EVGA GTX 680 4GB vs GTX 690. HELP!

[TDSmile]

Hello all.

Currently looking at:

CPU - Intel Core i7-3770K
Motherboard - Asus Maximus V Gene
RAM - G.SKILL Sniper Gaming Series 16GB (2 x 8GB)
GPU - EVGA GeForce GTX 680 4GB
PSU - Antec High Current Pro 850W
CPU Cooling - Thermalright True Spirit 140
Case - SilverStone FT02B
Optical Drive - SATA DVD-RW
Storage - 2TB Western Digital Caviar Black & Intel 330 Series 180 GB SSD
Sound Card - Asus Xonar DX

Now this is my first pc build and I have come at a complete halt here. I thought I was for sure going to get the 680 4gb but reviews are throwing me towards the 690. I will only be running two monitors at the most but will only be running one until the money comes back from this huge bill coming my way. I am trying to make this pc as future-proof (I guess is the correct word) as possible.

This only has come up because I thought that the the extra 2gb vram would be useful for multi monitor but reviews have been informing me that the extra is not needed unless going crazy with monitors. I also read that the 690 will run better than 2 680's for lower resolutions.

Thanks in advance to any willing helpers.

 

[Judge34411]

so the 680 is fast enough that it doesnot collect more than 2gb of vram usage even in 3 screens? did you actually tried high textures in skyrim or crysis 2? i did in skyrim and in castle draco mod managed to get 2,55gb usage on 1 1080 on my evga 660ftw sig 2 3gb card, tough fps went down 10-12fps when flying with tfc command around castle. guess the 192bit bus of 660

thank you for your insights
revro

Well that is my point. By the time I really will need the 4gb of vram my card will start to choke, and trust me, with less than 3 monitors you should not need it. I would think the GTX 670 will do what you want unless your are going for a 27" monitor 2560 x 1440, Then you might want a little more. But even then???

Maybe I am not explaining it right. But I know that 2GB vram is adequate.

I have learnt my lesson about trying to future proof with the cards I purchased. Cards btw are Galaxy GTX 680 GC 4gb and I am running them OC even though they are just about the fastest cards out of the box. CPU is 3770K OC a little (4.2)

Good luck.

 

[Merry Wizard]

The only time 2GB is not enough is in the case of mods or at high enough settings, on 3 monitors, that it wouldn't have been playable anyways.

If you look at mods, yes, you can run out of vram in a meaningful way.

What mods?

 

[bystander]

What mods?

Game mods, like Skyrim texture packs, not delivered by the game developers. It was in response to this:

so the 680 is fast enough that it doesnot collect more than 2gb of vram usage even in 3 screens? did you actually tried high textures in skyrim or crysis 2? i did in skyrim and in castle draco mod managed to get 2,55gb usage on 1 1080 on my evga 660ftw sig 2 3gb card, tough fps went down 10-12fps when flying with tfc command around castle. guess the 192bit bus of 660

thank you for your insights
revro

 

[Merry Wizard]

Game mods, like Skyrim texture packs, not delivered by the game developers. It was in response to this:

so the 680 is fast enough that it doesnot collect more than 2gb of vram usage even in 3 screens? did you actually tried high textures in skyrim or crysis 2? i did in skyrim and in castle draco mod managed to get 2,55gb usage on 1 1080 on my evga 660ftw sig 2 3gb card, tough fps went down 10-12fps when flying with tfc command around castle. guess the 192bit bus of 660

thank you for your insights
revro

I am about to purchase a new card myself, and for the reasons mentioned here, I lean toward a 680 (or maybe 670) with 4 gb vram. Worried about some decrease in fps, but the new ASUS 680 DC2 4gb should be easily overclockable and only takes up 2 slots. With a 690, you only get 2 gb vram per gpu.

 

[bystander]

Unless you plan to play games with lots of mods, 2GB is enough, otherwise, 4GB may be worth something.

 

[Merry Wizard]

Unless you plan to play games with lots of mods, 2GB is enough, otherwise, 4GB may be worth something.

Also needed for 3 monitors at 5760 X 1200. But do you sacrifice much in fps?

 

[bystander]

Also needed for 3 monitors at 5760 X 1200. But do you sacrifice much in fps?

Not according to all the benchmarks. The only time you lose FPS as a result of 2gb, even at that resolution, is when you turn settings so high that even with 4GB, you can't play it smooth.

 

[Merry Wizard]

Not according to all the benchmarks. The only time you lose FPS as a result of 2gb, even at that resolution, is when you turn settings so high that even with 4GB, you can't play it smooth.

What I meant was, is the 4 gb card slower than the 2 gb card? I suppose it depends on the overclock. The ASUS card comes with a reference clock out of the box, but they claim a decent overclock and the ROG people seem to like the card.

 

[manofchalk]

The amount of VRAM doesnt impact performance until you run out of it, and 2GB is fairly hard to max out at 1080p.

The ASUS fanboys/employees like an ASUS product. Might want to look up a less biased source, though I suspect its a good card anyway.

 

[Merry Wizard]

Thanks bystander and manofchalk.

 

[revro]

770 is not far away, and it should have 3gb and 384 bit bus. so waiting might be wise by now

best
revro

 

[Merry Wizard]

770 is not far away, and it should have 3gb and 384 bit bus. so waiting might be wise by now

best
revro

Good point. But 700 series might not be much of an upgrade. Maxwell probably not coming out until 2014. I do need a new card now, but it makes sense not to spend too much now with better cards on the horizon.

 

[revro]

yes 6 months ago i would say go for 670, but now we are 3-5 months away and only new game in next 3 months is crysis 3, tough who knows maybe they will bundle it with 8970 like they did with far cry 3

best
revro