Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Hardware and Software => Topic started by: swoopy on February 29, 2008, 09:30:26 AM
-
Im building a new system and i am just wondering if my PSU of 550W will need upgrading if i am running 2 cards in SLI
They are 2 Geforce 8800GTS 320MB, see link below
http://www.komplett.co.uk/k/ki.aspx?sku=343484
Or is it worth just getting one card? say the one below
http://www.komplett.co.uk/k/ki.aspx?sku=332049
Which of the two would perform better?
-
You spend 2x as much (or MORE, for the motherboard) for a small extra % of FPS.
It's not worth it. The efficiency just isn't there, and it's like welding 2 cars together side by side, expecting them to go 2x as fast. Well, for the most part they're going to almost perform the same as a single car.
SLI is only for folks with far too much money and who savor/crave the difference between 250fps and 260fps.
-
thx krusty for the info :aok
-
That depends on your PS. Not all 550W PS's are equal. If its an ANTEC I'd say probably not, but if its an OCZ, PC power and cooling, seasonic or other current top end PS then your probably good depending on how your 12V rails are set. You'd need a PS that has enough dedicated constant power to your 12V rails (and had enough of them)...probably 42 amps min for SLI...
I like the OCZ PS's alot but if the extra bucks are OK then this is a sweet deal...
seasonic 650W PS (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817151028)
As for the SLI, I agree with Krusty totally, waste of money for the most part. If you do get a single high end card make sure you've got enough amps on your 12V rail for it...
-
If i went for a XFX GeForce 8800GTX 630M 768MB XXX GDDR3 then does anyone know what recommended PSU is?
-
Looking at Tom's hardware guide, it looks like you'll get roughly a 20-25% increase with the 768MB GTX over the 320MB GTS, versus.. maybe a 5-10% with SLI'ing two GTS'. So it looks like you're making the right call here.
If you have a good quality 550watt PS, and you're not running a ton of peripherals off of it, then it will probably be enough... but you'll be toward the minimum. I would recommend going to at least a quality 650 or better though.
All I can say is... well I wish I had that kind of money to invest!
Good luck!
-
Originally posted by Tigger29
Looking at Tom's hardware guide, it looks like you'll get roughly a 20-25% increase with the 768MB GTX over the 320MB GTS, versus.. maybe a 5-10% with SLI'ing two GTS'. So it looks like you're making the right call here.
If you have a good quality 550watt PS, and you're not running a ton of peripherals off of it, then it will probably be enough... but you'll be toward the minimum. I would recommend going to at least a quality 650 or better though.
All I can say is... well I wish I had that kind of money to invest!
Good luck!
Thank you for that tigger
-
To my understanding, SLI has gotten a bad rap because, until recently, the PCIe x16 slots could only accomodate SLI in a x8/x8 configuration, allowing only half the data bandwidth for each card. Due to this, perfomance was barely better than a single card. Newer motherboards have rectified this, allowing both SLI'd cards to run at their full x16/x16 bandwidth.
At Tom's Hardware, they actually recommend 2x Superclocked 512 8800 GT's over the 768 8800 GTX or the superclocked 768 8800 GTX Ultra from a performance vs cost perspective.
Performance would also depend on SLI configuration (the following from Wikipedia... note that in AFR mode NVidea claims 1.9x the performance of a single card... probably due to the master card having to consolidate the output):
Split Frame Rendering (SFR), the first rendering method. This analyzes the rendered image in order to split the workload 50/50 between the two GPUs. To do this, the frame is split horizontally in varying ratios depending on geometry. For example, in a scene where the top half of the frame is mostly empty sky, the dividing line will lower, balancing geometry workload between the two GPUs. This method does not scale geometry or work as well as AFR, however.
Alternate Frame Rendering (AFR), the second rendering method. Here, each GPU renders entire frames in sequence – one GPU processes even frames, and the second processes odd frames, one after the other. When the slave card finishes work on a frame (or part of a frame) the results are sent via the SLI bridge to the master card, which then outputs the completed frames. Ideally, this would result in the rendering time being cut in half, and thus performance from the video cards would double. In their advertising, NVIDIA claims up to 1.9x the performance of one card with the dual-card setup.
SLI Antialiasing. This is a standalone rendering mode that offers up to double the antialiasing performance by splitting the antialiasing workload between the two graphics cards, offering superior image quality. One GPU performs an antialiasing pattern which is slightly offset to the usual pattern (for example, slightly up and to the right), and the second GPU uses a pattern offset by an equal amount in the opposite direction (down and to the left). Compositing both the results gives higher image quality than is normally possible. This mode is not intended for higher frame rates, and can actually lower performance, but is instead intended for games which are not GPU-bound, offering a clearer image in place of better performance. When enabled, SLI Antialiasing offers advanced antialiasing options: SLI 8X, SLI 16X, and SLI 32x (8800-series only). A Quad SLI system is capable of up to SLI 64X antialiasing.
[EDIT] I haven't seen, nor heard of a quad SLI set-up to date although some of the higher end motherboards now allow for tri-SLI with certain 8800 series cards, although space and heat are considerations.
-
Even back before PCIe, SLI only gave marginal results.
You've got an interesting point there, though: While the performance might not improve much (not much FPS gain), you can crank up certain settings higher without as much slow-down (FSAA, aniso, and so-on).
However, keep in mind in Tom's Hardware list, that's just the "more than $500" or whatever price category. Only way to reach that price category (whatever it was) is to run SLI, and the only options are basically 2 card types. Comparing a single card to the same card in SLI still doesn't give too much of a benefit.
Note that in the less than $500 range Tom's doesn't recommend any SLI over any single card. I'm guessing it's just not worth it in most cases.
-
If you're worried about getting the "right" card, don't get the 320meg memory version. Get 512 at least. Skuzzy pointed out that AH will go through memory fast, so why get a video card that should be able to run AH with FSAA and high res textures, and then find out you can't because you're running out of video memory?
Get an 8800GT or 8800GTS. Newegg also has a closeout sale going for video cards right now, with an 8800GTX going for under $300 after all the rebates are tallied up.
I'd personally go for a 512mb 8800GT right now, if I was buying today.
-
Originally posted by Tigger29
Looking at Tom's hardware guide, it looks like you'll get roughly a 20-25% increase with the 768MB GTX over the 320MB GTS, versus.. maybe a 5-10% with SLI'ing two GTS'. So it looks like you're making the right call here.
For many games, and if all you're looking at is FPS, then you won't see much of a diff by increasing the memory. But check out the reviews at hardocp, where instead of picking an arbitrary game configuration and then measuring FPS, they pick a baseline "no lower than" FPS and then jack up the image quality until the FPS drops below their minimum.
