SLI, wise or not?

F

F1a^_^

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jul 3, 2007
Messages
316
Hey,
Until now, I had this going through my mind. I was going to get a MSI 650i mobo and I'd get an 8800 GTS 640 meg right now. I wanted to get a P35 chipset, but after rethinking, I am going w/ a mobo that supports SLI because, maybe down the road when dx10 gets serious I may need to get another card and run SLI. Well, I just read somewhere that there is no point using SLI if you have a monitor smaller than 24''...I disagree, but I don't trust my judgement 100% just yet when it comes to computers..so I'd like to hear from you guys before I drop a lot of money on this stuff.
Also, let's say I run SLI and get another card, ie: another 8800 GTS 640 meg, will this be a lot faster and better and compare to the G9_ cards in the future? How will it perform? I lack knowledge when it comes to SLI, don't know how the cards work when they are put together.
Thanks so much.
 
I think it's unlikely that SLI will beat the next round of vid cards, although it may perform about equal to the lower end of the next round of cards.
 
F1a^_^ said:
Hey,
Until now, I had this going through my mind. I was going to get a MSI 650i mobo and I'd get an 8800 GTS 640 meg right now. I wanted to get a P35 chipset, but after rethinking, I am going w/ a mobo that supports SLI because, maybe down the road when dx10 gets serious I may need to get another card and run SLI. Well, I just read somewhere that there is no point using SLI if you have a monitor smaller than 24''...I disagree, but I don't trust my judgement 100% just yet when it comes to computers..so I'd like to hear from you guys before I drop a lot of money on this stuff.
Also, let's say I run SLI and get another card, ie: another 8800 GTS 640 meg, will this be a lot faster and better and compare to the G9_ cards in the future? How will it perform? I lack knowledge when it comes to SLI, don't know how the cards work when they are put together.
Thanks so much.
Click to expand...

Nobody who can talk about it knows what G9x can do. SLI serves you better when you're at the top end and the best single card just isn't good enough than trying to double up in the middle to beat the high end. By the time you need the second card to keep up, there's often some new feature that dual old cards won't give you. (historical examples: HDR+AA, TRSS-AA, angle-independent AF, HDMI, DX10).

As for the performance benefit, SLI can range from <1X (sometimes it actually degrades performance) to just under 2X the single card, depending on drivers, games, and settings.
 
There are a zillion threads about this and it usually turns into a giant pissing contest about cost and benefit.

I have used SLI since the 6800 GT series of cards.....6800GT,7800GTX,7900GTX and now 8800GTX, all in SLI combination.

All I can say is that I am able to run games at high resolution and superb in game detail. Each series seemed to me to be very capable and always could handle the game better than a single card of the same generation.
In raw frame rate studies, there may be a boost of 15-50% depending on the game and the person benching.
The jump in performance of the 8800 series has been phenominal......my single 8800 GTX could out perform dual 7900GTX cards without breaking a sweat......but the technology is so different, its hard to compare with anything before it.

For me the deal has always been, buy 1 card when its released(very expensive usually) then add the SLI partner when the price drops by 20-30%. That way I can usually continue to play new releases at the same quality settings with out sacrificing frame-rate too much. All the while reading reviews on the newest card to see how they compare to my SLI.
My gamble is in DX10. I'm not sure at all how these 8800s will handle a true,ground-up DX10 game (Crysis??) If they suck then I invested unwisely, if I can play the game the way it was intended, then I'm happy.
 
magoo said:
There are a zillion threads about this and it usually turns into a giant pissing contest about cost and benefit.

I have used SLI since the 6800 GT series of cards.....6800GT,7800GTX,7900GTX and now 8800GTX, all in SLI combination.

All I can say is that I am able to run games at high resolution and superb in game detail. Each series seemed to me to be very capable and always could handle the game better than a single card of the same generation.
In raw frame rate studies, there may be a boost of 15-50% depending on the game and the person benching.
The jump in performance of the 8800 series has been phenominal......my single 8800 GTX could out perform dual 7900GTX cards without breaking a sweat......but the technology is so different, its hard to compare with anything before it.

