Metro is a similarly-taxing title. To get it running well across three monitors, we dropped the detail preset from Very High to High and turned off tessellation.


Once again, when we're able to benchmark using FCAT, the dual-GPU Radeon-based configurations are reduced to unplayable frame rates.
The rest of the field yields stronger performance.


The Radeon HD 7950 Boost cards in CrossFire suffer horrible spikes in frame time variance; the Radeon HD 7990 doesn't do much better. In fact, these numbers take us all the way back to September of last year, when a crowd of game enthusiasts blindly singled out the GeForce GTX 690 for delivering a smoother experience than AMD's former flagship in Radeon HD 7990 Vs. GeForce GTX 690: The Crowd Picks A Winner. Almost five months later, and we're still waiting for AMD to resolve those issues.
With that said, even the GeForce GTX 690 registers some variance, while Asus' Mars 760 runs smoothly.
- Two GK104s On A Card For $650
- The Mars 760 Bundle And Software
- Test System And Benchmarks
- Results: Battlefield 4, 2560x1440
- Results: Assassin's Creed IV, 2560x1440
- Results: Metro: Last Light, 2560x1440
- Results: BioShock Infinite, 2560x1440
- Results: Grid 2, 2560x1440
- Results: Battlefield 4, 5760x1080
- Results: Assassin's Creed IV, 5760x1080
- Results: Metro: Last Light, 5760x1080
- Results: BioShock Infinite, 5760x1080
- Results: Grid 2, 5760x1080
- Overclocking
- Power, Temperature, And Noise Benchmarks
- Asus Mars 760: We Dig The Innovation, But There Are Smarter High-End Buys
That's why we included an OC'd titan to represent 780 Ti performance.
Read the article. The memory was clocked identical to 780 Ti, and the core overclock was even calculated to simulate it as closely as possible.
It's a valid representation. I see some of you don't agree and you certainly reserve the right to do that, but I'm quite satisfied with the results.
780 is not the same price point. The 780 Ti is, and we overclocked a Titan to simulate as per above.
Really?
780 is not the same price point. The 780 Ti is, and we overclocked a Titan to simulate as per above.
Thanks, I stand corrected, and the 770, 780, and 780ti is what I would like to see compared to the Mars.
My qualm with using a Titan for comparison is 1) The titan costs $300 more than the 780ti, and 2) The titan is slower.
I usually read these type of articles from a perspective of "if I was going to purchase this Mars 760 or a comparitive other card at the $700 price point, what would I buy?"
So I wouldn't buy a Titan for 300$ more and overclock it to try to get 780ti performance out of it. I would want to see how a 780ti overclocked compares to an overclocked Mars 760 - then make a choice from that.
But, from strictly a performance consideration, I understand where you are coming from.
Those of us who don't get the Nvidia sample cards to play with have to consider the price/performance factor
My qualm with using a Titan for comparison is 1) The titan costs $300 more than the 780ti, and 2) The titan is slower.
The point is, is overclocked to *match* the 780 Ti.
We tested it at stock, ***and then again overclocked to represent the 780 Ti***.
It goes over this in detail in the article. Check the test system page
You are paying for the complexities of sticking two GPU's and the SLi bridge on one card together with the larger HSF this requires, it shouldn't be that difficult to work that out surely?
Plus stability is always worst on dual GPU card
Not my thing