I love my 580s!

[Carfax83]

I finally got around to playing both Crysis 3 and I am pleasantly surprised at how well my rig is handling the game. I had originally intended to put the game off until I upgraded later this year as I didn't want to play on lowered settings, but after seeing a great deal on Ebay for both Crysis 3 and Bioshock Infinite, I decided to pull the trigger.

With my 580s overclocked to 900mhz, I'm seeing frame rates in the mid 30s to low 40s for the most part, which is very smooth on CryEngine 3. This is at 2560x1440 with everything on very high, v-sync turned off and SMAA is set to 1x.

Not bad for an old Nehalem based rig like mine :thumbsup:, although I have the CPU clocked as high as it will go at 4.2ghz with HT on with rock solid stability (Intel makes some tough CPUs). When I switch over to a Haswell based setup later this year, I should pick up some more frames to be sure..

A lot of credit goes to Crytek as well, for doing a fantastic job of optimizing Crysis 3. The level of detail I've seen in this game is absolutely stunning, and the best part is, there's no object pop in like in Crysis 2! It goes to show the power of DX11 when it's unhindered by having DX9 attached to the game like a barnacle.

How long do you think I can get acceptable performance out of my 580s? I had decided I was going to upgrade to the GTX 780 or whatever it will be named later this year, but if I continue to get acceptable performance at my preferred IQ settings, why bother to upgrade? The next graphics king will likely be Metro Last Light. Hopefully I will be able to play that game on very high settings as well

 

[Unoid]

with my rig spec below, I get 100-50fps at 1440p, with same settings.

weird

 

[brandon888]

I finally got around to playing both Crysis 3 and I am pleasantly surprised at how well my rig is handling the game. I had originally intended to put the game off until I upgraded later this year as I didn't want to play on lowered settings, but after seeing a great deal on Ebay for both Crysis 3 and Bioshock Infinite, I decided to pull the trigger.

With my 580s overclocked to 900mhz, I'm seeing frame rates in the mid 30s to low 40s for the most part, which is very smooth on CryEngine 3. This is at 2560x1440 with everything on very high, v-sync turned off and SMAA is set to 1x.

Not bad for an old Nehalem based rig like mine :thumbsup:, although I have the CPU clocked as high as it will go at 4.2ghz with HT on with rock solid stability (Intel makes some tough CPUs). When I switch over to a Haswell based setup later this year, I should pick up some more frames to be sure..

A lot of credit goes to Crytek as well, for doing a fantastic job of optimizing Crysis 3. The level of detail I've seen in this game is absolutely stunning, and the best part is, there's no object pop in like in Crysis 2! It goes to show the power of DX11 when it's unhindered by having DX9 attached to the game like a barnacle.

How long do you think I can get acceptable performance out of my 580s? I had decided I was going to upgrade to the GTX 780 or whatever it will be named later this year, but if I continue to get acceptable performance at my preferred IQ settings, why bother to upgrade? The next graphics king will likely be Metro Last Light. Hopefully I will be able to play that game on very high settings as well

well .... 2 580s are a bit slower then titan and will mach 780 as i know .... so ... 780 will be side upgrade but you know 1 card is always better .. + more Vram

but if i were you .... don't upgrade till Maxwell

 

[Jaydip]

580 was a solid card, I enjoyed mine as well.You can play MLL surely but just have to turn down some settings.

 

[Unoid]

Just by going by die size, 580 is slightly smaller than titan. However 580 was a 500ish card, yet titan is 1000. Such a consumer ripoff we have currently.

 

[imaheadcase]

I been thinking of selling both my 580s for awhile now. I don't feel i need that much power in most games I play now. lol rather just get a simple 680 and call it a day..at least till some game comes out that i need better.

 

[aigomorla]

waiting for the 780's to come out b4 i swap all 3 of my 580's out again.

<3 my 580's however i dont think i got to stretch there legs out very often, and the third gpu has been doing only physx for god knows how long.

Meaning i havent seen a game which has used the 3rd gpu enough to put any type of load on it. :\

 

[Fx1]

They are only one generation old. Also you have 2 of them and they were flagship cards.

Your surprised they still play games?

 

[rgallant]

"Release date, November 8, 2010 ... The Nvidia GeForce GTX 580 graphics card is the first in the Nvidia GeForce 500 Series to use a fully enabled chip based on [snip]."

-580sli are still rocking nicely for old cards and under developed[for pc] console game ports.

