Widescreen Gaming Forum

If you can have a faster GPU and a total of 2.4gb VRAM, go for that. It's enough.

Note this 2.4gb of VRAM is not total VRAM, it is the max of 1 card, in the op's case 1.2gb of VRAM is the max.

The data in the VRAM is mirrored to addtional cards, it is not combined to create a larger total VRAM storage.

As such I personally would be more inclided to go with 560 with 2gb over the 570 with 1.2gb, and just look at OC'ing the 560's a bit.

_________________
| Gigabyte X79S-UP5-WiFi Skt2011 | i7 4820k @4.4GHz Watercooled (Ivy Bridge-E) | Corsair Vengence 32GB @2133MHz 11-11-11-27 2T Quad-Channel (8x4GB) | AMD R9-Fury-X 4GB @1140/505MHz + EKWB Watercooled | 256GB Crucial MX200 SSD | 8x 1TB Samsung F3 SATA-II | Corsair 850W TX PSU | 3x Dell S2209W 22"wide TFT's (5760x1080res) | Logitech Z-5400 5.1ch speakers | Win7 Ultimate x64 |

[quote]If you can have a faster GPU and a total of 2.4gb VRAM, go for that. It's enough.

Note this 2.4gb of VRAM is not total VRAM, it is the max of 1 card, in the op's case 1.2gb of VRAM is the max.

The data in the VRAM is mirrored to addtional cards, it is not combined to create a larger total VRAM storage.

As such I personally would be more inclided to go with 560 with 2gb over the 570 with 1.2gb, and just look at OC'ing the 560's a bit.


hahaa... funny... this is exactly the two side of the arguments going on in my head for the last couple days... seems like there is no definite answer to this debate... it maybe easier to justify the 570 1.2GB if it is for a single monitor setup... thing just get so much more complicated once it is a 3 monitors setup...

but then again, I never see my cards use more than 1.3 GB.. usually below 1GB... so is 2GB a bit overkill? dont get me wrong, i definitely agree more the better for VRAM... but then now we also have the GPU power in consideration here....

[quote]If you can have a faster GPU and a total of 2.4gb VRAM, go for that. It's enough.

Note this 2.4gb of VRAM is not total VRAM, it is the max of 1 card, in the op's case 1.2gb of VRAM is the max.

The data in the VRAM is mirrored to addtional cards, it is not combined to create a larger total VRAM storage.

As such I personally would be more inclided to go with 560 with 2gb over the 570 with 1.2gb, and just look at OC'ing the 560's a bit.


Oh. that's pretty lame. Now I know...

Hell yes, get teh 560 and OC it.

I use two Palit 560TI 2GB cards in SLI and they serve me well in games (I have yet to feel the need to OC them). I've been able to max out just about every game (Skyrim, Just Cause 2, SWTOR are the most recent I've played) I've thrown at it (save for AA which I never use anyway) and have had playable FPS. My resolution is 5892x1080 with bezel correction factored in. The lowest I hit is in SWTOR when I planet hop and have to restart the client to achieve playable FPS, at which point I'm running at 40+ FPS depending on the planet I'm on. The other two games I didn't experience any significant performance hits to my recollection. Skyrim played smooth (until Bethesda patched it into oblivion, making the game unplayable) as did Just Cause 2. I've played other games, but I don't think they are more system intensive.

If you run into a GPU limit (and thats was supposed to happen... But for comparision we take a gtx570) youre gonna lose 10% Framerates (compared to the gty570)

If you run into a VRAM Limit (and thats not supposed to happen! If it does you can reduce AA or resolution) you're gonna drop to 2-5FPS!

So, depends on what you want to do! Skyrim with ultrahigg texture +8xAa i'd reccomend more Vram!
If you insist on 5FPS more ingamebut reduce to 2xAA (well only that will give way more FPS^^, but just for comparission) youre better off with a faster GPU.

Best is still, invest more money. Get better GPU with more Vram xD

_________________
We gonna send it to outa space!