Overclock.net banner

Which setup should I choose for SC2?

  • GTX 460 2gb SLI

    Votes: 30 48.4%
  • GTX 560 1gb SLI

    Votes: 32 51.6%

SLI: GTX 460 2gb or GTX 560 1gb for multi-monitors?

5K views 54 replies 25 participants last post by  yang88she 
#1 ·
Strict comparison between these two cards, please don't tell me to get 3gb 580s or 6970s.

So they're around the same price right now, I'm just wondering which setup would be provide better performance?

Setup is 3x 30"
 
#5 ·
Quote:


Originally Posted by coelacanth
View Post

I don't know which setup would perform better overall, but at 5760x1200 resolution 1GB of VRAM is not enough. The fact that the 560s > 460s will compensate for that somewhat.

Yea that's what I'm trying to figure out, if the extra cores on the 560 will overcome the extra 1gb of memory on the 460s.
 
#6 ·
From the tests I've seen, the gtx 560 still give an advantage over the 460 2gb. Granted I haven't found them paired up against each other in the same test due to when they were released, but looking at previous benchmarks of each in surround vision, the 560 sli has a performance increase over the 460's.
 
#8 ·
Quote:


Originally Posted by xsf
View Post

From the tests I've seen, the gtx 560 still give an advantage over the 460 2gb. Granted I haven't found them paired up against each other in the same test due to when they were released, but looking at previous benchmarks of each in surround vision, the 560 sli has a performance increase over the 460's.

Could you please link some of those test? I haven't seen any on the GTX 460 2gb in surround.

Quote:


Originally Posted by mango assassin
View Post

GTX 460 2GB in my opinion, not to mention the GTX 580 is incredibly over-priced for what it is, I say hold back this Gen's, and wait for the next ones. I thought the whole of ATi's and Nvidia's card were a let down that come out as of recent.

Thinking about the GTX 560, not the 580. Also, I have a GTS 450 right now, and it's not cutting it @ 4800x2560
 
#9 ·
i've never researched a purchase for such a high resolution (because i game at 1920x1080 like a normal gamer
), but i imagine 1GB of vram would be a severe issue. if you want to use any kind of AA and/or high res textures you'll need more than 1GB vram at that resolution. i believe that you're framerate will remain high as you monitor it, but you'll experience hitching as textures etc. are offloaded from the GPU because you've saturated your 1GB vram.

it sounds like you've heard it all before (6950 2GB unlocked blah blah blah)..but honestly the 460 2GB does not seem like your best bang-for-the-buck. however strictly between those two choices, i'd go with the 460 2GB.
 
#11 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by Porter_;12325528
i've never researched a purchase for such a high resolution (because i game at 1920x1080 like a normal gamer
tongue.gif
), but i imagine 1GB of vram would be a severe issue. if you want to use any kind of AA and/or high res textures you'll need more than 1GB vram at that resolution. i believe that you're framerate will remain high as you monitor it, but you'll experience hitching as textures etc. are offloaded from the GPU because you've saturated your 1GB vram.

it sounds like you've heard it all before (6950 2GB unlocked blah blah blah)..but honestly the 460 2GB does not seem like your best bang-for-the-buck. however strictly between those two choices, i'd go with the 460 2GB.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Booty Warrior;12327007
Although I know you said you're only interested in those two cards... have you considered the 2GB 560?
The reason I ask about the GTX 460 2gb is because one, I figured 1gb of vram wouldn't be enough. Two, I think it has the best cost/performance ratio. And finally, I want to go w/ Nvidia b/c with AMD you need to use a mixture of DVI-D and DP ports that cause a permanent tearing due to slightly different output signals from the two ports (see Vega's thread on [H]), plus it has more driver issues.

Clock for clock, the GTX 560 is only about 10% faster than the GTX 460, but the GTX 560 2gb cost $60 more than the GTX 460 2gb, and in SLI that's $120.
 
#12 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by ebolamonkey3;12329611
The reason I ask about the GTX 460 2gb is because one, I figured 1gb of vram wouldn't be enough. Two, I think it has the best cost/performance ratio. And finally, I want to go w/ Nvidia b/c with AMD you need to use a mixture of DVI-D and DP ports that cause a permanent tearing due to slightly different output signals from the two ports (see Vega's thread on [H]), plus it has more driver issues.

Clock for clock, the GTX 560 is only about 10% faster than the GTX 460, but the GTX 560 2gb cost $60 more than the GTX 460 2gb, and in SLI that's $120.
Gotcha. Well tbh, I don't know that there is a really good "budget" option for a surround setup.

The 2GB 460s wouldn't run out of VRAM at that res, but they're is still confined to a 256-bit bus (the 560 as well). If these are the only options in your price range, the 460 would have to be the choice since the 1GB 560 would absolutely choke with any amount of AA enabled. This guy tried maxing Crysis in Eyefinity with 1G VRAM... it didn't go so well.
biggrin.gif
 
#13 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by Booty Warrior;12329947
Gotcha. Well tbh, I don't know that there is a really good "budget" option for a surround setup.