Hardocp's testing makes it hard to make pretty charts that compare various video cards, but I think it is a lot closer to how most people actually use their own video cards. It's how I set up my own computer to run games... I set the resolution to my LCD's native 1280x1024, and then turn up the graphics settings until the framerate drops, then I back off the settings a bit and play the game that way.
Charts showing FPS in benchmarks can give you a relative performance comparison in some cases, but it does not really tell you how good the graphics will look between those cards. That's why toms hardware will show a 320 meg card performing nearly as well as a 768 meg card. They simply aren't testing with graphics options that use a lot of memory.
I remember when everyone was getting the nvidia 4200 with 64 meg of mem instead of 128, because the 64 meg cards ran a bit faster. But within a year, games were using 128 meg of memory and everyone with the 64 meg cards had to upgrade. I was able to hold out until the 6800GT cards dropped in price because I had bought a 128 meg card, while everyone else had to suffer through the horrible nvidia 5xxx series cards.
-
Originally posted by eagl
I'd personally go for a 512mb 8800GT right now, if I was buying today.
The Ge9600 line has 1GB VRAM cards coming out. Tom's Hardware has a review of the first 7 cards or so (comparing all to each other).
Personally, I want a 3870...
-
Originally posted by Krusty
You spend 2x as much (or MORE, for the motherboard) for a small extra % of FPS.
It's not worth it. The efficiency just isn't there, and it's like welding 2 cars together side by side, expecting them to go 2x as fast. Well, for the most part they're going to almost perform the same as a single car.
SLI is only for folks with far too much money and who savor/crave the difference between 250fps and 260fps.
Not true. Not even close. I have 2 computers with SLI. You can get up to about 80% extra video power with 2 cards. Not a small extra. Having said that here is my thoughts on SLI. A SLI motherboard prices go from about $80 on up. And I more than doubled my FPS on my 8800 system. And on another system went from about 60 to 135 fps. Note; a good sound card also improves frame rate. Added 20-30 fps.
Buying 2-$200 cards to SLI is economically not a good idea. Buy a good single $400 card. You will use less power take, up less room etc. It will perform up to 100% efficiency. Later if you need more video power add another good $400 card.
Power requirements. I would not recommend a 550Watt PSU for a SLI system. I have a 8800GTS 320mb video card. With one card you can use a 550Watt PSU. For two you'll probally need a 750 or more.
For my 8800GTX's 850 watts required. I have a 1000Watt PSU
Go to Newegg.com and go to thier power supplies and check the wattage on their wattage calculator.
-
Originally posted by alskahawk
I have 2 computers with SLI. You can get up to about 80% extra video power with 2 cards.
Prove it
[EDIT: That came off as combatitive. I mean it as entirely skeptical and unbelieving]
On the same settings, everything else unchanged on a system, adding a second card in SLI does not give anywhere near that kind of performance boost, based on all reviews I've ever read.
P.S. For newer 2.0 x16 cards, boards start at $150 and go to $250-$350 top end. Average is $200-$250. Quite pricy for these newer 2.0 x16 boards.
-
Just for comparison:
http://www.pcstats.com/articleview.cfm?articleid=2108&page=2
These are recent cards.
Note the SLI is barely much higher than contemporary single cards. It blows away older cards, but so would just ONE of the SLI you have installed.
How it stacks up in-game:
http://www.pcstats.com/articleview.cfm?articleid=2108&page=3
Even at max resolution (where SLI gains the most benefits) it's barely 5-10 FPS more than a single contemporary card.
A couple of points that review makes are a little off, like DX9 games not needing much VRAM, and some other little comments, but the comparisons are quite telling.
-
I'm not sure you didn't just defeat your own argument. From the links you posted:
"In 3DMark05 the the GeForce 8800GTS 320MB SLI setup gets the highest score of all. Two videocards really can be better than one according to this test. The dual 8800GTS' defeat the lone GeForce 8800GTX by almost 1000 points!"
" Is there any doubt which videocard setup is fastest here? As PCSTATS dialed up the resolution to 1600x1200, and the eye candy to SM3, the SLI GeForce 8800GTS 320MB SLI combo leaves the lone Geforce 8800GTX MSI NX8800GTX-T2D768E in the dust!"
Considering you can get 2x 320 8800 GTS for close to the same price as a 8800 GTX it seems SLIing those would be a better proposition.
-
Careful on video RAM. 512MB of video RAM is neat, but if it is 25% slower than a 256MB video card, I would opt for the faster RAM, instead of the quantity.
With faster RAM you can easily run higher resolutions and lower AA settings.
To run 1920 horizontal, which is popular for most HD LCD panels, you want fast RAM.
-
Originally posted by Skuzzy
Careful on video RAM. 512MB of video RAM is neat, but if it is 25% slower than a 256MB video card, I would opt for the faster RAM, instead of the quantity.
With faster RAM you can easily run higher resolutions and lower AA settings.
To run 1920 horizontal, which is popular for most HD LCD panels, you want fast RAM.
So is the XFX GeForce 8800GTX 630M 768MB XXX GDDR3 a good card then?
-
Doesn't SlI realy come into its own over 1240 res?
I'd say if running a 32 inch widescreen for sure do it - but if 1240, then like others have said you'l only get about a 20% increase.
-
This is my take on all this SLI, quad/multi core etc. Is that CPU speed has reached a ceiling. Not necessarily a hard ceiling but a practical ceiling. In other words CPU speed can exceed 4 GHz but at what cost? So to get more power technology is going sideways. SLI, Triple SLI/Quad Crossfire/ Multi core CPU. Front side bus and memory speeds are increasing every year if not quicker. Skuzzy's point about memory speeds is right on. A video card with DDR3 should almost always beat a similar card with DDR2 etc.
Now about motherboards. Its true that the first generation of SLI boards only have one PCIe slot at 16x and 8x in the second slot. But if you have 2 top level cards one in a 16x slot and one in a 8x slot isn't that still better than one card at 100%?
Most of the cards produced this year will have 2 PCIe 16x slots with 2.0 technology.
Most of the early 3 SLI motherboards will have a third slot at a lower speed. maybe as low as 4x. My estimate of 80% from the second card is conservative. You may soon get 99% more from your second card. I doubt that you'll ever get 100% from the second or third card.
Here's what I think will happen over the next two years. Triple SLI and Quad crossfire will be on most of your top systems. Game designers will find new and exciting ways to use this new tech. And as always the enthusiast will chase the best systems to play the best games. And 1000+watt PSU's and large monitors will be the norm. All this is mind boggling if you remember 14inch screens, DOS, 1.2 baud modems. I think the first upgrade I made was to add 4 MB ram to my 33MHz, 40MB computer. It cost $170.
