GTX 970 SLI vs GTX 1070 (Buy a second card, or buy the 1070?)

[MeesterJackson]

I originally made a post similar to this about a few weeks ago. However, that was before the price drops starting kicking in for the GTX 970 and originally, I was going to get the 1080. However, I've decided to be realistic instead of just being like "omg I could be future proof for years" like I initially started out when the 1080 first launched. I've got a 1080p 144hz monitor. So yeah, I don't really need the 1080, it'd be overkill. The reason I want to upgrade is because my single GTX 970 doesn't really take advantage of my monitors refresh rate, especially with most newer games. Not to mention, with some games like GTA V, Fallout 4, and even Borderlands 2/Pre-Sequel (with PhysX maxed out) I see some heavy frame dips from time to time that can even go below 40 FPS which REALLY bothers me. I'm a person that likes to max out my games and see the FPS shoot up so that I'm really getting good use out of my monitor. 

Now I get it, SLI = hotter and sometimes isn't compatible with some games thus rendering it useless. With that being said, again, the 970 is going down in price. A single 970 at $270-330 USD (depending on which one I get) vs a single 1070 at 440+ USD. The 1070 usually beats out the GTX Titan X in most games...though so do two 970's. Also, I know the 1070 has like 8GB of VRAM and the 970 has basically 3.5GB of VRAM, but...I game at 1080p so VRAM really isn't an issue and wont be for still a few years most likely. 

As you can tell, I'm kinda leaning towards the SLI 970's...but my decision is still far from final overall and I do have a couple of weeks before I actually purchase my upgrade, so with that being said, I wanted to hear your opinions on what my final decision should be and why. I'd really appreciate it. 

PS: Sorry for the semi-long post....I tend to type a lot lol...

[totjup5]

At this point i'd go for the 1070. it won't perform quite as well when SLI scaling is perfect but it will be far more consistent, and it will likely get better driver support for longer. And that's coming from someone who ran 970s in SLI for the last year and a half.

[TheGamingGuy17]

If you go for the 970 sli you can have trouble with games that dont support sli scaling and as you said you have more vram in the 1070 so you can future proof and if you wait for board members card like asus, evga, and msi you probably can get a lower price then $440.

[BbsMentos]

If you have the money I think you'll be better with a 1070. Less power consumption, less heat and less problems with games that don't support SLI

[MeesterJackson]

1 minute ago, TheGamingGuy17 said:

If you go for the 970 sli you can have trouble with games that dont support sli scaling and as you said you have more vram in the 1070 so you can future proof.

Well, if you read the whole post, you'd realize all I do is game at 1080p, so 3.5GB isn't super bad for me. I'm not SUPER concerned about "future proofing" as I originally was. 

[Imakuni]

970 SLI isn't a smart move anymore. It was already a bad idea when the 980ti came, now it's even worse of a thought. Get yourself a 1070, it'll be perfect for 1080 144hz.

[Ninjanometry]

After buying a used GTX 690, I have learned the hard way:
Get the best single card, (and secondarily the MOST VRAM) you can for your money and by the time you've saved up enough for a 2nd card, it should be discounted!

[adams]

1070

[dizmo]

I'd go with the 1070, for numerous reasons. Less chance of failure, less power consumption and heat, etc.

It's also the cheapest, if you're trying to justify it that way. Sell your 970 for $225, and it only costs you $200.

 

As for the memory issue, games might start to utilize more. Especially now that it's widely available to them. You've never messed around with the higher quality skins?

 

 

[MeesterJackson]

1 minute ago, Imakuni said:

970 SLI isn't a smart move anymore. It was already a bad idea when the 980ti came, now it's even worse of a thought. Get yourself a 1070, it'll be perfect for 1080 144hz.

I wouldn't say "it was worse" the main reason it wasn't smart to get two 970's is because the 980 Ti was actually cheaper than the two cards at the time. 

[MeesterJackson]

1 minute ago, dizmo said:

I'd go with the 1070, for numerous reasons. Less chance of failure, less power consumption and heat, etc.

It's also the cheapest, if you're trying to justify it that way. Sell your 970 for $225, and it only costs you $200.

 

As for the memory issue, games might start to utilize more. Especially now that it's widely available to them. You've never messed around with the higher quality skins?

 

 

Higher quality skins? 

[Vortez]

Powerful single gpu always is better choice than SLI or Crossfire but for 1080p GTX 1070 is little bit a overkill.

[dizmo]

1 minute ago, MeesterJackson said:

Higher quality skins? 

Texture packs! That's what I was looking for. Couldn't remember what it was called when I was writing the post.

[MeesterJackson]

2 minutes ago, Ninjanometry said:

After buying a used GTX 690, I have learned the hard way:
Get the best single card, (and secondarily the MOST VRAM) you can for your money and by the time you've saved up enough for a 2nd card, it should be discounted!

I don't have the money for a 1080. If I wanted one, I'd probably need to buy one with a credit card and I really don't want to spend months paying it off. 

[MeesterJackson]

1 minute ago, Vortez said:

Powerful single gpu always is better choice than SLI or Crossfire but for 1080p GTX 1070 is little bit a overkill.

Not for newer games with a 144hz monitor its not. Also, like I said, I sometimes get massive frame dips with some newer games. So the 1070 would be fine. 

