Sign up for a new account or log in here:
also @ TechSpot: Asus' new lineup of Z87 Haswell motherboards revealed
Considering next-gen cards are still months away, we didn't expect to bring any more GPU reviews until the second quarter of 2013. However, we realized there was a gap in our current-gen coverage: triple-monitor gaming. In fact, it's been almost two years since we pitted the HD 6990 and GTX 590 against each other to see how they could cope with the stress of running games at resolutions of up to 7680x1600.
We're going to mix things up a little this time. Instead of using each camp's ultra-pricey dual-GPU card (or the new $999 Titan), we're going to see how more affordable Crossfire and SLI setups handle triple-monitor gaming compared to today's single-GPU flagships.
On AMD's side, we'll test a pair of HD 7850s (~$360) and an HD 7970 (~$430), while Nvidia's corner will feature two GTX 660 Tis (~$580) and the venerable GTX 680 (~$470).
Related Products from Product Finder
AMD Radeon HD 7850 2GB GDDR5 PCIe
The AMD ATI Radeon HD 7850 measures 24cm (9.4 in) long. The core clock frequency of the AMD ATI Radeon HD 7850 has been lowered from 1GHz to 860MHz. The GDDR5 memory still works at 1.2GHz, which is effectively 4.8GHz DDR. The HD 7850 has 1024 SPUs and 64 TAUs, while the ROPs remain at 32. It is also PCI Express 3.0-compatible
Nvidia GeForce GTX 680 2GB GDDR5 PCIe
The Nvidia GeForce GTX 680 contains four GPCs with a total of eight SMXs, 1536 CUDA cores, eight geometry units, four raster units, 128 texture units, and 32 ROP units. The base clock is 1006MHz, the GTX 680 also carries 2GB of GDDR5 VRAM running at 6008MHz with a 256-bit interface providing 6.0Gb/s of throughput. Dual six-pin power connectors feed the card's TDP of 195W.
AMD Radeon HD 7970 3GB GDDR5 PCIe
The AMD ATI Radeon HD 7970 measures 27 cm long (10.6 in), the GPU core is clocked at 925MHz, and the GDDR5 memory operates at the same frequency of 1375MHz (5.5GHz DDR). Still, pairing that frequency with a 384-bit memory bus gives the HD 7970 264GB/s of theoretical bandwidth. The HD 7970 carries 2048 SPUs, 128 TAUs and 32 ROPs, up 33% from 1536 SPUs and 96 TAUs, it's also the first PCI Express 3.0-compatible card.
User Comments: 64
Got something to say? Post a comment-
I'm saying people should decide where they want to be in gaming and purchase their CPU and GPU accordingly.
SLI and Crossfire should not even be an option to consider, if all they have is a budget CPU. I feel this review was about budget SLI/Crossfire configurations, not budget CPU's.
-
I've been using crossfire configuration for 5 years now and would never go back, having 2 cards for the game to use makes both the stress and temperatures lower for uses and therefore the cards will last longer. started off with 5850's and now have 7870's, there is no game which I cannot play max settings which is perfect
-
baN893 said:
Go Green Team!
rofl. It's good to see TechSpot hasn't lost their sense of humor
Great review btw, really appreciate the work put into this 
-
One could also argue, that if someone on a budget is following this guide to build a triple monitor setup, the (avg fps) results could be misleading. How are they to know how their (for example) 4 thread i5 will compare to a 12 thread i7?
I don't know... maybe that most games have a hard enough time using four threads as it stands? Last time I checked, it was mostly RTSs and some simulators that really took advantage of more than 2-4 threads.
-
Maybe you're too narrowed to see the sarcasm in my post. Read it again. The penny may drop but in your case...
Then tell jo5hh too, because it seems you're bad writing sarcasm; no quote, no exageration or an ending that put clears your sarcasm. I'm pretty sure I'm not the only one following your post who thought you were talking serious.
-
Footlong said:
Not to mention microstuttering that increases a lot in any dual chip solution. I prefer a single card. It's cheaper in my eletric bill.