-
Originally posted by swoopy
So is the XFX GeForce 8800GTX 630M 768MB XXX GDDR3 a good card then?
Go here for a huge discount on an 8800GTX: http://www.hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1279441
It's through newegg. If you can find one cheaper anywhere else, go for it. But this is the cheapest I've seen. Promo expires Friday night.
-
I like mine. Have two of them. They are power hogs tho. Even one is over kill in AH. Good in other games such as Call of Duty.
-
Originally posted by swoopy
If i went for a XFX GeForce 8800GTX 630M 768MB XXX GDDR3 then does anyone know what recommended PSU is?
As per the wattage guide at Newegg.com; 590 watts
That is with a AMD x2
2 gig ram
2 DVD Rom
2 7.2 HDs with one HD 551 watts
with a Intel duo 559 watts
-
I only just now saw this again:
Originally posted by BaldEagl
I'm not sure you didn't just defeat your own argument. From the links you posted:
"In 3DMark05 the the GeForce 8800GTS 320MB SLI setup gets the highest score of all. Two videocards really can be better than one according to this test. The dual 8800GTS' defeat the lone GeForce 8800GTX by almost 1000 points!"
Look at it again. They're talking 1000 points in scores upwares of 11,000+. That's less than 1% higher, score-wise.
" Is there any doubt which videocard setup is fastest here? As PCSTATS dialed up the resolution to 1600x1200, and the eye candy to SM3, the SLI GeForce 8800GTS 320MB SLI combo leaves the lone Geforce 8800GTX MSI NX8800GTX-T2D768E in the dust!"
Considering you can get 2x 320 8800 GTS for close to the same price as a 8800 GTX it seems SLIing those would be a better proposition.
The first comment is an exaggeration. It is faster, yes. It does not "leave it in the dust" per se. Look at those benchmarks, across ALL games, it's only about 5-10 FPS faster at ANY resolution/quality/detail setting.
They use a lot of hyperbole, I think that's just a bit of it showing through.
-
Be warned Vosnik. I have a 640MB 8800GTS it only needs 1x 6 PIN pci-e power lead. I believe the GTX needs 2x pci-e leads.
I bought an enermax 650W and it has modular cables so i can plug in what I actually need. Do you know the current specs of your PSU???
The amps on the 12v rails is what you need to careful on.
-
Those spec's are for SLI cards vs single 8800GTX. 2-8800GTS's were the fastest.
You defeated your own argument. Anyway in terms of AH both would be more than needed. :)
-
They were on par. 5FPS is negligable, especially when you're talking the difference between 130 fps and 135 fps.
That's also not twice the speed of the single card by itself, and still not very much faster than a high end single card.
SLI is marketing. It's like buying 2 Yugos and the dealer telling you that's better than buying 1 volvo :D :t :O
-
Here's a thought for you Krusty.
Lets say you get a machine with a 320 8800 GTS card (about $190). One day, you decide it's time to upgrade and you want to go to 640 megs of memory. You can trash the $190 8800 GTS and buy a new 640 8800 GTS for $275 (a total investment of $465) or, with SLI, you add another 320 8800 GTS and have almost the same power for a total investment of $380.
I use these cards just as an example because it's easy to compare but the same could be true going from 256 to dual 256 vs 512, etc.
To me, it doesn't seem worthwhile only at the very high end, or for only the very rich. It seems that it adds a significant level of flexability in an upgrade path. Now, it may be that you'll trash that old card anyway, but at least the SLI path offers you another option.
At least that's how it seems to me.
-
Okay, from an upgrade standpoint, a "catch up to performance" step, I can understand it more.
However, that's not how it's marketed most places (almost always 2 highest-end cards in SLI), and I've read a couple of articles where folks did that but had trouble finding the exact same card a couple of years after the fact, so they couldn't run it properly in SLI.
Definitely a strategy of sorts (planning for future upgrades) but not without peril.
As an aside, I personally wonder if there's much price difference in motherboards, all other features being equal between SLI and non-SLI.
[EDIT: On second thought: Using SLI to keep up with the curve isn't going to help much, if SLI doesn't increase FPS much for that extra card. Your price-per-fps might not be worth it. (*shrug*)]
-
I got about 250+ FPS with 2-8800 GTX's in SLI mode. With one card I get 60-100 FPS in AH.
That was with a AMD x2 3.2GHz
Asus M2N Deluxe SLI Motherboard One PCIe Slot at 16x One at 8x.
2GB Kingston Ram
150GB Raptor 10k RPM HD
XFI Sound card
750 Watt PSU(Recommended wattage; 795)
I have since robbed the 8800GTX's for a quad system I built. Almost any SLI for AH is overkill. However it does give you more video power. :aok
-
IMO sli is a huge waste of money. If you SLI two new cards, you're going to pay a HUGE premium for a small fps increase.
If you SLI two old cards, you're going to waste half the price of a better, next generation card in order to get another old card which will most likely be slower in the end - and then you have two real old cards in your hands with zero resell value.
That alone is a bad deal but when you add that to the fact that SLI profiles aren't even available for all the titles - it turns worse.
I've found that the best way to purchase hardware is to be patient, keep an eye on hardware news and pick the next new generation leap even if it costs a bit. For example when Geforce256 came to the market it seemed ridiculously expensive but fast. I droped the cash for it and it proved to be an excellent buy - games were lightning fast at start and even 3 years later I could still play latest titles with it. If you SLI a slower card you're going to have a mediocre at best performance first with the single card, then suffer almost unplayable fps, then update back to mediocre fps and soon suffer unplayable fps again.
-
IMO sli is a huge waste of money. If you SLI two new cards, you're going to pay a HUGE premium for a small fps increase.
If you SLI two old cards, you're going to waste half the price of a better, next generation card in order to get another old card which will most likely be slower in the end - and then you have two real old cards in your hands with zero resell value.
That alone is a bad deal but when you add that to the fact that SLI profiles aren't even available for all the titles - it turns worse.
I've found that the best way to purchase hardware is to be patient, keep an eye on hardware news and pick the next new generation leap even if it costs a bit. For example when Geforce256 came to the market it seemed ridiculously expensive but fast. I droped the cash for it and it proved to be an excellent buy - games were lightning fast at start and even 3 years later I could still play latest titles with it. If you SLI a slower card you're going to have a mediocre at best performance first with the single card, then suffer almost unplayable fps, then update back to mediocre fps and soon suffer unplayable fps again.
250+ FPS in SLI in AH. 60-100 single card. 8800GTXs. Not a small increase. In graphic intensive games its even more noticible.
