GTX 460 768 - is it a waste to SLI it given the low memory and that I run 1920x1200?

[toyota]

The question is. Does the GTX 460 has the horsepower to utilize more than that amount of vram? More vram is useless if your card doesnt have the horsepower to utilize it

of course gtx460 sli has enough power to utilize more than 1gb never mind just 768mb. overclocked gtx460 in sli would be about as fast as the gtx570 and in some cases gtx580.

 

[LiuKangBakinPie]

of course gtx460 sli has enough power to utilize more than 1gb never mind just 768mb. overclocked gtx460 in sli would be about as fast as the gtx570 and in some cases gtx580.

You cant overclock extra shader units
In the end single precision G/flops is shader count x shader frequency x 3

Example

As you can see the Gtx 570 is only manage to utilize the extra bandwidth in some circumstances. The 580 on the other hand got the horsepower to fully utilize more bandwidth.
You can OC it but you cant add that extra shaders thats missing. Like trying to overclock a dual core cpu to a quad core.

 

[toyota]

You cant overclock extra shader units
In the end single precision G/flops is shader count x shader frequency x 3

Example
http://i1233.photobucket.com/albums/ff388/shovenose/SURROUND-MEM-28.jpg
http://i1233.photobucket.com/albums/ff388/shovenose/SURROUND-MEM-29.jpg

As you can see the Gtx 570 is only manage to utilize the extra bandwidth in some circumstances. The 580 on the other hand got the horsepower to fully utilize more bandwidth.
You can OC it but you cant add that extra shaders thats missing. Like trying to overclock a dual core cpu to a quad core.

oh god, you are the guy from the other forums. lol. look I am not going to get into a big debate with you but its a fact that gtx460 sli has plenty of power to run settings that exceed 768mb of vram.

 

[LiuKangBakinPie]

oh god, you are the guy from the other forums. lol. look I am not going to get into a big debate with you but its a fact that gtx460 sli has plenty of power to run settings that exceed 768mb of vram.

Which guy?
The 460 has the power to utilize 1Gb thats correct I was just referring tothe cards in general as most people are under the idea because Metro say so much vram usage in Afterburner more vram means it will perform better which is not the case. The 460 like the 560ti will do fine utilizing 1Gb but 2GB it will struggle to utilize. Thats for a single card btw as I know CF or SLI the gpus are still being seen as two individual GPU's

 

[happy medium]

I'm gonna look at this in a reverse engineering type of way.

1 gtx460 768mb will not have the horsepower to give proper fps and utilize 768mb of memory in graphically intensive games like BF3, but 2 gtx460 768mb cards have the horsepower to use more than 768mbs of memory but will give playable framerates.

Example:
Answer to problem....... with BF3 is to simply run on high settings, not ultra, and med post processsing, with fxaa..

Most other games you can run 2xaa instead of 4xaa and they will run fine.

 

[ocre]

this article compares the `460 SLi versions 768mb, 1gb, and 2gb in a lot of games, take the time to look at how much a performance cut when you go to one 768mb card. I cannot see it being the solution here:

http://benchmarkextreme.com/Articles/GTX%20460 ANALYSIS/P18.html

 

[ocre]

You cant overclock extra shader units
In the end single precision G/flops is shader count x shader frequency x 3

Example

As you can see the Gtx 570 is only manage to utilize the extra bandwidth in some circumstances. The 580 on the other hand got the horsepower to fully utilize more bandwidth.
You can OC it but you cant add that extra shaders thats missing. Like trying to overclock a dual core cpu to a quad core.

Those results are from SLI, SLI with surround exaggerates the difference in RAM tremendously.

You should also link the source of your picture you copied:

http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/foru...-memory-surround-stereo-3d-performance-7.html

http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/foru...pu-memory-surround-stereo-3d-performance.html


Without Sourround (3d) and SLI these cards extra vram nvidia cards are, unimpressive. Even the 580 which a reviewer says:

"For some, this review will likely be a bitter pill to swallow. We’ve seen countless forum posts of people bitching, whining and complaining that newly released GTX 580 cards don’t come equipped with 3GB of GDDR5. They turned their noses up and uttered “pointless” when MSI introduced their Lightning and Gigabyte first showed the GTX 580 Super Overclock. Both of these sported 1.5GB of memory and they ran circles around the 3GB EVGA card in this review. "

"the underlying GF110 architecture proves to be a rendering bottleneck long before the bandwidth provided by 1.5GB of GDDR5 memory and a 384-bit interface becomes fully saturated. "


Source:

http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/foru...44390-evga-geforce-gtx-580-3gb-review-15.html


It only gets more and more pointless when you go down the latter. 2.5gb 570, 2gb 560, 2gb 460.

But saying all that, 768mb still isnt enough RAM to keep the 460 saturated.

 

[SickBeast]

OP, let me give you some insight as I actually own and use a pair of 768mb GTX 460s in SLI.

First of all, if you want to know the memory usage in games, use MSI Afterburner. It will show you.

As others have said, you will need to adjust the settings accordingly in modern games. That means turning down the textures a notch, and avoiding AA if you can. In BF3 I've found that the "post" AA works great whereas traditional MSAA kills my cards.

In a year or so I have a feeling that we're going to run into some more major problems with cards like this, but for now, we've only got 256mb less than most people, so it's a matter of making some small sacrifices in order to use our setups optimally.

In most games, particularly ones that came out 6 months to a year ago, having 768mb of vram is plenty and you wouldn't even notice a difference between this type of setup and another that has 2gb.