1 minute ago, dizmo said:

Texture packs! That's what I was looking for. Couldn't remember what it was called when I was writing the post.

Hmm...I DO have a lot of mods for Skyrim, but most of them aren't super heavy in VRAM usage for the most part. (I've just started playing Fallout 4, I plan on beating the main story before downloading mods). 

[dizmo]

18 hours ago, MeesterJackson said:

Not for newer games with a 144hz monitor its not. Also, like I said, I sometimes get massive frame dips with some newer games. So the 1070 would be fine. 

Hmm...I DO have a lot of mods for Skyrim, but most of them aren't super heavy in VRAM usage for the most part. (I've just started playing Fallout 4, I plan on beating the main story before downloading mods). 

I'd go with a single 1070 then. If you ever want to use the texture packs, you'll have the ability, unlike having a 3.5gb card and maybe not.

If you check out this sites review, it's rather interesting. On average the SLI 1070's get a 50% increase in performance. The 970 to 1070 is about a 40ish % increase.

Bench

Looking at those, I'd say that you'd likely see very similar performance between a 1070 and SLI 970's....though you'd be down the VRAM.

[RyGuy99]

19 hours ago, MeesterJackson said:

... so 3.5GB isn't super bad for me.

7 minutes ago, dizmo said:

I'd go with a single 1070 then. If you ever want to use the texture packs, you'll have the ability, unlike having a 3.5gb card and maybe not.

*4GB

Also I haven't run into issues with HD texture packs with my 970 at all. Perhaps in the future I will but the 4GB of vram has held up extremely well so far.

 

[dizmo]

27 minutes ago, RyGuy99 said:

*4GB

Also I haven't run into issues with HD texture packs with my 970 at all. Perhaps in the future I will but the 4GB of vram has held up extremely well so far.

 

While technically true, accessing the extra 500mb does have a 4-6% performance hit.

Why use 2 cards, have the issues that come with it, as well as half the memory when you can save $200 and get a card will a full 8GB and basically the same performance?

[RyGuy99]

21 minutes ago, dizmo said:

While technically true, accessing the extra 500mb does have a 4-6% performance hit.

Why use 2 cards, have the issues that come with it, as well as half the memory when you can save $200 and get a card will a full 8GB and basically the same performance?

Not a performance hit that I have noticed at all. And I'm just talking about the memory not the 2 cards vs 1. People have to put the 3.5GB vram myth to rest. It's 4GB 

[dizmo]

50 minutes ago, RyGuy99 said:

Not a performance hit that I have noticed at all. And I'm just talking about the memory not the 2 cards vs 1. People have to put the 3.5GB vram myth to rest. It's 4GB 

It has 4gb, technically. 500mb of that is slower memory. Check out the PCPer article if you'd like clarification on the matter.

 

[RyGuy99]

4 minutes ago, dizmo said:

It has 4gb, technically. 500mb of that is slower memory. Check out the PCPer article if you'd like clarification on the matter.

 

Please save your breath I know the specs I heavily research everything before I buy. I still bought the card and it hasn't affected me in the slightest despite me pushing my card to the limit.

[MeesterJackson]

2 hours ago, dizmo said:

I'd go with a single 1070 then. If you ever want to use the texture packs, you'll have the ability, unlike having a 3.5gb card and maybe not.

If you check out this sites review, it's rather interesting. On average the SLI 1070's get a 50% increase in performance. The 970 to 1070 is about a 40ish % increase.

Bench

Looking at those, I'd say that you'd likely see very similar performance between a 1070 and SLI 970's....though you'd be down the VRAM.

Well that was my point when I made this post. I knew the 970's would give me about 1070 performance if not better when 2-way SLI'd. I'd just have less VRAM and it'd be hotter (and I guess SOME games might not be compatible). 

45 minutes ago, RyGuy99 said:

Please save your breath I know the specs I heavily research everything before I buy. I still bought the card and it hasn't affected me in the slightest despite me pushing my card to the limit.

It's 3.5GB with 500MB of slower VRAM added. If you "heavily research everything" you'd know this. There's no need to be a jerk to someone just because they're trying to correct you...especially when you ARE wrong. 

[RyGuy99]

1 minute ago, MeesterJackson said:

Well that was my point when I made this post. I knew the 970's would give me about 1070 performance if not better when 2-way SLI'd. I'd just have less VRAM and it'd be hotter (and I guess SOME games might not be compatible). 

It's 3.5GB with 500MB of slower VRAM added. If you "heavily research everything" you'd know this. There's no need to be a jerk to someone just because they're trying to correct you...especially when you ARE wrong. 

I literally agreed to the point. I didn't disagree at all. If you read my comment you would have understood that. I wasn't being a jerk just at all like you are. Knock it off!

[MeesterJackson]

1 minute ago, RyGuy99 said:

I literally agreed to the point. I didn't disagree at all. If you read my comment you would have understood that. I wasn't being a jerk just at all like you are. Knock it off!

It really didn't seem like it...lol 

[RyGuy99]

1 minute ago, MeesterJackson said:

It really didn't seem like it...lol 

Well I did. That's what the "don't waste your breath" was for. I already knew that haha