For me the deal has always been, buy 1 card when its released(very expensive usually) then add the SLI partner when the price drops by 20-30%. That way I can usually continue to play new releases at the same quality settings with out sacrificing frame-rate too much. All the while reading reviews on the newest card to see how they compare to my SLI.
My gamble is in DX10. I'm not sure at all how these 8800s will handle a true,ground-up DX10 game (Crysis??) If they suck then I invested unwisely, if I can play the game the way it was intended, then I'm happy.
Click to expand...
This is exactly where I'm trying to get at and see if it's a smart move. I'm going to do the same exact thing. Buy an 8800 right now, and when the prices drop A LOT, buy a second a run SLI. I just read some stuff about SLI and it makes it seem like it's bad. Hopefully it will present the same, if not better gfx and speeds as the new upcoming cards.
 
Current gen SLI can provide a significant performance boost over the currently available fastest single card solution under certain conditions. One of these conditions (and the largest at that) is that you game at a resolution of 1920x1200 or higher. So, agree or not: SLI is not worth it unless you have a 24 inch or larger monitor (some say it's only worth it on 30 inches.) This is a tried and true prerequisite. The second condition is that you're gaming with two of the fastest cards on the market (the GTX or Ultra.) Otherwise, any performance gain is minimized and isn't worth it.

The SLI performance advantage comes from the additional card's ability to push pixels, as it will chip in when a graphics performance bottleneck has been reached in this manner (think in terms of shear processing power and nothing else.) If one card is capable of pushing all the pixels on your monitor, then the second card is going to twiddle its thumbs. Keep in mind that having two cards does not equate to having one card that's twice as fast or powerful. At best, if you realize any benefit from the second card, you'll realize on somewhere around 50-60% on average (although it all depends on the game--some like FS10 or WoW don't utilize the second card much at all under any circumstance.)

Secondly, SLI is only worth getting if you can drop the cash on two 8800 GTX or Ultra cards, and can do so now. This ensures that you would be getting a performance boost over the currently available fastest single card solution. Even if two GTS 640 cards outperform a single 8800 GTX card, it doesn't do it by much, and it certainly isn't worth the added expense or complexity of that second GTS card. A single GTX should have no trouble besting any less powerful SLI solution, up to and including two 8800 GTS 320 cards (a complete waste of money due to the limited amount of VRAM.)

Furthermore, SLI as an upgrade path is almost aways a bad idea, no matter what model card you plan to purchase. If you have the idea of waiting a few months for prices to drop on the second card (perhaps when that next generation comes out,) you'll find that just replacing the single card will offer much greater performance with less complexity (and often for less money.) It will also keep you free of a more complicated upgrade path in the future.

So ultimately, if you aren't gaming at a resolution of 1920x1200 or higher, and don't want to spend a grand on two GTX cards, forget about SLI. It isn't worth it.

Mark.
 
Markyip1 said:
Current gen SLI can provide a significant performance boost over the currently available fastest single card solution under certain conditions. One of these conditions (and the largest at that) is that you game at a resolution of 1920x1200 or higher. So, agree or not: SLI is not worth it unless you have a 24 inch or larger monitor (some say it's only worth it on 30 inches.) This is a tried and true prerequisite. The second condition is that you're gaming with two of the fastest cards on the market (the GTX or Ultra.) Otherwise, any performance gain is minimized and isn't worth it.

The SLI performance advantage comes from the additional card's ability to push pixels, as it will chip in when a graphics performance bottleneck has been reached in this manner (think in terms of shear processing power and nothing else.) If one card is capable of pushing all the pixels on your monitor, then the second card is going to twiddle its thumbs. Keep in mind that having two cards does not equate to having one card that's twice as fast or powerful. At best, if you realize any benefit from the second card, you'll realize on somewhere around 50-60% on average (although it all depends on the game--some like FS10 or WoW don't utilize the second card much at all under any circumstance.)

Secondly, SLI is only worth getting if you can drop the cash on two 8800 GTX or Ultra cards, and can do so now. This ensures that you would be getting a performance boost over the currently available fastest single card solution. Even if two GTS 640 cards outperform a single 8800 GTX card, it doesn't do it by much, and it certainly isn't worth the added expense or complexity of that second GTS card. A single GTX should have no trouble besting any less powerful SLI solution, up to and including two 8800 GTS 320 cards (a complete waste of money due to the limited amount of VRAM.)

Furthermore, SLI as an upgrade path is almost aways a bad idea, no matter what model card you plan to purchase. If you have the idea of waiting a few months for prices to drop on the second card (perhaps when that next generation comes out,) you'll find that just replacing the single card will offer much greater performance with less complexity (and often for less money.) It will also keep you free of a more complicated upgrade path in the future.