-
250+ FPS in SLI in AH. 60-100 single card. 8800GTXs. Not a small increase. In graphic intensive games its even more noticible.
Umm SLI shouldn't even theoretically increase your FPS more than 40% in the best case scenario. There's something fishy there. A single 8800GTX should get much higher fps than 100 in AHII, even midpriced cards get 100fps easy with vsync off.
I just tested AHII with 1680x1050x32 1024 textures and all sliders to max settings, 156fps in tower using a SINGLE 8800GTS 640mb (older/slower) model. In flight still over 135fps. So a single GTX should do 200fps easily.
-
If your are running Aces High II with vertical sync disabled, then you are asking for troubles. SLI will never be a bang-for-the-buck solution.
-
If your are running Aces High II with vertical sync disabled, then you are asking for troubles. SLI will never be a bang-for-the-buck solution.
I concur fully. Vsync should be disabled only for benchmarking and enabled always for gaming. Best is to set the driver to 'force vsync on' setting. One should note, however, that if vsync is on you should also enable triple buffering. Otherwise your fps will be cut to half after a certain limit.
-
Umm SLI shouldn't even theoretically increase your FPS more than 40% in the best case scenario. There's something fishy there. A single 8800GTX should get much higher fps than 100 in AHII, even midpriced cards get 100fps easy with vsync off.
I just tested AHII with 1680x1050x32 1024 textures and all sliders to max settings, 156fps in tower using a SINGLE 8800GTS 640mb (older/slower) model. In flight still over 135fps. So a single GTX should do 200fps easily.
With various single cards I get around 60FPS. Including a 8800 GTX. With my current setup 1-PNY 8800GTS 340mb video card I run right at 60 FPS. This is with a 24 inch monitor. With stock settings nothing adjusted. With 2-8800GTXs I run average 250FPS. With only SLI enabled. I don't run with Vsync or any other setting turned off. In Call of Duty with SLI there is a noticible visual quality difference.
-
With various single cards I get around 60FPS. Including a 8800 GTX. With my current setup 1-PNY 8800GTS 340mb video card I run right at 60 FPS. This is with a 24 inch monitor. With stock settings nothing adjusted. With 2-8800GTXs I run average 250FPS. With only SLI enabled. I don't run with Vsync or any other setting turned off. In Call of Duty with SLI there is a noticible visual quality difference.
Well if you run a single 320mb GTS at high resolutions it's most likely that you're getting a heavy hit to fps because your displaymemory is exhausted. Which resolution/textures/FSAA are you running at? The 320mb on the 8800 just isn't enough for high res gaming. If I get over double fps on the similar 8800 with double memory, it's most likely the cause of the problem instead of SLI being so much more powerful.
And btw if you run with vsync on, you're never going to see fps over 60 on flat panels. Not if you run GTS, GTX or Ultra in SLI. Your fps will rise only with vsync off - maybe vsync is disabled in SLI mode? That might explain the big difference. In any case SLI documentation itself doesn't promise doubling of speed, not even near it.
Edit: quick googling shows that many users have had issues with vsync getting disabled when running SLI so that's probably why you saw the difference in fps. It's not real.
-
Right now is actually one of the only times when SLI makes sense. There are new generation of 9600 GT OC cards available for $150 a piece that can outperform a 8800 GTX when in SLI. That situation will quickly disappear once 9700/9800/9900 will be introduced making the dual 9600 a bad deal again.
But right now IF you own a SLI capable motherboard and capable power supply, you can build a SLI 9600 system for $300 where you need to pay $358 for a single 8800GTX. So by using SLI you can save 50 bucks and get a comparable performance setup.
But as said, once the rest of the 9xxx series will be released, that SLI will be a waste of money bang for buck wise.
-
alaska, Im not questioning your claims...but I would love to see screenshots.
Especially near ground battles and CVs
That's where I take my hugest hits...anywhere near furball island. Or, when trying to attack GVs.
I'm drooling for a new system...and SLI sounds appealing. But I'm questioning the best value/best performance.
-
alaska, Im not questioning your claims...but I would love to see screenshots.
Especially near ground battles and CVs
That's where I take my hugest hits...anywhere near furball island. Or, when trying to attack GVs.
I'm drooling for a new system...and SLI sounds appealing. But I'm questioning the best value/best performance.
I took a couple of quick screen shots just before I tore the system apart. I think one of them is over 300FPS SLI and the other is about 60FPS (single card) on a 24 inch monitor (set to normal res 1900?). I am on the road right now and will post them this weekend.
I went from this system; Ultra aluminum full tower case, Asus M2N Deluxe SLI(1 PCIx16 1PCIx8), 3.2GHZ AMD x2, 2GB Kingston Ram, 2-8800GTX Video cards, 150GB 10K Raptor HD, Water cooling, 750 watt PS.
I then swapped out these components. PNY 8800GTS 340MB VC, 2GB PNY ram, Antec 900 case, Thermaltake cpu fan. I had heat problems, too little PSU and now I have a solid simple AH dedicated machine. 35*C under load. (this thread has gone on so long I don't even have the machine I started with..lol)
I used the 8800GTX's on a new Intel quad system. I haven't run any tests with it.
-
Heres a question I have for all those who don't believe in SLI. If SLI is just marketing etc.
1. Why are all the system reviewers in all the magazines giving SLI computer systems high marks.
2. Why do all the benchmarks (used by the same reviewers the magazines) show SLI systems beating single systems?
3. Why are all the top gaming computer companies such as Falcon NW etc using SLI as their top systems?
-
Heres a question I have for all those who don't believe in SLI. If SLI is just marketing etc.
1. Why are all the system reviewers in all the magazines giving SLI computer systems high marks.
2. Why do all the benchmarks (used by the same reviewers the magazines) show SLI systems beating single systems?
3. Why are all the top gaming computer companies such as Falcon NW etc using SLI as their top systems?
1: Because SLI obviously improves performance but since it doesn't work on all titles and gets outperformed by the next gen card anyway it's not that much value in the end. I wouldn't want two lower end cards for the price of one high-end one.
2: Because SLI systems beat single systems but rarely manage to do so for less money. They're not a miracle solution that would give you a GTX for half the price - before GT/9600 you had to pay more to get similar performance. Right now SLI works only because the higher end new generation hasn't been yet released because the market lacks competition as ATI can't compete with Nvidia at the moment. Nvidia could release the 9800 if it wanted.
3: You need to use SLI on a TOP system because two 8800 ultras in SLI will beat a single card. Even though it ends up costing ludicrously much.
Yet when 9800 comes out it will wash the table with the sli 8800. So it's better to be patient than waste money on old gen cards right now.
