680 2 way SLI or 690?

[Gishan]

You could get a single 680 and see if it is enough for your usage. For a single monitor it should be fine for most games.

If you really want more performance then get another 680. If not you'll save a lot of money. :)

 

Generally: don't wait for next gen tech to hit the market... in the most cases you will get slightly better performance for a lot more money.

And at the time it arrives there'll be roumors about the next gen. :)

[Gishan]

Oh and I agree with the others on the 690 having to little memory!

 

I've had a 690 for about half a year and was not very satisfied with it... fortunately I could return it to my retailer.

This card is kinda weird - for a single monitor setup it would be an overkill in the most situations and for a triple monitor setup its at its limit due to the 2GB...

[Acefire]

Neither, that vram bottleneck. Go for titan hands down. And don't fall for the GTX 680 4gb scam. That 256 bit buffer chokes hard with 4gb's with barely 200gb/s bandwidth. The 680/70 were only made to really shine with 2gb of vram, which doesn't cut it anymore. I would also say I am getting a little weary of recommending 3gbs of vram with the way bioshock and crysis plow through it. 

[Gishan]

Neither, that vram bottleneck. Go for titan hands down. And don't fall for the GTX 680 4gb scam. That 256 bit buffer chokes hard with 4gb's with barely 200gb/s bandwidth. The 680/70 were only made to really shine with 2gb of vram, which doesn't cut it anymore. I would also say I am getting a little weary of recommending 3gbs of vram with the way bioshock and crysis plow through it. 

 

 

He wrote that he doesn't have the money for a Titan (or even two).

So there isn't much left except going for a 680 4GB or to switch to the red team.

[Acefire]

Well just don't fall for the 4gb 680's. Thats just a scam. 

[physX]

I would go with two GTX 680. They are about 5% faster than one GTX 690.

If you buy a gtx 690 , you shouldn't buy an another gtx 690 because 4-way SLI sucks.(believe me)

The gtx 680s will give you a better good looking PC.

But they will consume more power than one 690.

Hope i helped you.

The choice is in your own

GOOD LUCK :)

[Acefire]

2gb of vram halfway through 2013 is a bad recommendation all around. Either { 7970 / Titan / wait for next gen}. Those are the only choice you won't be kicking yourself in the but for making in 6 months. 

[Guest Gazzer96]

Woa, stop right there.  You don't need dual cards.  Single 680 will do you fine.

I'm trying to make it future proof.

[Guest Gazzer96]

Well just don't fall for the 4gb 680's. Thats just a scam. 

I'm going to need 4GB of VRAM for what I am planning to do with the PC.

[R4STABAN]

You best option if you *need* an nvidia card right now is to get a single 670 2gb and sell it later.

If you don't need one then wait for next gen which is next month or so

Buying 2 680s now and running 1080p until christmas is like setting fire to your money.

[Acefire]

4gb on gtx cards are bottlenecked because of 256bit buffer.

www.pcper.com/files/review/2013-04-28/a_singleGPU%20(1).png

[killerx525]

4GB 680 is not worth paying for as  a 7970 will perform better at high resolution while coming at a lower price.

[ARod]

I'm trying to make it future proof.

 

So, you're going to pay double for how much more performance?  FYI, it's nowhere near double the performance.  Get a single beefy card.  Save the money for your next single beefy card in two years.  

[Luumi]

Do not waste your money on titans if you only want to play at 1080p. Even at 1440p two 680s would be much better for your money, even only the 2gb ones. You can buy 4gb ones if you find them for a good price, but my recommendation for you is either two 680s or two 7970s if you want to invest this amount of money in 3D power. I have two 7970s and they offer very good amount of power for 3D applications and are probably the best cards alongside with 7950s for the money. 7970 is as good as 680 in general use and you can get one here in Europe for only 330 euros now! Two 7970s or 680s are better than a single titan and cost much less.

[kaneandtaker]

690 is basically just 2x 680s in SLI

Granted the 690 is downclocked a bit but you can overclock them to stock 680s

 

You're comparing the same thing IMO

[SalomaoBRs]

I recommend the SLI 680 2 way, because you will have more performance.

The next video cards are coming, i recommend you wait for them.

