I don't see 2gb vram cutting it with 3x 6970s with 3x 1080p. So you'll need the 6990.
You can fit 3x6970 on the $1000 budget as well.
ok lets look at the costs. 1000usd setup you guys say. Mmm adding the 6970 did anyone look at their cooling they used? Was it stock or did they spend extra on it?
I always believe you buy a gpu to match your monitor setup. Now lets say you want to play at 1600p. 1x Gtx 580 3gb version on nvidia side.
Amd side 6990.
Now if you got a setup and run 3x 1080p then to see the value of that you need what 6990 plus a 6970 cf config or 2x Gtx 580 3gb versions.
I don't see 2gb vram cutting it with 3x 6970s with 3x 1080p. So you'll need the 6990.
Now we are in the LCD era so we will only see 120fps or 60fps per resolution max.
Did they look at it logical or did they just throw 3 high end cards together and test it on a couple of games? What's the price of 3 x 1080p LCDs vs a 1600p LCD. What about the 6990 running 105 degrees in some games. Running that gpu alone on the reference cooler make it sound like a hoover and it still run hot. You'll need to add extra cooling cost aswell.
If you update your drivers and it breaks something, an intelligent person rolls back to the drivers that were working with his setup and informs AMD/nVidia of the bug. Someone with an agenda comes onto forums whining about nonexistent issues to push their position.
Both company's drivers are very good. Both company's drivers occasionally have bugs. If you don't want to deal with that, buy a console.
Ummmm, what kind of pie you baking mate?
And then use them in 2 pci-e slots? That's the benefit of the 6990/6970 crossfire setup. If you are going to use 3 slots then both companies have similar options at that price point.
ok lets look at the costs. 1000usd setup you guys say. Mmm adding the 6970 did anyone look at their cooling they used? Was it stock or did they spend extra on it?
I always believe you buy a gpu to match your monitor setup. Now lets say you want to play at 1600p. 1x Gtx 580 3gb version on nvidia side.
Amd side 6990.
Now if you got a setup and run 3x 1080p then to see the value of that you need what 6990 plus a 6970 cf config or 2x Gtx 580 3gb versions.
I don't see 2gb vram cutting it with 3x 6970s with 3x 1080p. So you'll need the 6990.
Now we are in the LCD era so we will only see 120fps or 60fps per resolution max.
Did they look at it logical or did they just throw 3 high end cards together and test it on a couple of games? What's the price of 3 x 1080p LCDs vs a 1600p LCD. What about the 6990 running 105 degrees in some games. Running that gpu alone on the reference cooler make it sound like a hoover and it still run hot. You'll need to add extra cooling cost aswell.
sorry I answer a 100 questions a day about Amd users having issues with the drivers. Just go look around the forums. Its a issue that's been plaguing Amd for a long time. Nvidia have the occasional problem but you can't argue that it equals to what Amd users are going thru. Seriously if you say its not the truth just go around the internet on the forums and have a look at the problems in the graphics sections. That's why many users stick to nvidia coz they don't want to take that risk. Amd have lost a lot of sales just over that issue. Another example is their workstation cards. Again drivers and that's one of the things that makes those cards so valuable. The drivers. Just have a look by using a application called nhancer and have a look at the profiling system and settings that can used to get rid of problems you might have. You can see nvidia at least did some testing on it as you can even set the gaming engine the game is using. After all the game gets written to middleware and not to the drivers.
ok lets look at the costs. 1000usd setup you guys say. Mmm adding the 6970 did anyone look at their cooling they used? Was it stock or did they spend extra on it?
I always believe you buy a gpu to match your monitor setup. Now lets say you want to play at 1600p. 1x Gtx 580 3gb version on nvidia side.
Amd side 6990.
Now if you got a setup and run 3x 1080p then to see the value of that you need what 6990 plus a 6970 cf config or 2x Gtx 580 3gb versions.
I don't see 2gb vram cutting it with 3x 6970s with 3x 1080p. So you'll need the 6990.
Now we are in the LCD era so we will only see 120fps or 60fps per resolution max.
Did they look at it logical or did they just throw 3 high end cards together and test it on a couple of games? What's the price of 3 x 1080p LCDs vs a 1600p LCD. What about the 6990 running 105 degrees in some games. Running that gpu alone on the reference cooler make it sound like a hoover and it still run hot. You'll need to add extra cooling cost aswell.
sorry I answer a 100 questions a day about Amd users having issues with the drivers. Just go look around the forums. Its a issue that's been plaguing Amd for a long time. Nvidia have the occasional problem but you can't argue that it equals to what Amd users are going thru. Seriously if you say its not the truth just go around the internet on the forums and have a look at the problems in the graphics sections. That's why many users stick to nvidia coz they don't want to take that risk. Amd have lost a lot of sales just over that issue. Another example is their workstation cards. Again drivers and that's one of the things that makes those cards so valuable. The drivers. Just have a look by using a application called nhancer and have a look at the profiling system and settings that can used to get rid of problems you might have. You can see nvidia at least did some testing on it as you can even set the gaming engine the game is using. After all the game gets written to middleware and not to the drivers.
