1080 SLI vs Titan X Pascal

1080 SLI or Titan X Pascal

  • 2x 1080 in SLI

    Votes: 38 19.0%

  • The Titan!

    Votes: 162 81.0%
  • Total voters
    200
For my case (both figuratively and literally), Titan, I cannot use 2 GPU's with backplates at the same time without losing either my Wireless connection or SLI.

For everyone else, probably 1080 SLI.

30% is approaching the "do not SLI territory though, 50% is my cutoff point.
 
Im a one man card too. But i would probably go sli.

You are paying 1$ extra for every cuda core more that titan has lol.
 
Depends how well new Titan X overclocks. If it's a monster overclocker then I might be interested.
But 1080SLI has about 60% more performance than a single 1080. And new Titan X is supposedly 30% faster than 1080. So it's 30% slower than 1080SLI at about the same price.

Now in my case I would have to get two water blocks instead of one. And the price here in Sweden on two 1080 is ~1350 euros. Total cost would be about €1600 probably more. But cheaper cards are easier to sell...

I need to see benchmarks on the new Titan X and especially overclocking benchmarks. I read somewhere that release date is August 2nd, that's soon :)
 
5150Joker said:
One faster card is always better than two slower ones.
Click to expand...

Completely and totally this.

SLI support has done nothing but get worse, and it is poised to be complete shit soon with DX12 requiring the developer to enable it (how long has RoTTR had DX12 and no SLI support in DX12? (Yet has DX11 SLI support)). And let's not forget Nvidia dropping >2 way SLI support altogether, which leads to their dropping all support in the not so distant future.

Hopefully the 1080 Ti is released soon, as I'd rather not pay $1200 for a card that will be replaced an a year.
 
5150Joker said:
One faster card is always better than two slower ones.
Click to expand...

Not in this case. When people say two slower ones, they really mean 1070 SLI vs Titan X.
The 1080 cuts into 50% of the new Titan X performance lead over the previous Titan. 1080 SLI will greatly out pace the new Titan X.
 
One faster card is indeed better than two slower cards, but two faster cards are even better than one faster card that's better than two slower cards.

TLDR: SLI Pitan X or go home
 
arestavo said:
Completely and totally this.

SLI support has done nothing but get worse, and it is poised to be complete shit soon with DX12 requiring the developer to enable it (how long has RoTTR had DX12 and no SLI support in DX12? (Yet has DX11 SLI support)). And let's not forget Nvidia dropping >2 way SLI support altogether, which leads to their dropping all support in the not so distant future.

Hopefully the 1080 Ti is released soon, as I'd rather not pay $1200 for a card that will be replaced an a year.
Click to expand...

Really depends on the games you play. I mainly play AAA titles with high end requirements at 4K, where SLI support is more common.
If you like to play low requirement games at lower resolutions or indie titles, one card will be better financially.
 
Last edited:
Even some high end, graphics intensive, AAA titles don't have SLI support (or do but it works like shit, or don't but can be shoehorned and it may or may not work like shit) - Just Cause 3 immediately springs to mind.

Not that many AAA titles don't work with SLI, it's just that enough don't that it forced me into a single card solution because I want to game not spend hours trying to get the fucking thing to work right. For reference, in the past I have had 4 way, 3 way, and 2 way SLI solutions (funny enough, in that order) with top end cards.
 
I'll get a couple 1080ti's when they come out. They'll probably be about as fast as the Titan X. And people running 1080 sli will be crying when the 1080ti comes out, just like with the 980ti did. So many tears that day...
 
Drawmonster said:
I'll get a couple 1080ti's when they come out. They'll probably be about as fast as the Titan X. And people running 1080 sli will be crying when the 1080ti comes out, just like with the 980ti did. So many tears that day...
Click to expand...
I don't know about 1080 SLI. But 1070 SLI is going to get stomped by overclocked Pitan X
 
Drawmonster said:
I'll get a couple 1080ti's when they come out. They'll probably be about as fast as the Titan X. And people running 1080 sli will be crying when the 1080ti comes out, just like with the 980ti did. So many tears that day...
Click to expand...

My guess is a 1080ti would be around $1000 so I'm not sure they'll be crying too hard...
 
Most the games that actually need SLI these days, like Quantum Break, don't even support it.

Most games which actually do have SLI support, the Titan X by itself should be fast enough to run them at 4K + 60 FPS.
 
Except Witcher 3, that thing needs and supports SLI.

But yeah, state of mGPU support these days and the fact that Witcher 3 seems to be a monster of a game on its own has prevented me from pulling the trigger on 1080: it's not enough, especially for that price.

If Titan X is enough, I'd be far more temped to get it than 1080, that much is certain.
 
wigglywaffles said:
Most the games that actually need SLI these days, like Quantum Break, don't even support it.

Most games which actually do have SLI support, the Titan X by itself should be fast enough to run them at 4K + 60 FPS.
Click to expand...

The choice is this. The new Titan X will be around 980Ti SLI with stock clocks. 980Ti's are going for $350-400. $700 vs $1200.
I don't think the comfort of a single card is worth $500. As for Quantum Break that's a MS development problem, not a SLI problem.
 
