I think my post above pretty clearly shows the value of SLI. Before you chime in "That's just Doom3!" remember Prey, Quake4, and Wolf2 all based on Doom3 engine, all out this year AFAIK.
I think my post above pretty clearly shows the value of SLI. Before you chime in "That's just Doom3!" remember Prey, Quake4, and Wolf2 all based on Doom3 engine, all out this year AFAIK.
I not questioning that sli is the fastest. I just state that the $'s for the small gain in gaming enjoyment or fps - is not worth it. I include the cost of bigger power supply, quiet solutions and special mb. Also worth mentioning that a high end cpu is probably a must to realize most of those gains. Better to stay mid upper range and upgrade yearly if needed. But if money is no object......
It might not be "worth it" to you, but the gains in fps are hardly small (as I've shown many times) and the gain in enjoyment is subjective.
Personally, I not only like starting my games at 16X12 4X8X minimum, and just having the SLI tech.
Or... how about those who want the absolute best performance money can buy right this minute? I agree, it isn't for everybody... but when you limit it to noobs and the uninformed it only makes you look both.
I still don't see how people can call it "big money". I mean, my god, live a little people. I saved more than the cost of an SLi system by simply making a phone call to a bank to get a lower interest rate on my new car. Buy a house, have kids... then you'll see what "big money" really is.
Some people spend thousands on fancy wheels for their car. A guy I know drops hundreds a week at a strip club. My wife could spend $400 just on shoes in one freakin weekend. I wouldn't drop a dime on any of those things, but who am I to tell them not to?
The point is... why belittle another person's purchase simply because you would choose not to make the same one? Don't think spinner wheels are a worthwhile investment? Don't buy them. But do you plan on yelling it out the window to every minivan with spinners you pass by?
So, you want to think about what a waste of money something is? How about how much someone pours into rent each month that they will never see again? Or everytime you stop at the gas station to fill up the ol' SUV or truck? Or, better yet, how much of your taxes is going to the government so that they can investigate steriods in baseball? There's a whole lot worse things one could waste money on than an extra $400 video card.
Rollo if nvidia gave me cards, I would use sli also. Deadseasquirrel you may see an investment of over $1000.00 (counting mb, power upgrades) as cheap to temporarily have the best, but the great majority of the market does not agree. Still it is your dime.
Me getting a good deal on cards now and then doesn't change what SLI is- and it's not for noobs and the uninformed.
It's also not for rich people "who want to have the best" necessarily.
People who can only afford one 6800GT for $350 now can upgrade to two down the road and significantly increase their power. When you consider how many people paid over $600 for significantly slower X800XT PEs and 8850 XT PEs, $700-$800 for two 6800GTs seems like a bargain.
The motherboard and psu costs aren't part of it. The motherboards are more flexible boards with the potential to outlive their single graphics counterparts, which is worth $50..
Many people who don't have SLI have good PSUs, I'd hardly call the 400W required for 6800GT SLI extravagant these days. Most of us had 400W PSUs before SLI came out.
It doesn't matter to me if you've decided you can't/won't afford this level of performance, but you can't say it's a bad deal that only noobs would buy when it's really about the BEST deal now in terms of increased framerates. There's now other component you can spend an extra $400 on and get this kind of increase.
newmenu, good thing you came here to ask before you bought it. Saves some disappointment.
You could always get another Ultra to achieve SLI if you want, but your wallet might go AWOL on yo' ass if you do.
On the other hand, I've read the performance and image quality is beyond reproach. It's a nice feeling not having to worry about running games fine. I got that feeling (and knowledge) when I recently bought my new computer, and I'll be getting it again when I SLI.
You could always get another Ultra to achieve SLI if you want, but your wallet might go AWOL on yo' ass if you do.
On the other hand, I've read the performance and image quality is beyond reproach. It's a nice feeling not having to worry about running games fine. I got that feeling (and knowledge) when I recently bought my new computer, and I'll be getting it again when I SLI.
The vast majority of gamers do not play 1600x1200 4x8x. I'd estimate 1/3 of them are using CRT's and playing at 1024x768. I'd estimate another 1/3 are using either 17" or 19" LCDs and play at 1280x1024. That squarely puts 16x12@4x8x as elitist, and I'd also bet that the vast majority of people who claim to actually play games at that resolution are more interested in benchmarks than actually playing the game. It's very rare to find a true gamer who also is a benchmark competitor. I used to be one back in the days of Geforce 256, P3 slot1 cpus, and Unreal Tournament. Now I just want my rig to give me the best bang for the buck when I upgrade it twice a year. As long as my framerates are smooth and my image quality is high, then I'm satisified.
