my current 570 is EVGA and have loved it, so that was what I was going to stick with if I was going with nvidia
m
0
l
a c 76 U Graphics card
a b C Monitor
March 3, 2013 3:41:12 AM

Puresilence said:
Also if I were to venture out and just go dual 7970's which version/brand would you recommend.


I've had a great experience with sapphire. And they are an AMD board partner. Their vaporx coolers are very good.

7970s are lower price/higher performance, and keep in mind you get crysis 3, bioshock infinity, tomb raider, sleeping dogs, far cry 3, and Hitman. 6 AAA games. Free. When you buy 2 7970s. 680s don't make sense normally but you throw those in and....
m
0
l
a c 171 U Graphics card
a b C Monitor
March 3, 2013 3:55:09 AM

sli is better than crossfire, lower frame latencies, better game support, no stuttering. It is a known fact that crossfire introduces stuttering particularly when the cards are being pushed with higher resolutions/triple monitor setups. SLI offers better playability and smoothness even if it doesn't achieve higher average fps.
m
0
l
a c 76 U Graphics card
a b C Monitor
March 3, 2013 4:10:52 AM

iam2thecrowe said:
sli is better than crossfire, lower frame latencies, better game support, no stuttering. It is a known fact that crossfire introduces stuttering particularly when the cards are being pushed with higher resolutions/triple monitor setups. SLI offers better playability and smoothness even if it doesn't achieve higher average fps.


It's a known fact AMD drivers had some frame latency issues, but it's also a known fact it's been fixed and is something they continually check for now. there nothing inherently wrong with crossfire that's not also wrong with SLI
m
0
l
March 3, 2013 4:23:01 AM

I would also go with 2 GTX 680s or possibly 1 GTX 690 (I'm an Nvidia guy also) I'm running 2 GTX 670s (EVGA FTW 2gb editions & LOVE them, plus they are made by the best in the business)

My 2 GTX 670s in SLI are 24% better then 1 GTX Titan (I've seen a comparison from a website I'm a member of) Just think what 2 GTX 680s will net you over a GTX Titan. those are WAY!! overpriced & so wrong to list at $1,000

You also can't go wrong with the 6 FREE AAA titles that AMD has to offer. That is a FANTASTIC deal there.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
a b C Monitor
March 3, 2013 1:19:09 PM

iam2thecrowe said:
sli is better than crossfire, lower frame latencies, better game support, no stuttering. It is a known fact that crossfire introduces stuttering particularly when the cards are being pushed with higher resolutions/triple monitor setups. SLI offers better playability and smoothness even if it doesn't achieve higher average fps.



I experience stuttering on my 680's!! Actually Crossfire works very well at this time, pretty much every WQHL driver from Nvidia the last few months have cause major problems in BF3!
m
0
l
a c 91 U Graphics card
a b C Monitor
March 3, 2013 5:20:38 PM

iam2thecrowe said:
sli is better than crossfire, lower frame latencies, better game support, no stuttering. It is a known fact that crossfire introduces stuttering particularly when the cards are being pushed with higher resolutions/triple monitor setups. SLI offers better playability and smoothness even if it doesn't achieve higher average fps.


Dude, I understand where you are coming from, but you've got to stop going around the forum telling everyone how Nvidia is better than AMD in various ways. with the current gen of cards, AMD has come a long way in terms of drivers, and the main determining factor should be price. people will have biases here and there, but stop being so pushy...
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
March 3, 2013 8:48:41 PM

If you were going to go with dual 7970's, which I would go for, I'd suggest you pick up one traditional dual fan design and a blower style card. Sapphire and HIS Iceq turbo. That's how I would set it up, so all the hot air doesn't get dumped in your case.
m
0
l
March 3, 2013 8:57:13 PM

GTX 690 is the best solution for you.
m
0
l
a c 171 U Graphics card
a b C Monitor
March 4, 2013 12:33:02 AM

vmem said:
Dude, I understand where you are coming from, but you've got to stop going around the forum telling everyone how Nvidia is better than AMD in various ways. with the current gen of cards, AMD has come a long way in terms of drivers, and the main determining factor should be price. people will have biases here and there, but stop being so pushy...

im not pushy, just being blunt because i have said it 50 times already, and i'm getting sick of saying it. I have owned AMD crossfire recently a couple months back, the drivers honestly aren't much better than they were back in the 4000 series. I just dont want to see another person spend their hard earned cash on a crossfire setup then sell the cards a month later because a single card gives better/smoother playability than dual cards, regardless of what benchmarks say.

from a techreport article:

"Interestingly, in this page of Ryan's Titan review, he reproduces images that suggest a potentially serious problem with AMD's CrossFire multi-GPU scheme. Presumably due to sync issues between the two GPUs, only tiny slices of some frames, a few pixels tall, are displayed on screen. The value of ever having rendered these frames that aren't really shown to the user is extremely questionable, yet they show up in benchmark results, inflating FPS averages and the like.

