View Single Post
Old 06-25-11, 06:52 AM   #23
Rollo
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 1,719
Default Re: debating a second gtx 590 or two gtx 580 3gb's

Quote:
Originally Posted by slaWter View Post
I had 3 GTX 580 3GBs and my 4.1GHz 980X was not fast enough for them.
Exactly, but it's probably great for two of them.

I used to be like the OP, until I tried to add a second 8800GTX to my AMD FX60 rig and saw I wasn't getting near the scaling the reviewers did with C2D processors.

I saw it again with the Phenom II 965 and SLi'd GTX480s and 2GB GTX560s.

A 4.1GHz i7 is a good enough cpu to get some scaling on the three 580s, but that H article showed 4.8 is better. I've always had a theory that NVIDIA GPU scaling looks worse than ATi's at times because the GPU starts out at higher performance for a single GPU, and the smaller percentage of scaling is a function of the multiple GPUs being more CPU limited.

http://www.hardocp.com/article/2011/...rifire_redux/6

This article seems to prove out my theory; however, I don't know if I agree 100% with Kyle's assertion the ATi cards are more efficient is a preferable situation. While it is good they achieve their maximum level of performance with less CPU power, what about people like you who need more graphics power? The performance of the NVIDIA GPUs appears to keep climbing as more CPU speed is applied, which is a good thing for people trying to run extreme resolutions like you are. (or 3d Vision surround or 3d Surround with Physx)
__________________
Rig1:
intel 990X + 2 X EVGA 3GB GTX580 + 3 X Acer GD235Hz
3D Vision Surround

Rig 2:
intel 2500K + NVIDIA GTX590 + Dell 3007 WFPHC

[SIZE="1"]NVIDIA Focus Group Member
[B]NVIDIA Focus Group Members receive free software and/or hardware from NVIDIA from time to time to facilitate the evaluation of NVIDIA products. However, the opinions expressed are solely those of the Members.[/B][/SIZE]
Rollo is offline   Reply With Quote