So ultimately, if you aren't gaming at a resolution of 1920x1200 or higher, and don't want to spend a grand on two GTX cards, forget about SLI. It isn't worth it.

Mark.
Click to expand...


Uh... okay. If you've already got one card and you don't want to spend much, then I think SLI might be the way to go. In all reality, I only spent 70 dollars for this 6800GS and traded my friend a 7600GT for the other one (he's got a 7600GT as well, so he SLI'd too). There's a noticable difference in frame rates. I ran games with a 15" bowl CRT monitor and I saw frame-rate increases. I'm running hacked SLi too, so I've got a couple more issues since I use an older version of drivers, but I'd do SLI if it cost me around 100 dollars for the second card ;) .

I disagree with you up above. You'll always be chasing technology if you exercise that technique you have above and spending more and more. SLI is for people who don't want to drop another 100 or 200 dollars over the next-gen high end but still want to get an increase in performance. It almost sounds like you're trying to justify your own purchase of 2x 8800GTX's. Personally, I think to drop 1000+ dollars into graphic cards is pure ludicrious, there are better places to put your money, and especially if you can build a whole system for that graphics budget. But to each his own.

To the op, if the prices satisify your budget right now, I'd recommend going SLI just for the performance increase. That or you could go through the hassle of selling your 8800GTS and buying an 8800GTX for 200 dollars more. It all depends on what you want to do. If I were in your position, I'd keep my eye out for some pretty cheap 8800GTS's and if there's one that's good, buy it. Then just hang with that till we see what the next gen cards have in store for us.
 
StealthyFish said:
It almost sounds like you're trying to justify your own purchase of 2x 8800GTX's. Personally, I think to drop 1000+ dollars into graphic cards is pure ludicrious, there are better places to put your money, and especially if you can build a whole system for that graphics budget. But to each his own.
Click to expand...

Hardly. I've done a considerable amount of research on the subject of SLI. I've conferred with many expects here and at other forums, and with friends at both nVidia and AMD. I've given a lot of advice on system builds, and on SLI for that matter, and I'm always quite consistent in where I believe it will benefit a user's experience and where it won't. As for me, I built my rig within a specific budget and I wanted the 55-60% boost GTX SLI provides over a single GTX card. Could I have gotten by without it? Yeah, but I sure as hell enjoy having it. For me it's proven to be a good choice... certainly better than any Core 2 Extreme chip for a similar price. Of course, no gaming-rig PC is an investment when all it does is depreciate until it begs to be replaced in three to four years. But indeed, to each his own.

The OP is considering to go SLI with two GTS cards. Even today, a better solution can be had with a single GTX card, which will be cheaper than two GTS cards bought now or in the short-term future. A single GTX will perform admirably at all resolutions up to 1920x1200, negating the need for a second card. Furthemore, when the user decides to upgrade, it will be much simpler to replace one card than two. With one card, the OP gains the benefit of a simplier, cooler running system and the ability to purchase a P35 board, which is newer than 680i boards and will support a higher max FSB. If the OP wants to buy one GTS today with the idea of buying another GTS in the future, it would make more sense to replace the single GTS for a next-gen mid to high-end card for the same or less money. The OP is asking whether or not two GTS cards will perform as well, if not better than, future cards. No one knows for sure, but given past history, we can expect that it wont. Certainly, if there is little gain to be had from two GTS cards over one GTX, going with two GTS cards in hopes that it will out perform a future card seems futile.

Lastly, keep in mind that this question comes up all the time on all of the prominent hardware forums. Look here, at Anandtech, XtremeSystems, Toms Hardware, etc. There is indeed some debate, but I'm pretty certain that most advise along the same lines when it comes to 8800 SLI.... if you have the resolution and the cash to support two GTX cards, by all means go for it. Otherwise it's a waste. To the previous post, keep in mind we're talking about current gen SLI... With each generation of cards, the criteria of whether SLI is worth it can change.

Good luck,

Mark.
 