That's, you know, not good."
source: http://techreport.com/blog/24415/as-the-second-turns-fr...

http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Graphics-Cards/NVIDIA-GeFo... < this is the page refered to as "this page of Ryan's Titan review? This is with recent drivers. Along with my own poor experience with crossfire 6850's a couple months back these articles, along with many more on the subject, are enough for me not to recommend crossfire to anyone.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
a b C Monitor
March 4, 2013 7:02:22 PM

iam2thecrowe said:
im not pushy, just being blunt because i have said it 50 times already, and i'm getting sick of saying it. I have owned AMD crossfire recently a couple months back, the drivers honestly aren't much better than they were back in the 4000 series. I just dont want to see another person spend their hard earned cash on a crossfire setup then sell the cards a month later because a single card gives better/smoother playability than dual cards, regardless of what benchmarks say.

from a techreport article:

"Interestingly, in this page of Ryan's Titan review, he reproduces images that suggest a potentially serious problem with AMD's CrossFire multi-GPU scheme. Presumably due to sync issues between the two GPUs, only tiny slices of some frames, a few pixels tall, are displayed on screen. The value of ever having rendered these frames that aren't really shown to the user is extremely questionable, yet they show up in benchmark results, inflating FPS averages and the like.

That's, you know, not good."
source: http://techreport.com/blog/24415/as-the-second-turns-fr...

http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Graphics-Cards/NVIDIA-GeFo... < this is the page refered to as "this page of Ryan's Titan review? This is with recent drivers. Along with my own poor experience with crossfire 6850's a couple months back these articles, along with many more on the subject, are enough for me not to recommend crossfire to anyone.



Dude we are not interested in Nvidia biased articles period now I own both both dual 7970 and 680 setups as most on this forum know as I have posted pics. If anything I get less fps dips with my 7970's when compared to my 680's setup. Many may not want to spend their hard earned cash on Gk114 with its poor overclock scaling and limited bandwidth, enthusiast will continue to pick up Ares II and 7970's and slap waterblocks on them. Currently AMD is beating Nvidia in most games and now owns the console market!

I experience stuttering with my 680 setup In crisis 3 and Bf3!!!!! Nvidia has the best 3D that is a fact and that's why I own them, as far and price/performance AMD is not top by a long shot!
m
0
l
a c 91 U Graphics card
a b C Monitor
March 4, 2013 9:14:55 PM

redeemer said:
Dude we are not interested in Nvidia biased articles period now I own both both dual 7970 and 680 setups as most on this forum know as I have posted pics. If anything I get less fps dips with my 7970's when compared to my 680's setup. Many may not want to spend their hard earned cash on Gk114 with its poor overclock scaling and limited bandwidth, enthusiast will continue to pick up Ares II and 7970's and slap waterblocks on them. Currently AMD is beating Nvidia in most games and now owns the console market!

I experience stuttering with my 680 setup In crisis 3 and Bf3!!!!! Nvidia has the best 3D that is a fact and that's why I own them, as far and price/performance AMD is not top by a long shot!


^+1, and I'm not trying to be an AMD fanboi,

that aside, I must stress once more that given the OP's insane resolution requirement: triple 2560x1440, this is one of the few situations where a pair of titans can show their true potential. I agree that price/performance wise a pair of 7970s win hands down, but the OP will see a noticable difference with a pair of Titans
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
March 6, 2013 3:55:46 PM

iam2thecrowe said:
im not pushy, just being blunt because i have said it 50 times already, and i'm getting sick of saying it. I have owned AMD crossfire recently a couple months back, the drivers honestly aren't much better than they were back in the 4000 series. I just dont want to see another person spend their hard earned cash on a crossfire setup then sell the cards a month later because a single card gives better/smoother playability than dual cards, regardless of what benchmarks say.

from a techreport article:

"Interestingly, in this page of Ryan's Titan review, he reproduces images that suggest a potentially serious problem with AMD's CrossFire multi-GPU scheme. Presumably due to sync issues between the two GPUs, only tiny slices of some frames, a few pixels tall, are displayed on screen. The value of ever having rendered these frames that aren't really shown to the user is extremely questionable, yet they show up in benchmark results, inflating FPS averages and the like.

That's, you know, not good."
source: http://techreport.com/blog/24415/as-the-second-turns-fr...

http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Graphics-Cards/NVIDIA-GeFo... < this is the page refered to as "this page of Ryan's Titan review? This is with recent drivers. Along with my own poor experience with crossfire 6850's a couple months back these articles, along with many more on the subject, are enough for me not to recommend crossfire to anyone.