Pure unsubstantiated FUD. You can find driver problems from both vendors. You just choose to make a mountain out of one company's and ignore the other.
All of those users who's questions you are answering are getting no service from you, just propaganda.
What was nVidia's last driver bug? (I'll give you a hint. It has to do with 590's and smoke.) Don't tell me their nVidia's problems aren't as bad as AMD's!
Umm, both of NV'd major driver bugs has been to do with thermal\power control, while AMD's have just been buggy...
I am quiet happy to admit AMD has done very well with drivers in the last 2-3 yrs, however, I have no issue telling you now, ATI was notorious for breaking games one month to the next with their monthly driver updates as they had several game bundles that they tested on alternate months...Anand had an article about it....As for CCC, well that was just the worst control app ever!...and really its only in the last 3 months that AMD has come out with an app that allows profile installing for CF, before that, you had to get new drivers every time a new game came out...and lets just not talk about the ninety's!..LOL
I am well aware of how CF works thanks!.....I was making a point about apples to apples!
Ummmm, what kind of pie you baking mate?
Pure unsubstantiated FUD. You can find driver problems from both vendors. You just choose to make a mountain out of one company's and ignore the other.
All of those users who's questions you are answering are getting no service from you, just propaganda.
What was nVidia's last driver bug? (I'll give you a hint. It has to do with 590's and smoke.) Don't tell me their nVidia's problems aren't as bad as AMD's!
Having owned all three of the common GPU brands, AMD/Nvidia/Intel, I'd have to say without a doubt in my mind that Intel's drivers are the crappiest, at least with my specific rigs that is.
I get frequent "driver stopped working, display recovered" errors with the Intel drivers and IGP.
Intel's drivers on my laptop remind me of Windows 95...a daily reboot is highly recommended.
sorry I answer a 100 questions a day about Amd users having issues with the drivers. Just go look around the forums. Its a issue that's been plaguing Amd for a long time.
Could you provide links to those 100s of questions a day you answer?
I have used various nV and ATI cards over the years and the only major driver problems I had were with the nV 8800GTS 640 I got on launch day. I have never used XFire or SLI though.
Not to bang on about this but I have never heard of an ATI driver killing one of their cards...whereas with nV it has been twice now from what I understand. That is pretty serious and definitely invalidates your claim of "way more problems" with ATI drivers.
They both have issues once in a while.
go look around in all the major forums around the web. you will see. or google the screen flicker issue Amd gpu, or google bad fps in Crysis Crossfire or bsod ati.sys.
Ok, let me give it a try...
Screen Ficker
Bad FPS in Crysis
BSOD
Did I do that right? Is that what you wanted us to see?
Umm, both of NV'd major driver bugs has been to do with thermal\power control, while AMD's have just been buggy...
I am quiet happy to admit AMD has done very well with drivers in the last 2-3 yrs, however, I have no issue telling you now, ATI was notorious for breaking games one month to the next with their monthly driver updates as they had several game bundles that they tested on alternate months...Anand had an article about it....As for CCC, well that was just the worst control app ever!...and really its only in the last 3 months that AMD has come out with an app that allows profile installing for CF, before that, you had to get new drivers every time a new game came out...and lets just not talk about the ninety's!..LOL
lol we all know why they a bit off.
But looking at that test. Now we have nvidia whos features are stereoscopic 3d. I'm not going to add physx that's not relevant.
We have Amd who's features are eyefinity.
That's why they put 2gb on their gpus.
Why was the tests run on a feature that 1 manufacturer specializes in?
If I want to play on 3x 1080p monitors I would not even think about getting two nvidia cards that sports 1.5gb ram. Cmon its clear as day light you can even see in the first test it ran out of vram. What did they expect? Nvidia didn't made them for eyefinity they made them for their feature that's 3d. 3d cuts your fps in half depend on the game. Some got like a 1 to 2 percent hit on it. That's where a 1000usd nvidia setup will make sense to me to use its 3d feature. Why go out and waste money if you know your LCDs are 3x 1080p monitors and you need more vram? same as why go waste 1000usd on a Amd setup when you got a 3d LCD running at 1080p or 1600p?
how will benchmarks look comparing Amd setup vs nvidia setup in 3d?
Why not do the benches on 1080p and 1600p single monitor setups?
Btw I meant 2x6970 not 3. Made a typo with all these 3s.
And a driver can't blow up your card at boot. The 590 smoked at boot which suggest the bios tables was messed up. That's what the driver use to scan for the voltages. Wizzard made a mistake in his edited bios.
Btw I meant 2x6970 not 3. Made a typo with all these 3s.
hmm then how about DA2 problem? And then opengl problem ?
please don't insult the reviewer if you don't like the result, they have devoted a great deal of time to review the hardware for you for free so you don't make mistake and buying wrong hardware. If you don't like it, just don't read it, as simple as that, and btw wizard never modify the bios in his review, its just asus bios that allow high voltage adjustment like their boxes said
ok a 6970 plus a 6990 gives you 36 fps on 3x1080p. Whats 2x6970 going to give you?Do you realize that 2X6970 is faster than 6990.. and even though 6990 has 4 GB of total VRAM.. the effective VRAM is still 2 GB.