-
baN893 said:One could also argue, that if someone on a budget is following this guide to build a triple monitor setup, the (avg fps) results could be misleading. How are they to know how their (for example) 4 thread i5 will compare to a 12 thread i7?
I don't feel like this should be a place for hypothetical arguments such as the one you are making. Just because you are trying to build a budget setup shouldn't mean that you lack basic understanding of CPU bottlenecks. If you are going to build a desktop and want to do it right (especially if you are going through reviews of triple monitor setups) you should have come across CPU reviews where it is evident that the FPS difference between an 1155 i5 and a 2011 i7 are seriously marginal.
In case any newbie who doesn't know about this, this is for you: [link]
-
Just thought I'd pitch in some useless info. I run a Core2 Quad @ 3.2ghz with a single Gigabyte 7850OC 2GB. I've just finished the sleeping dogs campaign at medium settings running 5760x1080 and while cleeeeeaarly not maxed out my frame rate never dropped low enough for me to notice or for it t break my immersion.
If I could fit a second gpu on this old matx mobo I would probably xfire my 7850 but that isn't going to happen. If anything this review has helped me to decide I'm better off selling my 7850 and buying a 7950 instead. Total cost will be about the same but with less hassle driver wise and no need to upgrade anything else.
-
No one would buy the $280 HIS 4GB HD7850 when a Gigabyte, XFX, HIS HD7950 is $20 away.
If I see someone try to do it like Gwen from the Ghost Machine, I would make like Jack.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZDkdD3jwAS4
I'm assuming you will conclude this way as I haven't even started to read the article yet, so thanks ahead for the lesson. On with the reading.
-
Amd tressfx open standard innovation,must see-
(tomb raider the first game to use revolutionary tressfx real time hair simulation)
http://blogs.amd.com/play/tressfx/
[link]
-
Souvs said:
Showdown of 7950 Crossfire vs 680 SLI at 5760*1080 (Eyefinity/Surround)
[link]
amd the god of performance and also price/performance especially at super-high resolution
Amd tressfx open standard innovation,must see-
(tomb raider the first game to use revolutionary tressfx real time hair simulation)
http://blogs.amd.com/play/tressfx/
[link]
-
JC713 said:
Just thought I'd pitch in some useless info. I run a Core2 Quad @ 3.2ghz with a single Gigabyte 7850OC 2GB. I've just finished the sleeping dogs campaign at medium settings running 5760x1080 and while cleeeeeaarly not maxed out my frame rate never dropped low enough for me to notice or for it t break my immersion.If I could fit a second gpu on this old matx mobo I would probably xfire my 7850 but that isn't going to happen. If anything this review has helped me to decide I'm better off selling my 7850 and buying a 7950 instead. Total cost will be about the same but with less hassle driver wise and no need to upgrade anything else.
This is hard to believe
Amd tressfx open standard innovation,must see-(tomb raider the first game to use revolutionary tressfx real time hair simulation)
http://blogs.amd.com/play/tressfx/
[link]
This is huge in computer animated films also
-
Skidmarksdeluxe said:
This is hard to believeI had major issues with 2 X GTX460's installed. Ended up selling both & buying a GTX 570. I never looked back. I've since upgraded but I'll never ever consider dual setup's again.
-
JC713 said:I had major issues with 2 X GTX460's installed. Ended up selling both & buying a GTX 570. I never looked back. I've since upgraded but I'll never ever consider dual setup's again.
Is it too loud or hot?
-
Skidmarksdeluxe said:Is it too loud or hot?
Neither. I just had a lot of glitching, erratic frame rate problems & crashing to desktop while playing. (No. It wasn't my PSU)
-
JC713 said:Neither. I just had a lot of glitching, erratic frame rate problems & crashing to desktop while playing. (No. It wasn't my PSU)
Interesting, I guess it is worth buying a single card rather than 2 I guess
-
1 person liked this |Skidmarksdeluxe said:Interesting, I guess it is worth buying a single card rather than 2 I guess
Your mileage may vary, don't let me put you off but there are pitfalls that are inherent with multi gpu setups. If you decide to go with it I wish you the best of luck. As for me... I'll stick with single cards.
