4GB NVIDIA GEFORCE GTX 690 or 6GB AMD RADEON™ HD7990??

Hello

I am new here and i need quick help. I am about to buy a new PC and i am wondering which graphics card to take GTX 690 or HD7990?? I know that 7990 has 2gb more memory than gtx 690 but some people are saying that 690 is still a better option. new PC will be aimed only for gaming therefore i prefer to ask here first to get some response from someone who could tell me which is better for gaming.

thanks
36 answers Last reply
More about 4gb nvidia geforce gtx 690 6gb amd radeon hd7990
  1. 7990 performs better but the cooling options available for it right now are crap, go for the 690. You could also just go for a 670/680 in SLI, or a 7970 in Crossfire, same thing less money.

    Also the 690 is only a 2GB card, and the 7990 is a 3GB card. The two use two GPU's on one card which both have 2GB/3GB, SLI/Crossfire do not double frame buffer because the GPU's render frames independent of one another, there-for the memory is not pooled.
  2. cookybiscuit said:
    7990 performs better but the cooling options available for it right now are crap, go for the 690. You could also just go for a 670/680 in SLI, or a 7970 in Crossfire, same thing less money.

    Also the 690 is only a 2GB card, and the 7990 is a 3GB card. The two use two GPU's on one card which both have 2GB/3GB, SLI/Crossfire do not double frame buffer because the GPU's render frames independent of one another, there-for the memory is not pooled.


    thanks that was quick, i was also looking at taking HD7970 in cross fire that would be 6gb together right? it is cheaper than gtx690 but is it better? also i heard that amd drivers are a pain in the ass?
  3. No. VRAM is always limited to whatever one card has, e.g. SLI 4 Titan's and you get 6GB, not 24GB.

    Depending on who you talk to Crossfire is iffy, games not working, stuttering etc. Other people find it fine, depends which games you play and how good your perception is for stutter. AMD drivers are just as crappy as Nvidia ones, you never see anyone saying "Damn these 314.07 drivers are just so good", everyone always whines about drivers.

    As for Crossfire VS SLI, the AMD cards of this generation are undoubtedly faster, but the Nvidia setups display less frame latency (so less stutter). If or not it matters to you depends on if you can see that stutter, not everyone can.
  4. aye fair enough.. well i am now currently running on nvidia 9800 gt 1gb i cannot complain games are running well bot games like battlefield 3 crysis 3 and other advanced games are not working so well.. which is why i want a graphics card in my new pc that will run those games on max settings without any problems... so overall gtx 690 would be the best option right?
    just out of interest which would you choose?
  5. For that money I'd probably go with a Titan despite how much of a rip off it is. No SLI/Crossfire to worry about, just raw performance you can use in any game, its also bound to get faster as drivers improve in time, where as everything else out is about a year old at this point. From what you are looking at, a 690, from the reviews its a very quiet cooler given its task, where-as the 7990 isn't.
  6. cookybiscuit said:
    For that money I'd probably go with a Titan despite how much of a rip off it is. No SLI/Crossfire to worry about, just raw performance you can use in any game, its also bound to get faster as drivers improve in time, where as everything else out is about a year old at this point. From what you are looking at, a 690, from the reviews its a very quiet cooler given its task, where-as the 7990 isn't.


    yeah i've seen how much it is and seems a bit too much but nvidia cards always seemed to be more expensive... well i think if i get rid of ssd drive from the list and take TITAN card i should be within 1700 pounds

    i was looking at the benchmark for titan and gtx690 and 690 seems to be getting much better results than titan which seems surprising to me.
  7. 690 would be better for sure if you keep the resolution down. Crank it up into higher numbers like with nvidia surround and I bet the titan will show a bit better. I believe it might still limit you though and if you are set at either the 7990 or the 690 then to be honest save your save a couple dollars and just run sli or crossfire. Myself i'd lean more towards sli if i really had to choose but i don't care for either to be honest. I have 1 titan now and it is an excellent piece of hardware. just my 2 cents.
  8. Airm3n-1292454 said:
    690 would be better for sure if you keep the resolution down. Crank it up into higher numbers like with nvidia surround and I bet the titan will show a bit better. I believe it might still limit you though and if you are set at either the 7990 or the 690 then to be honest save your save a couple dollars and just run sli or crossfire. Myself i'd lean more towards sli if i really had to choose but i don't care for either to be honest. I have 1 titan now and it is an excellent piece of hardware. just my 2 cents.


