Quad SLI.....getting out of hand?

[RossCorp]

Can we really let nVidia and ATI think that quad SLI is a viable option for the masses? I think it's cool that it can be done, but in the big scheme of things, who cares?

This kind of setup is for the very elite and/or most hardcore gamers ever. A rig that was running quad-SLI would probably require a kilowatt or more, not to mention a bleeding-edge cpu just to minimize the bottleneck. Just doesn't seem worth the trouble.

 

[Extelleron]

Obviously it's not being marketed as an option for mainstream buyers. But for those people who have nothing better to do with their cash than spend it on an FX-60, 4GB of RAM, and 4x 7800GTX 512's............ let them.

 

[LittleNemoNES]

Quad SLI will hopefully not lead to lazy programmers. I think they should have at least gone to SLI triad.

 

[aznrice54]

Personally, I don't like the idea much...it's basically a brute-force approach to gaining the performance crown. I wish NV would put more effort into creating a single advanced GPU core than slapping together multiple OK cores to acheive a performance gain. I hope NV doesn't go on and think "hey, we did 4, let's try 8! Go Octo-SLI go!!!"

 

[EvanAdams]

wait untill a true big step happens there will be SO much wining from the Quad SLI people yet they are the ones who can afford an upgrade at that big step and we can reap the rewards in the FS/T forums

 

[Cooler]

We are not geting even 50% Increase in FPS with SLI so with quad SLI you might make 70%

 

[SpeedZealot369]

imagine 4 of those duel core 7800gt's in sli!!!

*just got a heart attack*

 

[TheoPetro]

im just worried that game programers will get the idea that quad SLI will be for the super duper extreme gfx. i dont want to buy a $400 card and not be able to play a game on high at a decent resolution. i run 1920x1200 so I see a use for SLI (dont have it but can see the use). if they are gonna ask me to drop $1600 on video cards then i will say "no deal" and most likely drop out of comp gaming all together (except for the games i can run now).

 

[Cooler]

Originally posted by: TheoPetro
im just worried that game programers will get the idea that quad SLI will be for the super duper extreme gfx. i dont want to buy a $400 card and not be able to play a game on high at a decent resolution. i run 1920x1200 so I see a use for SLI (dont have it but can see the use). if they are gonna ask me to drop $1600 on video cards then i will say "no deal" and most likely drop out of comp gaming all together (except for the games i can run now).

closer 2k for Quad SLI

 

[Acanthus]

I would imagine the primary market for this would be quaddros.

CAD/Maya/3DS Max, the like.

 

[BassBomb]

i think quad sli is stupid idea... i think sli is not a good idea for the money either

 

[Dethfrumbelo]

It seems like a stupid waste to me, but what do I know. How many people would be willing to blow $2000 on video cards and have them be worth < $1000 a year later? You'd also need at least a 1000W PSU.

 

[ItSells]

Originally posted by: aznrice54
Personally, I don't like the idea much...it's basically a brute-force approach to gaining the performance crown. I wish NV would put more effort into creating a single advanced GPU core than slapping together multiple OK cores to acheive a performance gain. I hope NV doesn't go on and think "hey, we did 4, let's try 8! Go Octo-SLI go!!!"

forget you, I want 2 gpus on each card and 8 total gpu in my computer so I can play Unreal 3,2007 and Crysis on 3007@native res on 8xAA 16xAF non-stop fps. If only i had the money

 

[deadseasquirrel]

Originally posted by: Cooler
We are not geting even 50% Increase in FPS with SLI so with quad SLI you might make 70%

Doom3 at 1600x1200 4xAA 8xAF
single 7800GT-- 51.6fps
SLI GTs-- 95
Percent increase-- 84%

Far Cry at 1600x1200 4xAA 8xAF
single 7800GT-- 45.6fps
SLI GTs-- 73.8
Percent increase-- 62%

(same page)HL2 at 1600x1200 4xAA 8xAF
single 7800GT-- 57.9fps
SLI GTs-- 85.5
Percent increase-- 48%

Quake 4 1600x1200 4xAA 8xAF
single 7800GT-- 29.9fps
SLI GTs-- 56.9
Percent increase-- 90%

COD2 1600x1200 4xAA 8xAF
single 7800GT-- 18.6fps
SLI GTs-- 26.8
Percent increase-- 44%

FEAR 1600x1200 4xAA 8xAF
single 7800GT-- 20fps
SLI GTs-- 33
Percent increase-- 65%

Splinter Cell Chaos Theory 1600x1200 4xAA 8xAF
single 7800GT-- 28.5fps
SLI GTs-- 53.6
Percent increase-- 88%

That's 7 of the most popular recently-released games, averaging about 70% increase in performance with SLI.

