Was dual-card technology a waste mostly to develop?

[Craig234]

I'm guessing it was not trivial to develop technology for two graphics cards to be used together to nearly double the performance.

And it seems top single cards usually can more than handle any software that's out.

But the usual buying advice seems to be that the only use for it is if you need to put two of the best cards for great performance immediately.

Otherwise, for lower quality cards they say 'just get a better single card', and for the 'get a second card later' it's 'by then, better cards that come out make more sense'.

So, while sometimes people do use two cards, it it just really not that useful to justify the expense of cards and motherboards having the feature?

 

[Cerb]

• There are people that will pay fro more cards
• Quite a few of the top single cards are themselves dual-GPU, using the technology developed for multiple cards
• It is a feature that has been around since 3D cards became mainstream (3Dfx scan line interleave)

If you are value-minded, it's a complete waste. But, there's enough of a market that isn't.

 

[OVerLoRDI]

I do not believe it was a waste for NVidia and ATi to develop. It is now an excellent way to extract more revenue from those who want more performance. Those who can afford 2560x1600 monitors or eyefinity/surround users would need more performance than a single gpu can offer. Multi-gpu technology opens up opportunities for more revenue from these users. Win for all involved.

 

[GaiaHunter]

Your points are valid in certain situations.

Imagine you bought a 5850 when it came out. Buying a 2nd 5850 (now or a few months ago) to net a decent boost is a much more cost efficient measure than upgrade to any of the most expensive single solution cards. It also lets you take advantage on the used market or any deals you might come around.

Also, in certain circumstances, the premium asked by the top performance card is just to high, making cards not that much slower 1vs1 becoming a much faster as a pair for around the same price.

As dual card technology evolves, it is making more sense, not less, to look at dual cards setups in certain situations.

 

[Lonyo]

• There are people that will pay fro more cards
• Quite a few of the top single cards are themselves dual-GPU, using the technology developed for multiple cards
• It is a feature that has been around since 3D cards became mainstream (3Dfx scan line interleave)

If you are value-minded, it's a complete waste. But, there's enough of a market that isn't.

How is it a complete waste if you are value minded?
If you are valu minded if anything it's better than buying a single card.
Most of the time, a pair of mid range cards (560s or 6800s) can outperform the top single card (GTX580) while also being cheaper. Value minded people might want to go for two cards over one single card to get maximum performance for their money.

Unless by value minded you mean people who only have a certain top budget, rather than people who want the most performance for their money.

 

[Silverforce11]

Your points are valid in certain situations.

Imagine you bought a 5850 when it came out. Buying a 2nd 5850 (now or a few months ago) to net a decent boost is a much more cost efficient measure than upgrade to any of the most expensive single solution cards. It also lets you take advantage on the used market or any deals you might come around.

This is a very important point, since previous gen high end tend to become very cheap but they still scale very well and offer great perf per $.

Say you got the 5850 for $275 a long time ago, now you grab a 2nd one for $150. Total price is relatively low (since the 1st 5850 has served its purpose and all you really spend is $150), combine the two and you get >gtx580 performance for dirt cheap. Rather than going to spend big $$ on a single card upgrade.

 

[bryanW1995]

No

 

[Puppies04]

Ah if it was only that simple, If I could buy another GTX 560TI, run SLI and be 100% sure all games would actually use both cards and not suffer from micro stutter, driver problems etc etc then I would... as it stands I will stick with this card until the 600 series is released and buy a mid/high range card again.

 

[OVerLoRDI]

This is a very important point, since previous gen high end tend to become very cheap but they still scale very well and offer great perf per $.

Say you got the 5850 for $275 a long time ago, now you grab a 2nd one for $150. Total price is relatively low (since the 1st 5850 has served its purpose and all you really spend is $150), combine the two and you get >gtx580 performance for dirt cheap. Rather than going to spend big $$ on a single card upgrade.

That is a somewhat unique example. Historically the buy one card now and another later if you need it has been a poor idea. This most recent generation (and half generation) has been the exception.