 

[Carfax83]

with my rig spec below, I get 100-50fps at 1440p, with same settings.

weird

The only way I can see you hitting 100 FPS is if you're looking at the ground or a wall or something. There's no way you're seeing such high frame rates in the more intensive areas of the game; even if your GPUs are overclocked.

This is what hardwarecanucks got on their test rig which has a 3930K overclocked to 4.5ghz using the 320 drivers and the Very high setting @ 2560x1600:

 

[Carfax83]

They are only one generation old. Also you have 2 of them and they were flagship cards.

Your surprised they still play games?

No, I'm surprised they can still provide smooth gameplay at the highest settings, considering they only have 1.5GB of VRAM; although I do have the memory overclocked to 4400mhz.

Crysis 3 isn't a joke, it's the most punishing game out now.. Based on that graph I posted from hardwarecanucks, my overclocked 580s are roughly almost as fast as a pair of stock 680s..

The rig hardwarecanucks used had a Ivy Bridge CPU clocked at 4.5ghz, while I have a Nehalem Core i7 at 4.2ghz. If I had that CPU, I would pick up close to 10 FPS or so, as Ivy Bridge is a good bit faster per clock than the Nehalem.

I always knew the 580s could handle Crysis 3, but just not at the very high setting.

 

[Carfax83]

"Release date, November 8, 2010 ... The Nvidia GeForce GTX 580 graphics card is the first in the Nvidia GeForce 500 Series to use a fully enabled chip based on [snip]."

-580sli are still rocking nicely for old cards and under developed[for pc] console game ports.

Do you consider Crysis 3 an under developed console game port?

 

[rgallant]

Crysis 2 at release was , Crysis 3 no

 

[Fx1]

No, I'm surprised they can still provide smooth gameplay at the highest settings, considering they only have 1.5GB of VRAM; although I do have the memory overclocked to 4400mhz.

Crysis 3 isn't a joke, it's the most punishing game out now.. Based on that graph I posted from hardwarecanucks, my overclocked 580s are roughly almost as fast as a pair of stock 680s..

The rig hardwarecanucks used had a Ivy Bridge CPU clocked at 4.5ghz, while I have a Nehalem Core i7 at 4.2ghz. If I had that CPU, I would pick up close to 10 FPS or so, as Ivy Bridge is a good bit faster per clock than the Nehalem.

I always knew the 580s could handle Crysis 3, but just not at the very high setting.

No your wrong.

You wont gain 10fps. Nehalum is still as good clock for clock in games. Especially in GPU bound game such as Crysis 3.

A single 7970 is faster than a 6990. Which must mean that your 580 SLI is likely only slightly faster than a 7970 ghz. Maybe less

 

[Smoblikat]

Im digging my Quad 6970 setup...................once I get my 1440P up and running I will stretch it out to the max.

 

[willomz]

A single 7970 is faster than a 6990. Which must mean that your 580 SLI is likely only slightly faster than a 7970 ghz. Maybe less

580 SLI is slightly faster than 660 SLI which is already 10%+ above a 7970GE.

 

[Carfax83]

No your wrong.

You wont gain 10fps. Nehalum is still as good clock for clock in games. Especially in GPU bound game such as Crysis 3.

First off, I never said I would gain 10 FPS, I said close to 10 FPS. Ivy Bridge has nearly 20% better IPC than Nehalem based on:

Sandy Bridge vs Lynnfield

The Sandy Bridge core gets an average of 14% better IPC in that review, and that's with a slightly smaller L3 cache.

Ivy Bridge is around 3 to 5% faster than Sandy Bridge, so like I said, an Ivy Bridge CPU should be getting almost 20% better IPC than a Nehalem based CPU.

Not saying I would get close to 20% better performance in Crysis 3 by switching over to Ivy Bridge, but I should definitely see some gains, especially in minimum framerates. I would expect a 6 or 7 FPS increase in minimum, and probably 2 or 3 in maximum..

A single 7970 is faster than a 6990. Which must mean that your 580 SLI is likely only slightly faster than a 7970 ghz. Maybe less

This statement is absurd and easily refuted:

GPU bench

Even at stock clocks, the 580 SLi pulls comfortably ahead of the 7970 Ghz. Overclocked, the gap would widen even further.

 

[Fx1]

First off, I never said I would gain 10 FPS, I said close to 10 FPS. Ivy Bridge has nearly 20% better IPC than Nehalem based on:

Sandy Bridge vs Lynnfield

The Sandy Bridge core gets an average of 14% better IPC in that review, and that's with a slightly smaller L3 cache.