    well i have 1920x1200 screen so would that be ok for 690? i was thinking to take TITAN but when i looked and the benchmarks and seen that 690 was getting better results i started wondering if its worth taking which is why i prefer asking first.

    but even so.. lets say i take gtx 690 then with it i will probably be able to play any game for next 3 4 years right...
  9. pmax330 said:
    Airm3n-1292454 said:
    690 would be better for sure if you keep the resolution down. Crank it up into higher numbers like with nvidia surround and I bet the titan will show a bit better. I believe it might still limit you though and if you are set at either the 7990 or the 690 then to be honest save your save a couple dollars and just run sli or crossfire. Myself i'd lean more towards sli if i really had to choose but i don't care for either to be honest. I have 1 titan now and it is an excellent piece of hardware. just my 2 cents.


    well i have 1920x1200 screen so would that be ok for 690? i was thinking to take TITAN but when i looked and the benchmarks and seen that 690 was getting better results i started wondering if its worth taking which is why i prefer asking first.

    but even so.. lets say i take gtx 690 then with it i will probably be able to play any game for next 3 4 years right...


    Hello,
    So your options are the 7990, 690 or a Titan. All are good cards and would work for your solution.

    From what I've read and found this is what your looking at for each card.

    690 - Solid performer and very well rounded. Great FPS in games and could see a life span of 3-4 years. Only limiting factor in it is if games continue to get higher res textures the vram on the card could become an issue; 4gb total however 2gb per gpu so think about it as a 2gb card.

    7990 - Once again, a solid performer. Great FPS could span 4-5 years. Limiting factors are its heat with the reference cooler. Most other coolers will do fine with the heat. Vram isn't a limiting factor in this because of the fact that it supports 6gb total (3gb per gpu).

    Titan - Here is the weird Step Brother of the cards. Almost as good of performance as the 7990 and 690 but at the same cost of a ~690. Now here is where it gets interesting, this card should be looked at if you fit one of these 3 solutions (supported by Toms review of this card) 1)You need a card that requires a dual slot card and won't fit the 690 or 7990. 2) You want the most powerful single card solution and don't want to have to bother with potentially crappy drivers for SLI/Xfire and 3) Your looking to SLI a set of Titan cards to do both gaming and editing.
  10. I doubt you'll get more than 2 years out of any current hardware, 3 at a push.
  11. drinkingcola86 said:
    pmax330 said:
    Airm3n-1292454 said:
    690 would be better for sure if you keep the resolution down. Crank it up into higher numbers like with nvidia surround and I bet the titan will show a bit better. I believe it might still limit you though and if you are set at either the 7990 or the 690 then to be honest save your save a couple dollars and just run sli or crossfire. Myself i'd lean more towards sli if i really had to choose but i don't care for either to be honest. I have 1 titan now and it is an excellent piece of hardware. just my 2 cents.


    well i have 1920x1200 screen so would that be ok for 690? i was thinking to take TITAN but when i looked and the benchmarks and seen that 690 was getting better results i started wondering if its worth taking which is why i prefer asking first.

    but even so.. lets say i take gtx 690 then with it i will probably be able to play any game for next 3 4 years right...


    Hello,
    So your options are the 7990, 690 or a Titan. All are good cards and would work for your solution.

    From what I've read and found this is what your looking at for each card.

    690 - Solid performer and very well rounded. Great FPS in games and could see a life span of 3-4 years. Only limiting factor in it is if games continue to get higher res textures the vram on the card could become an issue; 4gb total however 2gb per gpu so think about it as a 2gb card.

