What would you do: Two EVGA 670 SC 4GB $873 final or one 690 for $999+ ?

[mashumk]

Would SLI'd pair of EVGA 670 SuperClocked 4gb versions at a final cost of $873 be a better deal than a single 690 at $999-plus?

Disregarding the obvious bonus of 690 being single slot.

 

[SlowSpyder]

I would buy the two 670's, personally.

 

[aaksheytalwar]

What are the 670s clocked at? Is the 690 2gb or 4gb?

 

[BD231]

You'll get more ovcerclocking headroom going dual card so the faster option would be the 670's. You'd use less power with the 690 though, but not by much, maybe 50 watts best case.

 

[SickBeast]

The 4gb cards will be more future proof as I hear that Max Payne 3 eats through 2gb of vram easily.

That said the 690 is a nice card. Tough call.

 

[mashumk]

THe 690 has 4gb and 512 so there's the rub. 256-bit for the 670. Unless SLI combines them to make 512-bit. I'm not expert on SLI. Have always used single GPU but always near top line. Kepler has changed my approach. Made me more interested in more complex builds. I was ATI before. Had to reinstall OS a couple of times because driver issues just wouldn't work out. Couldn't erase 100% of any evidence the card existed to try reinstall of only the card. Hope nVidia treats me nice.

I don't always game, but when I do, I want it to look oh so pretty.

That would make a good slogan for nVidia right now since they've got the momentum.

"I don't always game, but when I do, I make it Kepler."

By the way, I always use a 30"' monitor or big TV for games. Multi-display is for day trading. Would settling for 2gb vram allow decent 1600p res on the 30" monitor for at least 2 years? or perhaps 4gb requirements might be coming within 1.5 years.

I didn't care before. But now my interest and standards are evolving. I don't mind upgrading high-range cards every 2 years.

 

[guskline]

mashumk. I thought the GTX 690 has a TOTAL of 4G Vram, 2G to each of the GXT680 chips. The GTX 670 SC 4G has a true 4 G Vram for one GPU.

 

[lavaheadache]

I would probably go for the 690 but I'm crazy

 

[SickBeast]

Yeah the more I think about it the more I think that the 4gb 670s are a better idea. They will be more future proof especially at 1600p with AA.

 

[OILFIELDTRASH]

If you find a $999 690 buy it then resell it for $1400. You wont find a $999 one though.

 

[chimaxi83]

THe 690 has 4gb and 512 so there's the rub. 256-bit for the 670. Unless SLI combines them to make 512-bit. I'm not expert on SLI.

The 690 has 4GB total, which means 2GB per GPU, 256 bit each. It's 680 SLI on one card. You don't add VRAM or bus widths together. 690 is slightly faster than 670 SLI. Two 4GB 670's > 690, imo.

 

[mashumk]

mashumk. I thought the GTX 690 has a TOTAL of 4G Vram, 2G to each of the GXT680 chips. The GTX 670 SC 4G has a true 4 G Vram for one GPU.

If that's so, that's an important factor. Thanks.

EDIT: Just looked it up. Yea so 2 4gb cards would be better it seems. Especially when much cheaper.

 

[Annisman*]

Well, I just bought 2X GTX 670 4GB for SLI, but the 690 wasn't in stock when I made the purchase, otherwise it would have been an interesting decision.

 

[BURNINGchicken3]

as long as you are not going to add on more cards later i would get the 670s. unless you will get 2 690s later on.

 

[BTRY B 529th FA BN]

I vaguely remember reading that the 690 is optimized for doing sli things over a "normal" dual slot, 2 GPU setup (sli)

 

[Hypertag]

I think there is a third option. Just buy two 4GB GTX 670s.

 

[Gordon Freemen]

What would I do for $873 & $999 respectively I would go on vacation to Mexico LOL That kind of cash would buy a whole lotta tequila and burritos !

 

[cmdrdredd]

The 4gb cards will be more future proof as I hear that Max Payne 3 eats through 2gb of vram easily.

That said the 690 is a nice card. Tough call.

I've heard Max Payne 3 runs great across a variety of hardware.

Anyway I'd go SLI because overclocked 670s in SLI will beat up a 690.

 

[Don Karnage]

690 is overpriced. Grab the 670's

 

[tweakboy]

Go with single card because your going to run into problems with SLI in which with a single card you wouldn't get those problems.

I think 690 OC the heck out of it,, it will beat 2 670's ..... but stock clocks its about the same. Then a year from now you can buy another 690 and SLI it. By that time SLI kinks will be fixed for all games ... imo.. gl

 

[SickBeast]

Go with single card because your going to run into problems with SLI in which with a single card you wouldn't get those problems.

I think 690 OC the heck out of it,, it will beat 2 670's ..... but stock clocks its about the same. Then a year from now you can buy another 690 and SLI it. By that time SLI kinks will be fixed for all games ... imo.. gl

?

The 690 is dual-GPU.

 

[SickBeast]

I've heard Max Payne 3 runs great across a variety of hardware.

Anyway I'd go SLI because overclocked 670s in SLI will beat up a 690.

Yeah but I would not want to be that person that dropped $900 on GPUs only to find out that the newest AAA title needs more than 2gb of vram to max it out.

 

[blackened23]

IMHO, 690. The 690 uses super high quality RAM (compared to the hynix used on most ref 670s) and easily oc's to 680 levels or even higher. Its also considerably less noisy than the 670, consider that a lot of ref 670 users are complaining of coil whine and fan noise. The 690 uses samsung VRAM which overclocks WAY BETTER than hynix, the 680s i've used all used hynix and the VRAM would barely OC. The samsung has considerably more OC headroom, and the GPUs themselves will oc to 680 levels easily like I stated earlier.

The 690 is just a beauty of engineering, I would personally go with that. There are also several water blocks in the works for the 690.......

 

[digitaldurandal]

THe 690 has 4gb and 512 so there's the rub. 256-bit for the 670. Unless SLI combines them to make 512-bit. I'm not expert on SLI. Have always used single GPU but always near top line. Kepler has changed my approach. Made me more interested in more complex builds. I was ATI before. Had to reinstall OS a couple of times because driver issues just wouldn't work out. Couldn't erase 100% of any evidence the card existed to try reinstall of only the card. Hope nVidia treats me nice.

I don't always game, but when I do, I want it to look oh so pretty.

That would make a good slogan for nVidia right now since they've got the momentum.

"I don't always game, but when I do, I make it Kepler."

By the way, I always use a 30"' monitor or big TV for games. Multi-display is for day trading. Would settling for 2gb vram allow decent 1600p res on the 30" monitor for at least 2 years? or perhaps 4gb requirements might be coming within 1.5 years.

I didn't care before. But now my interest and standards are evolving. I don't mind upgrading high-range cards every 2 years.

As has been stated, the 4gb 512bit bus does not work how you think. It is split between two GPUs. So the ram and bus is the same as the 670 sli would be.

 

[digitaldurandal]

Yeah but I would not want to be that person that dropped $900 on GPUs only to find out that the newest AAA title needs more than 2gb of vram to max it out.

Currently there is nothing that needs more than 2gb to max out at 1080p and it is even difficult to hit that limit even at 5760x1200.

I can run most games 5760x1200 with some AA - and I only have 1.25gb vram