as the title suggests i dont know whether to go with a 4gb nvidia 680 or 2 660ti's in sli. i will have a sabertooth motherboard and either a 3770k or 3930k
i will mainly do ultra high graphics gaming, video editing and some streaming
thanks
as the title suggests i dont know whether to go with a 4gb nvidia 680 or 2 660ti's in sli. i will have a sabertooth motherboard and either a 3770k or 3930k
i will mainly do ultra high graphics gaming, video editing and some streaming
thanks
Always better to get 1 card over 2. Most games don't support SLI or crossfire, you also have to deal with microstuttering, heat, and power consumption.
yikes i really dont know what to do, originally i wanted to go with the dual 660ti's as i know they crush a 2gb 680, but i don't know how they perform to the equally expensive 4gb 680
could u guys tell me which performs better?
maybe dual 660ti's (3GB) will be the best of both worlds?
are you going to be running multiple monitors?
rendering will surely use the dual 660ti's horsepower and crush the 680 though.
CaptainPip does make a good point though, dual card usually do use more power, take up space, and one (depending on the actual card) gets restricted airflow, and they can have driver issues.
im going to get a switch 810 so space isnt a problem, i've seen many videos saying that dual 660ti is faster http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BJI8f81a9IA but i don't know if they 680 they are using is the 4gb(the one im talking about) or the 2gb
-I looked up the card and he was using a 2GB 680
-nowaday games usually use under 2GB of Vram, i've seen BF3 reach 1.5GBvram. (single monitor 1080p) however if you want to use multiple monitors, you'll need more Vram.
oh so would the 4gb do better or worse than 2 660ti sli?
most likely: NO differnce
so you're about to pour yourself a bowl of cereal, what size bowl do you grab? well if you're really hungry you're going to need a big bowl, but if you're not very hungry, you're not going ot eat as much cereal thus you don't need a bigger bowl. But the question is- Does having a bigger bowl allow you to eat that moderate amount of cereal faster? most likely: NO
Let me explain
-the "bowl" for your cereal represents the amount of Vram you have.
-how "hungry" you are is what you're doing, or what applications/setting you're running, If you're VERY HIGH res. texture on tripple screens, you're VERY hungry so you'll need a bigger bowl, but if you're just single monitor gaming 2GB is just fine, (the bowl is just right).
Sum it up
If the drivers work for SLI and those specific games/applications then the dual 660ti's will be about 120% the speed of a single 680 (according linus: see link above) but you will have to pay more for them about 120% in cost more than the single 680.
I can't think of a single rendering professional program that doesn't support multiple cards, so that most likely won't be an issue (do some research yourself).
again, 2 cards will use more power and be hotter than the single card. and depending on what manufacturer you buy from noise will vary aswell.
personally to get the best of both worlds, i would pick up 2 3GB 660ti's, as it will have more than 2GB (but less than 4) and will kick butt on the 2GB 680
i think just plain 660ti's in sli would beat a 2gb 680 , but im talking about how they compare to a 4gb 680 which they compare to in price
The two 660Ti are probably better when gaming, but the 680 will give you higher consistancy in everything and a huge boost in applications suited towards using CUDA architecture, as they tend not to recognize SLI'd cards, instead only using the first one they come to. Also, if you ever happen to have another pile of money lying around in the future, it is usually easier to get a performance boost out of adding another card to a single card for dual SLI rather than adding a third to form triple SLI. It usually isn't particularly cost effective. I also am not really sure if the 660Ti's even support triple SLI...
what about the perfomance between two 660ti's in sli vs the evga ftw 680 4gb? could they both run crysis and other future graphic intensive games like watch dogs on ultra? which setup would be better for 2 or 3 monitors? i don't mind the power consumption, heat or noise. how do they compare when they are both overclocked?
i have another noob question: what does the power reset button on cases do?
The 680 would be able to handle those games for sure. And the power reset button restarts your computer. Also since using 2 cards in sli doesn't make use of each of the cards total ram the 680 is going to handle more monitors than the 2 660ti's.
Go for the best single card you can afford..and if you end up needing power, throw another. Then when you need MORE power, sell them, start over.
thanks so much guys, im going with the 4gb 680 and hopefully will add another someday
i cant decide between these two
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814130799
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814130798
and what exactly does the backplate do? logan seems inlove with it
It's more a show of quality really. Like imagine looking at your PC and seeing that shit. Looks so clean. Also I think it's to keep the PCB from bending on a hefty card such as the 680.
Out of the two, the best option is the 7970. It is better than the 680 4GB - I regret not getting one. I have the EVGA 680 4GB FTW+, and I am impressed with the performance, but I am coming from a GT 210. A 7970 or 7950 CF would have been a better investment.
i would argue 680 4GB > 7970 3GB because 4GB > 3GB
but on the other hand if you're not using CUDA, go amd
7950s will kick the shit out of a 680 4GB and dual 660ti's
i think ill go with the 4gb ftw 680
which would be a more future proof, but also better processor for mostly gaming but occasional 10-40minute video rendering? the 3930k or the 3770k