Graphic Card Benchmark for surround resolution ?

[Z-FiRE]

Hi,

I have a triple monitor configuration running in 5040x1050 (powered by Matrox TH2Go) with a GeForce 8800 GTX, and I'll have to change my graphic card in a futur. But I don't find any benchmark for this resolution. The higher resolution is alway 1920x1080 like here

So how do you do to choose your graphic card ? Is there a benchmark for surround resolution anywhere ?
If not, do you think the best card (or a good one) in 1920x1080 will be the best (or a good one) in 5040x1050 too ?

Thanks :)

edit : wich information is important to buy a graphic card with surround resolution ? Lot of RAM, fast processor... ?

[Abram]

As much GPU ram as you can muster, and a processor to match.

Twice now, I've made a large step-up in CPU upgrades before a large-ish step-up in video cards. The new CPU always made lager difference than i expected, and gained a bit more performance when i got the video card upgrade that followed.

As for benchmarks, Click the HArdware Benchmark section at the top menu. There are many Multi-Monitor benches.

[Paradigm Shifter]

GPU VRAM makes a lot more difference than raw GPU speed (which is also important, but a VRAM bottleneck will kill performance no matter how powerful the GPU core is).

I'd just look at 1080p Surround benchmarks this way if you're running triple-1050 - you're going to be getting higher framerates at the same settings.

Right now I'd look at the 2GB GTX560s for a 'cheaper' Surround setup. Or possible a pair of GTX480s if you can cope with the heat and power draw and you find them cheap (in the UK they're cheaper than GTX560s ATM)... for a more 'bells 'n' whistles' setup, 3GB GTX580s. But they're not cheap.

[tet5uo]

Heaven Benchmark 2.0 runs in surround :)

:rockout



Well now that I read the OP, I see this isn't what he was aking for.. but I'll leave my post up to remind me to read before responding :)

[Z-FiRE]

Ok thanks for your replies. I didn't see the "hardware & benchmarks" menu, shame on me :p

For my next video card i'll take the one with the higher VRAM as possible.

[Z-FiRE]

Do you think the best way is to have one big video card (like gtx 570 or 580) or 2 little one in SLI (like 2x 8800 gtx or 460 gtx) ? Or it will do the same results ?

[Paradigm Shifter]

Well, if you want to use nVidia Surround, you need SLI. I'd recommend either GTX480s (if you don't mind the power draw and can get them cheap) or 2GB GTX560s, or 3GB GTX580s. Surround is really VRAM hungry.

With AMD EyeFinity, you can do it with one card, but I'd still recommend a 6950/6970. The more VRAM, the better. And don't be fooled by the dual GPU cards saying they're 3GB or 4GB of RAM; they aren't really, it's just marketing - each GPU only has access to half the VRAM, and the contents of the VRAM is duplicated for each GPU.

Like HDDs and RAID1.

[Ryom]

What about the 2GB 560ti from Palit?
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814261099

[Paradigm Shifter]

What about the 2GB 560ti from Palit?
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814261099

...or 2GB GTX560s...

[Ryom]

Missed that :)

[Paradigm Shifter]

:mrgreen:

[tet5uo]

Better than me missing the whole point with my first reply :hide :)

[Z-FiRE]

Well, if you want to use nVidia Surround, you need SLI. I'd recommend either GTX480s (if you don't mind the power draw and can get them cheap) or 2GB GTX560s, or 3GB GTX580s. Surround is really VRAM hungry.

With AMD EyeFinity, you can do it with one card, but I'd still recommend a 6950/6970. The more VRAM, the better. And don't be fooled by the dual GPU cards saying they're 3GB or 4GB of RAM; they aren't really, it's just marketing - each GPU only has access to half the VRAM, and the contents of the VRAM is duplicated for each GPU.

Like HDDs and RAID1.

Thanks :) Actually I want to use the TH2Go like right now, i've this stuff with one 8800 GTX. I don't want ATI card :P only nvidia :D But i'm wondering if it's better to have 2x8800 GTX or 1x480 or 1x560...

[Paradigm Shifter]

Thanks :) Actually I want to use the TH2Go like right now, i've this stuff with one 8800 GTX. I don't want ATI card :P only nvidia :D But i'm wondering if it's better to have 2x8800 GTX or 1x480 or 1x560...

You'd be better served with a single GPU, than 8800GTX SLI. Aim for 2GB GTX560 or a GTX480... they will have more power than an SLI 8800GTX setup.

[KGB ate my bread]

don't know what games you play, but you're going to want a 2gb GPU if you plan to run 2x AA and 1x AF in a game like Battlefield: Bad Company 2

[tet5uo]

don't know what games you play, but you're going to want a 2gb GPU if you plan to run 2x AA and 1x AF in a game like Battlefield: Bad Company 2

Nah, I run 1.5 GB cards and 4xAA 4x AF at 5760x1080 and I've never seen it go above 1.2gb VRAM usage.

Still higher VRAM is always better for future games at surround resolutions, if they actually start pushing some heavy games out this year.

[Pokletu]

Hi, guys,

You're telling us that MEMORY is more important than STREAM PROCESSORS? You sound like you probably know what you're talking about, but this is a really big surprise to me.

In my reasoning(Though perhaps faulty: I need to know), the GPUs share memory(geometry and textures), and calculate the view angle: what's culled, foreground, bacground, off to the side, off-screen...
That's passed to the stream processors, which stretch the textures across the geometry, etc... and start drawing to the frame buffer. Therefore, for higher resolutions, more stream processors=sufficient bandwidth for high-rez frames.

If this is NOT the case, then my gut feeling about how graphic cards work(or certain architectures in question) needs correction.

Are you SURE that MEMORY is so important? Could you explain why?

Thanks.

[Skid]

First off, number of cores or Stream Processors is not an accurate way to measure the performance of the card, take the top two cards on the market atm, the GTX 590 and HD 6990. Both perform around the same level but the HD6990 has 3 times as many cores, and they are clocked faster then the GTX 590s cores.

But its worth remembering the memory issue is just that on higher resolutions you need more, its not that it make the card overall faster, but if your running at 5040x1050 with high graphics settings, you run the risk of running out of graphics memory. If that happens then the card will have to start swapping data or recalculating some of the more complex calculations that it stores so it doesn't have to keep doing them, like lighting maps. And this will just kill the performance.

The memory doesn't just store what's visible on the screen, it needs to store everything that could be rendered, and for speed, everything that might be rendered next. It also keep process information to help speed up future renderings, anti-aliasing also increases memory usage, etc.

[Pokletu]

I don't really get it.

Is the frame buffer where all the memory space is getting used up? That I could see, since higher resolution frames would be bigger "files".

Is the frame buffer written to the card's general memory?