Hi End GPU 780GTX - Performance or VRAM ??

[56RAF_klem]

I have delayed too long buying the EVGA GTX780 6GB and EVGA have confirmed it is end of life. I cannot find one anywhere. Also I have seen several reviews that say 6GB is not really necessary (in respect of what?? well as usual they were looking at FPS's).

The EVGA GTX780 3GB seems to stand head and shoulders above the other 3GB 780s so now I face the choice of the EVGA GTX780 3GB or an MSI or ASUS 6GB if they are still available (only pre-order at Scan.co.uk).

Question is, do I really need 6GB? If that is a definite advantage in CoD (and DCS) is it better to have more memory on those not-so-hot cards or the faster 3GB card? Or even the 3GB 780Ti?

I should point out it is for triple screen at 5760 x 1080. Also a fourth screen for VC although I have my old 8800 or GTX570 for that but also I am using the fourth screen in DCS to take in the instruments, so potentially 7680 x 1080.

Any thoughts welcome especially from anyone running a 780.
And no, I can't afford two of them!

[vranac]

Klem, look at this test.
http://forums.evga.com/tm.aspx?m=1959317

All of this kind of confirms what I've long suspected, and that is that nVidia knows what they're doing and there is a reason the 780 got 3GB just like there is a reason the GK104 cards have 2GB. nVidia builds these things and knows their limitations. I really don't believe you can take advantage of more than 3GB of VRAM with the GK110 chip for the vast majority of people because they don't have the muscle. GK104 chips probably can't really take advantage of anything past 2GB because they don't have the muscle. All I'm saying is there is a reason the reference memory buffers are what they are.

IMO, 3GB is enough for you if:

- you run 5760x1080 or lower and require above 40 FPS averages
- you are running two or less cards

You may actually surpass 3GB if:

- you are running three or more cards
- you are satisfied with sub 40 FPS averages
- you are running surround 1440P/1600P (even then I think you would have to have 3 or 4 cards to be playable above 40 FPS)

Regarding of which brand you'll buy I can tell you one thing, all those cards are practicaly the same. Manufacturers can put a better cooling or more beefy VRM section and that's it.
But all those coolers are very similar in performance so you can choose the cheapest one. For the example ASUS card or motherboard is usually 20-30 £ more expensive for the same features.
When you look at the RMA statistics they are similar.

[vranac]

Just to add, the new Maxwell GPUs are out so you should consider gtx970, it should be cheaper and it's faster than gtx780.

[56RAF_klem]

Just to add, the new Maxwell GPUs are out so you should consider gtx970, it should be cheaper and it's faster than gtx780.

You beat me to it !

This morning I received an email from scan.co.uk about the 900's. That's definitely the way I will go. I found some reviews that put it ahead of the 780Ti's. Less cores but higher peformance, lower power, cooler and about the same cost as a 780 Ti. I'll probably jump in and get the 980, around the same price as a 780Ti although about £150 more than 970.

[vranac]

Well, whatever, but IMO it's too much for some 15% faster card when you could get very close to 980 performance with moving few sliders in MSI afterburner.
I saw that 970's are OCing very well ~ 1400 MHz

[56RAF_klem]

Well, whatever, but IMO it's too much for some 15% faster card when you could get very close to 980 performaance with moving few sliders in MSI afterburner.
I saw that 970's are OCing very well ~ 1400 MHz

Well, normally I'd be stretched to buy a even a 780 but I've been saving for a major graphics upgrade for over a year. Even so I'll be using mismatched screen sizes for a while but will sort that out in about 6 months time.

To be honest I'm a bit wary of overclocking. My i7-950 3.06Ghz system was bought o/c'd at 4.2Ghz but ran very hot in FSX so I backed it off to 4Ghz, then started getting memory timing errors so knocked it back to 3.6G. One day I'll dig into memory voltages etc and wind it up again.

Anyway, thanks for the help.

[Remon]

Klem, look at this test.
http://forums.evga.com/tm.aspx?m=1959317



Regarding of which brand you'll buy I can tell you one thing, all those cards are practicaly the same. Manufacturers can put a better cooling or more beefy VRM section and that's it.
But all those coolers are very similar in performance so you can choose the cheapest one. For the example ASUS card or motherboard is usually 20-30 £ more expensive for the same features.
When you look at the RMA statistics they are similar.

