I'm curious what people think. I'm building a new rig, and trying to decide whether to make it SLi or not. At what point does the performance gain you get from SLi make a difference? 1920x1200 with full settings? 2650 full settings? 24 in screen? 30 in screen? I've seen a lot of differing opinions on this, so what do you think?
![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
When is SLi Worth It?
- Thread starter n00zler
- Start date
You need to be playing at a very high res to get a performance gain from SLi, or you need to be a real performance/AA junkie. Even at a res of 2650*1600, I'd argue that you're better off with a high-end single card solution and a planned upgrade in the future. A 4870x2 is more than acceptable at any res lower than that.
Of course the extra power will "future proof" your machine somewhat, but it makes far more sense to get a single card that will handle modern games today, then upgrade that card when it starts to slow down. The odds are highly in your favour that a new card two years down the road will outperform two current cards in SLi.
grimreeferx09
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Jul 22, 2008
- Messages
- 355
when you are gpu limited, and you need to double your fps.
something like gtx 260 sli, which are individually pretty reasonably priced, would make for a good sli setup
something like gtx 260 sli, which are individually pretty reasonably priced, would make for a good sli setup
if you can't afford to be disappointed by some of the inherent quirks that come with multi gpu you should avoid this kind of gaming platform entirely. if by full settings you mean 4x transparency aa and 16 x aniso with in-game options maxed out at 19x12, some single card solutions (gtx 260, gtx 280, 4870, 4870x2) are already capable of such feats.
Dark-Colonel
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2004
- Messages
- 441
SLi is worth it when you can buy the 2nd card for 25% cheaper than the original one you bought.
If you are a true eye candy freak and have a 2408fpw and want to run 4xAA, 16xAF for any game pretty much ... then you'll want the SLi for the 280GTX as an example.
But with a rig that beefy, the CPU needs to be immensely powerful or very overclocked to reduce bottlenecking as much as possible. A setup like that would be extremely economically unnecessary IMHO.
If you are a true eye candy freak and have a 2408fpw and want to run 4xAA, 16xAF for any game pretty much ... then you'll want the SLi for the 280GTX as an example.
But with a rig that beefy, the CPU needs to be immensely powerful or very overclocked to reduce bottlenecking as much as possible. A setup like that would be extremely economically unnecessary IMHO.
silent-circuit
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Sep 18, 2005
- Messages
- 16,136
1920x1200 and higher (24"+ LCD in most cases) with two top end cards. SLI with anything less than a pair of GTX 280s is stupid, pure and simple.
This is never going to change. Go big or go home when it comes to multi-GPU, and have the display available to make use of it.
This is never going to change. Go big or go home when it comes to multi-GPU, and have the display available to make use of it.
I'm currently running a 2408fp, and run games at 1920. But, since i'm a couple gen's old on my card I can't use high settings anymore. I'm still hearing a split here - some would say I should go SLi with this setup, some stick with a single high end card. This is why I love the internet 
In my opinion SLI is only worth it when you can't play your game at your monitors resolution with your desired setting using a single high end card.
So simple answer is get a GTX 280 and then decide if you need more to be happy.
Your always going to get a mix of response when you ask a question like this.
So simple answer is get a GTX 280 and then decide if you need more to be happy.
Your always going to get a mix of response when you ask a question like this.
silent-circuit
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Sep 18, 2005
- Messages
- 16,136
I'm currently running a 2408fp, and run games at 1920. But, since i'm a couple gen's old on my card I can't use high settings anymore. I'm still hearing a split here - some would say I should go SLi with this setup, some stick with a single high end card. This is why I love the internet
How demanding are you? If you are like me -- I refuse to drop resolution or run anything at less than maximum possible settings -- then SLI is really your only option. If you're willing to drop some settings occasionally a single GTX 280 will be plenty. SLI is also worthwhile if you like to set high levels of AA and AF.
At 2560x1600, the native resolution of most 30" LCDs, SLI is pretty much a "way of life."
totally agree with this statement. once i got a taste of multi gpu, i knew it was something i couldn't game without.
Agreed. This is how I am.
I always run with everything maxed to start, and drop settings (never the res) until I get a decent frame rate, but thats only because my vid card is showing its age right now. I think I'm pretty convinced SLi is for me
I always run with everything maxed to start, and drop settings (never the res) until I get a decent frame rate, but thats only because my vid card is showing its age right now. I think I'm pretty convinced SLi is for me
I'll drop the resolution before I'll drop the details and the eye candy. I think just about every game out there looks like shit using medium settings at 2560x1600. In contrast a game with all the settings maxed still looks pretty good at 1600x1200. In my opinion higher resolutions with shit details is nothing more than sharper and clearer shit.
crazyjeeper
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Aug 31, 2008
- Messages
- 1,830
SLI is worth it when you can get the second card cheap to shore up the first card and put off a big upgrade longer.