For me, right now that means: Asus P5GDC Deluxe, Intel 530J@3.9ghz, Zalman CNPS-7700, 2x512 PDP DDR2@693mhz, BBA ATI X800XL PCI-e, and Samsung 193P Monitor.. gaming steadily at 1280x1024 with default AA/AF settings (2x4x I think?).
Wether you like it or not, Rollo, you fall squarely into the elitest hardware category and appear to be consumed by benchmarks.
*edit* edited comment about render quality because I can't find the review *edit*
I lost a lot of love for Nvidia when my Geforce 256, Geforce2GTs, Geforce2Ultra, Geforce 3, and Geforce3ti500 all developed artifacting/heat problems within the first 4 months of use. The only thing that kept me away from ATI's superior hardware was the lack of driver support. Well, the lead driver coder for Nvidia walked to ATI and looks who's having driver problems now?
In any case, there is little argument that two video cards lose value faster than one. If the history of the 3D Video market is any predicter for the future, the next generation of single card solutions will outpeform the current 6800Ultrax2 SLI and will sell for roughly the same price as a single 6800Ultra does now. So do you want to buy one now with the plan to buy another, or do you want to buy a card that satsifies the needs of today and then buy a card tomorrow that satisfies the needs of tomorrow? That's a personal choice.
I chose to buy an X800XL. If someone releases a game that I want to play but can't hold 50+ frames at 1280x1024, then I'll sell one card and take a loss one time and buy another card then. You won't see my name at the top of the benchmark lists anymore, but you just might see my name at the top of the frag count or as a member of a winning clan (if I can find a game that rekindles my affectioni for FPS from the days of Unreal Tournament).
I really hope UT2K6 is that game.
EDIT: FYI, I did get a P4N Diamond delivered last night. It's having some real problems with the bios not doing what they advertise as far as overclocking. I got a new bios today (beta) from MSI, so I'm hoping to report it does a much better job... but for right this minute, the $250 board is being stomped by my old Asus P5GDC Deluxe (i914p) for overclockablility. Even if I do get it to reflect the reviews (that put it way ahead of everything, including 955), I'm pretty sure I'm not going to invest in either 6600GT SLI or 6800GT single with the plan to go SLI.. I'm 95% sure that the best plan is the X800XL (which I should be swapping my X700Pro for in the next few days thanks to an instore exchange warranty and a faulty retail gpu cooler). I have the option of swapping it towards anything I want (since they don't have x700 pro's anymore), and even owning and SLI board I'm pretty sure I'll be going with the X800XL... it provides too much horsepower for 1280x1024 (my monitor) for <$300 to be ignored.
For me, right now that means: Asus P5GDC Deluxe, Intel 530J@3.9ghz, Zalman CNPS-7700, 2x512 PDP DDR2@693mhz, BBA ATI X800XL PCI-e, and Samsung 193P Monitor.. gaming steadily at 1280x1024 with default AA/AF settings (2x4x I think?).
Wether you like it or not, Rollo, you fall squarely into the elitest hardware category and appear to be consumed by benchmarks.
*edit* edited comment about render quality because I can't find the review *edit*
I lost a lot of love for Nvidia when my Geforce 256, Geforce2GTs, Geforce2Ultra, Geforce 3, and Geforce3ti500 all developed artifacting/heat problems within the first 4 months of use. The only thing that kept me away from ATI's superior hardware was the lack of driver support. Well, the lead driver coder for Nvidia walked to ATI and looks who's having driver problems now?
In any case, there is little argument that two video cards lose value faster than one. If the history of the 3D Video market is any predicter for the future, the next generation of single card solutions will outpeform the current 6800Ultrax2 SLI and will sell for roughly the same price as a single 6800Ultra does now. So do you want to buy one now with the plan to buy another, or do you want to buy a card that satsifies the needs of today and then buy a card tomorrow that satisfies the needs of tomorrow? That's a personal choice.
I chose to buy an X800XL. If someone releases a game that I want to play but can't hold 50+ frames at 1280x1024, then I'll sell one card and take a loss one time and buy another card then. You won't see my name at the top of the benchmark lists anymore, but you just might see my name at the top of the frag count or as a member of a winning clan (if I can find a game that rekindles my affectioni for FPS from the days of Unreal Tournament).