 

[lavaheadache]

This is a very important point, since previous gen high end tend to become very cheap but they still scale very well and offer great perf per $.

Say you got the 5850 for $275 a long time ago, now you grab a 2nd one for $150. Total price is relatively low (since the 1st 5850 has served its purpose and all you really spend is $150), combine the two and you get >gtx580 performance for dirt cheap. Rather than going to spend big $$ on a single card upgrade.

Umm,

$150+$275= $425

Used 580 can be had for $350-$375 and brand new $425.

 

[cmdrdredd]

This is a very important point, since previous gen high end tend to become very cheap but they still scale very well and offer great perf per $.

Say you got the 5850 for $275 a long time ago, now you grab a 2nd one for $150. Total price is relatively low (since the 1st 5850 has served its purpose and all you really spend is $150), combine the two and you get >gtx580 performance for dirt cheap. Rather than going to spend big $$ on a single card upgrade.

Pretty much what I was thinking. The GTX 580 IMO doesn't warrant $500 for most situations and most people. Maybe if you're trying to break records and all that then go for it, or if you just have to have the fastest. For a majority though it's got more performance than they need, and they could grab a second card to match what they currently have and SLI/Crossfire them for a boost that matches or beats the 580.

Umm,

$150+$275= $425

Used 580 can be had for $350-$375 and brand new $425.

Show me a link to a GTX 580 for $425... the cheapest I can find even after rebate is $470

Get two GTX 560Ti's ($199 after rebate) and you're at $400. The only limitation you'd have besides some scaling issues with some games is the 1GB vram instead of 1.5. Then again you could get two 6950s for the same price as a GTX 580 before rebate. It is all depending on what you're playing and whether it has good multi card scaling.

 

[Silverforce11]

$275 = 2 years gaming out of it.

If you want both new (some places still sell them!), $150 x 2.

 

[LoneNinja]

Top performance needs multiple high end graphics cards. There also use to be a time when 2 of a lower card would out perform the single card that equaled cost. When the Radeon 4000 series was new, 2 4670s in crossfire were a better value than a single 4850. That was until prices began to drop.

 

[cmdrdredd]

Top performance needs multiple high end graphics cards. There also use to be a time when 2 of a lower card would out perform the single card that equaled cost. When the Radeon 4000 series was new, 2 4670s in crossfire were a better value than a single 4850. That was until prices began to drop.

It's all dependent on the resolution and games you're trying to play. Playing above 1920x1200 is going to likely need more than one card to get max IQ settings and good framerates in Battlefield 3, but would be fine with a single card playing CoD.

 

[SickBeast]

The way I look at it, nVidia got $200 out of me instead of $100 because of SLI. So now they can pad their coffers with that money.

It's not as though alternate frame rendering is rocket science, either. I think that the biggest feat was getting all those PCI-E lanes to work properly electrically on a motherboard that costs under $100.

The technology for using multiple cards has been around for years and years, since 3DFX did it way back probably 10 years ago now. nVidia bought them out and I'm sure it wouldn't have been too hard to implement the technology into their lineup.

The semiconductor industry is starting to hit serious walls and the laws of physics are creating major limitations. People are used to performance more than doubling every year, and SLI is a way to allow this trend to continue happening.

My only concern with it at this point is that we're going to exceed the 2000 watt limit of an electrical socket within a year or so if current trends continue.

Our electrical grid is not built to handle all of the technology that we currently have available. The reason why the Toyota Prius is not plug-in-ready is probably due to this fact.

 

[Silverforce11]

2000W.. gotta be joking, you would need an aircond dedicated to that PC.

The pace of game development is not keeping up to GPU power, so factor that in as well. Look at MW3, any crap gpu can run that and its the highest grossing game of all time.

 

[HendrixFan]

Umm,

$150+$275= $425

Used 580 can be had for $350-$375 and brand new $425.

But you wouldn't have had it for anywhere near the same amount of time. It isn't just an issue of cost, it is cost over a duration of time where dual cards are a benefit.

