| Forum Home | ||||
| Press F1 | ||||
| Thread ID: 135407 | 2013-10-30 09:10:00 | Graphics card advice needed | supersi (8401) | Press F1 |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 1358281 | 2013-10-30 09:10:00 | I'm purchasing a ASRock P67 PRO3 SE Intel P67 LGA 1155 ATX motherboard which as far as I can tell has 2 x graphics cards slots. I want to run 4 x dvi or hdmi connected monitors so I need 2 x graphics cards. I want to buy 2 graphics cards for a combined value of no more than $350. Currently I game using a Radeon HD 4850, so whatever cards I purchase I thought I could link to get better performance. How much of a performance gain can I get from linking cheaper cards and can anyone recommend good, value for money cards? |
supersi (8401) | ||
| 1358282 | 2013-10-30 17:36:00 | I would not buy Asrock, stick with ASUS or Gigabye. Many boards have 2 PCI-E slots. Performance isn't great with dual cards, certainly it doesn't justify the extra expense....but if you only need an old card, cost shouldn't be too high, you cannot buy 2 new cards with any decent performance though for that budget. I suggest you keep the one you have and look for another of the same second hand if you really need all those monitors. Me - I'd stick with one decent, high end card and 2 monitors. |
pctek (84) | ||
| 1358283 | 2013-10-30 17:57:00 | From a gaming point of view 2 graphics cards for < $350 is likely to be a downgrade from the 4850. You are much better off in my opinion to buy 1 good card and either use the onboard graphics or keep the 4850 to give you the 4th monitor. You can run 2 cards independently without using crossfire so they don't have to match. I'd be inclined to run two off the 4850 and two off a new card, make sure your PSU is up to it though. I assume at that price you are not planning to game over multiple monitors, you won't have the power. Also why a P67? that's an old board. Is it a replacement or do you have parts already to go with it? I'm pretty sure either of these will do 3 monitors although you will need a display port adapter and I haven't personally tried it, 2 is easy enough though. www.pp.co.nz www.pp.co.nz |
dugimodo (138) | ||
| 1358284 | 2013-10-30 18:04:00 | if your spending $350 on two gpus and connecting it to 4 screens the chances that these gpus will support 4 screens is very low and the performance you will get from it will be terrible. If its gaming your looking for you may want to get your priorities straight and get a single monitor and a far more powerful gpu with whatever money you saved by doing so (assuming you havent already got the monitors). Otherwise your best off saving up and buying ONE good gpu as you will not get better performance from two half price gpu's and especially not if your trying to run 4 monitors as it will require quite a powerful card to make gaming even slightly doable. | Slankydudl (16687) | ||
| 1358285 | 2013-10-30 19:56:00 | I would go for one GPU, like a 660 or something, to run all 4 displays off. This, imo, will be far better than 2 rubbish GPUs. Might even be able to pick up a 760 not much over your price range. All the Kepler-based GPUs can support quad display, provided the hardware partner has included the right combination of outputs. | inphinity (7274) | ||
| 1358286 | 2013-10-30 20:00:00 | I'm pretty sure either of these will do 3 monitors although you will need a display port adapter and I haven't personally tried it, 2 is easy enough though. Be carefull. Ive been caught out with claims of 3,4 monitor support. If you read the fine print you may find that at least monitor 3 (& or 4) will have to be NATIVE Display port, ie NOT via an adaptor : unless you buy a very expensive vid card. Not allways, but I bet most single vid card supporting 3,4 monitors WILL require native display port monitors. There are exceptions with some expensive CAD graphics cards & possibly some really expensive Matrox cards. |
1101 (13337) | ||
| 1358287 | 2013-10-30 21:08:00 | Hmm, I have a 650 Ti Boost in my 2nd machine, might grab all my old monitors in the weekend and see how many I can get it to run. It has connections enough for at least 3. Not sure I have the required cables though. Anyway at least 3 people repeated the same advice, 1 good card is better than 2 cheap ones. I'll repeat what may have been overlooked, you can always keep the 4850 and use it as well as a new card - no need for matching cards and crossfire/SLI. the P67 doesn't give access to the GPU in an i series CPU from memory, but there are other chipsets that do allow it to be used in parrallel with the add in card so that's an option also. On the rig in my signature for example I run dual screens and have tried it with both off the 7970 and also with one running off the intel integrated graphics, both methods work for 2 screens. |
dugimodo (138) | ||
| 1358288 | 2013-10-30 23:38:00 | I would not buy Asrock, stick with ASUS or Gigabye. Many boards have 2 PCI-E slots. Performance isn't great with dual cards, certainly it doesn't justify the extra expense....but if you only need an old card, cost shouldn't be too high, you cannot buy 2 new cards with any decent performance though for that budget. I suggest you keep the one you have and look for another of the same second hand if you really need all those monitors. Me - I'd stick with one decent, high end card and 2 monitors. ASRock is one of the leading OEMs of motherboards in the US, nothing wrong with them, innovative, feature rich at great prices....I would of suggested a Z77 board though, that way you can run 2 from the motherboard and 2 from the dGPU, saving the need for a second card. Edit - a single Kepler 6xx series can run 4 monitor on its own, 2 x DVI, HDMI and mini DP, supports 3 x surround and for montoring. |
SolMiester (139) | ||
| 1358289 | 2013-10-31 21:52:00 | AMD products (both APU and GPU) have superior multi-monitor solutions. | pablo d (15490) | ||
| 1 | |||||