Proper SLI test

[BenSkywalker]

FiringSquad's high res benches. With the exception of the benches provided by Rollo, it has been hard to find any real good tests for SLI setups, FiringSquad is the first site to throw up some decent numbers.

It appears that for high end CRT users, the 6600GT SLI setup may be better then a single 6800GT as it seems to be in the 15% faster range in most of the titles it is working properly on. Unfortunately the test doesn't include any numbers for the 6800U or ATi parts, hopefully some other sites will take a bit more serious look at high res numbers so we can get a broader sampling.

 

[Acanthus]

Very cool, ive wanted to know about 2048 benchies for quite some time.

Looks like a near 100% improvement in some titles.

 

[BFG10K]

I personally don't think reviewers should bother with anything lower than 1600x1200 when testing high-end cards. Tests like "1280x960x4x4" are utter nonsense.

 

[Megatomic]

What about 1280x1024 with 4x/8x? For some people that is about as high as they'll get with their monitors....

 

[BenSkywalker]

What about 1280x1024 with 4x/8x? For some people that is about as high as they'll get with their monitors....

People who buy such displays honestly shouldn't be too concerned with SLI. If you want really low res gaming, then why shell out the cash for SLI?

 

[Melchior]

I think its because it gives them faster frame rates... Just a thought.

 

[Dman877]

Lol, since when is 12x10 low res gaming?

 

[jim1976]

Originally posted by: BenSkywalker

What about 1280x1024 with 4x/8x? For some people that is about as high as they'll get with their monitors....

People who buy such displays honestly shouldn't be too concerned with SLI. If you want really low res gaming, then why shell out the cash for SLI?

Exactly

 

[ohnnyj]

Originally posted by: BenSkywalker

What about 1280x1024 with 4x/8x? For some people that is about as high as they'll get with their monitors....

People who buy such displays honestly shouldn't be too concerned with SLI. If you want really low res gaming, then why shell out the cash for SLI?

SLI would then guarantee that the framerate would never drop below acceptable levels. I have my 6800GTs running at 1920x1200 2xAA 16xAF in HL2 and it drops into the 30s at times.

Edit: I didn't even read the article but find it strange that they decided to do this on the Intel platform when they never did it for the original AMD tests. And from what I hear SLI is faster with AMD.

 

[nitromullet]

Originally posted by: Melchior
I think its because it gives them faster frame rates... Just a thought.

I understand what you are saying here, but I think that the point is if you're going to spend upwards of $1k for an SLI mobo and two top-of-the-line video cards you might also consider spending more than $250 on your display... Just a thought.

 

[imported_Kensai]

Originally posted by: ohnnyj

Originally posted by: BenSkywalker

What about 1280x1024 with 4x/8x? For some people that is about as high as they'll get with their monitors....

People who buy such displays honestly shouldn't be too concerned with SLI. If you want really low res gaming, then why shell out the cash for SLI?

SLI would then guarantee that the framerate would never drop below acceptable levels. I have my 6800GTs running at 1920x1200 2xAA 16xAF in HL2 and it drops into the 30s at times.

That's some nice fps. I usually don't run at a really high res (Usually around 1280X1024 or so.)

 

[ohnnyj]

Originally posted by: Kensai

Originally posted by: ohnnyj

Originally posted by: BenSkywalker

What about 1280x1024 with 4x/8x? For some people that is about as high as they'll get with their monitors....

People who buy such displays honestly shouldn't be too concerned with SLI. If you want really low res gaming, then why shell out the cash for SLI?

SLI would then guarantee that the framerate would never drop below acceptable levels. I have my 6800GTs running at 1920x1200 2xAA 16xAF in HL2 and it drops into the 30s at times.

That's some nice fps. I usually don't run at a really high res (Usually around 1280X1024 or so.)

Could be better, but then again I am never satisfied 🙂.

 

[jenneth]

SLI would then guarantee that the framerate would never drop below acceptable levels. I have my 6800GTs running at 1920x1200 2xAA 16xAF in HL2 and it drops into the 30s at times.

I thought SLI wouldn't run stable enough at 1920x1200?

So nVidia has fixed that issue then?

j.

 

[Ackmed]

No. WS LCD issues are still there.

 

[Megatomic]

Originally posted by: nitromullet

Originally posted by: Melchior
I think its because it gives them faster frame rates... Just a thought.

I understand what you are saying here, but I think that the point is if you're going to spend upwards of $1k for an SLI mobo and two top-of-the-line video cards you might also consider spending more than $250 on your display... Just a thought.

And what is the native resolution of the Dell 2001FP? Is it 16x12 or 12x10?

 

[SynthDude2001]

Originally posted by: Megatomic

Originally posted by: nitromullet

Originally posted by: Melchior
I think its because it gives them faster frame rates... Just a thought.

I understand what you are saying here, but I think that the point is if you're going to spend upwards of $1k for an SLI mobo and two top-of-the-line video cards you might also consider spending more than $250 on your display... Just a thought.

And what is the native resolution of the Dell 2001FP? Is it 16x12 or 12x10?

