Show us your Unigine Heaven benchmark scores!

I know the feeling

From what i have read on surround/ eyefinity AMD support multiscreen gaming better than Nvidia with a lot less hassle. This is only from reading online though and not tested by myself.

ganjiry said:

From what i have read on surround/ eyefinity AMD support multiscreen gaming better than Nvidia with a lot less hassle. This is only from reading online though and not tested by myself.

Yes I read that too Ryan on quite a few sites/reviews/benchmarks etc, but that was a few years back, things might have changed now, but smarteyeball is running a higher resolution on his 3 screens than the regular 1080 so that's gonna have a big impact on frame rates.

I expect if his monitors were all 1920x1080 then "maybe" you could get away with 2 cards. I think Vram plays a big part too when you go for a 3 monitor setup, I know the more you have the better as it uses a lot more.
I remember reading that somewhere, but again it was a while back.


At any rate, that is a kick ass rig smarteyeball has

Yeah that res is a proper fps killer :P
Vram is getting used a lot more nowadays enit as even the likes of BF3 will easilly use 2Gb of vram on a full 64 payer map. If i remember rightly 2Gb vram is just about ok for 3x 1920x1080 but at a low fps. Any higher res though and 4Gb is a must.

+1 thats a bostin rig you have there Smarty

paulpicks21 said:

I expect if his monitors were all 1920x1080 then "maybe" you could get away with 2 cards. I think Vram plays a big part too when you go for a 3 monitor setup, I know the more you have the better as it uses a lot more.
I remember reading that somewhere, but again it was a while back.

While there is a difference between 1080 and 1200 in FPS, at 5760 x 1*** it's not that big a difference.

You can get away with 2 cards and surround/ef. Although I wouldn't use any less than a pair of 7950 or 670's unless you have x3 22" screens.

The main difference between 2 and 3 cards I have noticed is that areas with 2 cards, it would either top out or drop to say 45FPS. With a 3rd card, the drop is less and it would go up to 60FPS more often.

Luckily some games are playable maxed with 2 cards already. Others like Bioshock INF, it gave the frames a boost enough to keep it @ 60FPS. The only time it dips, is when entering a new area. It quickly dips down to ~30FPS and then shoots back up to 60 and virtually stays there. For two cards, some detail lowering is a must but you can find a happy speed/quality mix.

Overall the 3rd card adds between ~0-30FPS+ and higher minimum frames. That higher can be the difference between kind of jerky 45FPS to smooth 60. Some games like Arma2 however, make zero difference.

Concerning VRAM, most games handle 2GB of VRAM +Surround quite well. I wouldn't tackle it with anything lese than 1.5GB/2GB though. MSAA is a big VRAM eater at high resolutions. Each step adds ~200MB+ to usage. Without AA, or FXAA, a lot of games sit at about 1.5-1.7GB already. Add x4AA and you might hit the buffer. Without, it's still under the limit.

But the biggest frame killer I've seen so far is SSAA (Screen Space Ambient Occlusion). With surround, that has to be turned off in all games.

At any rate, that is a kick ass rig smarteyeball has

ganjiry said:

+1 thats a bostin rig you have there Smarty

Thanks guys - I do love my setup. It took years to evolve, but evolve into man awesomeness it did

(Here's what it actually looks like)





*NB ▲ - I had a very loving and understanding wife with no kids... that was the result

smarteyeball said:

paulpicks21 said:

I expect if his monitors were all 1920x1080 then "maybe" you could get away with 2 cards. I think Vram plays a big part too when you go for a 3 monitor setup, I know the more you have the better as it uses a lot more.
I remember reading that somewhere, but again it was a while back.

While there is a difference between 1080 and 1200 in FPS, at 5760 x 1*** it's not that big a difference.

You can get away with 2 cards and surround/ef. Although I wouldn't use any less than a pair of 7950 or 670's unless you have x3 22" screens.

The main difference between 2 and 3 cards I have noticed is that areas with 2 cards, it would either top out or drop to say 45FPS. With a 3rd card, the drop is less and it would go up to 60FPS more often.

Luckily some games are playable maxed with 2 cards already. Others like Bioshock INF, it gave the frames a boost enough to keep it @ 60FPS. The only time it dips, is when entering a new area. It quickly dips down to ~30FPS and then shoots back up to 60 and virtually stays there. For two cards, some detail lowering is a must but you can find a happy speed/quality mix.

Overall the 3rd card adds between ~0-30FPS+ and higher minimum frames. That higher can be the difference between kind of jerky 45FPS to smooth 60. Some games like Arma2 however, make zero difference.

Concerning VRAM, most games handle 2GB of VRAM +Surround quite well. I wouldn't tackle it with anything lese than 1.5GB/2GB though. MSAA is a big VRAM eater at high resolutions. Each step adds ~200MB+ to usage. Without AA, or FXAA, a lot of games sit at about 1.5-1.7GB already. Add x4AA and you might hit the buffer. Without, it's still under the limit.

But the biggest frame killer I've seen so far is SSAA (Screen Space Ambient Occlusion). With surround, that has to be turned off in all games.