I really hope UT2K6 is that game.
EDIT: FYI, I did get a P4N Diamond delivered last night. It's having some real problems with the bios not doing what they advertise as far as overclocking. I got a new bios today (beta) from MSI, so I'm hoping to report it does a much better job... but for right this minute, the $250 board is being stomped by my old Asus P5GDC Deluxe (i914p) for overclockablility. Even if I do get it to reflect the reviews (that put it way ahead of everything, including 955), I'm pretty sure I'm not going to invest in either 6600GT SLI or 6800GT single with the plan to go SLI.. I'm 95% sure that the best plan is the X800XL (which I should be swapping my X700Pro for in the next few days thanks to an instore exchange warranty and a faulty retail gpu cooler). I have the option of swapping it towards anything I want (since they don't have x700 pro's anymore), and even owning and SLI board I'm pretty sure I'll be going with the X800XL... it provides too much horsepower for 1280x1024 (my monitor) for <$300 to be ignored.
BTW, this suggests that the next ATI chip (R520) is going to best 6800SLI even on their prized Doom3 benchmarks, and I bet it will cost less than the $1000 tag 6800GTxSLI or 6800UltraxSLI fetches today. So you really have to ask yourself, is it worth buying into SLI today when tomorrow (reported later this year) the next single chip will reduce your $1k SLI setup to smoldering rubble (and if it follows history, it will debut <$600).
Do you really need 16x12@4x8x for Doom3 right now? Most of us don't. Most of us are satisifed with 12x10@2x4x and call it "very high quality" at 60fps for $300 with the X800XL, with cpu horsepower causing the frame rates to drop to ~30fps no matter what video solution you use in the hardest to render moments.
Do you really need 16x12@4x8x for Doom3 right now? Most of us don't. Most of us are satisifed with 12x10@2x4x and call it "very high quality" at 60fps for $300 with the X800XL, with cpu horsepower causing the frame rates to drop to ~30fps no matter what video solution you use in the hardest to render moments.
They all should aspire to it though. When you add more pixels to the scene, you've done your eyes a BIG favor.
Based on what? You're posting numbers with no basis in fact, guesses that may not be close to accurate?
However, since you're basing your supposition on made up statistics, it means just as little. Personally, I think buying/tweaking parts to run benchmarks is pointless and a waste of time, but to each their own. I only benchmark to give other potential hardware buyers an idea of performance they can expect if they buy hardware similar to mine, and to give a more complete picture than the websites. (e.g. a person considering a 6800GT vs a 6600GT SLI set who likes HL2 a lot, and wants WMV9 acceleration someday, might be interested in knowing that running 2X AA vs 4X AA on the 6600GT SLI can get him a higher level of performance than the 6800GT at 4X8X- it might be a trade he'd make for the multimedia)
Like most of the rest of your post, this has no basis whatsoever in fact? You don't know this, and unless you can define your terms and point to the study statistics that show this- why post it?
I say all true gamers are benchmark competitors, and that "true gaming" is defined by being a benchmark competitor!
See how pointless it is?
Thats all well and good for you, but many people don't want to settle for the lower performance and image quality?
I fall in a smaller percentage than you, but thats the way of life- the higher the price of admission, the fewer people at the door. Usually the ones who take the plunge are very happy with their choice though- you'll seldom hear an SLI onwer saying "Curse all this gaming performance- why didn't I save my money and get last years performance?!?!?"
It wouldn't be much good, but I've never noticed these problems on the games I play? If you ever find the mystery review, it will probably note an IQ issue on one game that may well have been fixed by now. Beyond that- all cards have difficulties with one game or another. Try running "Sacrifice" on your X800XL and see what I mean? I'd trade bad fog on one game I apparently don't own for the kickass performance I've seen on many that I do any day.
You can rationalize not spending the money all you want, but it's better, and the level of performance increase it gives is actually an unparalleled bargain.
A FX 55 is $815 at newegg, my 3800+ is $374, difference of $441.. Do you really think adding $441 to your cpu cost gets you anywhere near the value another 6800GT (~$350-$400) and $50 more for the SLI version of your motherboard does?