[MzCatieB]

Titan

[Bubben]

The way I see it, the 690 is stupid. You shouldn't have to rely on a dual gpu solution for single monitor gaming (or at least not if you're going for 60fps) and if you want high res then the limited vram in the 690 will hold you back.

[dav1257]

I'm using a 680 now and personally i felt a bit silly shortly afterwards for not just getting a 670 and saving a bit of cash. 670 would have easily handled anything i have been playing in the last year.

 

As linus has sed numerous times b4, a general rule of thumb is to take the 2nd best solution (single gpu), as this tends to be the best bang for the buck.

 

I would usually say not to wait for the next best thing because u will always be waiting, however the 700s should not be that far away.

 

Also with games becoming more vram intensive im sure cards will follow suit and it will interesting to see what direction this heads in.

 

Nvidia will always produce something that is slightly less than what u really want so the next batch of rumours will stir excitement.

 

Long story short . . . i think i would wait a little while and get 2 x 770 with decent amount of vram.

[Guest Gazzer96]

690 is basically just 2x 680s in SLI

Granted the 690 is downclocked a bit but you can overclock them to stock 680s

 

You're comparing the same thing IMO

Thats what I was thinking, but comments from what I have read say that I should go with 680 2 way SLI even when I can get a single 690 for less.

[Guest Gazzer96]

I'm using a 680 now and personally i felt a bit silly shortly afterwards for not just getting a 670 and saving a bit of cash. 670 would have easily handled anything i have been playing in the last year.

 

As linus has sed numerous times b4, a general rule of thumb is to take the 2nd best solution (single gpu), as this tends to be the best bang for the buck.

 

I would usually say not to wait for the next best thing because u will always be waiting, however the 700s should not be that far away.

 

Also with games becoming more vram intensive im sure cards will follow suit and it will interesting to see what direction this heads in.

 

Nvidia will always produce something that is slightly less than what u really want so the next batch of rumours will stir excitement.

 

Long story short . . . i think i would wait a little while and get 2 x 770 with decent amount of vram.

My laptop has 3GB of VRAM (if you have read my last comments you may know that already) and on Garry's Mod I have a problem with running out of VRAM, even with 3GB of it! So really I do need at least 4GB of VRAM. Plus, Source Film Maker can end up using over 2GB. So 2GB GPU is not an option.

 

I recently bought a game called 'The Secret World' and it is really good, but there are points when the FPS sinks like a stone and near to freezing, due to the fact that I am running out of VRAM.

[Guest Gazzer96]

I've just found that the price for Asus' Titan is starting to drop in the UK (maybe due the fact not many people are buying them) and is now less than the EVGA's 690 and not far that far off from being less than Asus' 690. If it drops even more than I may well could afford it, or should I still wait for 780 coming out?

 

Please don't say that I should not get it because it would be overkill for a Titan with 6GB of VRAM, because It is nice to know that you will not have to worry about running out of VRAM when doing video editing or doing 3D rendering, which I am after doing when I have the build.

 

I am planning on trying to replace/add least amount of parts on the PC over the years to save money, So it is important that the parts are chosen.

[Guest Gazzer96]

4GB 680 is not worth paying for as  a 7970 will perform better at high resolution while coming at a lower price.

I am going with Nvidia because of the PhysX and some people may think that it is rubbish, but from what I have seen it looks really good. Plus, Nvidia have CUDA cores.

 

Would get AMD if I didn't care about PhysX and just wanted a PC purely for gaming.

[Acefire]

Bro Physx is a gaming thing bro. Nivida is a bad choice now. There is no reason to pick the less performance cards. AMD wins. More Vram. Cheaper. Better performance. Game bundles. 

 

4gb 680 is a scam. And if you get that then you're a fool. 680 2gb is vram bottleneck. = Get AMD

 

AMD is more performance= Get AMD

 

Amd is Cheaper = Get AMD

 

AMD game bundles = Get AMD

 

Nvidia has physx in 4 important games. 

 

Nvidia is coming out with a new series this month. 

 

 

BRO wait or get AMD. Thats the only choice. 

[Shikarikato]

I don't see PhysX being too much better than OpenCL especially considering OpenCL is getting a lot faster than Cuda in more applications.