There are multiple tests that show extra VRAM is useful, where the R9 290X beats the 780TI because it has extra memory. It helps at least with higher resolutions and/or bigger textures. There's a reason that NVIDIA has upped the memory 980 and 970 has over the last generation. Both come with 4GBs now.

Btw, if I'd buy an NVIDIA card, which I won't, it'd be the 970. Its bang for buck is tremendous.


PLUS: Something that hasn't been talked in the forums, and I hate to hype NVIDIA, they've added SuperSampling on the GFE now, its the card control program, with a feature they call DSR, Dynamic Super Resolution, making it very easy to control SS. This should help a lot with the lack of Anti Aliasing in CloD.

[vranac]

Well, normally I'd be stretched to buy a even a 780 but I've been saving for a major graphics upgrade for over a year. Even so I'll be using mismatched screen sizes for a while but will sort that out in about 6 months time.

To be honest I'm a bit wary of overclocking. My i7-950 3.06Ghz system was bought o/c'd at 4.2Ghz but ran very hot in FSX so I backed it off to 4Ghz, then started getting memory timing errors so knocked it back to 3.6G. One day I'll dig into memory voltages etc and wind it up again.

Anyway, thanks for the help.

You're welcome Klem. I hope that you'll be satisfied with your purchase.

About your OC, maybe you messed something with memory timings or multiplier (for RAM).
GPU's are much easier to OC than CPU's, you just drag a slider and if it's not stable you just lower it a bit then test again.
I just mentioned that because you can have a preformance of 980 for free ( you can OC 980 also of course).


@Remon I don't want to go into that nvidia vs ATI thing but I haven't seen any test where 290x is better than 780Ti at 4k or 5k resolutions.
Those cards are close in performance but 290x can be a bit faster in AMD sponsored game only. And 290x is a better choice because it's much cheaper for a similar performance.
I prefer nvidia only because I don't play anything else but il2.

The point of my post which is obvious from that test where it's confirmed that if you push AA and AF on those high settings and resolutions
gtx780 just don't have enough power to utilise more VRAM, it will run ~20 or less fps.

[SorcererDave]

For what it's worth I have a 780 6GB and it hasn't let me down yet. Runs everything I throw at it on a minimum of 60 fps (including Cliffs, even with its horrid optimization) and crucially for me, it renders video and 3D modelling work in the blink of an eye. I'm not convinced by this talk about using more than 3GB being impossible - I've done comparative performance tests with a friend using the 780ti and while his average FPS was better, the rendering speed was sluggish by comparison.

[ATAG_((dB))]

@Remon I don't want to go into that nvidia vs ATI thing but I haven't seen any test where 290x is better than 780Ti at 4k or 5k resolutions.
Those cards are close in performance but 290x can be a bit faster in AMD sponsored game only. And 290x is a better choice because it's much cheaper for a similar performance.
I prefer nvidia only because I don't play anything else but il2.

It's because you didn't search vranac. This is exactly where ATI excel. Voila http://www.anandtech.com/show/7930/t...295x2-review/6


To answer your questions I run 2 monitors, one normal 1080p and one 4k, that is like 5 1080p monitors. When I play CloD I use ALL my Vram that's 4Gb for my R9 295x2. It also depend what are you gonna do with your PC, gaming or computing and of course your budget

[56RAF_klem]

Thanks again guys.

I will stick with the 980 simply because I have the money (for once!) and it may just future-proof me a little more. I don't know what Edge will do for us - some say an improvement in performance - and there is the new DCS WWII map coming next year. Also I will be running those 4 screens.

So, once again thanks for the inputs. The release of the 970/980 made the choice a lot easier, especially on top of your comments

[ATAG_((dB))]

The GTX 980 have 4 GB I think. Go for it http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16814487068

I find the best place to have answer for my tech questions is www.overclock.net

o7

[vranac]

It's because you didn't search vranac. This is exactly where ATI excel. Voila http://www.anandtech.com/show/7930/t...295x2-review/6


To answer your questions I run 2 monitors, one normal 1080p and one 4k, that is like 5 1080p monitors. When I play CloD I use ALL my Vram that's 4Gb for my R9 295x2. It also depend what are you gonna do with your PC, gaming or computing and of course your budget

I don't have to search Decibel, I follow hardware very closely. We are talking about single GPU setup here, so I don't understand your point.

[ATAG_((dB))]

Your right bad reading from my part, I assume multiple GPU's for 4 or 5K since I expected no one to game at 4k with only one GPU

o7