Do you really need SLI to play games?

LordBritish

LordBritish

2[H]4U
Joined
Jan 28, 2001
Messages
2,062
It seems to me that you don't really need SLI to play games.

A single card solution seems to be adequate.

By the time you actually need another card in SLI to play a game smoothly enough, a faster single card has already been released at which point it's probably better to buy the faster single card than buy an older card to use in SLI mode.

Am I correct or am I correct?
 
That depends entirely on your resolution and desired settings. At 1920x1080 or lower I would say that is correct in the vast majority of games so long as you don't feel the desire to run a ridiculous amounts of anti aliasing and have a current generation high end single card. Some people can't stand the fact that an option exists that doesn't run smoothly on their setup (ubersampling in the witcher 2 for instance), and for them it's worth whatever amount of money/power/heat etc. to get that option to work. Others run multimonitor setups or 2560x monitors and really do need the extra power.
 
LordBritish said:
It seems to me that you don't really need SLI to play games.

A single card solution seems to be adequate.

By the time you actually need another card in SLI to play a game smoothly enough, a faster single card has already been released at which point it's probably better to buy the faster single card than buy an older card to use in SLI mode.

Am I correct or am I correct?
Click to expand...

I sure do. I buy sli at the beginning of a gen, not as an upgrade. 2560x1600 eye candy ftw!
 
Do you really need a quad core to game?
Do you really need 16gb of ram to game?
Do you really need an SSD to game?
Do you really need a +1920x1080 resolution monitor, or 3 to game?
Take a second and think to yourself the answer to that question.

Thats whats so great about pc gaming. Nobody will answer the questions the same way.
 
depends on whats acceptable to you.

i dont think i would take anything less then my gtx580 in SLI in BF3.
 
I was asking myself this question when I built my first ever gaming pc just last week...did my research and went with SLI 3gb 580's...damn I'm glad I went SLI with 2560 res. Looks awesome. Should last me for a while..till I upgrade with new kepler cards down the track.
 
I have 2 5830s, and have been happily gaming with them.

The other day I realized I didn't have crossfire on.

whoops.... :)

Craig

oops, I'm in the nvidia forum, I mean uh, 460s and SLi :3
 
csshih said:
I have 2 5830s, and have been happily gaming with them.

The other day I realized I didn't have crossfire on.

whoops.... :)

Craig

oops, I'm in the nvidia forum, I mean uh, 460s and SLi :3
Click to expand...
:p

I've run SLI or crossfire since the socket 939 days, and with every generation of video cards that I buy for that purpose, I'm glad I go that route. I am able to save on overall costs of the video portion of the build. So if I can get similar performance to a good single card out of two cheaper cards, why wouldn't I do that? And quite possibly save myself $100 in the process to put into another portion of the rig.

So, is it necessary? Most definitely not. Is it worth it? To most people that run it, yes.
 
OmegaSupreme said:
:p

I've run SLI or crossfire since the socket 939 days, and with every generation of video cards that I buy for that purpose, I'm glad I go that route. I am able to save on overall costs of the video portion of the build. So if I can get similar performance to a good single card out of two cheaper cards, why wouldn't I do that? And quite possibly save myself $100 in the process to put into another portion of the rig.

So, is it necessary? Most definitely not. Is it worth it? To most people that run it, yes.
Click to expand...

indeed!
It really depends on the games you play, as I've found myself playing non-demanding games like killing floor. :)

Craig
 
csshih said:
indeed!
It really depends on the games you play, as I've found myself playing non-demanding games like killing floor. :)

Craig
Click to expand...

Very true. I play all sorts of games from fairly demanding to almost not at all (on current gen video cards).

I remember when the 4870 was ~$300, for $130 (after MIR), I got 2 9600 GSO's (8800GS's on smaller die) and basically matched the performance of a single 4870 with those 2, yet my overall cost was $170 less. :D
 
I'm playing in 3D. I need SLI, because one 570 is not enough to play at max details with 3D Vision on :) And yes, I like 3D gaming, Skyrim is impressive :)
 
csshih said:
OT, but how's eye fatigue?

-C
Click to expand...
I don't play more then 2 hours a day... I play on default depth setting, and now I have no problems. Though, I been introducing my eyes to 3D same as I was introducing them to contact lenses. So I started at about 15 minutes for 3D and then I was slowly increasing the time of gaming.
 
LordBritish said:
It seems to me that you don't really need SLI to play games.

A single card solution seems to be adequate.

By the time you actually need another card in SLI to play a game smoothly enough, a faster single card has already been released at which point it's probably better to buy the faster single card than buy an older card to use in SLI mode.

Am I correct or am I correct?
Click to expand...
When SLI first came out, it was designed for people who either didn't get enough power out of their current high end GPU, or for those who couldn't afford to buy a new high priced GPU but could afford a second version of what they already had. Typically though at no point was two lower GPU's in SLI better than one higher version.

Now days that has changed significantly. For example at one time you could SLI GTX 460 TI's and get more performance than a single GTX 570, for less money (the one 570 cost more than 2 460's). This is because SLI scaling with quad cores cpu's has improved so much to the point of almost 100% scaling, sometimes even higher than 100% (explain that to me).

But no, you do not need SLI to have a gaming PC as long as your single GPU is decent. Now days SLI is gearing towards people who run 3 monitors in NV surround because mid to high end GPU's can max or almost max out any new game.
 
honestly if you're gaming at 1080p or less i really don't see the need for sli. as long as I get 60fps+ @ 1080p i am happy
 
I'll just give some results of my informal testing this weekend with BF3.

