Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in

Results: Battlefield 4, 5760x1080

Asus Mars 760 Review: Two GPUs In SLI; One $650 Graphics Card
By

Now we move on to the triple-monitor results using three 1920x1080 FHD displays, totaling 5760x1080. Keep in mind that, from this point on, AMD's frame pacing feature does not work. The company is purportedly on the verge of releasing its Catalyst 14.1 package, but it wasn't able to preview it to us for this story, and as of this writing, the software is still not available for download.

Once it is available, you should be able to switch on frame pacing at resolutions in excess of 2560x1600 and in Eyefinity, which will affect the Radeon HD 7990 and two Radeon HD 7950s in CrossFire. 

Of course, because we didn't have a version of FCAT that was compatible with Battlefield 4, the frame rates for those two Radeon-based setups are going to be optimistic. The frame time variance figures should be right, though.

We had to drop the detail preset to High in order to get these graphics solutions cranking out playable performance. Even still, some of the minimum frame rates are flirting with our 30 FPS target.

Asus' Mars 760 does really well though, holding its own against the $1000 GeForce GTX 690.

Two Radeon HD 7950s in CrossFire make this chart look particularly painful, though none of the multi-GPU setups yield appealing frame time variance results in Battlefield 4.

Ask a Category Expert

Create a new thread in the Reviews comments forum about this subject

Example: Notebook, Android, SSD hard drive

Display all 55 comments.
This thread is closed for comments
Top Comments
  • 20 Hide
    vertexx , January 31, 2014 2:08 AM
    I'm not sure why you would even publish this review without a 780ti in the comparison.
  • 19 Hide
    Shneiky , January 31, 2014 2:37 AM
    It was actually disappointing that there was no regular 760 SLI in there. It would have helped to see if the Asus's solution gives better results then regular 2 760s.
Other Comments
  • 4 Hide
    AMD Radeon , January 31, 2014 12:40 AM
    i would like to see dual GTX 780 Ti in one card
  • 4 Hide
    vinhn , January 31, 2014 1:27 AM
    @AMD Radeon, everyone would like to see it, not everyone would buy it, the market knows that, there's a reason why they would rather release the dual 760 rather than a 1600$ dual 780 Ti.
  • 6 Hide
    Immaculate , January 31, 2014 1:30 AM
    Why an i5-2550K?
  • -6 Hide
    blackmagnum , January 31, 2014 1:37 AM
    Bring on the Kepler cards already.
  • 20 Hide
    vertexx , January 31, 2014 2:08 AM
    I'm not sure why you would even publish this review without a 780ti in the comparison.
  • 19 Hide
    Shneiky , January 31, 2014 2:37 AM
    It was actually disappointing that there was no regular 760 SLI in there. It would have helped to see if the Asus's solution gives better results then regular 2 760s.
  • 3 Hide
    bemused_fred , January 31, 2014 2:52 AM
    Looking at the way that various card configurations bounce around in the charts, with the ranking of cards varying from page to page, the only thing I'm taking away from this article is not to bother with dual-GPU set-ups. It seems their performance is entirely decided by how well-optimised the games are for Nvidia or AMD, and not their actual specs.
  • 2 Hide
    Raheel Hasan , January 31, 2014 4:25 AM
    Too high price only $30 below 780ti, it should be around $550.
  • 2 Hide
    Adroid , January 31, 2014 5:25 AM
    I'm confused why the 780 and 770 aren't shown here - especially since the 780 is at the same price point.
  • 4 Hide
    Au_equus , January 31, 2014 5:40 AM
    without the gtx 780 ti, you are missing half the article, as ASUS, according to the price, was presenting this card as an alternative to the 780 ti at its price/performance. I stopped reading after the first BM.
  • 2 Hide
    cleeve , January 31, 2014 6:06 AM
    Quote:
    I'm not sure why you would even publish this review without a 780ti in the comparison.


    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.



  • 2 Hide
    bloodroses75 , January 31, 2014 6:08 AM
    At least it's under $1000... these video card companies lately seem to think that people are made out of gold.
  • 2 Hide
    cleeve , January 31, 2014 6:09 AM
    Quote:
    I'm confused why the 780 and 770 aren't shown here - especially since the 780 is at the same price point.


    780 is not the same price point. The 780 Ti is, and we overclocked a Titan to simulate as per above.

  • 3 Hide
    Mousemonkey , January 31, 2014 6:14 AM
    Quote:
    Bring on the Kepler cards already.


    Really? :lol: 
  • 1 Hide
    Adroid , January 31, 2014 6:31 AM
    Quote:
    Quote:
    I'm confused why the 780 and 770 aren't shown here - especially since the 780 is at the same price point.


    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 ;) 
  • 0 Hide
    cleeve , January 31, 2014 6:46 AM
    Quote:

    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 :) 

  • -3 Hide
    tristangl , January 31, 2014 6:51 AM
    I dont understand how can 1 card with 2 GPU can cost more than 2 760It needs half the material... this shoul dbe selling for 450-500$
  • 2 Hide
    toddybody , January 31, 2014 6:56 AM
    Yawn...not a great value when SC GTX 780's are at USD 499.99. Now, the GTX 790 will be something drool worthy :D 
  • 3 Hide
    Mousemonkey , January 31, 2014 6:57 AM
    Quote:
    I dont understand how can 1 card with 2 GPU can cost more than 2 760It needs half the material... this shoul dbe selling for 450-500$


    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?
  • 0 Hide
    tristangl , January 31, 2014 7:02 AM
    You are still using less material, and buying 2 core on 1 card... this should be lower than 2 cards IMO
    Plus stability is always worst on dual GPU card

    Not my thing
Display more comments