GTX 680 2GB vs GTX 670 4GB what to get for 1080p?

[Shou Miko]

i was recently asked this question from friends and a family member of which gfx to actually take when we talk about GTX 670 and GTX 680 from Nvidia but the thing i was more like was the size i was asked.

bcs if the two cards with the same clock speeds than there is only the cuda cores (1344 vs. 1536) in difference which will make u get difference scores and fps in games.

but i got asked if i would prefer the GTX 680 with 2gb or grapping a GTX 670 with 4gb or memory when i play games. bcs when they look at me i got a GTX 680 2gb myself and i don't play games like BF3 and Skyrim bcs that's not me, i just want my games to have good quality.

but how much difference will their be when we take the GTX 680 2gb vs. GTX 670 4gb when we only run 1920x1080 in games and i mean them all, bcs after i read that EA and Dice from next year will only make games for 64bit to make ppl have a 2 or 3gb vram on their gfx i still think a GTX 680 2gb is the way bcs could it possible be that 2gb buffering will run out anytime soon?

 

[erocker]

Just look at the 680/670 reviews. The vram amount won't make any difference at that resolution. If anything the extra vram may slow it down a miniscule amount due to latencies.

 

[Sinzia]

if you only run 1080 resolution, I doubt there would be a difference.

I run a single 680 on 5760x1080, memory usage in GPU-z rarely shows over a gig with skyrim+the official texture pack- and that's the "biggest" game I have to test with.

 

[DarkOCean]

Today 4gb wont make a difference @1080p, in the future who knows? but there will be other more powerfull gpus that could fully use 4gb. 2gb on gtx670/80 is more than enough for any game out there right now.

 

[Shou Miko]

erocket i have been looking even at W1zzard's GTX680/670 reviews and others showing 4gb versions gets lower scores but still the 4gb may be hard to eat for more games, but still some ppl want to be more like "future-proof" even that's not possible, so the 4gb maybe ain't totally bad if they don't wanna upgrade the next years.

but still i will now say GTX 670 2gb save some money and oc if u don't get pre-oc card or wanna spend all on GTX 680.

 

[wickerman]

The only game that I'd ever been able to see top out my old GTX 580 1536 was BF3 at 2560x1440. 1080p may be the standard gamers resolution today but the reality is..its a pretty low resolution compared to what high end cards today can really push. Frankly I think many would agree really all you would need to do 1080p on high details in the vast majority of games would even be a 560TI, which you can get for around $250ish with rebates.

But it's his money and if he wants the fastest card, that would be the GTX 680. The extra ram on the 670 isn't going to make up for the price premium you're going to pay (which looks to be around $100 vs the 2gb model). The fact that Nvidia launched the 680 at 2gb instead of 4gb should be some indication that they didn't feel it was worth it either.

Future proofing isn't really going to be as big a factor as you think to be honest. By the time you find a game that requires 4gb of ram to run 1080p, the 670 architecture is going to be so out dated that having the 4gb of vram wont make it any more playable than only having the 2gb version. But I suppose people running SLI set ups with multiple monitors would benefit from the extra ram, and being that the 670 adn 680 are close in performance, and most people would likely run 670s in SLI given their price...it is the obvious choice to make a 4gb version. But single card, single monitor...I don't see 4gb being any faster.

 

[LAN_deRf_HA]

Weirdos. I've hit over 3000 mbs in Skyrim with mods at only 1080p. 2100mbs in Crysis. That said most won't notice.

 

[Shou Miko]

Weirdos. I've hit over 3000 mbs in Skyrim with mods at only 1080p. 2100mbs in Crysis. That said most won't notice.

maybe it's bcs the GTX580 don't got TXAA and FXAA?

TXAA 1 should offer better than 8x MSAA visual quality with the performance hit of 2x MSAA.
Then TXAA 2 offers even better image quality but with the performance of 4x MSAA.

http://www.guru3d.com/article/geforce-gtx-680-review/6

 

[LAN_deRf_HA]

maybe it's bcs the GTX580 don't got TXAA and FXAA?

TXAA 1 should offer better than 8x MSAA visual quality with the performance hit of 2x MSAA.
Then TXAA 2 offers even better image quality but with the performance of 4x MSAA.

http://www.guru3d.com/article/geforce-gtx-680-review/6

I'm not sure how you're seeing that as a relevant reply but I'm not getting it? And the 580 does have FXAA which factors into that Crysis memory usage. I guess not everyone is as thorough with their modding and maximizing of CP settings as I am but if you're not doing all that you probably don't need top tier cards anyways. Stock Skyrim/Crysis can be maxed on much lesser hardware.

 

[nleksan]

I just got my MB and CPU so I am looking at the same dilemma myself regarding the video card. I went with the Rampage IV Extreme for the reason of excellent SLI support, among other reasons, so I would think that 3x 4GB 670 will perform better than 3x 2GB cards in a multi monitor setup, but I have yet to find any real data on the matter...

 

[Xaser04]

Get a custom cooled GTX670 with 2GB of VRAM. Either the Windforce 3X of Asus Direct CUII (non TOP) should boost to levels that will match a GTX680 out of the box, and both should prove good overclockers. The 680 will only ever be 5-10% better clock for clock *but* may not boost as high (seems very much luck of the draw).

 

[Shou Miko]

Get a custom cooled GTX670 with 2GB of VRAM. Either the Windforce 3X of Asus Direct CUII (non TOP) should boost to levels that will match a GTX680 out of the box, and both should prove good overclockers. The 680 will only ever be 5-10% better clock for clock *but* may not boost as high (seems very much luck of the draw).

well i already got my KFA2 GeForce GTX 680 2gb and i was thinking about getting custom design i dunno yet or just put a Arctic-Cooling Hybrid on it when gets out.

bcs i really luv how the Asus Direct CUII looks but for GTX 680 triple slot is too much.

but this was a question i got asked from a friend and a family member about the memory size.

 

[Xaser04]

well i already got my KFA2 GeForce GTX 680 2gb and i was thinking about getting custom design i dunno yet or just put a Arctic-Cooling Hybrid on it when gets out.

bcs i really luv how the Asus Direct CUII looks but for GTX 680 triple slot is too much.

but this was a question i got asked from a friend and a family member about the memory size.

At your resolution; 1080p, you should be absolutely fine with 2GB of VRAM for quite a while yet. There may be extreme outlier cases where it isn't enough, but I doubt they would be game breakers.

I can quite happily run 3620x1920 on my 670's despite the 2GB VRAM limit. There are games/settings that could cause issues, but I havn't found one yet that couldn't have a setting dropped to ensure the VRAM limit isn't reached, whilst retaining all of the visual quality.

 

[Black Flag]

Just buy Asus 7970 DC2T or MSI 7970 Lightning...

 

[Shou Miko]

Just buy Asus 7970 DC2T or MSI 7970 Lightning...

nope, not a AMD guy too many problems and i use PhysX myself and the GTX 670 priced at the same as the HD7970 and do the same performance if not more plus the GTX 680 it

 

[Black Flag]

hahaha! No problems at all and Physx is now history! Yeah but 7970 can be overclocked to 1100 MHz without adjusting the voltage. Clock to clock 7970 is equal with 680 and 100 USD cheaper...
If you find availability for nvidia's go and grab them...

 

[Shou Miko]

hahaha! No problems at all and Physx is now history! Yeah but 7970 can be overclocked to 1100 MHz without adjusting the voltage. Clock to clock 7970 is equal with 680 and 100 USD cheaper...
If you find availability for nvidia's go and grab them...

the local hardware store in my city got some GTX 670 and 680 in stock so it's not a problem

i even bought my KFA2 there.