As for this Quad SLI, well I don't see how I would ever be able to afford it, but if someone else can, and wants to, why not? I mean, you have buyers out there purchasing $1000 CPUs, $300 ram sticks, and Raptor HDDs in order to get 1-5fps more in gaming. At least dual-gpu solutions actually offer tangible benefits to gaming... to the tune of 70% according to the benches above-- try doing that with a $1000 CPU.

 

[mooncancook]

nice space heater!

 

[Matt2]

SLI makes sense to me. But only if you're going with two mid-high end cards to get super highend performance.

7800GTs are the perfect example of when SLI makes sense, myself and several other baord members here can back me up on that one.

I paid $300 a pop a couple of months ago and I got better than 7800GTX 512 performance for $200 less.

I think one option we may be overlooking is Quad-SLI down in the lower mid range. I wonder what kind of performance we can get with 7600GTs in Quad SLI?

 

[Matthias99]

Originally posted by: aznrice54
Personally, I don't like the idea much...it's basically a brute-force approach to gaining the performance crown.

...and how is this different from just making a GPU with more pipelines?

I wish NV would put more effort into creating a single advanced GPU core than slapping together multiple OK cores to acheive a performance gain. I hope NV doesn't go on and think "hey, we did 4, let's try 8! Go Octo-SLI go!!!"

While selling multiple cards can get to be a bit much, I personally think that moving towards multiple GPUs on cards (multiple discrete GPU cores working as one, not the 'sli-on-a-card' hackjobs we've seen so far) is almost inevitable.

I'm frankly very surprised we've gotten to 400+ million transistor GPU cores -- but then again, I didn't think many people would be willing to pay $600+ for a graphics card at a point where you can buy a full system for less than that.

 

[JackBurton]

Seriosuly man, do you think a 7800GTx or X1900XT ($500 cards) are made for the masses? Try telling an average Joe that wants to build a "kickass gaming machine" that the video card alone will cost $500, and watch his eyes pop out of his head. These $500 cards are made for gaming geeks. Quad SLI is made for gaming geeks with an ass load of money. It's as simple as that.

 

[Wreckage]

It's the quad dongle I'm worried about

|
|
|
V

 

[drpootums]

I would never pay that much for a Quad SLI setup, but you have to remember that there are people who would pay for something like that. I mean, it seems like most people buy that stuff for bragging rights, not for the actual need to increase performance.

 

[akugami]

Originally posted by: Wreckage
It's the quad dongle I'm worried about

|
|
|
V

Another threadcrapping by Wreckage. And he wonders why I call him a fanboy troll. In an nVidia discussion he just has to find an opportunity to slam ATI. Give it a rest already with the dongle crap.

Everyone knows it's not as elegant as having an internal connector as far as aesthetics go. However most people do not have the back of their computer case staring them in the face so it hardly matters since theres already at least four cables snaking around the back of most computer cases anyways.

Another thing, ATI is said to be in the works with a newer version of their Crossfire setups that won't require a bridge at all for the lower end Crossfire and likely use an internal bridge much like nVidia's for the higher end.


Either way, I can see uses for SLI, especially for those who upgrade very infrequently. Suffice to say I think SLI for the most part is a niche market and that most users are not candidates for this segment of the market. For a quad SLI setup, I think that unless it's for something like the Quadro line or other professional setup, I just don't see much of a benefit to the user. Yes, you can say your epenis has grown larger but at a $1600-2000 cost for just the video cards alone? I can get a very good complete computer for that price. As they say, a fool and his money are soon parted.

I just hope that the move to dual card and even quad card solutions are not a heralding of things to come much like the CPU market where instead of faster CPU chips we're getting dual and quad core chips.

 

[Ronin]

You do realize that the 'slower clocked CPUs', because of the way they're designed, actually perform better than their single core, same speed counterparts do?

 

[nib95]

Well I think SLI is a waste of money, so Quad SLI?
You have to either be stupid or stupid to buy that.
Even if you were FILTHY rich.

Give that extra $1200 to charity. because you really dont need it, considering 2/3/4/6 (dont know these days) months down the line an SLI configuration of the latest GPU's will already be more powerful.

For SLI users, the next single card will be /comparablebetter/cheaper then an SLI configuration, not to mention the fact that the 'second' card you require may not even be available anymore.
Totally pointless unless your ultra rich.

 

[SheepMan]

I agree for the average user quad SLI (or even quad Xfire) would be too much. However I believe this would be very useful for workstations that involve intense graphic design and simulation.

 

[StrangerGuy]

I'm looking forward to the day of playing rehashed games with Quad SLI!