You don't need to remove a card to test the difference SLI makes, BTW. Just change it in the nVidia control panel.

 

[Spurst]

you guys are really missing the main topic in my question, which is - if you have to turn down the settings to accomodate the sub par VRAM, do you really need the SLI to run the games at those settings, versus a single card running the same game at those settings. If dropping the settings doubles your framerate (to 90ish) then are you getting any real benefit from the other card?

My real world usage has found that I notice no real performance drop by removing the other card. Yes, MY FPS dropped, but it was not significant enough to impact my play.

I just got back from a week's vacation, so I have yet to test BF3 - i've only tested Crysis and AVP, so BF3 and Skyrim are next on the list sometime today.


I have another AMD Phenom 2 830 quad core that I built, and it needed a new gfx card (or my 8800GT) so instead... I just popped in the other GTX 460 and I'm good to go.

Eventually, I'll upgrade to a pair of 2GB GTX 460's, but for now I'll live with the 1.

 

[lavaheadache]

why the heck would you invest money into 2 more 460's just to have 2gb of memory?

Ultimately, it would be right around the same performance most of the time. It's not tlike it would be earthshattering differences.

If you want a big jump, go sli 570... or just wait till next gen.

 

[Spurst]

double tap.

 

[Spurst]

why the heck would you invest money into 2 more 460's just to have 2gb of memory?

Ultimately, it would be right around the same performance most of the time. It's not tlike it would be earthshattering differences.

If you want a big jump, go sli 570... or just wait till next gen.

Its not the performance I'm unhappy with - its the VRAM. The GTX 460 SLI is too strong for the low VRAM - so its not the performance, its the graphics settings that I'm unhappy with.

The core can handle ultra settings, but it doesn't have the VRAM to do it. So - its stuck at high.

If I can get a 2gb 570 SLI for a similar pricepoint that I can a 460 2GB sli, I'd gladly do it. However, I don't see it happening. Besides, the GTX 460 SLI is all I'd really need right now, anyhow.

 

[nanaki333]

saddly, i agree with toyota

lower your res to 1680 and leave everything turned up to see if that helps. you won't notice too much of a difference, that's what all that fancy AA stuff is for

 

[Spurst]

saddly, i agree with toyota

lower your res to 1680 and leave everything turned up to see if that helps. you won't notice too much of a difference, that's what all that fancy AA stuff is for

i think it looks worse at 1600x1000 with FSAA and that fancy stuff on than it does at 1920x1200 without FSAA.

 

[nanaki333]

i think it looks worse at 1600x1000 with FSAA and that fancy stuff on than it does at 1920x1200 without FSAA.

and you're entitled to that. i'm sure a lot of others agree too. call me old fashion, but i'm too busy playing games enjoying them than looking at how pretty. i can't remember the last time i played less than 1920 though cause i'm so spoiled... so maybe you're right...

i retract my previous statement... just turn your AA stuff down.

 

[Spurst]

and you're entitled to that. i'm sure a lot of others agree too. call me old fashion, but i'm too busy playing games enjoying them than looking at how pretty. i can't remember the last time i played less than 1920 though cause i'm so spoiled... so maybe you're right...

i retract my previous statement... just turn your AA stuff down.

i have to - with 1 card or 2. its the vram that dictates turning anything down that causes a serious jump to vram usage.

 

[nanaki333]

does your 460 have a 256-bit bus? i can do a straight up swap for 1 of yours for a PNY gtx 465. only thing i do with these cards now is fold and they're pretty much the same folding wise.

 

[Spurst]

does your 460 have a 256-bit bus? i can do a straight up swap for 1 of yours for a PNY gtx 465. only thing i do with these cards now is fold and they're pretty much the same folding wise.

part of the problem - 192- bit Memory. I appreciate the offer, but I'm okay with these cards - I just wanted to know its limitations. The pricepoint on this card was ~$70AR so I'm 100% pleased with the card, aside from the SLI limitations due to the low VRAM. Its a decent upgrade over my old 8800GT SLI, and since my projector is 1280x1024 native, this is perfect to max out pretty much all the settings with the new Phenom II x4 830 i built for it.

However.. my main gaming rig I rebuilt with a i5 2500k which is @ 4.5ghz, so it could probably use a stronger video card in the near future - so I'm keeping my eyes peeled for a deal on something with 1.5-2gb VRAM so I can max out 1920x1200.

 

[SickBeast]

you guys are really missing the main topic in my question, which is - if you have to turn down the settings to accomodate the sub par VRAM, do you really need the SLI to run the games at those settings, versus a single card running the same game at those settings. If dropping the settings doubles your framerate (to 90ish) then are you getting any real benefit from the other card?

My real world usage has found that I notice no real performance drop by removing the other card. Yes, MY FPS dropped, but it was not significant enough to impact my play.

I just got back from a week's vacation, so I have yet to test BF3 - i've only tested Crysis and AVP, so BF3 and Skyrim are next on the list sometime today.


I have another AMD Phenom 2 830 quad core that I built, and it needed a new gfx card (or my 8800GT) so instead... I just popped in the other GTX 460 and I'm good to go.

Eventually, I'll upgrade to a pair of 2GB GTX 460's, but for now I'll live with the 1.

You bring up a good point, and I don't have a definitive answer for you.

I will say, though, that I was somewhat underwhelmed with my SLI performance aside from synthetic benchmarks like Unigine Heaven.

You make a good point and I agree with you.