On my 2600K system OC'ed to 4.7GHz, I ran both EVGA GTX 580 3GB cards in tri-SLI, and then two MSI Lightning XE cards in regular SLI.

On my 30" @ 2560x1600, with Ultra settings, 4xMSAA and FXAA high, no motion blur, this what I more or less got for performance:

3x SLI = averaged 70-100 FPS, typically around 80 over time on maps like Caspian, Firestorm, Tehran Highway, etc.

2x SLI = averaged 50-70 FPS, typically around 60 over time on the same large maps.

Granted the Lightning XEs are OC'ed compared to the stock EVGAs, but my results fell pretty in line with what [H] already reported in their single play performance eval.

Bottom line, I would agree that at 1920x1080 you could get away with not running SLI unless you want to enable VSync or something.
 
Yes, for two reasons.

1. I like to play at max quality. Having a GTX480 for the last year and a half has spoiled me for most games. This then leads me to have higher expectations with newer games, and when i can't run max, i get sad. BF3 came around, and on my single gtx480 with video settings set to ultra, i was getting 45fps averages, with noticeably stuttery drops. So i went SLI, and that made me happy... in pants.
Dice themselves said ultra settings @ 1080p is intended for multi-card setups. My playing found similar results, i could not get smooth gameplay at ultra on a single card.

2. I like to play at highframerates. 60+ nice, 90+ ideal, because i plan on getting a 120hz screen, and i want to feel the fluid in the future. No single card will give me that on BF3. Hell, no single card will give me that on BFBC2 if i want HBAO on (which i do). Its also nice having 100 FPS averages in BFBC2, and 75 FPS averages in BF3.

So yes, i do need SLI to play games the way i want to play them. D
 
It makes a good upgrade path as far as I am concerned.

I bought a 560 Ti for $200. Few months later, I bought a second when BF3 and Skyrim were on the horizon and I knew i'd need the extra power. My total investment was $400, less than the cost of one GTX580, and the setup will perform somewhere between a 580 and a 590. Better performance at a lower cost, seems good to me, and I didn't have to worry about ponying up $500 up front for a single GPU of equal performance.
 
I agree with the idea of a good upgrade path. If you've got the PSU, buying another gpu down the road when it's cheaper is a good way to go.
 
If you play on little monitor then you probably don't need it. But if you do anything above 1080p and want eye candy then you will need it if you want good framerate.

I'm picky so I NEED it. I'm NOT satisfied playing a game on a 19" monitor and getting 30fps.

It all comes down to preference, I hate shitty performance so I'm going to get the best I can afford to give me the best experience possible.

But I'm kinda like a Tim Taylor I always need something with more power. Even if its overkill.
 
MorgothPl said:
I don't play more then 2 hours a day... I play on default depth setting, and now I have no problems. Though, I been introducing my eyes to 3D same as I was introducing them to contact lenses. So I started at about 15 minutes for 3D and then I was slowly increasing the time of gaming.
Click to expand...

hrm, ok. Whenever I see those 3D demo displays at say, costco or frys, it hurts! I wear contacts, too ;)

C
 
I couldn't possibly even use Surround (5960x1200) without at least a 2x SLi setup. It's just not possible without one, and even dual gpu/single cards are using SLi.

On top of that, I very much prefer to max all possible graphical enhancements.

Even if I was only using one display, I'd prefer an SLi setup.
 
Do I need this candybar I'm eating? Probably not, but I'm eating it anyway.

*applies logic to SLI/CFX*
 
some amazing games like
crysis 2 + dx11 + texture
battlefield 3
the witcher 2 also with uber off

Runs better on sli also at 1920x1200
 
I bought 1 gtx 590 and it handles any game thrown at it with ease...even multi monitor, im on the same boat as you with not wanting dual cards...my mobo is assassin2 with an i7-3930
 
RaZoRbLaDeD said:
I bought 1 gtx 590 and it handles any game thrown at it with ease...even multi monitor, im on the same boat as you with not wanting dual cards...my mobo is assassin2 with an i7-3930
Click to expand...

+1, I picked up a dell vostro 460 for $350 which has an:
i5
W7 64 bit
500 GB HD,

I added 16gb of ram for stupid cheap, and a hx850. Tossed it all in a amtec 900 case. The catch is it only has one pcie slot.

So I am going either 6990, 590, or waiting for 7970.

Total rig price will be about $1100 if the 7970 sells for $499 which is my guess.

That's not a bad price for a complete rig that can handle most games. I am sure guys with i7 580 SLI rigs will perform a tad better, but they are double the price to build that rig.
 
The bottom line answer comes down to $$$$$ ;)

Ya' do what you can with what ya' got.


jime
 
LordBritish said:
It seems to me that you don't really need SLI to play games.

A single card solution seems to be adequate.

By the time you actually need another card in SLI to play a game smoothly enough, a faster single card has already been released at which point it's probably better to buy the faster single card than buy an older card to use in SLI mode.

Am I correct or am I correct?
Click to expand...

This is correct for resolutions lower than 2560x1600. My GTX 280 ran everything well at 1920x1200. But a second GPU does help to extend the life of your current setup. My 5970 is considered "old" by todays standard. If I was still gaming at 1920x1200 this card would probably last me another year. But I made the jump to 2560x1600, and I CAN'T GO BACK!
 
If your playing on your native and your gpu gives poor performance then adding another would normally give you 60 to 70 percent performance increase.
But dont do what a lot of people do and that is they get another card and up the resolution as well which leaves you back at square 1. Remember that performance increase is on the same resolution. If your card is running smoothly on your native then theres no need to add another
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top