High end GPU advice (@ 5120x1440)

Hey Guys, 

While I am not building for a couple of months, I am wanting to get some advice on graphics cards. I am building a high end rig, for both gaming and rendering, udk, etc.

I will be needing to have a good enough graphics setup to power 2 - 2560 x 1440 resolution monitors at 5120 x 1440, so would like to be able to play modern and new games at this resolution too (I play anything from Skyrim, to Bioshock, to Battlefield, Crysis 3, etc...)

I am also wanting to build a system that is PhysX ready so Nvidia card is a must (i don't want to mess around with a smaller dedicated PhysX card), and as a bonus I am wanting to make my system as quiet and cool as possible. So would rather choose a graphics setup with already decent cooling.

What would be the best graphics setup, considering I would have about £900 to spare for a GPU setup:

-4GB GTX690 (I'm guessing 2GB VRam is not enough for modern games at this resolution?)   (About £750)

- 2 x 4GB GTX 670    (About £800)

- 2 x 4GB GTX 680    (A bit out of budget, would be about £1000)    

Or any other suggestions? Open to most suggestions? Thanks for your help guys.

Titan

only good nvidia option for that high of a resolution is the titan.  The 680/670/660ti etc start choking at anything above 1080p due to the low memory bandwidth.  The amount of vram doesn't matter if the rate at which its being used up is lagging behind the rest of the specs.  So yeah if physx is a must for you then titan is the best option.  If you don't mind AMD, then the radeon 7970 and 7950 are champs, they handle higher resolutions really well.

Titan.

only good nvidia option for that high of a resolution is the titan.  The 680/670/660ti etc start choking at anything above 1080p due to the low memory bandwidth.  The amount of vram doesn't matter if the rate at which its being used up is lagging behind the rest of the specs.  So yeah if physx is a must for you then titan is the best option.  If you don't mind AMD, then the radeon 7970 and 7950 are champs, they handle higher resolutions really well.

blaznwiipspman1

only good nvidia option for that high of a resolution is the titan.  The 680/670/660ti etc start choking at anything above 1080p due to the low memory bandwidth.  The amount of vram doesn't matter if the rate at which its being used up is lagging behind the rest of the specs.  So yeah if physx is a must for you then titan is the best option.  If you don't mind AMD, then the radeon 7970 and 7950 are champs, they handle higher resolutions really well.

blaznwiipspman1

i would say 2x670 . They should be faster than titan ( though consume more power ) and cheaperadamosmaki

This was my current line of thinking. Though would probably be the least futureproof of all the setups, as cannot add a third (motherboard will not allow), and drivers won't push much more out of these. 

I wouldn't recommend playing games across 2 screens, you'll have the bezel in the middle making fps games impossible.kraken2109

Very true. Well I guess if that annoys me I will just use one of the monitors for games.

only good nvidia option for that high of a resolution is the titan.  The 680/670/660ti etc start choking at anything above 1080p due to the low memory bandwidth.  The amount of vram doesn't matter if the rate at which its being used up is lagging behind the rest of the specs.  So yeah if physx is a must for you then titan is the best option.  If you don't mind AMD, then the radeon 7970 and 7950 are champs, they handle higher resolutions really well.

blaznwiipspman1

While I do like AMD (current rig even has an AMD card), it is quite important that I have Nvidia, as I will be developing some things with PhysX in the coming months.

[QUOTE="kraken2109"]I wouldn't recommend playing games across 2 screens, you'll have the bezel in the middle making fps games impossible._Matt_

Very true. Well I guess if that annoys me I will just use one of the monitors for games.

GTX Titan.

[QUOTE="_Matt_"]

[QUOTE="kraken2109"]I wouldn't recommend playing games across 2 screens, you'll have the bezel in the middle making fps games impossible.mitu123

Very true. Well I guess if that annoys me I will just use one of the monitors for games.

I would love to. But at the moment I am prioritising 1440p monitors over 3 monitors. If I had 3 monitors I just wouldn't be able to afford 1440p ones.

2 is a bad idea for many reasons, go for 1 or 3acanofcoke

Many reasons? Coul.d you please clarify? I mean outside of gaming can be difficult with a frame right in the middle, what other reasons is it not great to have 2 monitors?

2 is a bad idea for many reasons, go for 1 or 3acanofcoke

I have 2 monitors and it is far superior to 1.  I do only game on one of them though.

[QUOTE="acanofcoke"]2 is a bad idea for many reasons, go for 1 or 3_Matt_

Many reasons? Coul.d you please clarify? I mean outside of gaming can be difficult with a frame right in the middle, what other reasons is it not great to have 2 monitors?