Markyip1 said:
Hardly. I've done a considerable amount of research on the subject of SLI. I've conferred with many expects here and at other forums, and with friends at both nVidia and AMD. I've given a lot of advice on system builds, and on SLI for that matter, and I'm always quite consistent in where I believe it will benefit a user's experience and where it won't. As for me, I built my rig within a specific budget and I wanted the 55-60% boost GTX SLI provides over a single GTX card. Could I have gotten by without it? Yeah, but I sure as hell enjoy having it. For me it's proven to be a good choice... certainly better than any Core 2 Extreme chip for a similar price. Keep in mind that no gaming-rig PC, such as mine, is an investment when all it does is depreciate until it begs to be replaced in three to four years. But indeed, to each his own.

The OP is considering going SLI with two GTS cards. Even today, a better solution can be had with a single GTX card, which will be cheaper than two GTS cards bought today. A single GTX will perform admirably at all resolutions up to 1920x1200, negating the need for a second card. Furthemore, when the user decides to upgrade, it will be much simpler to replace one card than two. With one card, the OP gains the benefit of a simplier, cooler running system and the ability to purchase a P35 board, which is newer than 680i boards and will support a higher max FSB.

If the OP wants to buy one GTS today with the idea of buying another GTS in the future, it would make more sense to replace the single GTS for a next-gen mid-high-end card for the same or less money that will likely outperform two GTS cards in tandem.

If you have the money for a second GTS 640 card, then I truly believe you'll be better off selling an existing GTS 640 card and using the money made to buy a GTX card. In that case you shouldn't have to pay more than you're willing to originally spend on the second GTS card. It's just a smarter way to go, especially if you don't have the high-res monitor.

Lastly, keep in mind that this question comes up all the time on all of the prominent hardware forums. Look here, at Anandtech, XtremeSystems, Toms Hardware, etc. There is indeed some debate, but I'm pretty certain that most advise along the sme lines when it comes to 8800 SLI.... if you have the resolution and the cash to support two GTX cards, by all means go for it. Otherwise it's a waste. To the previous post, keep in mind we're talking about current gen SLI... With each generation of cards, the criteria of whether SLI is worth it can change.

Good luck,

Mark.
Click to expand...

I'm always a little more frugal with my money. I'm not one to buy a high end CPU or high end graphic cards. I've always gone for the mid-range if they were worth it. I'm speaking about this from a different perspective though. There's a big performance gap between my 6800GS's and an 8800GTS and I'd certainly take an 8800GTS. But let's say I bought each of my 6800GS's for eVGA's listed price of 90 dollars each. That's 180 dollars.+20 dollar and I could have bought an X1950XTX. I can only marginally perform better than an X1950XTX in 3dmark05 and lose out on some video quality settings. If I were buying them all now, I'd just have bought the X1950XTX. But I had the 6800GS already and was not up to going through attempting to sell my card, package it up, ship it out, and purchase a new card. I might as well have bought the other 6800GS for performance... right? Would you do the same?

It's always easy to say, "yeah, sell your card," but I'm quite sure you know, there's more work in that and some people are exactly committed to the idea of selling their card to someone else. Lots of chances to get screwed along the way. And in all reality, to pay 300 or so dollars for performing better than an 8800GTX? I'd seriously consider that over going through the hassle and risks of selling the card, getting the money out of that (by the way, you'd be losing money if you did that as well), and purchasing an 8800GTX.
 
I think we may be taking the thread off topic by getting into a debate over PC budget size. That's a debate that will have no resolution, as everyone has different priorities, hobbies, interests, etc. There is no right or wrong here... and when giving advice on these forums, often the first question asked (if not already provided by the OP) is what's your budget? This way advice can be tailored to what the OP is willing to spend.

In any case, I just want to re-iterate something I stated in my last reply that may have gotten lost in our back and forth. The OP asked in a reply several posts up if whether or not a GTS 640 meg system SLI will outperform future releases. As I stated above, there's no way to absolutely know for sure, but most (including myself) will confidently predict that it won't--In fact I'll say there's a 90% chance it won't.

To the OP: What's your budget?

Mark.
 
Don't go SLI unless you can afford to do it every year. Basically, the way to get the best graphics performance overall is to upgrade your video card about once per year or so. So figure out what you can spend in that time frame, and try to buy at that level.

Graphics just moves so fast that trying to spend a lot of money hoping that you won't have to upgrade is a losing proposition. Even if your rig is still somewhat competitive speed wise, it won't be features wise.

So while it may be nice to have an absolutely top of the line rig for a bit, it isn't so much fun two years down the road when you are still using the same thing, and it is now mid range at best.