I went from a 4770 to a 6950 for SC2, before that I was spending little time gaming. It was perfectly capable of running 2560X1600 for me. Once BF3 came out I wanted a little more power for that resolution and grabbed another 6950.

I paid much less than I would have for a 6990 and was able to spread out the cost of purchase over roughly a years time.

 

[SickBeast]

2000W.. gotta be joking, you would need an aircond dedicated to that PC.

The pace of game development is not keeping up to GPU power, so factor that in as well. Look at MW3, any crap gpu can run that and its the highest grossing game of all time.

1000w PSUs are already common, and I could swear I saw one that was 1250 watts. We're already half way there. Come on, that's a year in computer terms to get up to 2000.

I wonder how many watts Sandy Bridge at 4.8ghz paired with Quad SLI GTX 580s would use. I'll bet it's close to 2000 watts if not more.

 

[cmdrdredd]

1000w PSUs are already common, and I could swear I saw one that was 1250 watts. We're already half way there. Come on, that's a year in computer terms to get up to 2000.

I wonder how many watts Sandy Bridge at 4.8ghz paired with Quad SLI GTX 580s would use. I'll bet it's close to 2000 watts if not more.

They are quite a bit more effecient than before. Even with an Overclocked 2600k @ 4.8, Tri-SLI GTX 580s, 16GB DDR3, 3 HDDs, and multiple fans you can be under 1200.

 

[lavaheadache]

I've said it million times before and I'll keep saying it. Single powerful gpus offer tangible advantages over dual midrange cards even when the dualies display more fps. I will gladly spend the money on a top tier card to have consistent and predictable performance with minimal drawbacks.

 

[SickBeast]

I've said it million times before and I'll keep saying it. Single powerful gpus offer tangible advantages over dual midrange cards even when the dualies display more fps. I will gladly spend the money on a top tier card to have consistent and predictable performance with minimal drawbacks.

They do and you're right. The biggest drawback is that you become VRAM-limited with an SLI/crossfire setup in most cases. The drivers are getting better.

It's just become too tempting to SLI a pair of GPUs. In most cases you double your performance.

 

[dguy6789]

Ah if it was only that simple, If I could buy another GTX 560TI, run SLI and be 100% sure all games would actually use both cards and not suffer from micro stutter, driver problems etc etc then I would... as it stands I will stick with this card until the 600 series is released and buy a mid/high range card again.

Nowadays it's more likely than not that any given dual GPU solution will work fine with no tweaking necessary on a game chosen at random. The idea that there's massive issues with dual card solutions is nowadays more of a superstition than anything else among enthusiasts.

 

[Cerb]

Unless by value minded you mean people who only have a certain top budget, rather than people who want the most performance for their money.

Neither. People who want the highest performance per dollar at the time of purchase. Both of your definitions, while stated as exclusive groups, are identical viewpoints (maximize performance spending <=$x; I was thinking find the maximum performance/dollar, then spend that).

An additional card does not typically bring a 100% performance improvement. Up to a point, going up the ladder increases performance linearly, or better. After that point (6950, maybe 570, right now?), both getting a single higher-end card, or adding a second card, are each less efficient ways of spending. IoW, you are getting less performance for your money either way, except in a very small handful of games.

Now, there is of course, one caveat, that I was not considering in my initial reply: if prices on your card go down over time, it can be a better value to add another one of those cards, than to replace it, as time goes by.

 

[Throckmorton]

It's not a waste because people seem to buy them, and nVIdia/AMD do a good job on keeping a lid on the fact you're adding at least a frame of video lag.

 

[TakeNoPrisoners]

Many of the major tech websites do not recommend a multi-gpu setup in a everyday computer. Driver problems and day one support of games are the main reasons.

It makes all the sense in the world not to get a crossfire or sli setup. The crossfire problems with Skyrim are a good example. The game actually performs worse with crossfire at the moment then with a single card. I would not want this problem ever, it looks like I will never get a multi-card solution until it is actually a mature technology.

This is horrible. The crossfire setup sees terrible performance.

Without crossfire or sli, much better.

Skyrim is the most important game of the year for me, if I had a crossfire setup I would not be happy.