Which video card or cards for 2560 x 1440 gaming?

[JB71]

I will be buying a new rig in 2-3 weeks. I have decided on the ASUS PB278Q WQHD monitor and want to pair it up with the graphics card horsepower it needs for 60+ FPS on max settings with games.


So question #1 - If I only have 2GB of video memory will I run into problems gaming at 2560 x 1440?

Question #2 - If I get a GTX 690 am I limited to 2GB frame buffer even though it has 4GB?

Question #3 - If I go SLI with GTX 680s, what is the best 4GB card?


BTW, ATI is not an option for me, been burned too many times.....

 

[EzioAs]

If you want to go SLI, I suggest 2 670s. You'll save around $160 but get almost the same performance. No need to get 4GB version since 2GB is still enough for 1440p.

 

[JB71]

I read the HARDOCP article in BigMack70's reply. It actually makes me want to get the 4GB 680s even more. They mention the 670 GPU horsepower is limiting the use of extra VRAM. The price difference between 680 2GB and 4GB isnt huge.

Now to deciding which GTX 680 4 GB card is the best....

 

[c_h1132]

hd7970 faster and cheaper than gtx 680!!! but if your set on nvidia id get the 4gb for sure.

 

[asalikus]

+1 Yeah, AMD does KILL Nvidia in 1440p...

Well sadly AMD offers the best 1440p options with the 7970, but if you're set on Nvidia, your best option is SLI 680s or a 690.

You don't need 4GB vram, I don't think (and yes the 690 is 2GB effective VRAM). The cards run out of speed before they can run settings that need over 2GB vram. Reviews consistently show zero practical benefit to 4GB Kepler cards over 2GB ones.

Be aware that some settings like SSAA will not be able to be used in demanding games, but you don't need SSAA on a 1440p screen anyways.

 

[EzioAs]

JB71

I read the HARDOCP article in BigMack70's reply. It actually makes me want to get the 4GB 680s even more. They mention the 670 GPU horsepower is limiting the use of extra VRAM. The price difference between 680 2GB and 4GB isnt huge.

Now to deciding which GTX 680 4 GB card is the best....

You said you wanted to game at 2560x1440 and at that resolution, 4GB has no benefit over 2GB. Seriously, only get 4GB if you're playing at triple 1080p or higher.

 

[JB71]

I hear the Skyrim HD texture pack is killing 2GB cards. I know there isn't any such thing as 100% "future proofing", but games are going to be more taxing in coming months, not less. Money isn't much of an issue so.....

I am still pretty set on Nvidia, but someone go ahead and try to convince me that the 7970 is a better option.

 

[wdmfiber]

Just to confirm you know your monitor is 108ppi (pixels per inch).

Pretty much no matter what you get your limited to ~100ppi. 2560x1440 sounds high, but since the screen size is 27", to the eye it appears the same as 1920x1080 on a 22".

There are some exceptions, the IBM T221 comes to mind. But it's too old was about $6000 new. The Mac Book Pro 15" is just a laptop, but it shows 200+ ppi is coming again.

Anway just saying you could save some money. But then again it's not crazy what you want to do. Two high-end Radeon's or GTX's in SLI/crossfire; whatever brand you prefer. They're both good.

 

[wdmfiber]

BTW, ATI is not an option for me, been burned too many times.....

You should still check out the Asus Ares II, even if just to be aware of it. AMD and nVidia both get their chips from the same company now anyway, TSCM. Driver complaints? ...they never end for either.

The Vid is short, so you should be able to tolerate the host, Linus. Lol
Awesome GPU!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lb6X-2qWQFI

 

[goldsauce]

A 7970 or a 7950 would do good!