Keep to a once a year general formula. Doesn't have to be strict, you can wait longer than a year depending on how the releases are, just budget in the "what I can afford on a yearly basis" bracket. Don't have the mentality of "I'll save up and get a really nice card, then not have to upgrade for a long time," since with video cards that just works very poorly.

This, of course, assuming the goal is to continue to have good hardware for new games. If you are playing a given era of games and not updating, this doesn't apply to you. However for most PC gamers, this is the way to go. I know too many people that blow $300-600 on a card and then are stuck with it years later when really a $150 card would do well right now and they could then get another one the next year.
 
After I went SLi with the 6 series (after originally starting with a single card), I have went with SLi ever since (Now running XFX 7950GT Extreme SLi).


This whole "Its gotta have a 24" monitor to make sense" is utter RUBBISH and that's from experience. I've used SLi with 17, 20, 22, and my current 26 inch monitors and I had a CONSIDERABLE increase in framerates at higher settings with SLi on each one. Whatever setting, on any game, on almost any resolution.

SLi turns -"I wonder if I can turn up this setting/slider without lagging" to - "I don't feel like turning up this setting because I play better without it"


I've seen many unhappy gamers with a single card configuration --- I've NEVER seen an unhappy SLi gamer (unless he was getting pwned over a LAN).
 
I bought two 8800GTX superclocked cards. I may not be able to use all the power now with my 20" monitor. But considering that my PC gets replaced every 2-3 years, this system has to last me that long. In 2-3 years, this top-of-the-line system will probably be able to run 80% of games out there... but not all of them.
 
Dark Prodigy said:
SLi turns -"I wonder if I can turn up this setting/slider without lagging" to - "I don't feel like turning up this setting because I play better without it"
Click to expand...

True, but it is a question of if you can continue to afford it. In your case it sounds like you can, but for those that are going to have to make it a "if I buy it now I can't upgrade for a long time" it doesn't make sense. I mean I suppose I could have gone SLI when I got my previous card, I could have gotten 2x7800GTs or maybe even GTXs. However, that means I now wouldn't have an 8800. I don't think you can argue that the 7800s would be better than the 8800 because even if their performance was close, their features are not (the 8800 has just beautiful AnIso filtering that I love in Oblivion).

So please don't mistake me for saying "SLI is stupid" it's not, it is just really high end and you should go with it unless you can afford it. Affording it, in my definition, means being about to buy an upgrade every 12-18 months. If you have to stretch your budget, and thus put off upgrading longer, better to just back off and go with something less. You'll be a happier camper in the long run. I'd personally love to have SLI, but it would mean upgrading far less, and that's just not a good idea in my book.
 
I'm always swimmimg upstream in this discussion........
I think there are just too many intangibles when you get into a discussion about SLI. For every person that loves it, there's somebody who'll trash it, no doubt.
Cost is always an issue.
You need the MB to support the habit.
You need a good monitor to go to a reasonable resolution.

I dont agree that if you buy one 640MB 8800 you'll be unhappy with an SLI setup.
Your 8800-640 will be better than anything(single card solutions and maybe a few SLI set-ups) below it, period.
If you find that the single card is lacking in two or three months (all the while enjoying your games at graphic settings you may not have been able to reach in the past) you can add the second 8800-640 and keep that same level of quality or maybe a bit better, for less money than a single card of the next generation.

It never gets you off scott-free, but does allow you to play at great graphic levels and getting more mileage out of the investment. When you are dissatisfied, time to up the anty. But most likely, the price on that spanky new G92 series card will be below MSRP.

To me it's all subjective. I like what I like, and SLI gives me what I like.
 
i bought a 7600gtoc last summer. bought another one around christmas time when there was a sale. spent 230$ on the pair of them over the course of 6 months. sli works. i'm still happy with my graphics performance, even with about 15 cards ahead of mine in terms of performance.


i know... boooooo 7600's! meh, my games still look great @ 1680x1050 with my sli setup and the footprints from these cards are almost non-existant in terms of heat and power consumption; well, at least when compared to the newer bad-boys with their dual power connectors and such.

i wont comment directly regarding the extra noise but with any two video cards in cahoots, you'll have to consider 3rd party cooling and making use of rivatuner to regulate the fan speed.

+1 SLI
 
Had a 24" monitor, and didn't notice a major difference with SLI. One overclocked 8800GTX card actually felt about the same as two stock cards in SLI. SLI was a "bit" faster in the benchmarks, but in real games, it didn't make much of a difference. Because my monitor is relatively small compared to a 30", SLI didn't make a huge difference.