And once more, the difference you're seeing is because your single card setup is running vsync on (limited to 60fps) and your SLI setup is not using vsync (NOT limited to 60fps) thus giving a huge leap in fps. Your single card could do 200 fps if you disabled vsync.
-
You spend 2x as much (or MORE, for the motherboard) for a small extra % of FPS.
It's not worth it. The efficiency just isn't there, and it's like welding 2 cars together side by side, expecting them to go 2x as fast. Well, for the most part they're going to almost perform the same as a single car.
SLI is only for folks with far too much money and who savor/crave the difference between 250fps and 260fps.
this pretty much answers it..
for what you pay for any set of cards to run SLI, you could spend less on a single more powerful card and get much more performance output.
-
Benchmark; 3dmark06; 13166
Not a great score but respectable. Stock settings quad SLI system. My single 8800GTS 340MB system; 8400.
I don't think either Krusty or MrRiply(H) have a SLI system. I have two of them. SLI isn't for everyone. Economics; There's a racing Axum; How fast do you want to go? How much money you got? Could be a computer reference. How much flogging can you do on that AGP horse before it dies? Single card systems are the same way. Tweaking will get you a long way and is an excellent way to learn about computers or to make up for the lack of bucks. The above system referenced cost about $2200(approx). Now if I tweak it...
If you need a lot of graphic power or you like playing new games on the top settings go SLI. But like everything there are pitfalls. More parts, more chance of failure, More parts, more power required. Motherboard choice is more critical. Computer case choice is more critical, Cooling more of a factor. You will only have one or two PCI slots left after you SLI. Is a 8800GTX SLI system outrageous at $2200? Hardly a high end price. Specs; Intel Quad 2.4, XFX MB, 8800GTX x2, 4GB Ram(I used 6GB on test) 1000Watt PSU, Full tower Case, 7.2 WD HD x2, Windows XP Pro x64
Earlier in the week I posted 3 questions; My response is denoted with; a
here's the answers posted by Mr Ripley(H)
Question; Why do all the reviewers in all the magazines giving SLI computer systems high marks. (I gots bad grammar)
Because SLI obviously improves performance but since it doesn't work on all titles and gets outperformed by the next gen card anyway it's not that much value in the end. I wouldn't want two lower end cards for the price of one high-end one.
a; A SLI system will outperform a single card system. Maybe not always the best economical solution but a performance reality. Computer parts are always competing against the next generation. Like a reference to Hollywood "they eat their young". Computers are the same way. SLI has been out a couple of years now. Its hardly new. Buy computer stuff like a new car. Wait till December. My system is last years tech. Works good.
Question; Why do all the benchmarks (used by the same reviewers the magazines) show SLI systems beating single systems?
2: Because SLI systems beat single systems but rarely manage to do so for less money. They're not a miracle solution that would give you a GTX for half the price - before GT/9600 you had to pay more to get similar performance. Right now SLI works only because the higher end new generation hasn't been yet released because the market lacks competition as ATI can't compete with Nvidia at the moment. Nvidia could release the 9800 if it wanted.
a. A SLI system is faster than a single card system. You really didn't answer the question; So response to your response; Economics and speed. In some ways we are saying the same thing. Bear in mind for most of us this is a hobby. Hobbies are rarely rational. I posted this a while back; If two cards are going to cost you x amount. Then buy a single card for x amount. How would 2-9600 GTs do against a single 9600GT? Or two 9800s?
Question;Why are all the top gaming computer companies such as Falcon NW etc using SLI as their top systems?
3: You need to use SLI on a TOP system because two 8800 ultras in SLI will beat a single card. Even though it ends up costing ludicrously much.
a. Performance sells. The market sets the price. But I am confident that I can build a comparable system for a lot less than $8,000. And if it breaks I can fix it.
I think we have beaten this SLI horse to death. So I am going to post some screen shots from my old system and that will be my last comment on it. (I'll be nice and not post the AH 727FR (spike)i got with the quad system)
Note; 2 cars next to each other; slower, more drag. But if you lengthened the bodies and.... 2 engines in one car. faster until.... :salute
-
You should realize that it's pretty dumb to pay the price of a 8800 ultra to get a 8800gtx performance using two mid-price cards in SLI.
This is the point - I'd prefer to get the ultra instead. Right now I'd wait for the 9800 to be released before doing anything. It will most likely blow away the competition.
Your quad-SLI system just barely beats a single GTS despite being full four times more expensive. You'd be way better off buying one 8800 ultra or wait for the 9800. With the quad system your individual card gets degraded to 3291 points per card, that's a full 60% decrease in value for money. Reversed it means you're paying double money to get the performance of a single higher end card.
A very VERY bad deal.
-
I've been reading (and contributing to) this thread with interest. Here's my take on the whole thing:
Early SLI adapters saw almost no performance gains in SLI. It really WAS just a marketing ploy at that point. And why were there no performace gains? Because dual PCIe slot motherboards could only support the slots at x8/x8 (or if you were lucky x16/x8) vs x16 for a single card. In SLI, theoretically at x8/x8, there should have actually been a performance LOSS due to the master card having to consolidate the output of the dual cards, but the memory gain offset that allowing for a modest performance gain (either that or the x16/x8 configuration seem consistant with the 10-15% performance gain you often hear quoted).
Now, NVIDEA claims a 1.9x performance gain in SLI and numerous benchmarks that I've seen while researching over the past few months seem to bear that out (although not in all cases). The full realization of SLI is due to the advent of motherboards capable of supporting x16/x16 PCIe slots as well as the advance from split-frame to alternate-frame rendering. You still can't realize full 2x performance though (and likely never will) due to the master card having to consolidate output.
The advantages of dual proccessers can be seen in many computer technologies today; the ATI dual proccesser cards (2 proccessers on a single card... very expensive), dual core and quad core CPU's, Crossfire and SLI supported motherboards, PSU's, RAM, etc. There's no doubt that technology is marching toward multi-core proccessing, both in the CPU and GPU environments. I doubt it will be long before there are dual and quad core GPU's on the market.
In real terms, I've seen benchmark tests where both the 320 mb 8800 GTS and the 528 mb 8800 GT in SLI mode beat the 8800 GTX, but either of those options is more expensive than the GTX so the single GTX still provides the best bang for the buck. Furthermore, there is a real limit as to how much proccessing you actually need to run todays games on todays monitors, and the 8800 GTX will certainly run them all so do you really need more? In fact, a single 8800 GT or 8800 GTS will run almost anything thrown at it and the cost savings over a GTX or SLI configuration is significant. This tells me that from a pure performance standpoint, SLI is not worthwhile.
