Originally Posted by iARDAs
Here are some Dirt 3 screenshots
(the game is a courtesy of Drakenxile)
Those are some awesome details, and it's the amounts of details' that are so clear' that make these monitors awesome. I haven't played Dirt even though it was the first game everyone raved worked great with multi screens, is it worth getting for the game and fun or is it just nice too look at and bench?
Originally Posted by dboythagr8
Here are some benchmarks from Heaven on my 3GB 580 SLI setup and my 690 @ 2560x1600 respectively:
The 580s are running at 875mhz, the 690 at stock speed. Does this look/sound right to you guys? Trying to decide if I should sell my 690 and stick with my 580s.
How come everyone else's Heaven V3.0 results box looks different too mine? Anyway there's a 8fps difference and even 44fps at such a high res with everything
set too the maximum in Heaven is really good, but almost getting an average frames of 60 is amazing. People still under estimate heaven as a bench now, although it's no longer the best looking bench and most cards can run it fine at default (normal tessellation) @ 1920x1080, extreme tessellation @2560x1600 at very playable frames is gob smacking. No game that's not seriously un-optimised comes close too the same demand at these settings, so either cards great and should be great for a long time yet. It's what you feel comfortable with.
However I'm really surprised the 690's didn't run out of VRAM in that test with 8xAA and only 2gb of shared memory. Personally I would keep the 580's as VRAM will only become more and more important when resolutions expand and multi screens just keep catching on and it means you can add a 3rd or 4th in the future when you need the power