The 2GB 460s wouldn't run out of VRAM at that res, but they're is still confined to a 256-bit bus (the 560 as well). If these are the only options in your price range, the 460 would have to be the choice since the 1GB 560 would absolutely choke with any amount of AA enabled. This guy tried maxing Crysis in Eyefinity with 1G VRAM... it didn't go so well.
biggrin.gif
Well, everything besides the GTX 580/570 has 256bit bus, so I can't really help it there...
 
#15 ·
Well two 460s with 2GB can handle surround, but don't expect playing with high AA with them in many games as at very high resolutions, they will start to bottle neck on performance. So the 2GB memory won't be used to its limit.

I would say go for the 460s if its cost/effective issue. They cost a lot less and are still great cards.
 
#16 ·
Quote:


Originally Posted by Defoler
View Post

Well two 460s with 2GB can handle surround, but don't expect playing with high AA with them in many games as at very high resolutions, they will start to bottle neck on performance. So the 2GB memory won't be used to its limit.

I would say go for the 460s if its cost/effective issue. They cost a lot less and are still great cards.

Haha yea, I will mainly be playing SC2 with them w/o AA, so I think I should be fine!
 
#17 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by ebolamonkey3;12330235
Haha yea, I will mainly be playing SC2 with them w/o AA, so I think I should be fine!
Don't forget that SC2 doesn't support eyefinity/surround. Max if i'm not mistaken is 1920X1200, which is a stretched 1920X1080.
 
#18 ·
2 GB GTX 560 would be ideal, but might be a bit out of ur budget. but not by much.
i would not get anything less than 2 GB for multiple 30" panels. you might even need 3 GB. there's a member on here who runs 3 30" panels and he reported VRAM usage of way over 2 GB in some heavy games.
you will have to lower texture settings in some games.
 
  • Rep+
Reactions: ebolamonkey3
#20 ·
Quote:


Originally Posted by james8
View Post

2 GB GTX 560 would be ideal, but might be a bit out of ur budget. but not by much.
i would not get anything less than 2 GB for multiple 30" panels. you might even need 3 GB. there's a member on here who runs 3 30" panels and he reported VRAM usage of way over 2 GB.
you will have to lower texture settings in some games.

You will bottle-neck the ram over the 2GB only if you are going nuts with 8aa and 2560X1600X3 monitors.

With two 560s or two 460s, its not even possible anyway, no matter the amound of ram the cards have, as the cards aren't even close to the amount of raw power required to do that.

He is just trying to get a cheap surround setup. So anything over the 1.5GB won't matter that much.
 
#21 ·
in any case, more slightly slower memory is better than not enough memory. the bus will not move information fast enough to load and reload info if you are approaching the max Vram your card has. if you have 3x screens, definately go for a 2gb card. even tho the 460s are a bit slower than the 560, the 560s could just run out of memory at that resolution and then your performance will plummet. you dont add the memory of the cards in SLI, you effectively only get to use the memory from one card. go with a 2gb card for sure because even if it is a bit slower you wont run out of Vram.
 
#22 ·
http://www.overclock.net/graphics-ca...eyefinity.html
^guy trying to game on 3 30" ers
"Virtually all of these games tested even with just 2x AA blew through the 1536 limit on the standard 580's. DCS A-10C used 2200MB, Heaven 2.1 with 8x AA used 2700MB and Eve online at 16x AA used 2800MB VRAM. You see that even with 6970s 2GB with more than 2x AA you run into problems."
 
#23 ·
Quote:


Originally Posted by ebolamonkey3
View Post

Yea that's what I'm trying to figure out, if the extra cores on the 560 will overcome the extra 1gb of memory on the 460s.

You could have a card that is 10 times faster than a gtx 580,
but once the frame buffer runs out, the frame buffer runs out.
Simple as that
 
#24 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by Defoler;12330609
Don't forget that SC2 doesn't support eyefinity/surround. Max if i'm not mistaken is 1920X1200, which is a stretched 1920X1080.
I will just point this out again.
SC2 won't go to such high resolutions, nor support multi-monitor.
So going for surround for that game, is a bit pointless
tongue.gif


A single 560 2GB is more than enough for that game.

Just saying!

For any other really demanding game, even without AA, you will be hard-pressed on that kind of resolution, even with 560 with 2GB.
Metro 2033 you can forget it. Same with mafia if you even look toward physx (not run, just look and the game goes BOOM on you for thinking that way).

3x30" is extremly demanding. It will be rough.
Imo, get something better, or you will feel cheated by later on.
 
#26 ·
Thanks for all the response guys! I have decided to go with 2x GTX 460 2gb cards due to the extra 1gb of ram, and that these cards aren't too much lower than GTX 560s when OC'd.

Also, for those that say SC2 doesn't work in surround, it does in portrait mode. The game engine draws the screen by determining your monitor's height in pixels, and then fills out the rest of the screen horizontally, which is why the game renders a bit more of the map on 16:9 monitors than it does on 16:10 monitors.

In landscape mode, 3x screens are obvious too wide, and the aspect ratio is almost 5:1, so the game engine knows it has to be multiple monitors and won't let you use it to play on Bnet due to Blizz's policy on multi-monitors.

But in portrait mode, the aspect ratio is just little wider than 1080p (15/8 vs 16/9), and everything works. You only see a little bit more of the map compared to a 16:9 monitor, but you can use all 3 screens.

This is what it looks like on 3x 30" monitors


 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top