    7990 - Once again, a solid performer. Great FPS could span 4-5 years. Limiting factors are its heat with the reference cooler. Most other coolers will do fine with the heat. Vram isn't a limiting factor in this because of the fact that it supports 6gb total (3gb per gpu).

    Titan - Here is the weird Step Brother of the cards. Almost as good of performance as the 7990 and 690 but at the same cost of a ~690. Now here is where it gets interesting, this card should be looked at if you fit one of these 3 solutions (supported by Toms review of this card) 1)You need a card that requires a dual slot card and won't fit the 690 or 7990. 2) You want the most powerful single card solution and don't want to have to bother with potentially crappy drivers for SLI/Xfire and 3) Your looking to SLI a set of Titan cards to do both gaming and editing.



    thank you for that:) well so overall with each one of them there are points for and against, which card would you recomment as the best choice? and another question is there anything better than those 3 cards? like sli or crossfire for example if i took two nvidia gtx 680 2gb in sli or two amd hd 7970 3gb in crossfire would that be better ? or maybe any other cards? i know i'm asking tons of questions but i want to make sure i end up with the best choice
  12. cookybiscuit said:
    I doubt you'll get more than 2 years out of any current hardware, 3 at a push.


    aye but looking at how fast games progress in 2 or 3 years time there will probably be graphics cards with like 10gb memory etc its crazy how fast everything changes
  13. At 1920x1200 res i doubt you would have any issues nor would you probably tell much difference between a gtx 680 or the 690. Or in radeon probably the 7950 or 7970. If you were to jump up to say triple 1080p monitors and used surround or eyefinity is where you would start seeing the differences or if you bought a higher res single monitor. I could max settings on my samsung 1920x1200 monitor with a gtx 570 and that only had that weird 1.3 gb setup on it. So if you plan to do some surround gaming in the near future then I would say either go to the 7990 or the the titan with larger memory bus. If not then either the 7990 or 690 would work fine doubt you would tell much difference between the two. I just plain don't like crossfire or sli so either one to me I have a hate on against.
  14. Considering that only 3-4 games max out a 2gb card I don't see it really driving up that much in the future. I could see 2-3 gig becoming a standard and 6-8 gig becoming more of the high end market in 5 years.

    I run a Sapphire 7950 with a factory oc to 950mhz. Runs great and couldn't be happier with my choice.

    Benefits of doing xfire/sli vs single card dual gpus is that you have the ability to disparate heat better since they are on separate cards. This also means that you should be able to reach higher oc's on the cards if you wanted to do that. Also when your not needing the mussel but still wanting to use your computer your, the second card will almost completely turn off(I know AMD does this not sure about Nvidia).
  15. Airm3n-1292454 said:
    At 1920x1200 res i doubt you would have any issues nor would you probably tell much difference between a gtx 680 or the 690. Or in radeon probably the 7950 or 7970. If you were to jump up to say triple 1080p monitors and used surround or eyefinity is where you would start seeing the differences or if you bought a higher res single monitor. I could max settings on my samsung 1920x1200 monitor with a gtx 570 and that only had that weird 1.3 gb setup on it. So if you plan to do some surround gaming in the near future then I would say either go to the 7990 or the the titan with larger memory bus. If not then either the 7990 or 690 would work fine doubt you would tell much difference between the two. I just plain don't like crossfire or sli so either one to me I have a hate on against.


    noo i am a gamer but i am not that advanced gamer who keeps up with every detail up to date, as lond as games work on highers settings for next few years i will be more than happy:)
  16. drinkingcola86 said:
    Considering that only 3-4 games max out a 2gb card I don't see it really driving up that much in the future. I could see 2-3 gig becoming a standard and 6-8 gig becoming more of the high end market in 5 years.

    I run a Sapphire 7950 with a factory oc to 950mhz. Runs great and couldn't be happier with my choice.

