280x crossfire vs 770 sli vs 290x

[sciephos]

so im building a new computer and was wondering if i should get crossfire 280x's or 770's sli. im only going to be gaming on a single monitor and planning to upgrade to 3 cards later on. or i could go for a single 290x and crossfire that later on. what would be the best option?... nois dont really bother me and im gonna get a case that is fully optimised for air cooling. and wich brand should i buy from?

btw: im planning on buying expensive gpu's because i wanna max out on ultra and have 60+fps

gonna be using the i5 4690k and tha corsair air 540

 

[i7Baby]

If you want to go Xfire, just use 2 cards. A third one only gets half used.

1 x 770 is better than 1 x 280x, so 2 x 770's are better than 2 x 280x's.

And 2 x 770's are better than one 290x.

But if you're keen to still ad another card down the track, then get a 290x and another one later on. You'll need a big PSU - 1000W for 2 x290x

 

[sciephos]

If you want to go Xfire, just use 2 cards. A third one only gets half used.

1 x 770 is better than 1 x 280x, so 2 x 770's are better than 2 x 280x's.

And 2 x 770's are better than one 290x.

But if you're keen to still ad another card down the track, then get a 290x and another one later on. You'll need a big PSU - 1000W for 2 x290x

But u dont think that 3 770's is a good idea?... y not?

 

[i7Baby]

3 x 770's (or 280x's) won't run as good as 2 x 290x's.

 

[MeteorsRaining]

You play on single monitor, if its FHD, a single R9 290X is more than enough and will give 80+ FPS on any latest title.
If its 2k, then too single R9 290X is more than enough with 60+ FPS on ultra.
If its 4k, SLI 770 is the best option with 35-40 FPS on ultra.
But, for 4k, if you wanna add a 3rd card/ 2nd card later, then, as i7Baby said, get the R9 290X now and get another later, best setup.

Adding a 3rd card for a single display is a no brainer. Even on 4k 770 Tri-SLI is not worth it and Xfire of R9 290X will be much better.

 

[Xibyth]

You play on single monitor, if its FHD, a single R9 290X is more than enough and will give 80+ FPS on any latest title.
If its 2k, then too single R9 290X is more than enough with 60+ FPS on ultra.
If its 4k, SLI 770 is the best option with 35-40 FPS on ultra.
But, for 4k, if you wanna add a 3rd card/ 2nd card later, then, as i7Baby said, get the R9 290X now and get another later, best setup.

Adding a 3rd card for a single display is a no brainer. Even on 4k 770 Tri-SLI is not worth it and Xfire of R9 290X will be much better.

I think instead of 2k you meant 2.5k (or 1440p)
1920x1080 FHD is 2k, or just under 2000px wide,
2650x1440 QHD is 2.5k or just over 2500px wide,
3840x2160 UHD is 4k or just under 4000px wide.
Nonetheless I agree, a single GPU as strong as possible is always the winner. In some situations I do recommend a dual GPU card like the R9 295X, that is if your going 4K. But for the time being I highly recommend maxing out at 2.5k, for a multitude of reasons namely is the lack of software support for 4K.

In this situation I would go for the R9 290X, I won't tell you that you will get a solid 60FPS in everygame with it as there are far too many variables, but it will get you as close as possible in this situation with the most stable results. Also note that not every game supports SLI or Crossfire and you will suffer performance drops in these games as opposed to a single more powerful card, but at any moment they may not scale well and actually cause terrible performance in some scenarios.

 

[mastergup]

I would go for 1 290x now, and later 1 extra, yes 2 gtx 770 are faster, but when a game is using more memory then mayby you have a problem in with 2gb.
watch dogs Is a game like that, but that's not even run good maxed out on a titan 6gb.