Upgrade or SLI (770 v 960 2gig)

[Xaquarie]

Current Rig:

Mobo - P8Z68V-Gen3
CPU - I5-2500k (/w H100GTX), OC'D to 4.4ghz
GPU - GTX 770 sc 2g EVGA
Ram - 16gb
PSU - 620w, SS-620GM2
HD's - 250g Evo 840 SSD / 1TB HDD
Fans - 2 NF-P12 / 2 NF-P12 PWM / 1 Corsair SPL120L (I have a second for side panel mounting to help cool 2 gpu's if it will be needed)


I'm looking into either another 770 or upgrading to a cheapie 2gb 960. I'm almost positive I'll need PSU for SLI configuration (maps out to around 660W with all the things hooked up). I'm just unsure which would be better for the cost. Also looking into an i7 for this board (if I can find a good deal on a 3770k)

 

[crisium]

I wouldn't do either of those things.

A 960 is a sidegrade to the 770. In older games where Kepler was still optimized it can actually be slower.

SLI 770 2GB gives you three problems. VRAM bottleneck, Kepler optimizations, and SLI optimizations.

770 2GB SLI is essentially a GTX 690. Gamegpu still often uses a 690 for comparison purposes. Here are most of their latest charts:

http://gamegpu.ru/images/remote/htt...allout_4_Beta_Patch_1.3-test-fall4_2560_s.jpg
http://gamegpu.com/images/remote/ht...ssassins_Creed_Syndicate-test-new-ac_2560.jpg
http://gamegpu.ru/images/remote/htt...PU-Action-Rainbow_Six_Siege_-test-r7_2560.jpg
http://gamegpu.com/images/remote/ht...on-STAR_WARS_Battlefront-test-new-sw_2560.jpg
http://gamegpu.com/images/remote/ht...PU-Action-Just_Cause_3_-test-new-jc3_2560.jpg
http://gamegpu.com/images/remote/ht...l_of_Duty_Black_Ops_III-test-new-cod_2560.jpg
http://gamegpu.com/images/remote/ht..._V_The_Phantom_Pain-test-new-new-mgs_2560.jpg
http://gamegpu.com/images/remote/ht...and_Theft_Auto_V_-test-new-new-gta_v_2560.jpg
http://gamegpu.com/images/remote/ht...-Test_GPU-strategy-XCOM_2-test-XCom2_2560.jpg
http://gamegpu.com/images/remote/ht...Test_GPU-Action-Mad_Max_-test-new-mm_2560.jpg

690 performance is wild. It can lose to a single 7950 or beat a 290. And look at the 960, bouncing around from a little slower than a 770 to a minor upgrade at best.

From a 770 your best upgrade path in performance-per-dollar without breaking the bank is a Radeon 390. Alternatively on the used market you could attempt to find the Radeon 290 for a bargain.

 

[Xaquarie]

Can you elaborate on the VRAM bottleneck? Is that specifically because of the demand of newer games or something else?

I also don't know what Kepler is (quick search dates back to 02'). :/

Cliff note's on the SLI optimizations missing?

As far as the Radeon stuff, used looks outrageous ($5-700 D. :/

 

[crisium]

Newer games increasingly use more VRAM, yes. So even when SLI scales well, in many games you will not get good performance from only having 2GB.

Kepler is Nvidia 600 and 700 (except 750) series architecture. On average it doesn't perform as well as the newer Nvidia Maxwell (900 series) or the competing AMD cards in newer games as it used to 1.5+ years ago.

Not every game has SLI support. A 690 is an SLI of two 680s, which are slower clocked 770s. When you examine those charts you can find games where the 690 isn't any faster than a 680. That's when you don't have SLI support.

I linked all these before, but let me draw a narrative.

This is the example of ideal SLI support, Kepler performs well, and 2GB of VRAM is adequate. This is not repeated in most of the other charts I linked:
http://gamegpu.com/images/remote/ht...Test_GPU-Action-Mad_Max_-test-new-mm_2560.jpg

Here is an example where SLI scales well, but because Kepler is so slow and 2GB holds it back it doesn't give you much performance anyway:
http://gamegpu.com/images/remote/ht...PU-Action-Rainbow_Six_Siege_-test-r7_2560.jpg

And here's where SLI doesn't scale at all:
http://gamegpu.com/images/remote/ht...PU-Action-Just_Cause_3_-test-new-jc3_2560.jpg

So if you get another 770 for SLI, your performance will be very variable just like the 690 in these charts. A 960 as you can see overall isn't much different from a 770.

Realistically, the only way to see meaningful upgrade from the 770 on the new market is to get a faster card. If a Radeon 390 is too expensive in your market, you can look at the GTX 970 which is only a little slower. I don't think any new card slower than these would be a meaningful upgrade. If you are shopping used, a Radeon 290 is only slightly slower than a 390.

 

[tweakboy]

980 Ti GTX is great board. Must have a proper CPU to work. gl

 

[Xaquarie]

Thank you. I'll have to look when I get home from work (blocked here :/)