GTX 690 Worth it?

[ShaunW500]

So I'm building a new build and looking at options for graphics card. I've been looking at the GTX 690, reason why is because I want a graphics card that can play the games on max or near to max for next couple if years. Not a GPU that will last on those settings for 2 years. People keep saying to get 2 GTX 670s but problem with that is

*Less cool air to 2 GPUs because how close they are

*Problems that SLI have, micro shuttering ect.

The GTX 690 is on a single board so the SLI problems we all know shouldn't occur with 2 GPUs on same board.

So my question is, is a GTX 690 worth it?

Resolution I will play at is 1080p.

[Zuhairster]

Yes and No, if you have the money go for it, if you just like to play it on 1080p GTX 680 with 2GB GDDR5 would be enough unless you are going for a higher resolution which requires more graphic memory.

If i got the money i would go for GTX 690 but if dont i would go for GTX 680 and save up allitle more money later on for another GTX 680

if you are worried about heat on the two GPUs, there is always liquid cooling if u dare to go that route

[ShaunW500]

Yes and No, if you have the money go for it, if you just like to play it on 1080p GTX 680 with 2GB GDDR5 would be enough unless you are going for a higher resolution which requires more graphic memory.

If i got the money i would go for GTX 690 but if dont i would go for GTX 680 and save up allitle more money later on for another GTX 680

if you are worried about heat on the two GPUs, there is always liquid cooling if u dare to go that route

Problem that is stop me getting 2 gtx 680s is the problems SLI has where as GTX 690 2 gpus are on same board. I do have the money for GTX 690, other problem is all the GTX 690s have reference coolers there no aftermarket coolers.

[Broxigar]

IMHO I would not recommend going for the 690. Get a 7970 or 680 and add another if needed a year or 2 down the line and save yourself a small pile of money.

The card might be very fast and powerful now, but say a year down the line the developers brings out new tech in games that is required to run at high-max settings. If your 690 doesn't have that then you won't be able to play at high/max

I would recommend to stick with a 2yr upgrade cycle, e.g. 7970 / 680 or get the 89xx or 7xx cards that will be out in a few months.

[Zuhairster]

Yes and No, if you have the money go for it, if you just like to play it on 1080p GTX 680 with 2GB GDDR5 would be enough unless you are going for a higher resolution which requires more graphic memory.

If i got the money i would go for GTX 690 but if dont i would go for GTX 680 and save up allitle more money later on for another GTX 680

if you are worried about heat on the two GPUs, there is always liquid cooling if u dare to go that route

dont worry about the heat, as long as you dont overclock it too much it would not be a problem

690 reference coolers are good enough for playing games or even a little bit of overclocking

[ShaunW500]

What GTX 680 would you recommend. Asus, evga, MSI ect...

[ShaunW500]

IMHO I would not recommend going for the 690. Get a 7970 or 680 and add another if needed a year or 2 down the line and save yourself a small pile of money.

The card might be very fast and powerful now, but say a year down the line the developers brings out new tech in games that is required to run at high-max settings. If your 690 doesn't have that then you won't be able to play at high/max

I would recommend to stick with a 2yr upgrade cycle, e.g. 7970 / 680 or get the 89xx or 7xx cards that will be out in a few months.

What GTX 680 would you recommend. Asus, evga, MSI ect...

[killerx525]

If you want quietness then the Asus.

[Greg]

I would defiantly recommend a 7970, if you absolutely need that kind of performance, get another 7970 in crossfire. It benchmarks better than 690, and is cheaper.

[ShaunW500]

If you want quietness then the Asus.

I've heard problems with asus one. MSI lightning editon looks good.

[Broxigar]

IMHO I would not recommend going for the 690. Get a 7970 or 680 and add another if needed a year or 2 down the line and save yourself a small pile of money.

The card might be very fast and powerful now, but say a year down the line the developers brings out new tech in games that is required to run at high-max settings. If your 690 doesn't have that then you won't be able to play at high/max

I would recommend to stick with a 2yr upgrade cycle, e.g. 7970 / 680 or get the 89xx or 7xx cards that will be out in a few months.

I'm not really up to date on nVidia cards. But I'd stick to the Big3 MSI, Asus and Gigabyte.

[Dim]

My opinion is to get the single best graphics card you can at this time. The 7970 M. Platinum is very hit-and-miss, so something like the GTX 680 Lightning Edition from MSI, or even just a reasonable ASUS GTX 680 would be a good plan.

Playing at 1080p, this card will probably last you two years, in my opinion.

The good thing about single card is that in two years time, you can probably sell it for ~$200 and buy the single best card for 2015.

I just realised someone else said pretty much the same thing, but I'll just reinforce it :P

I don't recommend a 7970 for only 1080p; a GTX 680 with 2GB of VRAM will do fine.

If you find you really need a second card, get a motherboard with 3 PCI slots. Put one slot in between two air-cooled 680s and you will be fine.

Don't worry about that, honestly.

This will overclock like a beast:

http://www.ncix.com/products/?sku=78169&vpn=GTX680-DC2-4GD5&manufacture=ASUS

This is a reference card, but still clocked very high and cheaper:

http://www.ncix.com/products/?sku=71942&vpn=02G-P4-3686-KR&manufacture=eVGA&promoid=1067

I recommend the bottom one and liquid cooling it if you want pure silence.

You can try this waterblock

http://www.ncix.com/products/?sku=75522&vpn=5060175583437&manufacture=XSPC%20Asia%20Co%2E%20Ltd%2E

[Dim]

To add in finality;

Two liquid cooled 680s will cost about the same as an aircooled 690, maybe less.