-
JC713 said:Your mileage may vary, don't let me put you off but there are pitfalls that are inherent with multi gpu setups. If you decide to go with it I wish you the best of luck. As for me... I'll stick with single cards.
Plus some games scale really badly so it basically kills the point of the 2nd card
-
You have the 660 ti in SLI competing with the 7850 (much cheaper cards).
You should have it compete with the equivalently priced 7950 and you''ll find that AMD's offering gives you much more bang for the buck than the Nvidia.
You are biased towards NVIDIA with this article. You are pushing dual card setups versus single and yet the most balanced options (660ti and 7950) aren't even compared. Shame on you.
Remove this article and do a PROPER REVIEW
Wondering why you skipped over the 7870. It also comes close to the 7950 at times and is cheaper than a 660Ti.
One could also argue, that if someone on a budget is following this guide to build a triple monitor setup, the (avg fps) results could be misleading. How are they to know how their (for example) 4 thread i5 will compare to a 12 thread i7?I don't feel like this should be a place for hypothetical arguments such as the one you are making. Just because you are trying to build a budget setup shouldn't mean that you lack basic understanding of CPU bottlenecks. If you are going to build a desktop and want to do it right (especially if you are going through reviews of triple monitor setups) you should have come across CPU reviews where it is evident that the FPS difference between an 1155 i5 and a 2011 i7 are seriously marginal.
In case any newbie who doesn't know about this, this is for you: [link]
Ah, my bad. That 4T i5 should of read 4T i3 (or any AMD CPU).
Ah yea, I don't need that link... Mainly because it only shows 4 games out of 1000, and not even the best ones. If you think those 4 games tested are a full representation of multi-threading performance in games, then you stopped yourself short. Juss sayin.
I've built every computer I've ever owned, each costing at least $2000 (piece by precious piece). Click my name and take a look at my specs.
For the games I was playing at the time, and following all major CPU and GPU reviews, I knew I could get by with an i5 2500K @ 4.5GHz, but the majority of gamers on a budget, buy i3's and AMD CPU's, and we all know about i3's and AMD CPU's, which makes this multi-GPU review quite confusing on why they left out budget CPU's? I get the whole bottleneck thang, but budget gamers are MORE likely to already have bottlenecks, so showing, for example, 2 660Ti's getting 60fps @ 5760x1080, is not a true representation of what a budget gamer with an Phenom II 980 or Athlon II X4 will experience... IMO, and by the looks of it, others here too.
I mean, when we (me anyway) look at single GPU reviews using a single monitor, and see a range of CPU's tested with ours included in them, we can honestly expect to get VERY close to that performance.
When you show half the story, you get half the facts.
Not sure how many gamers running a Core 2 Duo still are considering a triple monitor setup with SLI GTX 660 Ti cards. But what you are really saying is they should read our CPU articles first, learn which CPU to buy and then invest in the GPUs, right?Maybe you need to visit your forums once in a while.
-
baN893 said:Ah, my bad. That 4T i5 should of read 4T i3 (or any AMD CPU).
Ah yea, I don't need that link... Mainly because it only shows 4 games out of 1000, and not even the best ones. If you think those 4 games tested are a full representation of multi-threading performance in games, then you stopped yourself short. Juss sayin.
I've built every computer I've ever owned, each costing at least $2000 (piece by precious piece). Click my name and take a look at my specs.
For the games I was playing at the time, and following all major CPU and GPU reviews, I knew I could get by with an i5 2500K @ 4.5GHz, but the majority of gamers on a budget, buy i3's and AMD CPU's, and we all know about i3's and AMD CPU's, which makes this multi-GPU review quite confusing on why they left out budget CPU's? I get the whole bottleneck thang, but budget gamers are MORE likely to already have bottlenecks, so showing, for example, 2 660Ti's getting 60fps @ 5760x1080, is not a true representation of what a budget gamer with an Phenom II 980 or Athlon II X4 will experience... IMO, and by the looks of it, others here too.
