Do you guys think the 2GB of Vram will be a hindrance in 5760 x 1200 Surround resolution Vs my two MSI GTX 580 3GB Lightning cards in SLI? Will the extra performance of two GTX 670s make up for it?
Do you guys think the 2GB of Vram will be a hindrance in 5760 x 1200 Surround resolution Vs my two MSI GTX 580 3GB Lightning cards in SLI? Will the extra performance of two GTX 670s make up for it?
after my own little situation of deciding if 2GB was enough for 2560 x 1600 i asked around with some friends who use triple monitor setups for feedback regarding there vram usage, results where....interesting
a GTX690 4GB on BF3 full ultra at 5760 x 1080 reported ingame vram usage as no higher than 1.8GB, the 690 also completely failed on ARMAII, this was attributed to poor driver support
then a GTX580 3GB on BF3 full ultra at 5760 x 1080 manged to actually exceed 3GB to about 3.1/3.2, a GTX670 2GB then equelled the 580's FPS on the same game/settings with vram usage showing as just under 2GB while another friends 670 2GB showed under 1.5GB vram usage at 2560 x 1440.
a bit-tech friend then pointed out that we where using different mobos, the guy who maxed his 580 3GBs was using PCI-E 2.0 X8 lanes, this apparently served as a bottleneck on his bandwidth, especially when SLI was tested, baseically i think our testing showed that high resolution FPS depends on things besides high amounts of vram, also made me grateful for getting a board with 2 PCI-E 2.0 x16 slots
So what do you think? Should I go with GTX 670s over the GTX 580 3GB cards or not? I'm using an X79 Asus Rampage Formula so SLI will be at PCIe 2.0 or 3.0(if they get that working) x16Originally Posted by Jake211049
after my own little situation of deciding if 2GB was enough for 2560 x 1600 i asked around with some friends who use triple monitor setups for feedback regarding there vram usage, results where....interesting
a GTX690 4GB on BF3 full ultra at 5760 x 1080 reported ingame vram usage as no higher than 1.8GB, the 690 also completely failed on ARMAII, this was attributed to poor driver support
then a GTX580 3GB on BF3 full ultra at 5760 x 1080 manged to actually exceed 3GB to about 3.1/3.2, a GTX670 2GB then equelled the 580's FPS on the same game/settings with vram usage showing as just under 2GB while another friends 670 2GB showed under 1.5GB vram usage at 2560 x 1440.
a bit-tech friend then pointed out that we where using different mobos, the guy who maxed his 580 3GBs was using PCI-E 2.0 X8 lanes, this apparently served as a bottleneck on his bandwidth, especially when SLI was tested, baseically i think our testing showed that high resolution FPS depends on things besides high amounts of vram, also made me grateful for getting a board with 2 PCI-E 2.0 x16 slots
hmm tricky one mate to tell you the truth, personally i never much cared for multi monitor setups so my own experiance is 580to670 on single monitor, i asked some friends who do use, they said its more heavily dependent on sheer driver/card combatibilty which the new 301.42 driver has helped tremendously on the 670s they said
as for if the lower vram on the 670s is enough, wellll that got a LOT of differing opinions, most of which revolved around the tests i described above, sorry mate but i have no 1 answer on that regard, prbly something youl have to decide yourself, maybe someone else here will give there experiance/opinion.
But aren't the differences of high VRAM more than just number of frames? Isn't it just as much about smoothness, much like despite lowering frame rates, VSync can smooth out the picture quality.
you'd have to prove the 2GB was a hindrance. everyone knows 670 is faster than 580.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks