SLI/Crossfire: I don't get multiple videocard setups

L

lobski

Limp Gawd
Joined
Apr 17, 2008
Messages
460
SLI/Crossfire:

Double or triple the cost, double or triple the heat, double or triple the power consumption, and nowhere close to double or triple performance. Are there any actual practical reasons to get a dual or triple video card setup? If I had the money for a SLI/Crossfire setup, I would personally upgrade my other areas. The only reason I see for a multi-videocard setup is for people with a ton of money! Even if you get 2x mid-range cards, a single high end card which probably costs the less is likely to out perform 2x mid-range cards.

I don't understand how even enthusiasts can go for an SLI/Crossfire setup. It's doubtful that we will see 2x performance on these setups.

Am I wrong for thinking SLI/Crossfire is a bit stupid?
 
lobski said:
SLI/Crossfire:

Double or triple the cost, double or triple the heat, double or triple the power consumption, and nowhere close to double or triple performance. Are there any actual practical reasons to get a dual or triple video card setup? If I had the money for a SLI/Crossfire setup, I would personally upgrade my other areas. The only reason I see for a multi-videocard setup is for people with a ton of money! Even if you get 2x mid-range cards, a single high end card which probably costs the less is likely to out perform 2x mid-range cards.

I don't understand how even enthusiasts can go for an SLI/Crossfire setup. It's doubtful that we will see 2x performance on these setups.

Am I wrong for thinking SLI/Crossfire is a bit stupid?
Click to expand...

Most people going with SLI setups do it to get performance beyond that of what is available in a single card. Or in some rare cases, its cheaper to buy two mid range cards to get better performance compared to one high end card.

And it looks good :D
 
what is the purpose of this thread? are you looking for first-hand user testimonials or is it a i'm-angry-i-need-to-cry-on-the-forums-kind of thing?
 
SLI can be cost-effective. For $80 you can buy a 4670. For $160, you can buy a pair of them, or a single 4850. In quite a few benches, the 4670 Crossfire setup is faster. It depends on what games you play.
 
My personal experience with SLI was terrible, but it was because things that are going to be (if not already) fixed like dual monitor support. My biggest problem was game compatibility, I had a lot of games that would crash with SLI turned on.

However, when there was a full moon and the wind was just right and the game supported it - it did as advertised. Going from 1 8600 to 2 8600s i saw a 20 - 30 fps gain in those cases. However, it was too much work for me. I am now into buying the right card for the job instead of doubling up later down the road.
 
Also the 4850's crossfired are on par with a GTX280 which is around 350.
 
Did you miss the [H]ardOCP article on 200 and 4800 series cards?

It clearly shows that the 4850 Crossfire is an amazing price performer.

http://enthusiast.hardocp.com/article.html?art=MTU1OCwxLCxoZW50aHVzaWFzdA==

"The true shining star that we have identified is the Radeon HD 4850 CrossFire! (Interestingly enough Kyle had picked out 4850 CrossFire back in July as possibly the best value for his own rig.) We have found that it offers performance rivaling GTX 260 SLI and GTX 280, for a much less expensive price. If you are building a new Intel platform, and we know a lot of you are these days, a 4850 CrossFire configuration might make a lot of sense as an economical but powerful gaming system right now. For those of you without $300 to spend on video cards, a single Radeon 4850 with the option to upgrade to CrossFire later is attractive as well."

Also, there are folks like me that run 3 or more monitors. I would need 2 video cards to start with, so maybe I would get 2 8800GTs which are nice and cheap and would be awsome to game with SLI turn on, and support the 3 monitors when not gaming,
 
AthlonXP said:
Also the 4850's crossfired are on par with a GTX280 which is around 350.
Click to expand...

Yeah but you have to deal with CF issues. Compatibility is a major factor with that. I am buying a 280 just to keep it simple. Plus, I would have to buy a CF mobo which makes it $400.

Bottom line? Multiple gpus are E-Peen territory like watercooling. If you want to do it, God Bless you. Me? I am old and don't want to F with stuff lol.

Just go with one Gpu and a good C2D and CRANK IT UP!
 
lobski said:
SLI/Crossfire:

Double or triple the cost, double or triple the heat, double or triple the power consumption, and nowhere close to double or triple performance. Are there any actual practical reasons to get a dual or triple video card setup? If I had the money for a SLI/Crossfire setup, I would personally upgrade my other areas. The only reason I see for a multi-videocard setup is for people with a ton of money! Even if you get 2x mid-range cards, a single high end card which probably costs the less is likely to out perform 2x mid-range cards.

I don't understand how even enthusiasts can go for an SLI/Crossfire setup. It's doubtful that we will see 2x performance on these setups.