Still, I'm personally attracted to the idea of SLI both from the dual proccesser technology standpoint and from the standpoint of a "stop-gap" or "poor mans" upgrade option (outlined in a prior post). There's something to be said for just adding a second card as an upgrade path rather than throwing away your initial investment entirely.
So, in conclusion, both MrRiplEy and alaskahawk are both right... and both wrong. There are real gains to be had but at what price?
I'm ordering my new system tomorrow and, while I'll probably never use the capability I am ordering an SLI capable motherboard. I just like the options it allows (and I want the PCIe 2.0 slots... and as long as there are no single slot 2.0 boards out there then it may as well support SLI).
[EDIT] One more thing to add to this. I've read that the Intel X38 chipset fully supports SLI but NVIDEA has not licensed the technology to Intel to market the chip as SLI supported for fear of losing their own motherboard chipset business. That tells me that the offer from Intel simply hasn't been lucrative enough... yet, and that both sides are holding out in the negotiations. Once NVIDEA does license SLI to Intel, I think SLI will become a much more mainstream consideration almost overnight.
-
even if 2x cards really equaled 2x improvement, which its nowhere close to reality. it would still be a waste of money.
for the price of 2 cheaper cards you could by a singel card that does more, and if you are using 2x the highest end card your not gaining anything either... you might be getting 175fps instead of 125.. which, unless you watch your frame rate counter more than the actual game.. doesn't improve anything.
-
Here's two frame rate shots. Asus M2N Deluxe SLI, 2-8800GTX, 2GB Ram, 150mb 10K WD HD, 750watt psu.
Single video card FR; 60 (Vsync on) I have since swapped the video cards to a quad system. On the quas the FR stayed around 400FR (only flew one flight, not enough to call an average) Note; on the post earlier I gave a 3dmark of my quad system. That was strait out of the box, windows just installed defragged and tested(mem running at 667). No bios update or tweaks. Should go over 1400 with bios update.
(http://i271.photobucket.com/albums/jj158/Denis119/aces%20high/ahss2.jpg)
(http://i271.photobucket.com/albums/jj158/Denis119/aces%20high/ahss0.jpg)
-
quad is a waste of money unless running programs that were written specifically to use it, SLI even more so.. except it sucks even on programs that are optimized for it..
quad + SLI = LOL
-
alskahawk why can't you understand that the single card performance is 60 because it has vsync on and your SLI has high framerate because vsync doesn't work on it? Your SLI will produce screen tearing and other non-vsync effects.
As far as that quad-SLI goes, a single 9800GTX benchmarks to 13500 points in 3DMark06. That's a way better investment than makeshift technology like SLI.
With quad-SLI you're losing 60% of the performance of the single card. It means you paid for 4 cards but end up having the performance of less than two.
You're paying $1600 to get the same performance of one $600 9800GTX.
-
alskahawk why can't you understand that the single card performance is 60 because it has vsync on and your SLI has high framerate because vsync doesn't work on it? Your SLI will produce screen tearing and other non-vsync effects.
As far as that quad-SLI goes, a single 9800GTX benchmarks to 13500 points in 3DMark06. That's a way better investment than makeshift technology like SLI.
With quad-SLI you're losing 60% of the performance of the single card. It means you paid for 4 cards but end up having the performance of less than two.
You're paying $1600 to get the same performance of one $600 9800GTX.
4 cards? Yes 4 cards 2 machines. average VC cost per machine; $400. Quad; Bought one VC (for another project) then upgraded to second card few months ago, then switched it all over when I found a deal on the quad. Other SLI system was built a year ago and has never torn a screen and is virtually maintenance free.
Economics; Try to find your 9800GTX on sale today. 2-8800GTXs around $800. Your comparing a system built today versus a system built with last years parts. Is it your contention that a SLI 9800GTX won't outperform a single 9800GTX system? Like to see the data on that.
3dmark06 top system; SLI, extreme quad (5k MHz+),forced air induction. Most systems above 20k are water cooled SLI overclocked quads. By the way my quad isn't for AH. Its for photo/video work and some gaming. If you really read my earlier comments you would have noticed I mentioned the considerations/potential pitfalls of SLI. Those comments are based on experience not what I read in a magazine. This really is my last comment on this.
-
alska you have a serious reading comprehension problem. SLI is not a viable option price/performance wise and therefore it should only be a last resort for extreme gamers i.e. 2-4 9800 ultra's in SLI at the moment when money is no object.
For the rest of the gamers who want the best bang for the buck, a single 9800 is astronomically better option instead of 2x8800.
-
alska you have a serious reading comprehension problem. SLI is not a viable option price/performance wise and therefore it should only be a last resort for extreme gamers i.e. 2-4 9800 ultra's in SLI at the moment when money is no object.
For the rest of the gamers who want the best bang for the buck, a single 9800 is astronomically better option instead of 2x8800.
This is the best you can do when I refute your argument? Read this; http://en.expreview.com/2008/02/26/9800gtx-3dmark06-score-here-dont-be-too-excited/
Thats a Intel Extreme overclocked 4GHz CPU system not a 2.4 ghz stock system. If you read the comments there are a lot of disapointed people.
As I have repeatedly stated my system is a few months old. If you reread some of the comments you'll see that we are largely in agreement. SLI is a highend option. And not to be taken lightly. My video cards were purchased last year and are last years tech. 2-BFG 8800GTX (oc) 1 small step below the ultra.
-
This is the best you can do when I refute your argument? Read this; http://en.expreview.com/2008/02/26/9800gtx-3dmark06-score-here-dont-be-too-excited/
Thats a Intel Extreme overclocked 4GHz CPU system not a 2.4 ghz stock system. If you read the comments there are a lot of disapointed people.
As I have repeatedly stated my system is a few months old. If you reread some of the comments you'll see that we are largely in agreement. SLI is a highend option. And not to be taken lightly. My video cards were purchased last year and are last years tech. 2-BFG 8800GTX (oc) 1 small step below the ultra.
All SLI will bring you is gigantic power supply needs and problems with game profiles etc. And in the end you'll be stuck with 2-4 totally outdated cards.
SLI is ok if you have a 8800GTX and can get another for half price. I would never SLI a new box with medium cards though. From the preliminary comments it seems like the 9800 was a disappointment i.e. nvidia wasn't kidding when it said it can delay the new architecture because ATI couldn't compete. Still a 9800 is performing better than your quad SLI 8800 for less than half the money.
Did you really mean a $1600 quad-SLI with that 13500 score of yours? If so that's pretty huge hit on performance per card. Considering a single $600 9800GTX gets a similar score..
Btw: Did you already figure out your fps levels were not comparable? I can run close to 150fps on a single 640mb GTS. The 512Mb GTS is 45% faster.