    Benefits of doing xfire/sli vs single card dual gpus is that you have the ability to disparate heat better since they are on separate cards. This also means that you should be able to reach higher oc's on the cards if you wanted to do that. Also when your not needing the mussel but still wanting to use your computer your, the second card will almost completely turn off(I know AMD does this not sure about Nvidia).


    thanks :) i am not that extreme gamer, most of the times i just complete one game and move to the next one and sometimes dont play the same game twice:) i am not into overclocking ... i remember attempting to overclock my processor and i failed completely just didnt know what to do.. i know thats pathetic lol:) i am ordering a pc with processor being already overclocked to 4.5 ghz so that will save me trouble but this graphics card was a problem for me because i didnt know which one will be best, for me the more memory the better it is but i know that is not the case .. i am considering 3 options now either GTX 690, HD 7990 or two gtx 680 2gb in sli... just have to decide which one also slightly off the topic but which windows would be better windows 7 ultimate or windows 8 pro?
  17. Either one I don't think there would be a difference in games between the two. Just that windows 8 I believe is optimized more for touchscreen's but i'm sure using a mouse wouldn't be much issue either. I prefer windows 7 and what i know.
  18. pmax330 said:
    drinkingcola86 said:
    Considering that only 3-4 games max out a 2gb card I don't see it really driving up that much in the future. I could see 2-3 gig becoming a standard and 6-8 gig becoming more of the high end market in 5 years.

    I run a Sapphire 7950 with a factory oc to 950mhz. Runs great and couldn't be happier with my choice.

    Benefits of doing xfire/sli vs single card dual gpus is that you have the ability to disparate heat better since they are on separate cards. This also means that you should be able to reach higher oc's on the cards if you wanted to do that. Also when your not needing the mussel but still wanting to use your computer your, the second card will almost completely turn off(I know AMD does this not sure about Nvidia).


    thanks :) i am not that extreme gamer, most of the times i just complete one game and move to the next one and sometimes dont play the same game twice:) i am not into overclocking ... i remember attempting to overclock my processor and i failed completely just didnt know what to do.. i know thats pathetic lol:) i am ordering a pc with processor being already overclocked to 4.5 ghz so that will save me trouble but this graphics card was a problem for me because i didnt know which one will be best, for me the more memory the better it is but i know that is not the case .. i am considering 3 options now either GTX 690, HD 7990 or two gtx 680 2gb in sli... just have to decide which one also slightly off the topic but which windows would be better windows 7 ultimate or windows 8 pro?


    Windows 7. I know Windows 8 is ok but for gaming roll with a more fully developed os.
  19. ok then HD7990 and windows 7 it is then:) thank you for all help
  20. drinkingcola86 said:
    pmax330 said:
    drinkingcola86 said:
    Considering that only 3-4 games max out a 2gb card I don't see it really driving up that much in the future. I could see 2-3 gig becoming a standard and 6-8 gig becoming more of the high end market in 5 years.

    I run a Sapphire 7950 with a factory oc to 950mhz. Runs great and couldn't be happier with my choice.

    Benefits of doing xfire/sli vs single card dual gpus is that you have the ability to disparate heat better since they are on separate cards. This also means that you should be able to reach higher oc's on the cards if you wanted to do that. Also when your not needing the mussel but still wanting to use your computer your, the second card will almost completely turn off(I know AMD does this not sure about Nvidia).


    thanks :) i am not that extreme gamer, most of the times i just complete one game and move to the next one and sometimes dont play the same game twice:) i am not into overclocking ... i remember attempting to overclock my processor and i failed completely just didnt know what to do.. i know thats pathetic lol:) i am ordering a pc with processor being already overclocked to 4.5 ghz so that will save me trouble but this graphics card was a problem for me because i didnt know which one will be best, for me the more memory the better it is but i know that is not the case .. i am considering 3 options now either GTX 690, HD 7990 or two gtx 680 2gb in sli... just have to decide which one also slightly off the topic but which windows would be better windows 7 ultimate or windows 8 pro?