Am I wrong for thinking SLI/Crossfire is a bit stupid?
Click to expand...

a lot of time the value of SLI or crossfire is not in FPS but the amount of eye candy you can turn up. and if your looking at high end then yes it does make sense, what your gripping about is curve of diminishing returns. the father up you go the steeper the curve. AT what point its not worth it is a matter of opinion. A GTX280 is awesome, but bang for buck the 4870 and the GTX260 beat it. same with the 4870X2.
 
Valset said:
a lot of time the value of SLI or crossfire is not in FPS but the amount of eye candy you can turn up. and if your looking at high end then yes it does make sense, what your gripping about is curve of diminishing returns. the father up you go the steeper the curve. AT what point its not worth it is a matter of opinion. A GTX280 is awesome, but bang for buck the 4870 and the GTX260 beat it. same with the 4870X2.
Click to expand...

Sorta the type of answer I was looking for, thanks.

The thread may reek of trolling, but my question was sincere. I do not "get" SLI/Crossfire setups.
 
There are many who think gaming on a computer is stupid. Good thing we don't need another's approval for our choice in life.
 
Meh, I am still not sure about Crossfire or SLI for my next build. If they scaled better and I mean alot better then I would definitely be all over it. Other than that I not going to spend double the money for I can turn a few option up to high... I probably would not be able to notice the difference.

In the end it all depends on what games you play and how demanding they. Finally it comes down to the player and how he/she perceives the game. Everyone see things differently and has different opinions on whats looks better or is the better value.
 
I think it's either one of two things:

1. get all brand new, top of the line cards, sli/crossfire them, and be able to play any game maxed/eye candy.

2. You HAD a good gaming rig......2 years ago, and instead of dropping another 2 grand on a new kick ass rig, you buy a matching video card, which at this point is dirt cheap, and you can play brand new games at a decent frame rate with everything on medium.

My 02 anyway.
 
lobski said:
Double or triple the cost, double or triple the heat, double or triple the power consumption, and nowhere close to double or triple performance.
Click to expand...

If you need > 1 top-of-the-line video card to drive a large monitor with eye-candy then it doesn't matter that you're not getting double the performance.

lobski said:
Are there any actual practical reasons to get a dual or triple video card setup?
Click to expand...

Of course: If a single high-end card isn't enough power... or if you're upgrading an older system.

lobski said:
Even if you get 2x mid-range cards, a single high end card which probably costs the less is likely to out perform 2x mid-range cards.
Click to expand...

Again, what if a single high-end card isn't enough? What if you already have the right motherboard & one of the mid-range cards? Then the multi-GPU upgrade is more attractive.

lobski said:
I don't understand how even enthusiasts can go for an SLI/Crossfire setup. It's doubtful that we will see 2x performance on these setups.
Click to expand...

It's not about doubling performance, it's about increasing it. This is just like asking if it's worth it for someone to spend more than double on an Intel extreme edition CPU. They probably won't get double the performance of a cheaper CPU but they will still be able to OC it higher.

lobski said:
Am I wrong for thinking SLI/Crossfire is a bit stupid?
Click to expand...

It might be stupid for your situation, but you are wrong for thinking that no one has a use for it.
 
supastar1568 said:
because its cool
Click to expand...

/thead

But yes, sli or crossfire is for performance. With higher resolutions and higher level of image quality comes a high level of demand on the video subsystem and some people like to have all their eye candy enabled while having a minimum targeted frame per second.

Having a 7800GTX (from launch) I naturally upgraded to from a 17" lcd to a 21" lcd. I had the image quality I and performance @ 1280x1024 but not @ 1650x1080 so I got another card and was happy. I then I got an 8800GTX (at launch) and upgraded to a 24" lcd. Newer games came out and I performance wasn't where I wanted it (back then with a slower proc Opty 165). Adding a used 8800GTX made me satisfied again.
 
SLI and crossfire exist for 2 reasons.

1) it is sometimes cheaper to use 2 cards than 1 higher end card, see 4850 crossfire for example.

2) Because you simply can not get preformance you want out of a single card. The ultra highend setup is defined as the single fastest card you can buy then putting two of them in crossfire or SLI. 2x 4870x2 or 3x GTX 280. No, it is not "price/preformance" linear compared to a 4850. The words "ultra high end" and "cost efficent" do not mix.
 
vengence said:
.... The words "ultra high end" and "cost efficent" do not mix.
Click to expand...

QFT.

It is like saying a Ferrari F430 sucks because it cost more than 10x a Toyota yaris and it does not go at a 1000mph.

BTW, I do apologize for saying Yaris and Ferrari in the same post.
 
It's not complicated. I had the money. I wanted faster performance with every in-game eye candy option turned up in LotRO. Even with two GTX 280s in SLi, I still find that performance could be better under certain circumstances.