And what goes with 3DMark it's not a valid measurement of gaming performance so the scores are pointless.
-
All SLI will bring you is gigantic power supply needs and problems with game profiles etc. And in the end you'll be stuck with 2-4 totally outdated cards.
SLI is ok if you have a 8800GTX and can get another for half price. I would never SLI a new box with medium cards though. From the preliminary comments it seems like the 9800 was a disappointment i.e. nvidia wasn't kidding when it said it can delay the new architecture because ATI couldn't compete. Still a 9800 is performing better than your quad SLI 8800 for less than half the money.
Did you really mean a $1600 quad-SLI with that 13500 score of yours? If so that's pretty huge hit on performance per card. Considering a single $600 9800GTX gets a similar score..
Btw: Did you already figure out your fps levels were not comparable? I can run close to 150fps on a single 640mb GTS. The 512Mb GTS is 45% faster.
And what goes with 3DMark it's not a valid measurement of gaming performance so the scores are pointless.
I stated the pitfalls of SLI earlier. The PSU must be considered carefully when contemplating SLI. I have a 1000Watt PSU. I have never had any profile problems in any other game with SLI. That doesn't mean that SLI was utilized fully. Just that I never had to stop my game because of SLI. And I agree SLI is a high end option. My SLI is a evolving project. The 2 video cards, computer case came from my AH computer(AMD x2 3.2GHz). Since the boss needed a computer (with ample video capacity)for video work and Tiger direct had a deal on a quad/motherboard I jumped on it. BTW the cost of the video cards; $525 and $475. About half the price of a year earlier. Like most of us I seldom buy and build at the same time. I buy a component one month, maybe two the next and so on.
If I built a SLI computer today; MB MSI P5 or possibly another 680i board(there are problems with the 780s)
Quad Extreme
2-Top Video cards(haven't reviewed any since 8800s so I'll hedge and say Top)
Not 3. Currently 3rd slot isn't up to speed with other two. Jury is out the 9800s and Direct x 10. More research needed.
2-150GB Raptor HDs Raid 0
1 500GB WD 7.2HD backup
4GB DDR3 ram or 8GB ddr2
Antec P190 +1200 (1200watts of PSU and case)
Windows XP Pro 64bit
Cost around 3k.
Now about my 3dmark scores. That's a very early score. Extreme overclocked retail systems get around 18-20k 3dmark. My computer needs a bios update, and some other normal tweaks. I felt is was respectable for a baseline test. 3dmark isn't a perfect analysis for a gaming. It essentially is a graphic/cpu test. It gives a ball park figure. I have yet to see any evidence that a single 9800 (2.4 quad) is getting over 13k. And even if brand x gets over 13k and if it was available when I build my system (it wasn't)it would have been costly.
As far as AH scores. The screen shots posted were from my AMD system when it was in SLI. Someone requested it so I posted it. At the time the system was having heat troubles. Not from SLI, though SLI didn't help. I diagnosed it to be bad air flow in the full tower Utra computer case. Replaced the vc's, computer case (w/antec 900) and memory. Now 35c after hours of AH.
I flew one flight with the quad. It was about a 5-10 minute flight with no particular profile. Definitely not a valid test. I got frame rates ranging from 727-200. Most of the time the frame rate was in the 400s. I would guess that a single 8800 would get about 250ish with the vsync forced off. More on this later. There is a lot of interest in SLI in the forum so I will post a new thread of 3dmark scores; SLI and single and hopefully some AH frame rates. Though that's going to be tough in a active arena. As every furball is different.
My quad system; XFX MB
2.4GHz Quad Intel
6GB Kingston ram(5cl..not optimal, may be replaced)
2-8800GTX oc
2-7.2 250 HDs. (soon to be upgraded with 10k HDs)
1000watt PSU
Ultra full tower case(still causing heat problems and will be replaced)
Note; the frame rates I noted; IMO were a testament to the quad cpu. It was nearly a 100FPS jump over the AMD 3.2GHz cpu. Of course further testing may show that to be just an anomaly.
-
But the point stands:
1) Your SLI system is not running vsync on - a big no no in AH and/or LCD monitors
2) Your dual 8800GTX performs similarly to a 9800GTX but ends up costing much more
So what's the point? In your case if you want to slap another cheaper card in the system, it's understandable. But for anyone else, the only smart choice would be to first buy the best available card if they wanted gaming performance. Then if that's not enough, add another one through SLI.
If you SLI a new system with mediocre base cards in order to get the performance of the best single card available, you end up losing money as a rule.
You need an expensive SLI motherboard. You need an expensive oversized powersupply. You need better case cooling. You need two to four displaycards with 60-40% end value depending if you use them on double or quad SLI. You need to worry about game profiles and compatibility. You lose vsync. If your system gets a problem you're not going to know if the problem is caused by the exotic SLI setup or some other problem making troubleshooting harder.
I'm sorry but SLI seems like a botch deal for anyone shopping for a new machine and only semi-appealable for anyone upgrading - IF they happen to have a SLI ready motherboard to begin with. In the end it's not a very cost effective solution especially when you consider the potential pitfalls.
Right now a 9600GT based SLI is about the only thing that makes sense - and even then you save only 50 bucks and end up with a more complicated system.
-
I'm new to the SLI topic as I just set up a new system with an Asus P5N-E SLI motherboard, using two GF7600GS cards. I know that these cards are nowhere near the latest and greatest - I had them and just wanted to experiment with SLI.
Here's my problem; with SLI mode enabled, Aces High locks up within seconds. AH tech support says AH is compatible with SLI mode, but I must run the SLI profile Nvidia did for AH. When I open my Nvidia control panel from desktop, I do see the AH game listed under the optimized game listings, but all the settings there are the default settings (this is true for other games it sees on my PC too). So I'm assuming there is a 'special' profile I need to use. I've searched the Nvidia website but don't see any such thing - anyone know about this?
Ribbs
-
The Ge9600 line has 1GB VRAM cards coming out. Tom's Hardware has a review of the first 7 cards or so (comparing all to each other).
Personally, I want a 3870... </drool>
But, those 1GB VRAM core clocks are CONSIDERABLY slower than the 512mb versions.
-
I'm new to the SLI topic as I just set up a new system with an Asus P5N-E SLI motherboard, using two GF7600GS cards. I know that these cards are nowhere near the latest and greatest - I had them and just wanted to experiment with SLI.
Here's my problem; with SLI mode enabled, Aces High locks up within seconds. AH tech support says AH is compatible with SLI mode, but I must run the SLI profile Nvidia did for AH. When I open my Nvidia control panel from desktop, I do see the AH game listed under the optimized game listings, but all the settings there are the default settings (this is true for other games it sees on my PC too). So I'm assuming there is a 'special' profile I need to use. I've searched the Nvidia website but don't see any such thing - anyone know about this?
