SLI 770 Classified-Titan-780 Triple Monitor 4k potential?

[Matt Hornig]

I am building a new system. Running the new ivy 6 core with the x79 dark. I use 3 22 1080p monitors currently. I am upgrading from crossfire 6950s. I eventually wanna be able to support higher end monitors even up to 4k. I know new cards are coming out in a few months.

Is it worth it to spend $1000 on these cards and will they handle the future with 4k?

Which would be better? A single Titan or 780would allow for another added down the road, but is Titan gonna be obsolete in a year? As far as being able to tackle 4k support with high settings on triple monitors?

Any other input is appreciated as far as planning for my GPU path.

 

[Jaxem]

Nothing possible right now or probably for a while will touch triple 4k monitors. It takes 2 Titans to push 60 FPS on a single 4k, read this article to get a feel for what it's going to take to get to 4k ready:

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/pq321q-4k-gaming,3620.html

 

[Thanatos Telos]

Not worth it. Wait until the R9-290 comes out and get two. It seems that with their new cards, AMD is fixing X-Fire on a hardware level.

 

[Matt Hornig]

Nothing possible right now or probably for a while will touch triple 4k monitors. It takes 2 Titans to push 60 FPS on a single 4k, read this article to get a feel for what it's going to take to get to 4k ready:

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/pq321q-4k-gaming,3620.html

Not worth it. Wait until the R9-290 comes out and get two. It seems that with their new cards, AMD is fixing X-Fire on a hardware level.

Well if that is the case. My 6950s don't seem to cut it on my triple monitor setup at least not on max settings. Would I be better of upgrading to maybe like sli 760s or something for sub $500 that will max triple 1080ps for gaming? I guess I could even do a single 780. I don't have a problem waiting but I need something to tide me over with my new system.

 

[Jaxem]

7970's are almost as cheap as 760's right now, two of them would do triple 1080 pretty darn well...as would the 760's. i don't think i'd spring for a 780 since you can max much cheaper with a xfire/sli setup.

 

[Cyler12]

7970's are almost as cheap as 760's right now, two of them would do triple 1080 pretty darn well...as would the 760's. i don't think i'd spring for a 780 since you can max much cheaper with a xfire/sli setup.

I've heard it is safer to do a single card. By all means I'm in for saving money though

 

[geofelt]

My guess is that you would do best today with two GTX780 superclock cards.
They are so close to titan that it seems not worth it.
There are some amd solutions that might look good, but until I see valid R 290X benchmarks in crossfire I would not think that would be so great.
Triple sli? There seems to be a case of diminishing returns.

4k monitors that are useful are not here yet. And, I think they will be a year off, and longer if you want a decent price.
The problem is getting a 60hz at 4k resolution.
By the time such monitors are available reasonably, I expect both amd and NVidia to have cards able to run them.

If you are building today, buy a good setup for today,, and be prepared to sell parts to upgrade when there is availability of parts.

 

[Bondfc11]

I agree with the 4k comments. They look amazing, but a 60hz cap is really not great for gaming. Having used a 4k monitor, at only 30Hz, for gaming I would say - WAIT! The 4k movement is just not ready for serious gaming. Go with something like a couple of 1440 IPS monitors at 120hz. That will blow you away since IPS is a huge leap from TN panels.

 

[iam2thecrowe]

7970's are almost as cheap as 760's right now, two of them would do triple 1080 pretty darn well...as would the 760's. i don't think i'd spring for a 780 since you can max much cheaper with a xfire/sli setup.

if you havn't read, crossfire + eyefinity = nearly 50% dropped frames by the time they reach your monitor.
http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Graphics-Cards/Frame-Rating-Eyefinity-vs-Surround-Single-and-Multi-GPU-Configurations/Discov
http://techreport.com/blog/25399/here-why-the-crossfire-eyefinity-4k-story-matters
If your doing a multi monitor setup now i would get 4gb cards at least, you will need the vram. A couple of 4gb 770's would do the job pretty well. I would probably wait till the new r290 card from AMD is released, if its not as good as they claim, it will at least bring down the prices of all the other cards.

 

[geofelt]

I have my doubts about the value of vram. It seems to be a performance issue, not a functional issue.
But... it is not a significant performance issue, even with triple monitors.
Read this: http://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/articles/Video-Card-Performance-2GB-vs-4GB-Memory-154/

 

[klepp0906]

How on earth would titan be obselete in a year? It won't be obselete in 3 lol. I am currently running well over 4k reso on one. If you want to run 3x4k titan is your only option. At 4680x2560 I use 3gb of VRAM in ffxiv, far faaar from the most graphically demanding game out.

 

[klepp0906]

Oh and for the prior poster.. Doubts about the value of VRAM? Go ahead and run a game at high enough settings to use it up and then come back and tell us about your doubts. Their is ONE reason titan hasn't received a price drop even when a card has come up that is a butthair faster. Guess what that reason is?

 

[geofelt]

The benchmark I linked to used 3 1080P monitors or 6m pixels.
Your three 2560 x 1600 monitors are twice that.

When vram fills up, and more is needed, it must be swapped out, somewhat like a page fault.
That is a performance hit.
The question is, how big of a hit.
The tests I linked
http://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/articles/Video-Card-Performance-2GB-vs-4GB-Memory-154/
were at max settings, and showed only a very small hit.

With sufficient pc ram, I would expect that exchange to be a quick ram/pcie/vram exchange.
An argument perhaps for 16gb of pc ram or more.

What fps results are you getting, and what is your graphics configuration?

I have yet to see a similar test for driving even more pixels.

 

[klepp0906]

The benchmark I linked to used 3 1080P monitors or 6m pixels.
Your three 2560 x 1600 monitors are twice that.

When vram fills up, and more is needed, it must be swapped out, somewhat like a page fault.
That is a performance hit.
The question is, how big of a hit.
The tests I linked
http://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/articles/Video-Card-Performance-2GB-vs-4GB-Memory-154/
were at max settings, and showed only a very small hit.

With sufficient pc ram, I would expect that exchange to be a quick ram/pcie/vram exchange.
An argument perhaps for 16gb of pc ram or more.

What fps results are you getting, and what is your graphics configuration?

I have yet to see a similar test for driving even more pixels.

Running out of VRAM is a massive massive hit. Let me dig up a few links for ya when I get off work.

 

[klepp0906]

to my surprise (and all of yours who kept up on this years CES) nvidia pushed 3x4k with 3 titans to demo something or another with AC4.

Makes me sad to have purchased 1440p displays but at the same time I'm not sure if I could handle 30hz >.<