Cuttlefish Posted August 31, 2014 Share Posted August 31, 2014 Any ideas on which would be better? I know that the m290x is better as a singular gpu, but I have no idea on dual. Will be playing intensive games such as: Cyrsis 3 Arma 3/2/Day-Z mod Day-Z standalone etc... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crasher Posted August 31, 2014 Share Posted August 31, 2014 DayZ SA is more CPU intensive than GPU. Same goes for Arma 3/2/DayZ Mod. Truth is if you don't have more than one monitor you don't need duals. I suggest M90X. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silencedotmid Posted August 31, 2014 Share Posted August 31, 2014 The better question is why are you messing around with dual mobile GPUs? Your laptop is going to be a firey hellpit. In addition, the state of SLI/crossfire is kind of bad right now, many games still don't support it and you get pretty diminishing gains. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AwesomeMcCoolName Posted August 31, 2014 Share Posted August 31, 2014 In addition, the state of SLI/crossfire is kind of bad right now, many games still don't support it and you get pretty diminishing gains. Ummm......no Most games nowadays (all the ones you'd actually need SLI/Xfire) support it; and two-way SLI/Xfire is still worthwhile. It's not until you get to three and four way that the extra added performance really starts to fall off. Any ideas on which would be better? I know that the m290x is better as a singular gpu, but I have no idea on dual. Will be playing intensive games such as: Cyrsis 3 Arma 3/2/Day-Z mod Day-Z standalone etc... What are the rest of the specs? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
There Posted August 31, 2014 Share Posted August 31, 2014 DayZ SA is more CPU intensive than GPU. Same goes for Arma 3/2/DayZ Mod. Truth is if you don't have more than one monitor you don't need duals. I suggest M90X. If you're on a laptop, you might. Drivers are improving. If you're not worried about heat, or the hassle that SLI/CF can sometimes be, the M290Xs are a much better option. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cuttlefish Posted August 31, 2014 Author Share Posted August 31, 2014 Ummm......no Most games nowadays (all the ones you'd actually need SLI/Xfire) support it; and two-way SLI/Xfire is still worthwhile. It's not until you get to three and four way that the extra added performance really starts to fall off. What are the rest of the specs? i7-4710MQ, 8gb ram, typical everything else, 750gb HDD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AwesomeMcCoolName Posted August 31, 2014 Share Posted August 31, 2014 i7-4710MQ, 8gb ram, typical everything else, 750gb HDD m290x assuming they won't thermal throttle--id suggest looking into reviews on the specific laptop Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cuttlefish Posted August 31, 2014 Author Share Posted August 31, 2014 m290x assuming they won't thermal throttle--id suggest looking into reviews on the specific laptop Many thanks again, I've posted this for my brother but I've decided to go for a pc now. Gonna be using an i7-4790k and a GTX 770 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AwesomeMcCoolName Posted August 31, 2014 Share Posted August 31, 2014 Many thanks again, I've posted this for my brother but I've decided to go for a pc now. Gonna be using an i7-4790k and a GTX 770 Much better choice. Although I'd still go for an R9 290 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cuttlefish Posted September 1, 2014 Author Share Posted September 1, 2014 Much better choice. Although I'd still go for an R9 290 I would but the tdp on it is too high for me ;-; Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AwesomeMcCoolName Posted September 1, 2014 Share Posted September 1, 2014 I would but the tdp on it is too high for me ;-; who cares about tdp Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cuttlefish Posted September 1, 2014 Author Share Posted September 1, 2014 who cares about tdp Me, cos more KWh to pay for ;-; Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AwesomeMcCoolName Posted September 1, 2014 Share Posted September 1, 2014 Me, cos more KWh to pay for ;-; TDP isn't the same as power consumption. TDP has to do with heat dissipation. A GTX770 and an r9 290 have very similar power consumptions--the 770 is only marginally more efficient than a 290. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
t1m1d Posted September 3, 2014 Share Posted September 3, 2014 Me, cos more KWh to pay for ;-; Unless you're playing games 24/7 I doubt you'll notice a difference in your power bill. And they only ever get even close to using that much power at absolute max load. At idle they barely use anything. I've never heard of anyone making decisions on a gaming pc before based on their electricity bill haha. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AwesomeMcCoolName Posted September 3, 2014 Share Posted September 3, 2014 I've never heard of anyone making decisions on a gaming pc before based on their electricity bill haha. A decent number of people opt for Intel over AMD, or at least say they do based on the fact that Intel is a lot more efficient--thus saving money in the long run. Little do those people know, that it would take about a decade of energy costs (assuming average use) to account for the extra cost of going Intel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
t1m1d Posted September 3, 2014 Share Posted September 3, 2014 Yeah, seriously. The r9 290 averages 215w at load, while the gtx 770 averages 190. Let's say you pay 15 cents per kwh (a lot higher than what I pay). The 290 only costs you $0.00375 more per hour. That's less than a third of a penny! You'd have to play for over 1300 hours to spend $5 more in electricity than the 770. Absolutely worth it IMO. That's nothing. edited 'cuz i'm dumb and initially used a 290x for the math Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cuttlefish Posted September 4, 2014 Author Share Posted September 4, 2014 Yeah, seriously. The r9 290 averages 215w at load, while the gtx 770 averages 190. Let's say you pay 15 cents per kwh (a lot higher than what I pay). The 290 only costs you $0.00375 more per hour. That's less than a third of a penny! You'd have to play for over 1300 hours to spend $5 more in electricity than the 770. Absolutely worth it IMO. That's nothing. edited 'cuz i'm dumb and initially used a 290x for the math Well, I'm English and I pay about 20p per kw. I've already ordered it with a 770 4gb so too late to turn back now, I guess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
t1m1d Posted September 4, 2014 Share Posted September 4, 2014 Well, I'm English and I pay about 20p per kw. I've already ordered it with a 770 4gb so too late to turn back now, I guess. Ah, sorry. I should have checked your location. Are you going to consider doing 1440p or multi-monitor gaming? Because the 4gb 770 models really excel there compared to the 2gb ones. Also probably bad timing but http://www.ocaholic.ch/modules/news/article.php?storyid=10731 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cuttlefish Posted September 5, 2014 Author Share Posted September 5, 2014 Ah, sorry. I should have checked your location. Are you going to consider doing 1440p or multi-monitor gaming? Because the 4gb 770 models really excel there compared to the 2gb ones. Also probably bad timing but http://www.ocaholic.ch/modules/news/article.php?storyid=10731 well fuck I'll be running 4k downsampled so the 2gb was pretty much out of question Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.