It will also have 10-15% better performance, and I doubt you'll see much microstuttering. Generally that's mostly seen on low-end cards that have been crossfired or SLI'd to get high-end card performance (such as dual 7770s or 660s, for example).

[randal007]

I recommend the EVGA 680, i Absolutely love this card. Now for 1080p i doubt you need a second one. I also dont think you would have much of a problem with micro stuttering, they seem to be very cool cards. If you were to sli them i would get a card that exhaust the air out of the case. 690 would be awesome to, you won't be disappointed with eather setup.

[ShaunW500]

To add in finality;

Two liquid cooled 680s will cost about the same as an aircooled 690, maybe less.

It will also have 10-15% better performance, and I doubt you'll see much microstuttering. Generally that's mostly seen on low-end cards that have been crossfired or SLI'd to get high-end card performance (such as dual 7770s or 660s, for example).

So you don't recommend gtx 690?

[Dim]

To add in finality;

Two liquid cooled 680s will cost about the same as an aircooled 690, maybe less.

It will also have 10-15% better performance, and I doubt you'll see much microstuttering. Generally that's mostly seen on low-end cards that have been crossfired or SLI'd to get high-end card performance (such as dual 7770s or 660s, for example).

So you don't recommend gtx 690?

I would personally like it due to the fact that it LOOKS AWESOME in the stock cooler.

Really, though, two 680s on a good motherboard sounds better to me.

Either way though, the 690 looks awesome and at least it gets the job done.

Like I said, though, for 1080p a single GTX 680 is more than enough. Getting more is just unnecessary unless you have a higher resolution.

How to graphics card: Get the single best graphics card you can afford--the 690 is good, but unnecessary with 1080p.

[killerx525]

If you want quietness then the Asus.

There isn't really nay particular problems with the Asus.

[ShaunW500]

To add in finality;

Two liquid cooled 680s will cost about the same as an aircooled 690, maybe less.

It will also have 10-15% better performance, and I doubt you'll see much microstuttering. Generally that's mostly seen on low-end cards that have been crossfired or SLI'd to get high-end card performance (such as dual 7770s or 660s, for example).

Okay. I've decided I'm going to get GTX 680. Do you recommend get 2 of them or just the one, I do have the money to get 2.

[Dim]

To add in finality;

Two liquid cooled 680s will cost about the same as an aircooled 690, maybe less.

It will also have 10-15% better performance, and I doubt you'll see much microstuttering. Generally that's mostly seen on low-end cards that have been crossfired or SLI'd to get high-end card performance (such as dual 7770s or 660s, for example).

Please post your full build so I can make a more indepth recommendation.

If you have the money for two GTX 680s, there may be a vital upgrade you can make instead of the second 680.

I would recommend a single 680, but again you may be missing something or something might bottleneck the GPU :)

[ShaunW500]

To add in finality;

Two liquid cooled 680s will cost about the same as an aircooled 690, maybe less.

It will also have 10-15% better performance, and I doubt you'll see much microstuttering. Generally that's mostly seen on low-end cards that have been crossfired or SLI'd to get high-end card performance (such as dual 7770s or 660s, for example).

Here my build.

CPU: intel i5 3570k OC to 4.0Ghz

Memory: 16GB 1600Mhz Memory

Motherboard: MSI Z77 mPower

CPU Heatsink: Corsair H100i

Case: Unknown

Graphics card: Unknown

Power supply: 700-1000watts

[Art Vandelay]

No, get two 670s and you will save a ton of money and not lose a whole lot of performance.

Even better, get two 7950s, they are the best value, right now.

[Blankie440]

IMHO I would not recommend going for the 690. Get a 7970 or 680 and add another if needed a year or 2 down the line and save yourself a small pile of money. The card might be very fast and powerful now' date=' but say a year down the line the developers brings out new tech in games that is required to run at high-max settings. If your 690 doesn't have that then you won't be able to play at high/max I would recommend to stick with a 2yr upgrade cycle, e.g. 7970 / 680 or get the 89xx or 7xx cards that will be out in a few months. [/quote']

I'm sorry to interject but I don't agree with this. Check Tomshardware and tell me how well the old GTX 590 fairs against this generation of cards and then you should have a good idea of how long a dual GPU single PCB card will crush games at max everything. That being said, I'm not entirely convinced that you need the 690 as 1080p gaming can be done extremely well with the GTX 670 and you save yourself a good amount of walking around money. The % of gaming performance between the 670 and the 680 is so negledgable that it isn't worth the extra $100+ dollars in my opinion. If I was in your shoes I would either do a single 670 or if you're truly worried about future performance then SLI two 670's and you will not be disappointed. By all means it's completely up to you I am just pointing out another viable option.

[LapX]

On a 690, this is basicaly two 680s, the sli problem STILL occurs + for 1080p gaming, this kind of configuration is overkill. Buy a 670 (because the 680 is not a great value right now, the 670 is only 5% to 10% slower) and in the future when you need it, sell your 670 and buy a 770,780,870,880 or whatever the case may be.

[Blankie440]

Also I'd recommend the MSI PE GTX 670 as a powerhouse of a card with great performance and reliablilty. Plus the overhead for overclocking it is greatly increased by the triple over voltage capabilities.

[Zuhairster]

To add in finality;

Two liquid cooled 680s will cost about the same as an aircooled 690, maybe less.

It will also have 10-15% better performance, and I doubt you'll see much microstuttering. Generally that's mostly seen on low-end cards that have been crossfired or SLI'd to get high-end card performance (such as dual 7770s or 660s, for example).

i think by going 2 GTX 680 it would be a bottle neck on the CPU side