If anyone has an even smaller monitor, they are seriously mistaken if they think SLI with the high end cards is going to help a lot.

I'd rather have one high end card than SLI. And when the G92's come out, I'll simply sell my remaining card and have a system that's much faster than the current SLi setups.
 
To those refuting the 24 inch monitor notion: Please keep in mind that this advice, which is often given by myself and many others, pertains mostly (or wholly, depending upon who you ask) to current 8800 SLI solutions.

The 8800 series of cards is powerful to the point that a single 8800 GTX card can suitably handle almost every game out today with all settings maxed at 1920x1200 or below, while the GTS 640 card has you covered at 1600x1200 and below, and so on and so forth. Buying a high end 8800 GTX or GTS card for an SLI system doesn't make sense when you're gaming at below 1920x1200 because all of the work can be easily handled by a single card.

It looks like everyone on this forum refuting the 24 inch monitor advice is using SLI with older generation cards. Well of course you'll see a difference with two older cards vs. one at lower res, since they're less powerful cards. I doubt a single 6800 can handle a modern, graphically demanding game at 1600x1200 or 1240x1080 with all settings maxed, and that by adding the second 6800 you'll definitely see a difference at that lower resolution. The resolution bottleneck for the 8800 GTX happens to be at 1920x1200 (lower for the GTS,) and when your pushing that or more, SLI only then begins to benefit.

Mark.
 
I tend to agree with most people here. SLI is only worth it if you play demanding games with AA/AF cranked with maximum in-game details and want the highest frame rates, or as a future upgrade path if you can't afford the creme de-la creme right off the bat. If you buy two lower end cards off the bat you'd be wasting your money, plain and simple.

A single high-end card (if you can afford it) is always going to be simpler to do, and it's more cost-effective (you have to invest $150+ in a high quality and amperage PSU, an extremely well ventilated case, an SLi motherboard, a powerful CPU to feed both cards, blah, blah, blah...) and just as if not more powerful provided you go with one high-end card rather than two mid-range models.

Now, don't get me wrong, SLi is not without it's merits. It's always good if you only have the budget for a single card now, if you're not happy with the performance you can always save up for another and get anywhere between a 50-80% performance increase depending on the title. It's meant as an upgrade path for the future to increase performance later, or with two top-of-the-line cards now you get the best that nVIDIA has to offer in GPU performance.

Like any man-made technology, it's not perfect and sometimes it doesn't always work as advertised (less than optimal performance scaling, the occasional incompatiblity issue, etc.) but if you do your homework and choose your hardware wisely from the start, SLi can and will in most cases enhance your gaming experience for the better.

As for the OP's question, I'm doing a similar route. I'm buying an EVGA 8800GTS 320MB superclocked next week, which will be sufficient for my needs now, and when the prices drop and that single card feels the crunch, I plan on adding a second in a few months' time. I feel your upgrade path is justified as long as you don't plan on buying a second card at the same time. If that's the case, go buy an 8800GTX or Ultra so you can always snap in another later.
 
Mr. Bluntman said:
I tend to agree with most people here. SLI is only worth it if you play demanding games with AA/AF cranked with maximum in-game details and want the highest frame rates, or as a future upgrade path if you can't afford the creme de-la creme right off the bat. If you buy two lower end cards off the bat you'd be wasting your money, plain and simple.

A single high-end card (if you can afford it) is always going to be simpler to do, and it's more cost-effective (you have to invest $150+ in a high quality and amperage PSU, an extremely well ventilated case, an SLi motherboard, a powerful CPU to feed both cards, blah, blah, blah...) and just as if not more powerful provided you go with one high-end card rather than two mid-range models.

Now, don't get me wrong, SLi is not without it's merits. It's always good if you only have the budget for a single card now, if you're not happy with the performance you can always save up for another and get anywhere between a 50-80% performance increase depending on the title. It's meant as an upgrade path for the future to increase performance later, or with two top-of-the-line cards now you get the best that nVIDIA has to offer in GPU performance.

Like any man-made technology, it's not perfect and sometimes it doesn't always work as advertised (less than optimal performance scaling, the occasional incompatiblity issue, etc.) but if you do your homework and choose your hardware wisely from the start, SLi can and will in most cases enhance your gaming experience for the better.