It's a shame people can't state their opinions or preferences without using the word "stupid." I wonder how it would be received if those who can and do choose to purchase these things were to call those who can't afford such things: "stupid." Something tells me there would be outrage. Yet it's perfectly fine to constantly make threads and posts like this that basically say: "Those who choose to spend their money differently than I would are idiots."

Or, I suppose I could just go back to my mantra that, if everyone did this, our forums wouldn't be so overrun with partisan video card flame wars, envy, and e-peen contests. Repeat after me:

I have video card x and I don't really give a shit what you think about that.

So, for me:

I have GTX 280 SLi and I don't really give a shit what you think about that. :D
 
SpeedyVV said:
BTW, I do apologize for saying Yaris and Ferrari in the same post.
Click to expand...
Havn't you seen Topgear? The Yaris going 80 can easily pass the Ferrari when the Ferrari is going 60!
 
Back when the 8800GTS was still almost $400, I had a 7800GT. I got a second one for almost nothing, SLI'd them and got the ability to play some of the newer games at the time without investing in a more expensive video card. It was well worth it at the time.

A few months later, when the prices of the 8800s started falling, I was able to pick one up used here for only $225.

Worked for me.... :D
 
SpeedyVV said:
QFT.

It is like saying a Ferrari F430 sucks because it cost more than 10x a Toyota yaris and it does not go at a 1000mph.

BTW, I do apologize for saying Yaris and Ferrari in the same post.
Click to expand...

I'm glad you said it, because i was going to when i got to the end of the thread. Whenever these threads come up, i just have to wonder if "mr self righteous" driving his 2 cylinder moped knocks on the window of everyone he sees driving a vehicle that costs way more for essentially a little extra and asks them this same question.

'Scuse me meester, did you know you could have bought a ford pinto instead of that mustang for 1/10th the price and still get around?
 
I think the benefit lies in one thing. Upgrade options.

If you have 1 of any of the cards that can do SLI, and you come to a point where your current flavor of the month isn't cutting it. You can upgrade with a 2nd card (and at the time of doing so, at probably a fraction of what you paid for the first one) get a good bump in performance, and extend the life of a system that otherwise would have required a more costly upgrade to get the same benefit.

I've never had a dual card setup. But back when they were first coming out (man that was YEARS ago) their performance to price ratio was horrible, 2 cards was like 10-20% increase over a single card. Now the price to performance ratio is much better, and SLI/CF have improved on the 2nd card benefit more so (thanks to PCI-E bus improvements and bandwidth) and your $ for $ gain is more so.
 
well, each to their own i guess although it does depend on what games you use. I remember the general comments like a 30% improvement which was a rumour that stuck and for many like vista being unusable still sticks.

i personally have used crossfire and liked it and may use it again but i know for a fact that the gains were good at times and 2x performance was achievable in games like oblivion which was the most demanding game at the time.

Under the right circumstances and games it becomes, with two high end cards a very good investment as it means you can hang on and take your time deciding when to buy your next card and not be forced to buy the "next big thing". It is also worth remembering that the more games stress a gpu the better they perform so compared to a single card, they can actually improve price performance over time.
 
I have my crossfire 4870 and wouldn't have it any other way. Well maybe a 4870 or two. Bought before that came out.
 
I use SLI for reasons that are different than most people.

I'm a pilot and I use three monitor (looking for a fourth) to replicate a "surround" at-home simulation experience for flying.

Currently, there are two options to drive what I need:

1) The Matrox TripleHead2Go
2) SLI/CrossFire with Multi-Mon support

The Matrox TripleHead2Go is a blackbox device that you plug three monitors into and it reports them to the video card and OS as a single, larger monitor. The problem here is that sometimes resolutions can get so high for that single "monitor" that the video card starts to be a bottleneck.

The cost for the TH2Go is ~$350USD

An SLI rig (in my case, when nVidia release multi-mon SLI in Big Bang II -- or, in current CrossFire drivers) exposes four DVI headers. That's up to four monitors, whereas the TH2Go is only three. Plus, with SLI/CrossFire, both cards are rendering the scene so there is not the bog down of performance seen with the TH2Go.

I'm using 2 8800GTX cards. In today's market, that puts the total cost right at what the TH2Go costs.

For me, it was a cost-benefit equation.
 
and lets not forget the best reason of all...


"oh, you have (insert video card here)? I have two of em; no big deal"


/thread
 
Not every upgrade has a performance increase that is the same percentage as the price increase(on a lot more levels than computer upgrades, think of a marginal cost curve in economics). SLI/Crossfire and CPUs (to some extent) are just some examples. It gives more options to those who have the money to spend on it, and want the best performance they can afford.
 
lobski said:
SLI/Crossfire:

Double or triple the cost, double or triple the heat, double or triple the power consumption, and nowhere close to double or triple performance. Are there any actual practical reasons to get a dual or triple video card setup? If I had the money for a SLI/Crossfire setup, I would personally upgrade my other areas. The only reason I see for a multi-videocard setup is for people with a ton of money! Even if you get 2x mid-range cards, a single high end card which probably costs the less is likely to out perform 2x mid-range cards.