    Windows 7. I know Windows 8 is ok but for gaming roll with a more fully developed os.


    one more little think.. i have windows 7 pro with licence key if i borrow windows 7 from my friend and use my windows 7 pro key it wouldnt work would it?
  21. pmax330 said:
    drinkingcola86 said:
    pmax330 said:
    drinkingcola86 said:
    Considering that only 3-4 games max out a 2gb card I don't see it really driving up that much in the future. I could see 2-3 gig becoming a standard and 6-8 gig becoming more of the high end market in 5 years.

    I run a Sapphire 7950 with a factory oc to 950mhz. Runs great and couldn't be happier with my choice.

    Benefits of doing xfire/sli vs single card dual gpus is that you have the ability to disparate heat better since they are on separate cards. This also means that you should be able to reach higher oc's on the cards if you wanted to do that. Also when your not needing the mussel but still wanting to use your computer your, the second card will almost completely turn off(I know AMD does this not sure about Nvidia).


    thanks :) i am not that extreme gamer, most of the times i just complete one game and move to the next one and sometimes dont play the same game twice:) i am not into overclocking ... i remember attempting to overclock my processor and i failed completely just didnt know what to do.. i know thats pathetic lol:) i am ordering a pc with processor being already overclocked to 4.5 ghz so that will save me trouble but this graphics card was a problem for me because i didnt know which one will be best, for me the more memory the better it is but i know that is not the case .. i am considering 3 options now either GTX 690, HD 7990 or two gtx 680 2gb in sli... just have to decide which one also slightly off the topic but which windows would be better windows 7 ultimate or windows 8 pro?


    Windows 7. I know Windows 8 is ok but for gaming roll with a more fully developed os.


    one more little think.. i have windows 7 pro with licence key if i borrow windows 7 from my friend and use my windows 7 pro key it wouldnt work would it?


    How it worked with vista is all the disks had the image of ultimate but it was locked by your key that you entered. It should work the same.
  22. Guys,I'm kind of an Nvidia fanboy. I know 690 is freaked up by the arrival of that 7990. So,just asking out of curiosity,somebody has any idea how Nvidia will tackle the situation? How will they take back what they've lost-The tag of having the best gaming card? Is Nvidia planning a new card which could outperform 7990 is every aspect? :D
  23. dannylivesforher said:
    Guys,I'm kind of an Nvidia fanboy. I know 690 is freaked up by the arrival of that 7990. So,just asking out of curiosity,somebody has any idea how Nvidia will tackle the situation? How will they take back what they've lost-The tag of having the best gaming card? Is Nvidia planning a new card which could outperform 7990 is every aspect? :D

    Well if you haven't seen it yet I think you (and the OP) should see this review: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/radeon-hd-7990-review-benchmark,3486.html
    While there are allot of things in the review that I think were prejudicial in favor of the 690 even someone like me that's a little bit of a AMD (GPU's only) fanboy has to admit the 690 is still the king of the gamer cards.

    If this holds true for Multi-monitor set ups of 3 or more monitors is anybody's guess. That was never touched on in the review but, I would imagine that with AMD's track record and the fact that it has more memory that is one area that the 7990 would shine.

    Another area the 7990 shines is in GPU computing. Nvidia has stated that they have focused less on GPU computing with the 680/690's to improve and focus more on gaming and it shows. The 7990 absolutely blows the 690 away on these benchmarks.

    The 7990 also does well in avg. FPS but, the 690 is very close in most instances and unlike most dual GPU configurations it has almost none of the issues that are commonly known to cause micro-stutter. The 7990 not so much, it preforms rather poorly in this area at the moment giving the 690 IMO the very clear title of king of the gamer cards!

    With all that said, I would choose the AMD HD7990 and this is why:
    1.) GPU computing is as important to me as gaming.
    2.) I use three monitors.
    3.) The new AMD reference HD 7990 is the first official AMD 7990 release and it has good cooling. Better than the 690's cooling.
    4.) The 690 has been out for a while and has had time to optimize their drivers whereas the first official AMD 7990 was just released and they will undoubtedly improve the issues that cause micro-stutter as is evidenced in the review with AMD's Prototype driver that will also undoubtedly be improved before its final release.