The comfort of the single card comes from whether or not you are satisfied with the performance of a single 980ti, not average of SLI 980ti.

The matter of fact is, 980ti SLI, just like all SLI, has the pitfall of non-SLI supporting games. If you are happy with the performance of a SINGLE 980ti, then 980ti SLI makes more sense (ironically).

If single 980ti isn't enough, SLI 980ti is going to be an entirely fruitless exercise, and you may as well get Titan X.

A lot of people use SLI average performance as a benchmark to compare single cards with. Truth is, that is a rather misleading comparison, because not all games support them, and those that do will not scale linearly (IE if 980ti SLI is on average 60% better than 980ti on its own, it could vary in the range of 0% to 100%, depending on the game). Single card GPU has an unequalled advantage that it does NOT require game support for you to be able to utilise the performance, assuming no CPU nor monitor refresh rate bottlenecks.

Obviously, like I have said a bazillion times before, this conclusion changes dramatically depending on your gaming tastes, or even your geographical location (since the pricing will be a LOT different). If all your games support SLI, and/or if 980ti SLI is cheaper AND you are happy with 980ti on its own, then 980ti SLI makes sense.

I tend to play a HUGE variety of games, some support SLI, others do not, but I place far more emphasis on the game's appeal, not its technical details. I don't go out of my way to play SLI games just because I run SLI. I play the game because I want to (regardless of SLI), and I feel that in this case, single GPU makes more sense (IE I let my games decide my hardware, not the otherway round, which is currently what's happening with my single 970 and I hate it).

So paradoxically, I'd the choice of SLI or not has a lot more to do with whether or not you can accept the performance of a SINGLE card in the SLI config, if one cannot, then you will invariably run into SLI issues, and one is better off going for the higher end Single. If you are happy with single 980ti, then SLI 980ti is much less of a bad idea.
 
WorldExclusive said:
The choice is this. The new Titan X will be around 980Ti SLI with stock clocks. 980Ti's are going for $350-400. $700 vs $1200.
I don't think the comfort of a single card is worth $500. As for Quantum Break that's a MS development problem, not a SLI problem.
Click to expand...

No, that's just part of the new trend of developers abandoning SLI support. Microsoft is far from the first to do this and it is just going to continue even moreso. With DX12, multi-GPU is dead. Quantum Break performs poorly because it quite possibly has the best graphics of any PC game ever released.

Best bet would be to wait on the 1180 Ti... we've almost reached the point where SLI is pointless for achieving 4K + 60 FPS in everything.
 
After having SLI/CF for the last ten years or so, I'm done with it. Support keeps getting worse and worse, not better as I had hoped. Seems like NV is trying to kill it off with the way they've stopped supporting tri+ SLI and dropped it all together on their mid tier cards (eg gtx 1060). If DX12 changes that, I may go back some day, but for now, it's so hit or miss, it's just not worth it.
 
Single card for me. Dual gpu if the money is right but even then only for the top of the line gpu
 
Ive necer had a problem with sli and ive been doing dual cards since voodoo 2!
 
I think 1080 SLI would come out ahead. I'm running 1080 SLI now actually, and seems to work great. Especially at high resolutions you get way more than 30% increase in performance.

It can even approach double performance in the right circumstances. I know not all games support SLI, but many do.

crysis3_3840_2160.png


The Titan X would avoid SLI software bugs, but you'd be sacrificing a huge amount of performance for around the same dollars spent.
 
wigglywaffles said:
No, that's just part of the new trend of developers abandoning SLI support. Microsoft is far from the first to do this and it is just going to continue even moreso. With DX12, multi-GPU is dead. Quantum Break performs poorly because it quite possibly has the best graphics of any PC game ever released.

Best bet would be to wait on the 1180 Ti... we've almost reached the point where SLI is pointless for achieving 4K + 60 FPS in everything.
Click to expand...

I am waiting for Titan Volta. It has been my plan to stay with 980Ti SLI until then. This Titan only matches my current setup at $500 more, so there's no need to upgrade.
What happens when 4K @ 120Hz comes to market? A single card will not be able to run it. Listen, I have heard all of the arguments for single card but that's why overpriced $1200 cards exist.
Nvidia created the Titan series and is moving towards a single card focus because people are willing to pay hundreds more for the same performance as two cards in SLI.

I'm not into throwing money and performance away for satisfy hard-head ideas.

Until SLI officially dies, 4K and the coming 4K at 100-120Hz, SLI is still needed.
 
Last edited:
B2BigAl said:
After having SLI/CF for the last ten years or so, I'm done with it. Support keeps getting worse and worse, not better as I had hoped. Seems like NV is trying to kill it off with the way they've stopped supporting tri+ SLI and dropped it all together on their mid tier cards (eg gtx 1060). If DX12 changes that, I may go back some day, but for now, it's so hit or miss, it's just not worth it.
Click to expand...