You make my laugh dude. My first Nvidia card was Geforce2mx, then g3, g4, g6800, g7800, 7900, 8800GTS and my last nvidia card was GTX285...than I for the heck of it got AMD 6950 and flashed it to 6970 sold it with profit got 7950 with free games...sold it got 7970 with another free games sold it got another 7970 with more free games.

I had zero issues with AMD card. On contrary I had to RMA nvidias card countless times( RMA 7800/7900/8800(2x) my evga285 had to be RMAed 4 times and that was it for me). From AMD cards I had to send back only 1 of my 4 6950...so say what you want...AMD is better at least for now :) 
m
0
l
a c 216 U Graphics card
a c 128 C Monitor
March 6, 2013 4:03:58 PM

If you don't want "biased" articles which are quantifying issues many sites have noted before, why not take a look at videos comparing the two. Here are a couple that aren't even in crossfire, just 7950 vs 660ti and 7970 vs 680. The latter doesn't even show you what card it what, just watch and guess.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NLcq6IQz-sM&feature=play...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Md1Xpwq1X0&feature=play...

You ask yourself which is better. Now add that in crossfire, the problem is far worse explained in the "biased" articles above.

Edit: I'd really like to see comparisons on a 120/144hz monitor with v-sync on. I have a feeling the crossfire problem would go away with v-sync, though the hitching still may not, as that is an issue with syncing with the action.
m
0
l
a c 171 U Graphics card
a b C Monitor
March 6, 2013 5:55:38 PM

maxinexus said:
You make my laugh dude. My first Nvidia card was Geforce2mx, then g3, g4, g6800, g7800, 7900, 8800GTS and my last nvidia card was GTX285...than I for the heck of it got AMD 6950 and flashed it to 6970 sold it with profit got 7950 with free games...sold it got 7970 with another free games sold it got another 7970 with more free games.

I had zero issues with AMD card. On contrary I had to RMA nvidias card countless times( RMA 7800/7900/8800(2x) my evga285 had to be RMAed 4 times and that was it for me). From AMD cards I had to send back only 1 of my 4 6950...so say what you want...AMD is better at least for now :) 

i can go you one further, my first 3D video card was a Nvidia riva 128! then riva tnt, tnt2, geforce2, radeon 8500, radeon 9800pro, nvidia 7600gt, 8800gts, amd 6850, 6850 crossfire, then the gtx660. I have never had to RMA any of them. the first poor experience i had was with AMD 6850 and 6850 crossfire and experienced all the stuttering that is being talked about in recent relevant articles which is why this time i went for a nvidia gtx660 which in benchmarks performs worse than crossfire 6850's but in real world crossfire is crud and doesnt give a smooth playing experience unless your hitting your 60fps vsync limit all the time, and doesnt work well at all for some games.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
March 6, 2013 7:13:17 PM

iam2thecrowe said:
i can go you one further, my first 3D video card was a Nvidia riva 128! then riva tnt, tnt2, geforce2, radeon 8500, radeon 9800pro, nvidia 7600gt, 8800gts, amd 6850, 6850 crossfire, then the gtx660. I have never had to RMA any of them. the first poor experience i had was with AMD 6850 and 6850 crossfire and experienced all the stuttering that is being talked about in recent relevant articles which is why this time i went for a nvidia gtx660 which in benchmarks performs worse than crossfire 6850's but in real world crossfire is crud and doesnt give a smooth playing experience unless your hitting your 60fps vsync limit all the time, and doesnt work well at all for some games.


They are all performing good...
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/crysis-3-performanc...
m
0
l
March 7, 2013 1:05:17 AM

I had the Diamond Edge 3d pro. Anyone remember that? I doubt it. It was using the NV 1 gpu. This is pre voodoo pre gl quake. I tell you that card was expensive over $300 in 1995 for the 4 MB Vram version and the product was plauged with issues. I am looking at spending 1k on new video hardware now and 1 k in about 6 months time. The 2k budget has me leaning towards titans due to fewer gpu's to scale and i have an RX 360 rad that needs some gpu blocks to be added to it. I want to like crossfire if I didnt desire more performance than a single card can deliver I would get a hd 7970. I recently had to sell my 2 gtx 680's that I have had since release due to short term money shortage but now that I have that done with and i am reevaluating the gpu market. I am currently unsatisfied with the available options. Titan is awesome performance wise but I just would feel a lot better at a price tag no higher than $849.99 based on other solutions availabler this would be a little higher than the percent performance increase but there is always a little bump for the best of the best. Still at 2k i assume 2 titans will equal or beat any other offering at or below 2k. and of course going 3 way is 3k and hard to stomach even for me even if purchased 1 at a time months apart. My concern is that Gtx 780 or hd 8970 will come out in a matter of months and match or even beat the Titan in performance. Remember how huge the performance jump was hd 6970 to hd 7970. multi gpu wise I would assume 3 hd 7970 or gtx 680's would come close to 2 titans heck I am running around in circules. I am still mad about NV 1 though no lie!!! lol
m
0
l
March 7, 2013 1:33:49 AM

