Worthwhile upgrade for GTX690?

[LindaLoo]

Hi guys

1. Would an SLI configuration of GTX980s be a worthwhile upgrade from a GTX690 in your opinion?

Or

2. Would even x2 GTX970s still be a decent and worthwhile upgrade?

Or

3. Should I just wait for a while?

Any thoughts or opinions gratefully received.

[GFDuke]

Your 690 is still a great gaming card. There really would be no advantage. Save your money.

[LindaLoo]

Thanks for the reply.
Yes, I recently came to the same conclusion and having overclocked it a bit more, my experience with Shadow of Mordor has definitely improved.

[urbanfox]

It would be a huge upgrade, especially if you game above 1080P. Make no mistake about it.

[GFDuke]

Only in expense. I run a GTX690 myself @ 2560x1680 and it rocks. I have researched this. Being a dual vid card and having 4gb of mem is plenty. There's no need for sli 980's for gaming. I'm waiting for the next gen and the prices of present cards will come down. The vid cards these days are overkill for present games.

[Buckeye]

I run a EVGA 690gtx also. Yeah its a great card.

The only thing I do not like about it is many games I play, mostly Free to Play or others do not use SLI.
I pretty much only play Path of Exile now and I am not sure it uses SLI. World of Tanks didn't either back when I played it, not sure about now tho.

[urbanfox]

Only in expense. I run a GTX690 myself @ 2560x1680 and it rocks. I have researched this. Being a dual vid card and having 4gb of mem is plenty. There's no need for sli 980's for gaming. I'm waiting for the next gen and the prices of present cards will come down. The vid cards these days are overkill for present games.

It's still a good card, yeah, but SLI 970's or 980's would still be a huge upgrade. My main rig has gone through crossfired 7970's, crossfired 290x's, a 780 Ti, and now a 970, but don't take my word for it, look up reviews. Also, it's not 4GB on the 690, it's 2x2GB. Big difference, especially with newer games and higher resolutions. It's not 4GB of usable ram, it's 2GB that mirrors 2GB.

EDIT: Look at how a single 980 performs against a 690 http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/1351?vs=1184

[GFDuke]

None of that is noticeable to the human eye. The most demanding Game on that list for memory is Crysis 3 and that only uses 1gb of memory. Video cards these days are overkill for most games out there.

[Buckeye]

Yeah it still performs very good for a couple gens old.

[GFDuke]

I just don't think the upgrade performance vs price is a worthwhile investment for the average gamer. If you're looking to compete and put them under LN2 for competition that's a different story. But to just game. Def. not worth the 1200.00. Unless maybe you happen to pawn off your 690 for some good cash and then it's a buy one get one free deal.

[Xello]

The most demanding Game on that list for memory is Crysis 3 and that only uses 1gb of memory.

Completely untrue, even crysis 1 uses more than 1GB of ram if you have it. I've seen crysis 3 go over 2GB, and watch dogs over 3GB. Many games are very memory hungry now at certain settings. I'd also say fps jumps from 20 to 40+ are very noticeable, whether you have human eyes or fish eyes.

[GFDuke]

Crysis 3 System requirements.
http://www.systemrequirementslab.com...emId=11526&p=r

[urbanfox]

None of that is noticeable to the human eye. The most demanding Game on that list for memory is Crysis 3 and that only uses 1gb of memory. Video cards these days are overkill for most games out there.

You're kidding, right? Min/rec specs for games are rubbish. As for not being noticeable to the human eye, I completely disagree. In the last 12 months I've gamed with with 2x7970's, 2x290x's, 290x, 2x7850's, 7850, 780 Ti, and now a 970. I game at 2560x1440 and I can say there are HUGE differences between all those cards and the different tiers. Oh, and Crysis 3 uses much, much more than 1GB of VRAM.

EDIT And that link I posted was ONE GPU vs a 690. Obviously SLI 980's or even 970's would murder it.

[GFDuke]

You are entitled to your opinion as I am mine. I still don't think it's worth a $1200.00 investment.

[urbanfox]

Oh I definitely don't think that, I was just saying it's a huge upgrade performance wise. Two 970's for under $660 would be a much better buy.

[urbanfox]

If he could sell his 690 for $325-400, that would be a heck of an upgrade for the $!

[GFDuke]

I just don't think the upgrade performance vs price is a worthwhile investment for the average gamer. If you're looking to compete and put them under LN2 for competition that's a different story. But to just game. Def. not worth the 1200.00. Unless maybe you happen to pawn off your 690 for some good cash and then it's a buy one get one free deal.

What I said.

[urbanfox]

What I said.

I was disputing your anti-performance claim.

None of that is noticeable to the human eye. The most demanding Game on that list for memory is Crysis 3 and that only uses 1gb of memory. Video cards these days are overkill for most games out there.

^ That.

[[XC] Synthetickiller]

I have a GTX690, so here's my .

I've been able to run everything at 1600p (now 1440p), until I bought Crysis 3. I cannot run it at 1600p/1440p max. The game was barely playable at 1080p (maintaining 30fps or more), but that's it. I'd venture to say that other games like metro: last light would give this card a run for it's money. Besides this, no problems, no hick ups. Everything works.

With the frame jumping, I notice it, despite what everyone tells me. I guess I have super human eyes? I really don't care what others think, since I know my own experiences.

The card is solid & was purchased for what is being discussed. I knew it would last at least 2 or 3 gens. I would wait for the following:

1. GTX 970s (and 980s) drop in price.
2. GTX 990/995 variants come on the market & you can replace your "aging" dual gpu card with another dual cpu card.

The 970s are such a steal for the money, it's a hard call if you have the money burning a hole in your pocket. Since I water cool, I'd rather not dump cash into two blocks. That's what keeps my insatiable appetite for upgrades under control. Considering the power efficiency of these new cards, a 990/995 should be in the works (if nvidia wants to shake up the world again, bringing out an "affordable" dual gpu card). It would sip power vs a 690. Sorry, getting off topic... We can all dream.

If you aren't in a situation where you can't run games at the settings you want (probably fairly uncommon), I'd wait. A GTX 690 basically trades blows with a gtx 980 (right?). That's NOT a good upgrade since you can't sell the 690 for $550. Dual GTX 970s will set you back about $660 USD. That's an amazing set up for the money & you won't have spent so much that you're hurting, but at the same time, basically doubling the performance you have now.

This being XS, upgrade, go big or go home. Ok, if you don't have that attitude & you don't care about synthetic benchmarks, only move if games are only playable at settings you find unacceptable. Whatever comes out next gen will be another 10%+ jump in performance & that might just be the time, assuming the power inefficiencies are still there.

[Xello]

Whatever comes out next gen will be another 10%+ jump in performance & that might just be the time, assuming the power inefficiencies are still there.

As far as advice to the OP I would agree with this, I went from a 680 to a 980 few weeks ago and I still see it as a stop-gap gap card and will be selling it to upgrade to whatever number they put on the card that has the next process node on it (the 20nm that should have been on the 980 but was delayed due to TSCM or whatever) since as impressive as the efficiencies are on the 900s they should be rather more impressive once that happens.