And to me I don't care how much eye candy is added. At anything but native resolution on my LCD I get a headache, so dropping the settings down is how I handle my aging video cards now that I use an LCD. And yes some games look like shit by the time I get them playable. But that never stops me from enjoying them.
Like I said above everyone is different though I should have pointed out not only in what works for playable settings on a specific setup for them but also in what can be afforded and maintained.
If you can afford to keep a your self gaming on a bleeding edge SLI system then great go for it. But if you can't and buy an SLI system and then in a few months have to start making compromises to keep the games playable anyway, I fail to see the point. Since usually in 3months time or so you could buy a better video card with the money you saved.
I guess the point I am trying to make is to really think things through unless you have an endless supply of money to throw at your PC. Over the years I have watched friends through an insane amount of money on PC's that they they can't afford to upgrade for along time, when in the long run they would have been better off spending less money on day one and then upgrading again later.
SLI is worth it when you can get the second card cheap to shore up the first card and put off a big upgrade longer.
Even that logic when applied to SLI doesn't work for me when the money your going to put towards the second card combined with the money you can get for selling your current card could be used to just buy a better cards. Allowing you to also avoid spending money on what has often been an Nvidia chip set based motherboard and the headaches that tend to come along with one.
Since SLI was announced people have loved to talk about using it as an upgrade path rather then just getting a whole new cards. It is a great concept but I can't think of one time since it's debut where SLI has actually worked out to be the best option for someone looking to upgrade to keep up with games.
SLI is worth it when you can get the second card cheap to shore up the first card and put off a big upgrade longer.
Problem with that is by the time they get that cheap, the next gen single slot mid-high range card usually performs equal if not better than last gen SLI.
7950GX2s to a 8800 and 9800GX2 to a GTX260 for example
Not to mention all the headaches that come with multi GPU.
From a price/performance view, SLI doesnt make sense imo. Its for people that need the best framerates with current technology.
MittWaffen
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Dec 8, 2008
- Messages
- 323
Nvidia chip sets = bad.
Stay away!
Stay away!
The higher the resolution, the better SLI/Crossfire scales. With max settings at 2560x1600, you can see nearly double performance with SLI/Crossfire, and at that resolution you do actually need SLI/Crossfire. At 1680x1050, you'll never see double performance, and be lucky to see more than 30 percent. At 1920x1200, whether to go SLI/Crossfire or not gets a lot more debatable.
Agreed. Crysis is a perfect example of being forced to lower the res to use the eyecandy.
Both CF/SLI add heat, increased power useage, increased price for second card and sometimes waiting for a patch or driver that improves AFR or adds support for a new title.
A new PSU is needed in most cases if looking at the higher end cards/card in the case of the X2. SLI requires a Nvidia chipset board unless you're building a X58 setup.
Older titles can be maxed with a single GPU, but newer games can play smoother with much higher levels of eyecandy on a multi-GPU setup.
http://www.hardocp.com/article.html?art=MTU1OCwsLGhlbnRodXNpYXN0
This is [H]ardocp's value guide from late September. Some of it is a bit dated but it still imparts good info on performance. Obvioulsy prices have changed some. Also the GTX260 216 core has been added as well as 1GB memory versions of the 4850 and 4870.
I agree that if you can avoid nvidia chipset MBs do it. They are expensive and seem to have more common problems than intel chipsets. Now that X58 is in the wild you can get SLI option without nvidia for a price only slightly higher than prudence suggests. On nvidia I would say go with no less than a GTX260 if you plan to use SLI. If ATI is your game then both 4850 and 4870 are available in an X2 configuration so go with the Crossfire on a single card before using discrete cards in CF.
This is [H]ardocp's value guide from late September. Some of it is a bit dated but it still imparts good info on performance. Obvioulsy prices have changed some. Also the GTX260 216 core has been added as well as 1GB memory versions of the 4850 and 4870.
I agree that if you can avoid nvidia chipset MBs do it. They are expensive and seem to have more common problems than intel chipsets. Now that X58 is in the wild you can get SLI option without nvidia for a price only slightly higher than prudence suggests. On nvidia I would say go with no less than a GTX260 if you plan to use SLI. If ATI is your game then both 4850 and 4870 are available in an X2 configuration so go with the Crossfire on a single card before using discrete cards in CF.