CPU is a waste of money
SLI is a bargain
Check out my single vs double 6800GT benches- you're not going to get a 30fps increase in performance buying any processor, RAM, or hard drive on the planet. SLI is the only game in town for getting huge performance increases and longevity out of your investment.
So what? New hardware is usually faster- that's why we buy it? I truly doubt an R520 will beat my 6800GT at Doom3 to the extent that I beat say, a X800Xl, given ATIs OpenGL driver woes.
LOL- you're really working hard to convince yourself you don't need nice stuff
A Chevy Malibu will get you to the store and back, but a Ferrari is more fun to drive?
SLI is only good for those who want the best hardware. It's definitely not a cost-effective solution. Here's why:
You do not get 2x the performance for spending 2x the money on 2 cards. Lets say each high end card costs $400. With SLI, you'd spend $800 on video cards, plus $50 extra for the motherboard. The first year you will have the fastest setup available, playing all the games with all the eye candy at high resolutions. The next year, you can keep the setup and it will still be good, but if a next gen card is 2x as fast as this gen (and the rumors say it will be), then it will beat your SLI setup, simply by the fact that your SLI is not 2x as fast as a single card. Given the fact that a sigle high end card can run current games at max quality without problems, you could have bought the single card this year and still play with all the eye candy, then sell it for lets say $200 next year, and buy a new card for $400. Total ownership cost this way would have been $600 vs. $850 for SLI. And that's not counting the fact that next gen cards will probably have newer features that your SLI setup will not.
Now, take a look at the other SLI option - buy one card now, and another one later. Again, you spend $450 now (dont forget that motherboard), and then next year you buy the same card for $200. Not bad, $650 vs. $850, but again, you could have sold the old card, and bought a single new one that will even better and faster. Also, for SLI, you'll only have one choice of cards - the same one you already have. You'll be investing money into old technology by the time you use SLI, and you still won't match a single newer high end card.
Technically, you don't need SLI. A 6800u and especially a x850xt pe will play all the latest games at 1600*1200 full eye candy, and still maintain good fps. And I've already shown in some other posts that in some tests a x850xtpe actually beats dual 6800gt's at 1600*1200 full eye candy settings. SLI is basically a hobby for those who like the technology. And it only makes a difference in the high end range. At 1024*768 resolution, you'll see no benefit from SLI. Dual 6600gt's also can't match a single 6800u, so no point of SLI there either. Basically, SLI is not much use for most people, only for those who like spending money.
You do not get 2x the performance for spending 2x the money on 2 cards. Lets say each high end card costs $400. With SLI, you'd spend $800 on video cards, plus $50 extra for the motherboard. The first year you will have the fastest setup available, playing all the games with all the eye candy at high resolutions. The next year, you can keep the setup and it will still be good, but if a next gen card is 2x as fast as this gen (and the rumors say it will be), then it will beat your SLI setup, simply by the fact that your SLI is not 2x as fast as a single card. Given the fact that a sigle high end card can run current games at max quality without problems, you could have bought the single card this year and still play with all the eye candy, then sell it for lets say $200 next year, and buy a new card for $400. Total ownership cost this way would have been $600 vs. $850 for SLI. And that's not counting the fact that next gen cards will probably have newer features that your SLI setup will not.
Now, take a look at the other SLI option - buy one card now, and another one later. Again, you spend $450 now (dont forget that motherboard), and then next year you buy the same card for $200. Not bad, $650 vs. $850, but again, you could have sold the old card, and bought a single new one that will even better and faster. Also, for SLI, you'll only have one choice of cards - the same one you already have. You'll be investing money into old technology by the time you use SLI, and you still won't match a single newer high end card.
Technically, you don't need SLI. A 6800u and especially a x850xt pe will play all the latest games at 1600*1200 full eye candy, and still maintain good fps. And I've already shown in some other posts that in some tests a x850xtpe actually beats dual 6800gt's at 1600*1200 full eye candy settings. SLI is basically a hobby for those who like the technology. And it only makes a difference in the high end range. At 1024*768 resolution, you'll see no benefit from SLI. Dual 6600gt's also can't match a single 6800u, so no point of SLI there either. Basically, SLI is not much use for most people, only for those who like spending money.
Yeah, but a Viper, while nowhere as stylish or exclusive as a Ferrari, is just as fast for half the price.
Both are utilitarian devices that have small portions of the population who are enthusiasts of. This small portion tends to spend considerably more for a device which significantly exceeds its basic utilitarian purpose to give them more satisfaction. The satisfaction tends to come from less mundane styling and higher levels of performance. The enthusiast core for both elements also tend to push the technology forward.