I don't understand how even enthusiasts can go for an SLI/Crossfire setup. It's doubtful that we will see 2x performance on these setups.

Am I wrong for thinking SLI/Crossfire is a bit stupid?
Click to expand...

Yes, you're wrong. Where you see stupidity, others see merit.
 
I'll make this as simple as I can. When you have a 30" monitor and you want to play games on it you need all the performance you can get. As far as I am concerned no single card out there can give acceptable performance in every game at 2560x1600 with 4xAA and 16xAF.

While multi-GPU setups do not usually offer the greatest scaling in games the performance you get is greater than it is with a single card. It isn't a cost effective solution, but it was never meant to be.
 
While I can completely understand the demands of super high resolution gaming (I'm typing on a Dell 30" right now, heh), here's my question to those that believe SLI is a possible way to boost performance as time goes by: do two 7-series cards in SLI provide the same performance in new games as 1 8-series card?

http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/gaming-graphics-charts-q3-2008/Call-of-Duty-4-v1-6,745.html
http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/gaming-graphics-charts-q3-2008/Crysis-v1-21,757.html
http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/gaming-graphics-charts-q3-2008/Mass-Effect,779.html

...Hmm. It seems improvements in architecture often trump sheer numbers of GPU's.
 
Eggothewaffle said:
While I can completely understand the demands of super high resolution gaming (I'm typing on a Dell 30" right now, heh), here's my question to those that believe SLI is a possible way to boost performance as time goes by: do two 7-series cards in SLI provide the same performance in new games as 1 8-series card?

http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/gaming-graphics-charts-q3-2008/Call-of-Duty-4-v1-6,745.html
http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/gaming-graphics-charts-q3-2008/Crysis-v1-21,757.html
http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/gaming-graphics-charts-q3-2008/Mass-Effect,779.html

...Hmm. It seems improvements in architecture often trump sheer numbers of GPU's.
Click to expand...

Umm, why are you looking at the 7 and 8 series? We're on the 9 and 200 series....
 
Most people I know with SLI setups are still in the 7-series generation. But if you want, the comparison can also be extended between the 8/9-series and the 200 series. Games like COD4 do illustrate the SLI advantage, but when dealing with framerates beyond 100, isn't that point a little moot?
 
Eggothewaffle said:
Most people I know with SLI setups are still in the 7-series generation. But if you want, the comparison can also be extended between the 8/9-series and the 200 series. Games like COD4 do illustrate the SLI advantage, but when dealing with framerates beyond 100, isn't that point a little moot?
Click to expand...

If your running an 8800 GTX SLI at 2560x1600 your not going to see 100 FPS on almost any new game settings maxed.
 
vengence said:
If your running an 8800 GTX SLI at 2560x1600 your not going to see 100 FPS on almost any new game settings maxed.
Click to expand...

The only one that might do that is Call of Duty 4. Even then some places in the game you'll have issues maintaining decent frame rates.
 
The 7 series was terrible though, early on it was okay but as games progressed it got worse and worse and nowadays it just hasn't aged that well. Longevity was not in mind when it was designed.

also, unless things have changed, toms charts have never got any multi-gpu configs right.
 
For the record, I've never actually seen anyone blatantly brag or flaunt their e-peen at the expense of others who are scraping to only procure one card. That's a bit of a straw man. Nobody does it.

Like Dan said. . . it's just about wanting as much performance as possible and being willing to spend the money to get there. And yes, there is a lot of misinformation out there regarding SLi and Crossfire that a lot of folks tell themselves so that they won't want it or so they can demean those who have chosen to spend more than them.

Finally, SLi as an upgrade option (one card now, second card later) has never made a whole lot of sense to me. To me, the only really smart way to go about SLi is to get the two top-of-the-line video cards at the outset and enjoy the "best possible" performance for as long as possible. Getting one $400 video card today and then plopping in a second one eight months later for another $250 doesn't really make sense to me considering that the second card is only that cheap eight months later because the new generation has arrived. And the new gen single card will probably perform about as well as your (now) $650 SLi rig if you're instead willing to sell what you've got for about $200 and plop down another $400. In the end, you'll find that getting that second card "later" rarely if ever makes sense and you'd be better off selling your existing card and upgrading to the new big thing.

To me, SLi only makes sense if you're willing to "go big" at the outset of a new generation and buy two immediately.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top