Besides the system in my sig, I also have a Q9550/SLI'd EVGA GTX280s folding 24/7.
I could pull a 280 for Tri-SLI from the second rig, but I'm not giving up my X-Fi!
So since I'm running two nearly identical systems, my opinion is slightly bias, hehe.
I could pull a 280 for Tri-SLI from the second rig, but I'm not giving up my X-Fi!
So since I'm running two nearly identical systems, my opinion is slightly bias, hehe.
silent-circuit
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Sep 18, 2005
- Messages
- 16,136
im not bashing the thread, but i will say never.......too many problems !!!!!
i prefer 1 single gpu solutions
Your monitor isn't big enough. That's all there is to it.
silent-circuit
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Sep 18, 2005
- Messages
- 16,136
And how much would it cost one of us peasants to build a 3 way SLI, non-X58 Intel chipset rig of which you speak? Just CPU(s), Mobo, RAM?
~$1500, before GPUs, case, HDD, optical, monitor, etc. I believe he has a Skulltrail setup...?
And how much would it cost one of us peasants to build a 3 way SLI, non-X58 Intel chipset rig of which you speak? Just CPU(s), Mobo, RAM?
About $600 for the board plus you'd need LGA771 CPUs, FB-DIMMs a monster power supply and then everything else. So in other words: A lot. I'm running QX9775's which are still on Newegg for $1550 each right now. So two of those, about $400 in change for the RAM (8GB here) and then you've got the video cards and everything else to buy. I'm not sure what the Geforce GTX 280 costs today. I haven't looked at them in some time.
Indeed.
Pretty much wrote my response for me.
It is needed less today than it was a year ago, but it is still needed. If I were building a new system today, I don't think I could see any way to NOT put 2-260s in it. At a mere ~400$ it's just too damn cheap for the insanity of graphical power you get out of it.
Majestic_Lizard
n00b
- Joined
- Dec 17, 2008
- Messages
- 9
It depends on what card you are talking about. With my 8800 GTs there was a noticeable performance increase with SLI, probably nearly 40 percent improvement. However, with my 9800 GTX+ @760 MHz at SLI, the improvement is not as noticeable on account of the fact that one factory overclocked 9800 GTX+ could run virtually any game maxed out, right out of the box. Two of them turned out to be almost superfluous.
Although I had read that the benchmarks on a single 9800 GTX were inferior to two 8800 GT in SLI on several sites, I've found that a single factory overclocked 9800 GTX+ is actually about equal to two stock 8800 GTs running in SLI. There is apparently a significant improvement between the original 9800 GTX and the 9800 GTX+, particularly when the 9800 GTX+ is factory overclocked.
Considering that the GTX200 series makes the 9800 GTX seem obsolete in comparison, I'm guessing that for the time being a SLI or Tri-SLI configuration for the GTX 280 or GTX 260 would be an extravagant waste of money.
Although I had read that the benchmarks on a single 9800 GTX were inferior to two 8800 GT in SLI on several sites, I've found that a single factory overclocked 9800 GTX+ is actually about equal to two stock 8800 GTs running in SLI. There is apparently a significant improvement between the original 9800 GTX and the 9800 GTX+, particularly when the 9800 GTX+ is factory overclocked.
Considering that the GTX200 series makes the 9800 GTX seem obsolete in comparison, I'm guessing that for the time being a SLI or Tri-SLI configuration for the GTX 280 or GTX 260 would be an extravagant waste of money.
Paraphrased the quote.
Well it also depends on game and resolution. @1920 I definately missed my 280 sli in waw. 40-60 ish fps less or more on tweaking to a 90fps solid with sli full max everything. It does matter in fps games.
Majestic_Lizard
n00b
- Joined
- Dec 17, 2008
- Messages
- 9
My monitor's resolution does not even go up that high. LOL.
The higher the resolution, the more benefit a multi-gpu setup offers.
That's why many even though they can afford a larger monitor, choose a 22in.
1920x1200 and up can make a card look short in the legs in certain games.
The drop in monitor prices have many looking to upgrade. I've always suggested buying as much monitor as you can afford. It can be carried over to a new system and it is what you see all the time.
That's why many even though they can afford a larger monitor, choose a 22in.
1920x1200 and up can make a card look short in the legs in certain games.
The drop in monitor prices have many looking to upgrade. I've always suggested buying as much monitor as you can afford. It can be carried over to a new system and it is what you see all the time.
silent-circuit
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Sep 18, 2005
- Messages
- 16,136
If you don't have a monitor that runs 1920x1200 or higher you shouldn't even be considering SLI. A single GTX 260 at ~$200 AR is all you need, period.