    To sum it up, the new AMD reference HD 7990 is an awesome card and it's better than the GTX 690 in all areas with the very real exception of micro-stutter. AMD is developing very promising drivers that employ the same characteristics that Nvidia has used to virtually eliminate micro-stutter in their GTX 690. I have personally seen AMD's drivers work wonders in eliminating micro-stutter on my CrossFire set ups and I see no reason to believe this will be any different, making the 7990 not only the best card for gaming but the best card over-all that money can buy.

    Until of course something better comes along. :lol:

    dannylivesforher said:
    Is Nvidia planning a new card which could outperform 7990 is every aspect?
    Of course they are and I'm sure AMD's already planning ways to beat that and I'm sure Nvidia ............AMD...........Nvidia...............AMD...............Nvidia............AMD.......... :pt1cable:

    And there's one final thing you can be absolutely positive of: No matter which card you buy, when you buy it or how much you spend, in one year (probably less) there will be something better and in ten years (most likely less) it will still be a dinosaur! :rofl:
  24. Quote:
    Well if you haven't seen it yet I think you (and the OP) should see this review: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/radeon-hd-7990-revi...

    I've seen it bro...And that's what caused me panic,for I'm an Nvidia fanboy :D

    And,I know now AMD is the one shining,with their 7990 beating the almost 1 year old GTX 690. But still,690 is not TOTALLY beaten,is it? There were some areas in the review where 690 outperformed 7990 too. But in overall performance,I know AMD has the upper hand.

    Quote:
    While there are allot of things in the review that I think were prejudicial in favor of the 690 even someone like me that's a little bit of a AMD (GPU's only) fanboy has to admit the 690 is still the king of the gamer cards.

    How is that? 690 is still on the top? :o I can't believe it...! I thought it was 7990...

    Quote:
    Of course they are and I'm sure AMD's already planning ways to beat that and I'm sure Nvidia ............AMD...........Nvidia...............AMD...............Nvidia............AMD.........

    I heard Nvidia is planning a GTX 790 to be released on end of 2013...Is there any truth in that news?
    And,you ended your sentence with ".....AMD...." Does that mean AMD would be on top again? :D I'm sorry I was kidding... :D

    And I have one more doubt. I heard 7990 was built with 2 7970 GPUs..Is that right? Then why could Nvidia not make a card with 2 TITAN GPUs....? :??: Titan almost performs equal to 690 and 7990 in most of the cases...So if 2 of Titan's GPUs were put together on a board,would they not outperform any card on this whole planet? :D Forget about the price....I was speaking about the importance of performance... :D
  25. 2x 670 for my vote. AMD multi-GPU setups are a joke and a GTX 690 is a rip off.
  26. dannylivesforher said:
    I know now AMD is the one shining,with their 7990 beating the almost 1 year old GTX 690. But still,690 is not TOTALLY beaten,is it? There were some areas in the review where 690 outperformed 7990 too.
    Yea, AMD's frame rates are great until you factor in micro-stutter, then the 7990 doesn't look quite so great. So in my opinion when it comes to gaming Nvidia's still on top for the moment.

    I've seen AMD work wonders in eliminating micro-stutter before for dual GPU's. If they can do that with the 7990 without lowering the frame rate it might take the crown but, then in all reality both cards will be so close in gaming it won't make much difference which one you buy.
    Quote:
    But in overall performance, I know AMD has the upper hand.