[QUOTE="_Matt_"]

[QUOTE="acanofcoke"]2 is a bad idea for many reasons, go for 1 or 3acanofcoke

Many reasons? Coul.d you please clarify? I mean outside of gaming can be difficult with a frame right in the middle, what other reasons is it not great to have 2 monitors?

Ah ok, that's fine then :) . 

Maybe I will just game on one of the monitors then.

I wouldn't recommend playing games across 2 screens, you'll have the bezel in the middle making fps games impossible.kraken2109

This

3 screens ok, but this isnt supported by all games - but all the ones you named i wouldnt play on 2 screens

Also what are you doing with PhysX?  As to be honest this will be more and likely phased out over the next couple of years certainly game wise in favor of better physics engines

Also what are you doing with PhysX?  As to be honest this will be more and likely phased out over the next couple of years certainly game wise in favor of better physics engines

5SI-GonePostal

titan.

My god. Do all of you use your PCs for nothing but gaming? He said he'll be doing rendering and other intensive things outside of gaming. Being able to use more than one monitor for rendering or editing is so much more productive.quikdash6

pretty much :P

My god. Do all of you use your PCs for nothing but gaming? He said he'll be doing rendering and other intensive things outside of gaming. Being able to use more than one monitor for rendering or editing is so much more productive.quikdash6

[QUOTE="blaznwiipspman1"]

only good nvidia option for that high of a resolution is the titan.  The 680/670/660ti etc start choking at anything above 1080p due to the low memory bandwidth.  The amount of vram doesn't matter if the rate at which its being used up is lagging behind the rest of the specs.  So yeah if physx is a must for you then titan is the best option.  If you don't mind AMD, then the radeon 7970 and 7950 are champs, they handle higher resolutions really well.

acanofcoke

I recommended him the titan, and since he needs cuda the 7970 and 7950 are out.  its true that at higher resolutions the geforce 680 and 670 start to choke up compared to the 7970 and 7950, its not an opinion that much is pretty much fact.  he wants to game at ultra high esolutions, double that of 1440p so yeah te best nvidia card that fits his criteria is the titan

F it Go 5400x1920 @ 120hz GioVela2010

F it Go 5400x1920 @ 120hz GioVela2010

dem bezels

Does your monitors use Displayport or DVI-D to reach 1440p?ShadowDeathX

DVI-D almost certainly. I think Display Port is a potential option, but most GPUs only have a single display port anyway.

[QUOTE="5SI-GonePostal"]

Also what are you doing with PhysX?  As to be honest this will be more and likely phased out over the next couple of years certainly game wise in favor of better physics engines

ShadowDeathX

Nah PhysX too. I am going to be developing a project in UDK with PhysX. Otherwise I wouldn't care.

I am currently thinking 2x 4GB GTX 670s.

Can someone confirm that is definitely worth investing in the 4GB version? If we assume I have 2 1440p monitors always on, but only play on a single 2560x1440 monitor for the majority of games?

Edit: I'm just asking, because i have been looking at some reviews that suggest that 9 times out of 10 the 2GB GTX 670 is actually faster benchmarks in games, even at 5760 x 1080, so seems the extra 2GB vRAM is more hindrance, even at that resolution. The only real exception seems to be in Skyrim.

[QUOTE="ShadowDeathX"]Does your monitors use Displayport or DVI-D to reach 1440p?_Matt_

DVI-D almost certainly. I think Display Port is a potential option, but most GPUs only have a single display port anyway.

AMD video cards usually have more than 1.  For instance my 6950 has 2 display ports.

[QUOTE="GioVela2010"]F it Go 5400x1920 @ 120hz GummiRaccoon

dem bezels

They should be equally fast until you reach VRAM bottlenecks for the 2GB version. Which you will rather quickly on a 2560*1440 monitor. horgen123

[QUOTE="GummiRaccoon"]

[QUOTE="GioVela2010"]F it Go 5400x1920 @ 120hz ]mitu123

dem bezels

[QUOTE="mitu123"]

[QUOTE="GummiRaccoon"]

dem bezels

Elann2008

[QUOTE="Elann2008"][QUOTE="mitu123"]Thin bezels aren't too bad, but I would rather game with up to 3 monitors.

mitu123

[QUOTE="mitu123"]

[QUOTE="GummiRaccoon"]

dem bezels

Elann2008

I like how thin those bezels are

[QUOTE="mitu123"]

[QUOTE="Elann2008"] I don't see what's wrong with the bezels? Unless you just don't like bezels at all. Bezels aren't going to get thinner than that. If you absolutely must not have bezels, you can get one of those widescreen curved monitors that cost a ton of $$$ like this one.Elann2008