Asus GTX 680 SLI 2GB or 4GB

[xxtigrisxx]

Performance and Cooling. Asus GTX 680 DirectCU II Top 2GB SLI or Asus GTX 680 DirectCU II 4GB SLI. Which of these 680's would be the better choice, 2GB's seemed like enough but the 4GB model seems like it would perform better as I am going to use it on 3 monitors. But by the looks of it the 4GB models' cooling did not seem to be as good as the 2GB. It's great that it has dual slots instead of the triple slot but it does not matter to me. The question is which would perform better on a triple screen setup and would have the better cooling?

 

[bigshootr8]

Honestly, I would go with a AMD 7970 or 7970 Ghz edition card for the price you would pay for a 680. AMD has a better eco system with multi monitor solutions. However, if you are into 3D then I can understand the desire to go with something like a 680 although I would go with a 670 with the 4 gigabyte model. If you aren't worried about 3d and you aren't worried about physx I think your best bet is with the 7970/ghz edition.

 

[slomo4sho]

Depends on the resolution you intend to play at. If you are going with a multi-monitor setup it may be a good idea to go with the 4GB cards but a single 1440P display would do fine with 2GB for the near future.

 

[bigshootr8]

Right and 4 gigabyte would make more sense for higher resolutions and multiple screens the only issue I have with Nvidia's solution from a multi monitor and high resolution standpoint is there memory bit bandwidth.

 

[bigcyco1]

Honestly, I would go with a AMD 7970 or 7970 Ghz edition card for the price you would pay for a 680. AMD has a better eco system with multi monitor solutions. However, if you are into 3D then I can understand the desire to go with something like a 680 although I would go with a 670 with the 4 gigabyte model. If you aren't worried about 3d and you aren't worried about physx I think your best bet is with the 7970/ghz edition.

I do not think so crossfire is horrible right now.

 

[13thmonkey]

can you wait till the end of may? GTX770 should be 4GB at no premium and equal or better the 680, according to the leaks

 

[bigshootr8]

Big I'm talking from a single gpu standpoint. I'm not talking about a multiple gpu standpoint. However if he did get a multiple gpu setup then yes I would think 2 gtx670's with 4 gigabytes of ram would be the best option seen that the 680 is severely over priced.

 

[bigcyco1]

Big I'm talking from a single gpu standpoint. I'm not talking about a multiple gpu standpoint. However if he did get a multiple gpu setup then yes I would think 2 gtx670's with 4 gigabytes of ram would be the best option seen that the 680 is severely over priced.

Oh o.k. i misunderstood and i agree the 680's are overpriced.

 

[bigshootr8]

Course, yea was just thinking of the more mature platform for multi monitoring although I would say that people do get multi gpu configurations for multi screen setups so either way you could be right as well. I can see it being better to get two 670's in the end. In the end I would do either of the two.

1. one good solid 7970 ghz edition probably the vapor-x from sapphire

or

2. GTX670's in SLi 4 GB models.

 

[17seconds]

Performance and Cooling. Asus GTX 680 DirectCU II Top 2GB SLI or Asus GTX 680 DirectCU II 4GB SLI. Which of these 680's would be the better choice, 2GB's seemed like enough but the 4GB model seems like it would perform better as I am going to use it on 3 monitors. But by the looks of it the 4GB models' cooling did not seem to be as good as the 2GB. It's great that it has dual slots instead of the triple slot but it does not matter to me. The question is which would perform better on a triple screen setup and would have the better cooling?

To answer your question without going on a tangent, you are better off with the 4GB models on a triple monitor setup. That's really the reason they make the 4GB models. The other thing about 2GB is that it is already being challenged by a couple of games (Crysis 3 and modded Skyrim), and I wouldn't feel really safe with 2GB over the long run as newer more graphically demanding games get released.

Obviously, cost is not a major consideration for you, so the 680's in SLI are your best bet. A single card is simply not enough for multiple monitors, with the GTX Titan 6GB as the only exception to that rule. If you did want to save some money, the GTX 670 4GB models in SLI could be a consideration at a slight performance cost. Crossfire is out and requires the use of displayport connections anyway.

 

[bigshootr8]

Right but from what I've seen eyefinity is stronger the 3d surround unless your intent is to use 3d. which is why I believe the 7970 is the stronger player here. And the 680 isn't that much stronger then the 670 to warrant the extra cost.

 

[17seconds]

Right but from what I've seen eyefinity is stronger the 3d surround unless your intent is to use 3d. which is why I believe the 7970 is the stronger player here. And the 680 isn't that much stronger then the 670 to warrant the extra cost.

You don't see the displayport limitation as an annoyance?
In any event, you guys have gone off on a tangent, xxtigrisxx wasn't even asking about AMD cards, or even the GTX 670 for that matter. If I had the money to spend on dual 680's and triple monitors, I wouldn't hesitate to pull the trigger on the best I can buy.

 

[bigshootr8]

No I do not see it as an annoyance. In fact they make adapters so that you can covert display port to dvi. I use display port on my monitor now and I'll tell you its stronger because of the amount of bandwidth it can put out.

I haven't gone off on a tangent. I'm juts saying that for a 3 screen setup that eyefinity may be the stronger option. That a 680 is overpriced that a 670 with 4 gigabytes would be the stronger solution. Also in the event that he was wanting to max things out then he may want to double up on two 670's bam that is it.