Ribbs
Hmmm... I used to run Nvidia BFG Geforce 7800 GT OC 256 mb cards in SLI mode without using any profile and they worked just fine. What type of drivers are you using? Stock or modded? I think we need more information and just how many watts does your power supply displace? I think someone will be asking for a posting of your Direct X test results here shortly,
All the Best...
Jay
awDoc1
-
Thanks Jay, I did rule out power issues; The MB manual states a 450w requirement for my config - I'm running a 600w PSU. I also checked again for power connections on the video cards that I might have overlooked but didn't find any to make.
The video drivers are whatever the latest posting on the Nvidia website are (as of last week). I should also mention I'm running Vista (32bit) and Dx10. Also, it's not just Aces High that locks almost immediately but World of Warcraft too - weird. I think I need to look to something beyond just an AH compatibility issue - I was really curious though if the SLI profile for AH should show all default settings (found within the Nvidia control panel).
Ribbs
-
But what if you already own 2 video cards?
I was given 2 7800GTX's by someone who upgraded. I would think buying an SLI capable board for my next build and using it would make sense then.
I currently have an old system with a 6800 AGP card.
-
But what if you already own 2 video cards?
I was given 2 7800GTX's by someone who upgraded. I would think buying an SLI capable board for my next build and using it would make sense then.
I currently have an old system with a 6800 AGP card.
Ok, as someone who owns two SLI systems. 2-8800GTXs one with 2-7950s Here is what you will need to SLI.
Space, cooling and power are the three main problems with SLI. Two 7800GTX video cards will probably raise your temp by 10 degrees.
Case; 2-7800s should fit in a Antec 900 ($79) (my 8800s fit in a 900) Buy quality tho. Its difficult to cool a bad case. Recomend full tower; Antec 1200 or a Cosmos(cooler master)
Cooling; Water cooling not necessary. You can use a cpu fan/heatsink;
Memory; Same as with any gaming computer today; 2 gig minimum
Motherboard. Research find a good solid MB. With two 768 GTX's (yesterdays technology) You won't need the newest hottest MB. Look for one that has 2-PCIx 16speed busses. Some of the first generation stuff had 16/8x combo speed. Not that you'll notice that much.
Power Supply; There is a wattage calculator at the Newegg.com website. 2-7800s I recomend a 750 watt minimum.
Hard Drive; 10,000 rpm. 7200 rpm's are cheaper.
Operating System; I run XP. I also have Vista on a laptop. And since the service pack update have not had anymore problems with it. On a new system; I would probably go with Vista.
-
...probably 42 amps min for SLI...
Given most household electrical circuits are connected at the main box in the house with 15 or 20 amp circuit breakers, perhaps someone wanting to run SLI ought to run extension cables from different parts of their house to their multi-input power supply just to be on the safe side, doncha think? ;-)
As for the SLI, I agree with Krusty totally, waste of money for the most part. If you do get a single high end card make sure you've got enough amps on your 12V rail for it...
SLI is a waste of money for games that don't work well with it. And for games that do, well, it's not a waste of money if it gives you what you want from it, and you can afford it. There are plenty of games that get a good 50%-70% or higher framerate boost with SLI, and whether it's a waste of money or not depends on a person's means, desires, and what game they want to play.
Have you played Crysis? It's a machine killer. here's a part of an article (http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/nvidia_3-way_sli_performance/page4.asp) showing benchmarks of Crysis showing performance with one card, two cards, and three cards, and the scaling is unbelievable. They're seeing nearly like 80-90% scaling with those configurations in that game. It would be hard to argue that that is a waste of money (in the context of video gaming, which in the grand scheme of things is all a waste of money, really).
-
Given most household electrical circuits are connected at the main box in the house with 15 or 20 amp circuit breakers, perhaps someone wanting to run SLI ought to run extension cables from different parts of their house to their multi-input power supply just to be on the safe side, doncha think? ;-)
SLI is a waste of money for games that don't work well with it. And for games that do, well, it's not a waste of money if it gives you what you want from it, and you can afford it. There are plenty of games that get a good 50%-70% or higher framerate boost with SLI, and whether it's a waste of money or not depends on a person's means, desires, and what game they want to play.
Have you played Crysis? It's a machine killer. here's a part of an article (http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/nvidia_3-way_sli_performance/page4.asp) showing benchmarks of Crysis showing performance with one card, two cards, and three cards, and the scaling is unbelievable. They're seeing nearly like 80-90% scaling with those configurations in that game. It would be hard to argue that that is a waste of money (in the context of video gaming, which in the grand scheme of things is all a waste of money, really).
Just like some folks (like my wifey) would say that playing AH is a waste of money but I want to and I do. I've run both Nvidia Sli (BFG 7800 GT OC cards) and now AMD/ATI Crossfire (Sapphire 3870 cards) and the most trouble free and best looking has been the crossfire configuration. I could run three or four vid cards in my system but the two at X16 seem to be just fine. However... I do NOT run that resource hog CCC but use Ray Adams ATI Tools instead and Omegadrivers.
All the Best...
Jay
awDoc1
-
Motherboard. Research find a good solid MB. With two 768 GTX's (yesterdays technology) You won't need the newest hottest MB. Look for one that has 2-PCIx 16speed busses. Some of the first generation stuff had 16/8x combo speed. Not that you'll notice that much.
x8 is quite likely all you will ever achieve in Sli unless you have one of the latest motherboards in PCIe 2.0 and even then most games wont need the extra benefit of x16 (FSX being the only exception that I am aware of). PCIe 2.0 is scaleable and backward compatible.
-
x8 is quite likely all you will ever achieve in Sli unless you have one of the latest motherboards in PCIe 2.0 and even then most games wont need the extra benefit of x16 (FSX being the only exception that I am aware of). PCIe 2.0 is scaleable and backward compatible.
Most of the quality MB's produced in past year and a half are probably PCIe 2.o. I added that statement based on my 2 year old asus m2n SLI Deluxe 16/8x. But truthfully, I didn't notice any groundbreaking difference when I switched my 2 VC's to a XFX 2-16x MB. No doubt there is some difference but not that noticeable unless you run some sort of test on it. IMO.
For those commenting on that SLI doesn't work with some games. I haven't run into any. I am limited (Damn AH!) to a handful of games. Maybe its some older games that have problems?
Note; I probably overestimated how much 2-7800s will raise your Temp. Probably closer to 5 degrees. With my 8800s it was about 10 degrees.