At any rate, that is a kick ass rig smarteyeball has

ganjiry said:

+1 thats a bostin rig you have there Smarty

Thanks guys - I do love my setup. It took years to evolve, but evolve into man awesomeness it did

(Here's what it actually looks like)





*NB ▲ - I had a very loving and understanding wife with no kids... that was the result

This single card right here is enough to run what you run by itself because Vram is very important for what you are using 5760/1200 or what ever this card 6Gb is what you need to run smooth I would be ok with this because I have that much Vram already so I would be ok with 2 cards I would get the 4 gb Versions of Nvidia to make it really run tops

you have 4.5gb with all three cards

At this stage, 6GB is overkill for most games. Handy for x3 2560x1400 surround though

4GB is a real sweet spot. 2GB still good for most. Had a quick blast on Stalker COP. 1.4GB + x2AA

Games like Max Payne 3 seem to share RAM pretty well when going overboard of limit.

smarteyeball said:

At this stage, 6GB is overkill for most games. Handy for x3 2560x1400 surround though

4GB is a real sweet spot. 2GB still good for most. Had a quick blast on Stalker COP. 1.4GB + x2AA

Games like Max Payne 3 seem to share RAM pretty well when going overboard of limit.

Max payne 3 for me toped out at 3gb something like that or 2gb because I remember 2x 6870's was like 1.6gb of vram

smarteyeball said:

paulpicks21 said:

I expect if his monitors were all 1920x1080 then "maybe" you could get away with 2 cards. I think Vram plays a big part too when you go for a 3 monitor setup, I know the more you have the better as it uses a lot more.
I remember reading that somewhere, but again it was a while back.

While there is a difference between 1080 and 1200 in FPS, at 5760 x 1*** it's not that big a difference.

You can get away with 2 cards and surround/ef. Although I wouldn't use any less than a pair of 7950 or 670's unless you have x3 22" screens.

The main difference between 2 and 3 cards I have noticed is that areas with 2 cards, it would either top out or drop to say 45FPS. With a 3rd card, the drop is less and it would go up to 60FPS more often.

Luckily some games are playable maxed with 2 cards already. Others like Bioshock INF, it gave the frames a boost enough to keep it @ 60FPS. The only time it dips, is when entering a new area. It quickly dips down to ~30FPS and then shoots back up to 60 and virtually stays there. For two cards, some detail lowering is a must but you can find a happy speed/quality mix.

Overall the 3rd card adds between ~0-30FPS+ and higher minimum frames. That higher can be the difference between kind of jerky 45FPS to smooth 60. Some games like Arma2 however, make zero difference.

Concerning VRAM, most games handle 2GB of VRAM +Surround quite well. I wouldn't tackle it with anything lese than 1.5GB/2GB though. MSAA is a big VRAM eater at high resolutions. Each step adds ~200MB+ to usage. Without AA, or FXAA, a lot of games sit at about 1.5-1.7GB already. Add x4AA and you might hit the buffer. Without, it's still under the limit.

But the biggest frame killer I've seen so far is SSAA (Screen Space Ambient Occlusion). With surround, that has to be turned off in all games.

At any rate, that is a kick ass rig smarteyeball has

ganjiry said:

+1 thats a bostin rig you have there Smarty

Thanks guys - I do love my setup. It took years to evolve, but evolve into man awesomeness it did

(Here's what it actually looks like)





*NB ▲ - I had a very loving and understanding wife with no kids... that was the result

Cheers for the info mate, Very helpfull
Wicked man cave

Solarstarshines said:

smarteyeball said:

paulpicks21 said:

I expect if his monitors were all 1920x1080 then "maybe" you could get away with 2 cards. I think Vram plays a big part too when you go for a 3 monitor setup, I know the more you have the better as it uses a lot more.
I remember reading that somewhere, but again it was a while back.

While there is a difference between 1080 and 1200 in FPS, at 5760 x 1*** it's not that big a difference.

You can get away with 2 cards and surround/ef. Although I wouldn't use any less than a pair of 7950 or 670's unless you have x3 22" screens.

The main difference between 2 and 3 cards I have noticed is that areas with 2 cards, it would either top out or drop to say 45FPS. With a 3rd card, the drop is less and it would go up to 60FPS more often.

Luckily some games are playable maxed with 2 cards already. Others like Bioshock INF, it gave the frames a boost enough to keep it @ 60FPS. The only time it dips, is when entering a new area. It quickly dips down to ~30FPS and then shoots back up to 60 and virtually stays there. For two cards, some detail lowering is a must but you can find a happy speed/quality mix.

Overall the 3rd card adds between ~0-30FPS+ and higher minimum frames. That higher can be the difference between kind of jerky 45FPS to smooth 60. Some games like Arma2 however, make zero difference.

Concerning VRAM, most games handle 2GB of VRAM +Surround quite well. I wouldn't tackle it with anything lese than 1.5GB/2GB though. MSAA is a big VRAM eater at high resolutions. Each step adds ~200MB+ to usage. Without AA, or FXAA, a lot of games sit at about 1.5-1.7GB already. Add x4AA and you might hit the buffer. Without, it's still under the limit.

But the biggest frame killer I've seen so far is SSAA (Screen Space Ambient Occlusion). With surround, that has to be turned off in all games.

ganjiry said:

+1 thats a bostin rig you have there Smarty

Thanks guys - I do love my setup. It took years to evolve, but evolve into man awesomeness it did

(Here's what it actually looks like)





*NB ▲ - I had a very loving and understanding wife with no kids... that was the result

This single card right here is enough to run what you run by itself because Vram is very important for what you are using 5760/1200 or what ever this card 6Gb is what you need to run smooth I would be ok with this because I have that much Vram already so I would be ok with 2 cards I would get the 4 gb Versions of Nvidia to make it really run tops

you have 4.5gb with all three cards

I just want to clarify something with you Solar, cos from the way you have worded this it appears you think all the vram from GPU's is added together.

It's not. It only uses the Vram from 1 card in any SLI or Xfire set up. You could have 4 of mine or your cards in Xfire but it will only ever be able to use 3GB.

Paul.