Nice comparison.
However, I was more wondering what mathematical formula Rollo used to determine that the performance of an X800XL = Chevy Malibu and SLI = Ferrari.
Originally posted by: Creig
Nice comparison.
However, I was more wondering what mathematical formula Rollo used to determine that the performance of an X800XL = Chevy Malibu and SLI = Ferrari.
Yeah, the Malibu would be more equivalent of a gf4 mx. The x800xl is lets see, ummm... maybe a Chevy Corvette is more like it. We should have a thread like this - if your video card was a car, what would it be?
Originally posted by: munky
Originally posted by: Creig
Nice comparison.
However, I was more wondering what mathematical formula Rollo used to determine that the performance of an X800XL = Chevy Malibu and SLI = Ferrari.
Yeah, the Malibu would be more equivalent of a gf4 mx. The x800xl is lets see, ummm... maybe a Chevy Corvette is more like it. We should have a thread like this - if your video card was a car, what would it be?
You're giving the X800XL way too much credit here.
When pushed to it's limits the Corvette is fairly close to many Ferraris in 0-60, 1/4 mile, and top speed.
6800GT SLI is 50% (or more) faster than a X800XL in many situations. X800XL would be more like the Dodge Neon with the "sporty" engine.
bah.. silly wabbits...
sli is still more a niche solution than anything else. too expensive, too complicated, too much heat (and hey, i chose nv this generation). the problem is this -- is it faster than anything else? yup, undeniably. does it justify the cost? only to a minority. will it run quake4 faster than anything? yes -- except a g70 which will then be half the cost of current sli.
nv sees 2x performance for their next gen hardware, and i imagine ati will be in the same area if not more, which will make it faster than any sli (sli does not give 2x the performance). for most people, that just doesn't make sense. for most it's better to have a very fast card now, and get better than sli perf next gen. for those who have and enjoy sli now, great -- you have the fastest solution avail (you can run your games at 1600 where i have to run it at 1280), but don't get upset if it just doesn' make sense for most people.
sli is still more a niche solution than anything else. too expensive, too complicated, too much heat (and hey, i chose nv this generation). the problem is this -- is it faster than anything else? yup, undeniably. does it justify the cost? only to a minority. will it run quake4 faster than anything? yes -- except a g70 which will then be half the cost of current sli.
nv sees 2x performance for their next gen hardware, and i imagine ati will be in the same area if not more, which will make it faster than any sli (sli does not give 2x the performance). for most people, that just doesn't make sense. for most it's better to have a very fast card now, and get better than sli perf next gen. for those who have and enjoy sli now, great -- you have the fastest solution avail (you can run your games at 1600 where i have to run it at 1280), but don't get upset if it just doesn' make sense for most people.
I agree. I guess people can't get that through their heads. If anyone buys dual 6800 Ultras the month before the G70 is available, I'm going to drive off a cliff.
Good summary. I couldn't care less what other people do with their money though.
Wishful thinking. If you think you're going to see much more performance than $700 6800 GT SLI for the same price or less anytime soon, remember this post- I will remind you in August of how I'm still playin'-you're still waitin'.
Edited for intoxicated rudeness.
Edited for intoxicated rudeness.
and i'll be playin as well.. there isn't a game out there, nor will there be until perhaps an unreal 3 engine game that a current gen high end won't play well, and it won't be out until mid/late '06 -- a year or more away. might even be a stretch to think q4 will be out in '05 (and while i was 'ho-hum' about d3, i am looking forward to q4), tho i think my gt will handle q4 just fine, thank you.
so you can remember this post in aug; you'll be playin at 1600 4x/8x and i'll be playin at 1600 w less aa/af, or 1280 with 4x/8x -- so what? the diff is inconsequential. sure, an sli setup is faster, and will offer a bit higher res, but as i said, not many ppl can logically justfiy that kind of money for a tad better iq (i could certainly afford it; just hard to justify for me).
when unreal3 comes out in '06 there will be singe card solutions in the 4-500 range which will outperform sli that ppl have inversted $800+ on it. go ahead and remember this post then
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 22K
-
News NVIDIA and Intel to Develop AI Infrastructure and Personal Computing Products- Started by poke01
- Replies: 384
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
Facebook
Twitter