I mean, when we (me anyway) look at single GPU reviews using a single monitor, and see a range of CPU's tested with ours included in them, we can honestly expect to get VERY close to that performance.
When you show half the story, you get half the facts.
Just out of curiosity, could you please link me the review, or multiple ones as well, where I see a full representation of multi-threading performance in games? I'm always willing to learn something new.
That link also wasn't intended for you. It is for people who are new to the whole thing. Also, you made your profile private so people like me aren't allowed to drool over your specs. :'(
I see what you are saying with not including low-budget CPU's, but this review isn't meant to review CPU performance in triple monitor setups. It's a standoff of
"SLI vs. Crossfire vs. Single High-end GPU"
I don't think this review is trying to say "this is a budget build that is perfect for triple monitor gaming", simply "this is how budget SLI vs. Crossfire vs. Single High-end GPU will compare against each other when CPU bottlenecks are eliminated". TechSpot could/should do a follow up review saying something along the lines of "based on our recent review about budget triple monitor graphic card configurations, we found Crossfire 2GB HD 7850's to be the best value solution. Now let's see how low we can go with processors that are cheaper than an 1155 i5 3570k/2500k without bottlenecking the GPU's performance."
I hope TechSpot would do that, as part of a "Budget gaming series" or something. I'm sure we would agree that that would be beneficial, informative, and educational to all of us.
-
jeetshek said:
I was planing to buy a MSI Lightning 7970 for 5760x1080 resolution. The plan is after purchasing this bad boy, I will purchase one more cheap 7970 or a 7950.
I was wondering few things
1. If I will push Lightning 7970's overclocking potential, do I need a second one ?
2. Should I go for 7870 crossfire instead of a 7970 ?
3. I have a 1366 X 768 montor (Please dont laugh) . Though I have plans for upgrading the display but....Can I add 2 more monitors of same resolutions for playing games ? will it look good.
-
syntaxbreaker said:
Ohh that is pretty cool of a gaming gear men, but pretty cool budget too
-
4 people like this |StaffSteve said:
I was planing to buy a MSI Lightning 7970 for 5760x1080 resolution. The plan is after purchasing this bad boy, I will purchase one more cheap 7970 or a 7950.I was wondering few things
1. If I will push Lightning 7970's overclocking potential, do I need a second one ?
2. Should I go for 7870 crossfire instead of a 7970 ?
3. I have a 1366 X 768 montor (Please dont laugh) . Though I have plans for upgrading the display but....Can I add 2 more monitors of same resolutions for playing games ? will it look good.
1. For the resolution you play at NO.
2. No, stick with one high-end card if you can.
3. You can add two more 1366x768 screens but I wouldn't bother. A single cheap 27" with a 1920x1080 resolution would look much better in my opinion.
-
1 person liked this |
@Steve, we gotta work on get your likes further up the charts. You and the other article contributors do so much more for TechSpot than myself, I feel ashamed to have the score I do.
-
Souvs said:I was planing to buy a MSI Lightning 7970 for 5760x1080 resolution. The plan is after purchasing this bad boy, I will purchase one more cheap 7970 or a 7950.
I was wondering few things
1. If I will push Lightning 7970's overclocking potential, do I need a second one ?
2. Should I go for 7870 crossfire instead of a 7970 ?
3. I have a 1366 X 768 montor (Please dont laugh) . Though I have plans for upgrading the display but....Can I add 2 more monitors of same resolutions for playing games ? will it look good.
Jeet, a single 7970/7950 will suffice....but always use latest driver from amd (13.2 beta 6 at present) and happy gaming.....
and ,as for 1080p is only noticeable if you are using 40"+ big monitor and several inch away from monitor...
don't go for market scam,720p hd is still a great resolution for gaming man....see the below uld for that...
Most Popular
| Trending | Featured |
Subscribe to TechSpot
Get free exclusive content, learn about new features and breaking tech news.