As for the OP's question, I'm doing a similar route. I'm buying an EVGA 8800GTS 320MB superclocked next week, which will be sufficient for my needs now, and when the prices drop and that single card feels the crunch, I plan on adding a second in a few months' time. I feel your upgrade path is justified as long as you don't plan on buying a second card at the same time. If that's the case, go buy an 8800GTX or Ultra so you can always snap in another later.
Click to expand...

You make many points about SLI that I agree with, but there is a serious flaw in your own SLI strategy. The 320 MB onboard memory of the 8800GTS 320 is not sufficient to hold the data for the high resolution/high AA performance that the card's GPU is otherwise capable of. As such that is its primary performance bottleneck, and SLI will not overcome it because of the RAM in SLI not being additive. Going SLI with that model would allow the crunching power to go much higher, but the memory capacity to use the power just won't be there. Read [H]'s review of the card. It shows how the memory limitation holds it back while the 640 model scales higher, simply because games like Oblivion can overwhelm anything less than 512MB of video RAM.

Even if newer titles stress the computational power of the GPU enough to give you benefits from SLI, their RAM requirements are likely to go up just as fast. All that to say, if you want to SLI an 8800GTS later, you really need the 640 model or the second card won't do you much good.
 
Commander Suzdal said:
You make many points about SLI that I agree with, but there is a serious flaw in your own SLI strategy. The 320 MB onboard memory of the 8800GTS 320 is not sufficient to hold the data for the high resolution/high AA performance that the card's GPU is otherwise capable of. As such that is its primary performance bottleneck, and SLI will not overcome it because of the RAM in SLI not being additive. Going SLI with that model would allow the crunching power to go much higher, but the memory capacity to use the power just won't be there. Read [H]'s review of the card. It shows how the memory limitation holds it back while the 640 model scales higher, simply because games like Oblivion can overwhelm anything less than 512MB of video RAM.

Even if newer titles stress the computational power of the GPU enough to give you benefits from SLI, their RAM requirements are likely to go up just as fast. All that to say, if you want to SLI an 8800GTS later, you really need the 640 model or the second card won't do you much good.
Click to expand...

Believe me I am very well aware of this fact; don't think it hasn't crossed my mind. I know I will be memory limited in the future. But that's not a major problem, yet. Primarily because of this simple fact: I won't be gaming at anything higher than 1280x1024, which is the ceiling after which perfomance starts dropping off in a very noticable manner over the 640MB cards. And in anything below that the 576MHz core and 1700MHz memory clocks of this card will offset (and in most cases) outperform the 640MB standard clocked card present day. So in the resolutions I game at, this is a better choice for me at this point. I'm not saying the OP should shun the 640MB cards in favor of a factory O/C'd 320MB one...

The bottom line is that I don't have that much cash, and plus I'm getting this card for a SONG from a friend of mine that's the owner of a local computer shop ($150 plus my current almost brand-new 7950GT 256MB) and still you have to admit that it is a far better solution than any 8600 series card.

Anyhoo this is getting off topic...
 
SLi in the end seems really only useful if you have cash to blow and you cannot wait for the next generation. The cost usually outweighs the gains.
 
Mr. Bluntman said:
Believe me I am very well aware of this fact; don't think it hasn't crossed my mind. I know I will be memory limited in the future. But that's not a major problem, yet. Primarily because of this simple fact: I won't be gaming at anything higher than 1280x1024, which is the ceiling after which perfomance starts dropping off in a very noticable manner over the 640MB cards. And in anything below that the 576MHz core and 1700MHz memory clocks of this card will offset (and in most cases) outperform the 640MB standard clocked card present day. So in the resolutions I game at, this is a better choice for me at this point. I'm not saying the OP should shun the 640MB cards in favor of a factory O/C'd 320MB one...

The bottom line is that I don't have that much cash, and plus I'm getting this card for a SONG from a friend of mine that's the owner of a local computer shop ($150 plus my current almost brand-new 7950GT 256MB) and still you have to admit that it is a far better solution than any 8600 series card.

Anyhoo this is getting off topic...
Click to expand...

Ah, you're good then. Might even be at the widescreen equivalent--1680x1050? Plus a sweet deal is a sweet deal.
 
jesus, this thread is still going?
Btw, I'm not running SLI. Just stickin to one gpu until I become rich.
/thread
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top