2650x1600 - GTX770 SLI - 2GB vs 4GB

icu222much

Junior Member
Nov 15, 2012
22
0
0
I'm building a computer for a friend at 2560x1600. ATM, it looks like the best bang-for-buck GPU at that resolution is the GTX770. I'm currently planning to get him one 770, and then grab another one in a year or so to SLI.

I've been reading lots of posts saying that 4GB is great for multi-monitor setup, and 2GB is great for gaming at 1080p. How about in my friend's situation of 2560x1600? Keep in mind that he does intend to SLI in the future.
 

RussianSensation

Elite Member
Sep 5, 2003
19,458
765
126
Get GTX760 MSI Gaming SLI. GTX770 SLI is a waste of $ for the huge price difference, especially the 4GB versions going for $450. Take the $ saved and get yourself 20nm GPUs that will give you 50-70% more performance.
 
Last edited:

RussianSensation

Elite Member
Sep 5, 2003
19,458
765
126
Kepler milks the 256 bit bus to the hilt. Also demonstrates we cant use arguments that automatically conclude competing higher bit bus cards would have to be superior in high res performance anymore.

That review actually shows that 770 loses to 7970GE at higher resolution.

Same is concluded by TPU:

perfrel_2560.gif


Same at Computerbase:
http://www.computerbase.de/artikel/grafikkarten/2013/nvidia-geforce-gtx-770-im-test/4/

Everyone knows that it's not accurate to compare 256-bit vs. 384-bit cards in isolation (i.e., the 384-bit card won't be 50% faster or anything). The problem with 770 is the price. You pay $100-150 extra for a card that's slower at 2560x1440/1600 than $300 7970GE. Makes no sense. If you want solid SLI performance, after-market 760s + Overclock is a far better bang for the buck to hold someone over before transitioning to Maxwell/Volta.
 

bystander36

Diamond Member
Apr 1, 2013
5,154
132
106
That review actually shows that 770 loses to 7970GE at higher resolution.

Same is concluded by TPU:

perfrel_2560.gif


Same at Computerbase:
http://www.computerbase.de/artikel/grafikkarten/2013/nvidia-geforce-gtx-770-im-test/4/

Everyone knows that it's not accurate to compare 256-bit vs. 384-bit cards in isolation (i.e., the 384-bit card won't be 50% faster or anything). The problem with 770 is the price. You pay $100-150 extra for a card that's slower at 2560x1440/1600 than $300 7970GE. Makes no sense. If you want solid SLI performance, after-market 760s + Overclock is a far better bang for the buck to hold someone over before transitioning to Maxwell/Volta.

Look up the 5760x1080 results, interestingly, in most reviews it compares similarly to how AMD and Nvidia compare at 1080p, but the 1440p and 1600p favor AMD.
 

amenx

Diamond Member
Dec 17, 2004
4,105
2,376
136
That review actually shows that 770 loses to 7970GE at higher resolution.
These are the 5760x1200 performance figures for 770 vs 7970GE from that review:

5760x1200 performance

BF3:
770 = 52.6
7970GE = 52.6

Bioshock Inf:
770 = 36.3
7970GE = 35.8

Crysis 3:
770 = 32.9
7970GE = 31.8

FarCry 3:
770 = 28.1
7970GE = 27.1

Grid2:
770 = 87.6
7970GE = 83.4

Hitman Absolution:
770 = 32.5
7970GE = 36.6

Of course selection of games can throw the advantages of either card off, which is why you may find different figures from different reviews.

Everyone knows that it's not accurate to compare 256-bit vs. 384-bit cards in isolation (i.e., the 384-bit card won't be 50% faster or anything).
That was a point I was making. But I have seen many here use the larger bit bus argument as enough reason to go for one card over another.

The problem with 770 is the price. You pay $100-150 extra for a card that's slower at 2560x1440/1600 than $300 7970GE. Makes no sense. If you want solid SLI performance, after-market 760s + Overclock is a far better bang for the buck to hold someone over before transitioning to Maxwell/Volta.
Not arguing for value of any cards here, my main focus was on the 770's 256-bit performance at high res. In that review, there was an anomaly (in Grid2) where the 770 underperformed at 2560x1440 yet beat the 7970GE at 5760x1200. In the end, they lumped all the FPS together and averaged them out which can give misleading conclusions. Yet, the 770 beat (or equaled) the 7970GE in 4 games vs 2 @ 2560x1440 and in 5 games vs 1 @ 5760x1200. After this I will never look at averaged performance of games in cards, incl that of TPU. But rather look at each individual games performance to arrive at what I think would be a clearer view a cards overall performance.
 

moonbogg

Lifer
Jan 8, 2011
10,637
3,095
136
Nice review. How about some added experience to that from little old me. BF3 has skips and hitches with less than 1.5gb vram maxed at 1080p. I'd never consider a card at this time with less than 3gb ram. Maybe those reviewers noticed that when scoping in with a rifle there was a slight pause with the 2gb card but they thought nothing of it because it only happens 25% of the time due to texture swapping. Can you live with that? I can't.
 

ocre

Golden Member
Dec 26, 2008
1,594
7
81
op, if i was getting two 770s i would go with the 2gb and save the cash.

Also as RS stated i think two 760s would be a very potent option you might want to consider. If you want to save some money and still have some serious power. otherwise if you dont care about the lesser cards value, i vote 2gb 770s
 

3DVagabond

Lifer
Aug 10, 2009
11,951
204
106
Also look at the 770 performance at 5760x1200 in a variety of games.

http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2337752

Kepler milks the 256 bit bus to the hilt. Also demonstrates we cant use arguments that automatically conclude competing higher bit bus cards would have to be superior in high res performance anymore.

I posted this elsewhere, but you can't use multi monitor as being simply "high res". It's a whole different set of variables. All else being equal more memory bandwidth does give better scaling as resolution increases. Just look at what happens to the 660ti compared to the 670.