    Well here I agree because Nvidia's 690 could use a little more ram for multi-monitor set ups (IMO the 7990 could use more also). Nvidia has also moved away from GPU computing and while the 690 generally flunked those scores (with flying colors), the 7990 beat out the 680, the Quadro's and AMD's own FirePro's.
    Compute used to be one of Nvidia's strong points. They say they moved away from it on their 600 series cards to focus more on gaming which think is a mistake (and quite possibly a lie). Not everyone wants to buy two separate specialized computers to do everything they need to do and everything they want to do. So the Idonno award for best overall goes to the 7990 :pt1cable:
    Quote:
    I heard Nvidia is planning a GTX 790 to be released on end of 2013...Is there any truth in that news?
    Yea, that's what I heard also. I heard it was going to have similar specks and price to the Titan not the original $500 that was first reported.
    Quote:
    And I have one more doubt. I heard 7990 was built with 2 7970 GPUs..Is that right?
    Yup, just like the 690 was built with two 680's
    Quote:
    Then why could Nvidia not make a card with 2 TITAN GPUs
    Yea! With a little LN2 cooling and a monstrous PSU that shouldn't be any problem at all. :rofl: Although some day..........:lol:

    Anonymous said:
    AMD multi-GPU setups are a joke

    Mine works very well, thank you. :kaola:
  27. Quote:
    Yea, that's what I heard also. I heard it was going to have similar specks and price to the Titan not the original $500 that was first reported.


    So,would that 790 outperform the 7990? :ange:
    Could you guess anything from the current available information? :D
  28. Quote:
    2x 670 for my vote. AMD multi-GPU setups are a joke and a GTX 690 is a rip off.


    Well,let's put the price to a side and speak of performance...I know it's overpriced. And I'm not gonna buy a 690 either. But I'd like to see some Nvidia card performing on top of everything... :D And that's why I speak like that....
  29. dannylivesforher said:
    So,would that 790 outperform the 7990? :ange:
    Could you guess anything from the current available information? :D


    If it has similar performance to the Titan it wouldn't, but still the Titan is the fastest single GPU card available, so if your looking for kudos for Nvidia, there you go! :D

    Although the 90 has come to mean dual GPU so in spite of what I think I've heard, I could just be totally wrong about this.

    Edit: As a matter of fact I think I am I believe it's the 780 that's supposed to be similar to the Titan which would make a 790 if they even decide to make one way faster than the 7990 or any thing else for that matter (for a little while). :wahoo:
  30. Quote:
    As a matter of fact I think I am I believe it's the 780 that's supposed to be similar to the Titan

    Yeah,I kinda heard like that too....Heard the 780 is gonna be priced similar to the Titan.

    Quote:
    a 790 if they even decide to make one way faster than the 7990 or any thing else for that matter (for a little while). :wahoo:

    For a little while...?
    Like the 690 did? :lol:
    Then it would be awesome... :D Just not for AMD GPUs... :D
  31. So some of you have talked about the stuttering with the AMD cards. I just wanted to refer back to the reveal article from Toms. They did say that when they used the 13.5 beta drivers the Mirco stutter was almost gone in most games and their group couldn't tell the difference between them. We know that AMD is working on fixes for this for each game. My question is, since it is getting fixed, are we worrying about it still?
  32. drinkingcola86 said:
    So some of you have talked about the stuttering with the AMD cards. I just wanted to refer back to the reveal article from Toms. They did say that when they used the 13.5 beta drivers the Mirco stutter was almost gone in most games and their group couldn't tell the difference between them. We know that AMD is working on fixes for this for each game. My question is, since it is getting fixed, are we worrying about it still?


    You misread. They were using the 13.5 drivers and prototype drivers. The 13.5 beta drivers were the bad ones. It was the prototype drivers which they said was much better (though it was not compared to the 690, so I don't know how that would play out).
  33. drinkingcola86 said:
    So some of you have talked about the stuttering with the AMD cards. I just wanted to refer back to the reveal article from Toms. They did say that when they used the 13.5 beta drivers the Mirco stutter was almost gone in most games and their group couldn't tell the difference between them. We know that AMD is working on fixes for this for each game. My question is, since it is getting fixed, are we worrying about it still?