The 1080, Titan X and the coming 1080Ti are poor value cards.
980TI SLI allows me to skip this gen.
chenw said:
The comfort of the single card comes from whether or not you are satisfied with the performance of a single 980ti, not average of SLI 980ti.

The matter of fact is, 980ti SLI, just like all SLI, has the pitfall of non-SLI supporting games. If you are happy with the performance of a SINGLE 980ti, then 980ti SLI makes more sense (ironically).

If single 980ti isn't enough, SLI 980ti is going to be an entirely fruitless exercise, and you may as well get Titan X.

A lot of people use SLI average performance as a benchmark to compare single cards with. Truth is, that is a rather misleading comparison, because not all games support them, and those that do will not scale linearly (IE if 980ti SLI is on average 60% better than 980ti on its own, it could vary in the range of 0% to 100%, depending on the game). Single card GPU has an unequalled advantage that it does NOT require game support for you to be able to utilise the performance, assuming no CPU nor monitor refresh rate bottlenecks.

Obviously, like I have said a bazillion times before, this conclusion changes dramatically depending on your gaming tastes, or even your geographical location (since the pricing will be a LOT different). If all your games support SLI, and/or if 980ti SLI is cheaper AND you are happy with 980ti on its own, then 980ti SLI makes sense.

I tend to play a HUGE variety of games, some support SLI, others do not, but I place far more emphasis on the game's appeal, not its technical details. I don't go out of my way to play SLI games just because I run SLI. I play the game because I want to (regardless of SLI), and I feel that in this case, single GPU makes more sense (IE I let my games decide my hardware, not the otherway round, which is currently what's happening with my single 970 and I hate it).

So paradoxically, I'd the choice of SLI or not has a lot more to do with whether or not you can accept the performance of a SINGLE card in the SLI config, if one cannot, then you will invariably run into SLI issues, and one is better off going for the higher end Single. If you are happy with single 980ti, then SLI 980ti is much less of a bad idea.
Click to expand...


What are these games that doesn't support SLI? Is it Battlefield, GTA V, etc. made by real PC devs?
Or are they piss poor ports like Quantum Break, Batman and the usual Ubisoft trash? How about indie games will small development budgets?

I always say, consider the source. If the dev is rolling out garbage, don't assume it's the norm.
 
Last edited:
WorldExclusive said:
The 1080 and Titan X are poor value cards. Pascal as a whole is a poor value compared to previous generations.
980TI SLI allows me to skip this gen.



What are these games that doesn't support SLI? Is it Battlefield, GTA V, etc. made by real PC devs?
Or are they piss poor ports like Quantum Break, Batman and the usual Ubisoft trash? How about indie games will small development budgets?

I always say, consider the source. If the dev is rolling out garbage, don't assume it's the norm.
Click to expand...
Mgpu support is not the norm. Why even pretend?
 
WorldExclusive said:
The 1080, Titan X and the coming 1080Ti are poor value cards.
980TI SLI allows me to skip this gen.



What are these games that doesn't support SLI? Is it Battlefield, GTA V, etc. made by real PC devs?
Or are they piss poor ports like Quantum Break, Batman and the usual Ubisoft trash? How about indie games will small development budgets?

I always say, consider the source. If the dev is rolling out garbage, don't assume it's the norm.
Click to expand...

Is Doom garbage? Is Wolfenstein: New order and old blood garbage? Neither of them supports SLI.

I don't play Battlefield because I have been done with online player vs player type games a LONG time ago. I don't play GTA V because I can no longer play the bad guys.

If you play games that exclusively support SLI, more power to you. I don't. I play games, not marvel at the background technical jargon (I don't go "OMG! THIS GAME SCALES 10000% with SLI, I GOTTA PLAY THIS" for example). If I wanted to play "Ubisoft garbage" like AC:U, which is broken under SLI, I play it.

I let my games decide my hardware, not the otherway round. I don't go out of my way to pick games that are not "garbage", I pick the games I enjoy playing. If Ubisoft comes out with a game I like, I play it. If EA still pumps out games that I have no interest in, even if they have 100% SLI scaling, I won't play them.
 
chenw said:
Is Doom garbage? Is Wolfenstein: New order and old blood garbage? Neither of them supports SLI.

I don't play Battlefield because I have been done with online player vs player type games a LONG time ago. I don't play GTA V because I can no longer play the bad guys.

If you play games that exclusively support SLI, more power to you. I don't. I play games, not marvel at the background technical jargon (I don't go "OMG! THIS GAME SCALES 10000% with SLI, I GOTTA PLAY THIS" for example). If I wanted to play "Ubisoft garbage" like AC:U, which is broken under SLI, I play it.

I let my games decide my hardware, not the otherway round. I don't go out of my way to pick games that are not "garbage", I pick the games I enjoy playing. If Ubisoft comes out with a game I like, I play it. If EA still pumps out games that I have no interest in, even if they have 100% SLI scaling, I won't play them.
Click to expand...

A little too splenetic but a valid argument nonetheless.
 
lack of multi gpu support for all aaa titles these last 3 years has soured this long-time mgpu proponent on the tech. doubly troublesome going forward is the handing of mgpu support primarily to devs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top