1600x1200

 

[Megatomic]

Thanks. And with most people going to larger LCDs like this I guess that BFG's rant is valid. 🙂

 

[SynthDude2001]

Originally posted by: Megatomic
Thanks. And with most people going to larger LCDs like this I guess that BFG's rant is valid. 🙂

Yup. 🙂

There are already cases in which I had a faster video card (I run a 2005FPW - 1680x1050), and I already have a 6800GT. I need an A64 as well, but still...

I didn't spend $337 on this video card to run it at 1024x768, that's for damn sure. :laugh:

 

[ronnn]

Originally posted by: BFG10K
I personally don't think reviewers should bother with anything lower than 1600x1200 when testing high-end cards. Tests like "1280x960x4x4" are utter nonsense.

Personally I think many more people are interested in a review at 1280 x 1024 (or whatever) with maximum settings, than 2048 x 1536. If the review shows me that for most things a second tier card is sufficient, that would be of interest. I am sure there is room for this type of review, but for most of us it means little until the price of huge lcd's drop alot. :beer:

 

[Jeff7181]

Personally I still game at 1024x768. My monitor will go to 1280x1024 and 1280x960 but only at 60 Hz, and it's a CRT, so eyestrain is a problem. I still like to see 1024x768 benchmarks. Hardware is NOT to the point yet where midrange cards can run games at 1024x768 with 4XAA and 16XAF without slowdowns. It actually has a ways to go, because some parts of HL2 drop into the 40's with my 6800GT with 4XAA and 16XAF and max detail. To me that's not acceptable.

 

[ohnnyj]

Originally posted by: jenneth

SLI would then guarantee that the framerate would never drop below acceptable levels. I have my 6800GTs running at 1920x1200 2xAA 16xAF in HL2 and it drops into the 30s at times.

I thought SLI wouldn't run stable enough at 1920x1200?

So nVidia has fixed that issue then?

j.

I have a 24" Sony CRT (GDM-FW900).

Originally posted by: Jeff7181
Personally I still game at 1024x768. My monitor will go to 1280x1024 and 1280x960 but only at 60 Hz, and it's a CRT, so eyestrain is a problem. I still like to see 1024x768 benchmarks. Hardware is NOT to the point yet where midrange cards can run games at 1024x768 with 4XAA and 16XAF without slowdowns. It actually has a ways to go, because some parts of HL2 drop into the 40's with my 6800GT with 4XAA and 16XAF and max detail. To me that's not acceptable.

What CPU do you have?

 

[Jeff7181]

Originally posted by: ohnnyj

Originally posted by: jenneth

SLI would then guarantee that the framerate would never drop below acceptable levels. I have my 6800GTs running at 1920x1200 2xAA 16xAF in HL2 and it drops into the 30s at times.

I thought SLI wouldn't run stable enough at 1920x1200?

So nVidia has fixed that issue then?

j.

I have a 24" Sony CRT (GDM-FW900).

Originally posted by: Jeff7181
Personally I still game at 1024x768. My monitor will go to 1280x1024 and 1280x960 but only at 60 Hz, and it's a CRT, so eyestrain is a problem. I still like to see 1024x768 benchmarks. Hardware is NOT to the point yet where midrange cards can run games at 1024x768 with 4XAA and 16XAF without slowdowns. It actually has a ways to go, because some parts of HL2 drop into the 40's with my 6800GT with 4XAA and 16XAF and max detail. To me that's not acceptable.

What CPU do you have?

A64 @ 2.475 with 1 GB RAM

 

[jenneth]

Right, forgot to ask you about what kind of monitor you have. SLI have problems at 1920x1200 using DVI.

 

[BFG10K]

What about 1280x1024 with 4x/8x?

There's no reason to go lower than 16x AF anyway because any modern card will basically give it to you for free. Same thing with 2x MSAA really.

For some people that is about as high as they'll get with their monitors....

Such people are wasting their time buying a single high-end card, much less two of them. I run most games older than a year at 1920x1440 with 4xAA because my single 6800U has more than enough muscle to do so. To run at 1280x960 on an SLI setup is quite frankly ludicrous.

Lol, since when is 12x10 low res gaming?

Since the likes of the 9700 Pro introduced 1600x1200 as a standard resolution. These days I'd class 1600x1200 as a middling resolution since 6800U/X800 XT cards can easily push 1920x1440.

 

[Jeff7181]

Originally posted by: BFG10K

What about 1280x1024 with 4x/8x?

There's no reason to go lower than 16x AF anyway because any modern card will basically give it to you for free. Same thing with 2x MSAA really.

For some people that is about as high as they'll get with their monitors....

Such people are wasting their time buying a single high-end card, much less two of them. I run most games older than a year at 1920x1440 with 4xAA because my single 6800U has more than enough muscle to do so. To run at 1280x960 on an SLI setup is quite frankly ludicrous.

Lol, since when is 12x10 low res gaming?

Since the likes of the 9700 Pro introduced 1600x1200 as a standard resolution. These days I'd class 1600x1200 as a middling resolution since 6800U/X800 XT cards can easily push 1920x1440.

You must be very tolerant of low frame rates. I can't stand when it drops below 60 in a first person shooter. Something slow like Flight Sim 2004, above 30 is fine.