    1.) Because bystander is right in saying:
    Quote:
    You misread. They were using the 13.5 drivers and prototype drivers. The 13.5 beta drivers were the bad ones. It was the prototype drivers which they said was much better (though it was not compared to the 690, so I don't know how that would play out).

    2.) The OP didn't ask which card might be better in the future. He just asked which card was better for gaming, which is the 690 at the moment.

    2.) Even though the short answer to OP's question is the "690 is better for gaming" it's not the complete answer. A complete answer isn't possible without mentioning all the other variables of which Micro-Stutter is an important one.
  34. cookybiscuit said:
    No. VRAM is always limited to whatever one card has, e.g. SLI 4 Titan's and you get 6GB, not 24GB.
    You bring up a good point here. All the dual GPU cards only advertize their total memory not their total effective memory which is only half of the total.

    The 690's total effective memory is only 2GB which is not IMO enough for gaming @ max settings with more than 2 -1080p monitors or 1 hi-res monitor in all games.

    The 7990 does better here with 3GB but, IMO it's still not enough for more than 3 1080p monitors and questionable for 2 hi-res monitors for the most demanding games @ max settings.

    The card that really shines here is the Titan with a total (both actual and effective) of 6GB so even with less processing power it might be the better choice for Mulit-dispay gaming.

    Both AMD and Nvidia produce these cards where they double the GPU's but not the effective ram making them IMO unbalanced.

    Quote:
    Depending on who you talk to Crossfire is iffy, games not working, stuttering etc. Other people find it fine, depends which games you play and how good your perception is for stutter. AMD drivers are just as crappy as Nvidia ones, you never see anyone saying "Damn these 314.07 drivers are just so good", everyone always whines about drivers.

    As for Crossfire VS SLI, the AMD cards of this generation are undoubtedly faster, but the Nvidia setups display less frame latency (so less stutter). If or not it matters to you depends on if you can see that stutter, not everyone can.

    Up to about one and a half years ago I would have agreed with you 100% on this but, lately both AMD and Nvidia have been doing a great job in reducing micro-stutter on dual GPU configurations and the only reason I say reducing and not eliminating is because even single GPU cards will probably always have it to some degree. The problem only arises when it's perceptible (on this we agree).

    Allot of people have been praising new drivers for eliminating micro-stutter, myself included. It's not that we can't perceive it, we certainly could before the newer drivers. It's that now for many configurations micro-stutter has been reduced to an imperceptible amount. :D
  35. I'm not sure I'd characterize micro-stutter as perceptible or not perceptible for different people (at least a lot of it), as all the side by side comparisons always end up with everyone seeing a difference. I think it is more about being tolerable.

    For years I've seen micro-stutter, and didn't realize it. I always just assumed that is what gaming is like. Once all this was brought to the open a few months ago, I learned that those stutters are not supposed to be normal.

    Even SLI, which does a better job at reducing it, is not immune to it either. We've just gotten used to it enough to ignore it or tolerate it.
  36. pmax330 said:
    Hello

    I am new here and i need quick help. I am about to buy a new PC and i am wondering which graphics card to take GTX 690 or HD7990?? I know that 7990 has 2gb more memory than gtx 690 but some people are saying that 690 is still a better option. new PC will be aimed only for gaming therefore i prefer to ask here first to get some response from someone who could tell me which is better for gaming.

    thanks


    If your only options are the GTX690 or the HD7990 I'd say get the GTX690 it is a better solution and has less issues. However you should also take in to account the game bundle and the new lower price for the HD7990 now offers. Are they games you play or you are looking to purchase? Is price a major factor in your decision AMD has dropped $300 off the HD7990 price. Personally the games don't mater to me if I could afford either I'd get the GTX690. But pick the card you feel you'll enjoy the most. When your spending this much money on a VGA card you should have no regrets about your choice. In the end it doesn't mater what any of us say. You are the one that is spending the money. I always feel when you look at your computer you should have a big smile on your face when you reach for the power button.
Ask a new question

Read More

Graphics Cards Graphics