I'm actually trying to make the same choice as this guy. So far in my research I've found GTX to be really over priced if you want a 256 bit 2g card X 2 and radeon seems to be the clear choice here. Save some money and the card will last for years. Im about to upgrade my two 6990 i got, because my water cooler pissed all over them are murdered them. So i think I'm going to pick Radeon but now i gotta figure out weather to go 7800 or 7900 or wait till next cyber Monday and get some 7970's.

Price: 7970 vs 680 x 2
radeon: sapphire 7970 x 2 = 818$ shipped on amazon with Prime
GTX: EVGA GeForce GTX 680 = 938$

Its this simple both brands are nice we all know that, they will do the job just depends on how picky you are. It comes down to brand loyalty and personal pickiness. I came super close to picking two EVGA gtx 660's for my new cards but I stopped because they didn't offer 256 bit 2g cards, and from my experiance with EVGA (I build custom computers for a living) ive had several clients complaining about their cards frying especially when they are 192 bit, and with my radeon clients so far I've only had 1 or 2 problems and those were due to PSU power surges and one overheated and that was because the fan broke and he failed to fix it.
Moral of the story is Save and buy top of the line GTX or Radeon if you want it to last for a few years. Its really money and preference.
m
0
l
a c 171 U Graphics card
a b C Monitor
March 7, 2013 3:10:41 AM

derpmaster said:
I'm actually trying to make the same choice as this guy. So far in my research I've found GTX to be really over priced if you want a 256 bit 2g card X 2 and radeon seems to be the clear choice here. Save some money and the card will last for years. Im about to upgrade my two 6990 i got, because my water cooler pissed all over them are murdered them. So i think I'm going to pick Radeon but now i gotta figure out weather to go 7800 or 7900 or wait till next cyber Monday and get some 7970's.

Price: 7970 vs 680 x 2
radeon: sapphire 7970 x 2 = 818$ shipped on amazon with Prime
GTX: EVGA GeForce GTX 680 = 938$

Its this simple both brands are nice we all know that, they will do the job just depends on how picky you are. It comes down to brand loyalty and personal pickiness. I came super close to picking two EVGA gtx 660's for my new cards but I stopped because they didn't offer 256 bit 2g cards, and from my experiance with EVGA (I build custom computers for a living) ive had several clients complaining about their cards frying especially when they are 192 bit, and with my radeon clients so far I've only had 1 or 2 problems and those were due to PSU power surges and one overheated and that was because the fan broke and he failed to fix it.
Moral of the story is Save and buy top of the line GTX or Radeon if you want it to last for a few years. Its really money and preference.

seriously dude, the amount of bits the ram is, has nothing to do with reliability. 192 bit is no more likely to fry than 256bit. there is a known fact about evga cards at the moment where they designed the power circuitry wrong resulting in many fried cards because way too much voltage is going through certain components.
m
0
l
March 7, 2013 2:09:51 PM

Please note I only included the bit rate because to
Be more specific on the card. No it doesn't super matter but it does help. I'm just stating for the value radeon seems to be more affordable per price to performance . It's just like intel and amd. Both are great I love amd became its low cost I love I intel because its reliable, but it's pricey. Amd is the poor mans parts and intel the blue chip parts.nvidia and radeon are the same way it's heritage. They both work they are both nice it's just how much you want to spend. They'll get the job done.
m
0
l
April 6, 2013 4:28:54 PM

Some other people on here may not approve... but I suggest going with the titan. Main reason cause it's not that far behind the GTX 690, the titan can be overclocked very well and the performance gap will close. The GTX 690 will still be better but not by far when the titan is overclocked. Also going with any dual gpu setup may cause micro-stuttering and not all games will run equally on any dual gpu setups but every game will run equally on the titan.

The titan will satisfy your triple monitor setup with its 6gb of memory and in a few years to come when the GTX 700 series cards and maybe even the GTX 800 series cards are out the titan will be much cheaper than what it is now meaning you'll be able to pick up another and SLI it. Meaning your setup will be upgradeable, unless you want to 3 or 4 way SLI with 680's of course.

Not to say that the titan would be showing its age anytime soon but in 3 years time it might not run every game on max settings over 60fps on 3 monitors, anyways like others said dual 7970's would get the most bang for your buck, the titan may not be number 1 in performance atm but thats only by a small margin when you overclock the titan and the titan seems like the best option in the long run.
m
0
l
!