Ivy Bridge is around 3 to 5% faster than Sandy Bridge, so like I said, an Ivy Bridge CPU should be getting almost 20% better IPC than a Nehalem based CPU.

Not saying I would get close to 20% better performance in Crysis 3 by switching over to Ivy Bridge, but I should definitely see some gains, especially in minimum framerates. I would expect a 6 or 7 FPS increase in minimum, and probably 2 or 3 in maximum..



This statement is absurd and easily refuted:

GPU bench

Even at stock clocks, the 580 SLi pulls comfortably ahead of the 7970 Ghz. Overclocked, the gap would widen even further.

It doesnt scale in games. Especially games like Crysis 3 with big GPU bottlenecks.

I checked into this with my i7 950 vs 3770k and the difference was sometimes 1-2 fps and in some games Ivy was worse.

The only possible increase would be from clock speed. Even then im not sure it would improve Crysis 3.

Also a 7970 can clock well into 1200mhz and those AT benches use outdated drivers. Im sure the 580 will have some advantage but it also has half the Vram.

there are no useful modern benchmarks since no one is bothered about 580 SLI in todays world

 

[Carfax83]

It doesnt scale in games. Especially games like Crysis 3 with big GPU bottlenecks.

I checked into this with my i7 950 vs 3770k and the difference was sometimes 1-2 fps and in some games Ivy was worse.

What resolution do you play at? I have a hard time believing a 3770K only gave you 1-2 FPS over a i7 950. Perhaps the maximum frame rate was only 2 FPS higher, but the minimum should have been much more.

The minimum frame rate is more important, as that determines how smooth the gameplay is.

Also a 7970 can clock well into 1200mhz and those AT benches use outdated drivers. Im sure the 580 will have some advantage but it also has half the Vram.

The drivers won't be near enough to make up that much of a gap.

there are no useful modern benchmarks since no one is bothered about 580 SLI in todays world

Like one poster said, the GTX 580 and the GTX 660 Ti are roughly comparable in performance (with the 580 edging out the 660 in heavy games due to greater bandwidth), and the GTX 660 Ti in SLI is definitely faster than a single 7970 Ghz.

GTX 660 Ti SLI vs 7970 Ghz

 

[Fx1]

What resolution do you play at? I have a hard time believing a 3770K only gave you 1-2 FPS over a i7 950. Perhaps the maximum frame rate was only 2 FPS higher, but the minimum should have been much more.

The minimum frame rate is more important, as that determines how smooth the gameplay is.



The drivers won't be near enough to make up that much of a gap.



Like one poster said, the GTX 580 and the GTX 660 Ti are roughly comparable in performance (with the 580 edging out the 660 in heavy games due to greater bandwidth), and the GTX 660 Ti in SLI is definitely faster than a single 7970 Ghz.

GTX 660 Ti SLI vs 7970 Ghz

According to Guru3D the 660ti is faster than a 580 GTX. So really you should stop comparing it to a 660ti in BF3 its alot quicker also! So no they arent comparable.

As i said id like to see comparable benches with modern drivers.

 

[alcoholbob]

Crysis 3 is a console corridor shooter with tiny environments. You might get 10 fps in Crysis 1, not Crysis 3 (by going to IVB).

 

[Carfax83]

According to Guru3D the 660ti is faster than a 580 GTX. So really you should stop comparing it to a 660ti in BF3 its alot quicker also! So no they arent comparable.

As i said id like to see comparable benches with modern drivers.

I made a mistake. I meant to say the GTX 660..

 

[guskline]

Carfax83: You have solid high performance gpus. Great to hear they perform well in Crysis 3!

 

[Carfax83]

Crysis 3 is a console corridor shooter with tiny environments. You might get 10 fps in Crysis 1, not Crysis 3 (by going to IVB).

While I haven't finished playing Crysis 3 yet, I don't think the Liberty Dome classifies as a corridor or a tiny environment...

Also, for the last time, I never said I was going to gain 10 FPS by going to IVB....I said close to.

And I don't see how that's unreasonable. I would be able to clock the CPU higher than my current CPU by at least 300mhz, so part of that performance gain would also come from faster speed as well as more IPC..

 

[Carfax83]

Carfax83: You have solid high performance gpus. Great to hear they perform well in Crysis 3!

Thanks. Eventually I will have to retire them, but they've certainly served me well over the years.. The Core i7 920 as well.. It's unbelievable how that CPU has held up over time, considering how much voltage I have going through it