8800GTS SLI vs 8800GTX

[Rimnet]

Hey all. Recently, I decided that it was time for me to build a new rig. Amazingly, this occured to me very shortly after Anandtech wrote their High End Computer guide. Now, I trust this site over any other when it comes to PC hardware. Frankly, this site has lead me right for years.

Anyways, for the most part I followed the Basic High End Guide. Specifically I took the advice to purchase 2x EVGA 8800gts 640mb cards over a single card solution. However, two days after making my order on newegg, I have began to realize that most people I have discussed my new rig setup with have critisized the choice of purchasing SLI over a beefier single card.

Since I trust this site, and the user's of it's community; I decided to ask on these boards. Why do you think the guide recommended SLI. Or more to the point: Should I RMA these 8800gts's and get a 8800gtx in exchange?

I do have a 24in LCD monitor with a naitive resolution of 1920x1200. This is also the monitor range that anandtech recommended readers to buy. I am thinking the resolution requirement may have been the reason why the SLI choice was made over the Single card choice.

... help ...

 

[ArchAngel777]

With SLI, you have to rely on proper driver support and profiles to work properly. In the best case scenario you may have close to 80% performance increase, worse case scenario you are no better than a Single GTS.

Personally, I don't like the idea of not knowing if my card is going to be blistering fast, or if it will take the back seat. I prefer consistancy and simplicity. I would personally opt for the single card solution any day over an SLI rig.

In the end it is your choice, but my vote goes for single card solution.

 

[MarcVenice]

Not to many people have SLI setups, and not to many of them tell them how well it works. Driver support is one thing, although I disagree with archangel, usually you will see a 50 to 80% increase in performance, that is, if the game supports SLI correctly, and has no driver issues. It eats a lot of power though. I'm a little confused though, you've the same monitor as anandtech recommended, and you have the SLI setup, like they recommended, so whats the big deal? Why not try it out, and if it frigging sucks, rma that stuff and get a GTX, you can always experiment with SLI later on when the prices of the GTX's drop

 

[mazeroth]

I'd ship them back and go with the single GTX. Or you may even consider the X2900XT if you're looking for good DX10 performance.

 

[f4phantom2500]

id go with the gtx; with sli you only get as much memory as the card with the lowest amount of memory, so 640MB, but with the single card you get 768.

 

[Zenoth]

I would have chosen the GTX.

I myself own a GTS 640MB, and I do not plan to go for SLi. The next generation's single card solution on the high-end front will be the same as if I had an SLi'ed GTS setup, if not better. It's always the same story, when a new generation is released, that new gen's high-end card, alone, is performing as good as, if not better than an SLi setup of the previous generation. So when nVidia's G90 and/or AMD's R700 is released I will consider that rather than considering an SLi setup to "keep up" with the newer technology. In other words I think SLi is good for one thing and it is to invest/spend/waste money, and nothing else.

Now ... if the next generations would take much longer to be released than a single year, THEN, and only then would SLi be worth it. Because, quite frankly, waiting a year for the "next generation" is what kills the potential value of SLi. It just ain't long enough of a wait to justify its usage.

 

[deadseasquirrel]

Here is a review by FiringSquad that shows the 640GTS SLI vs the GTX.

At your given resolution, here are the results:

FEAR
GTS SLI.......108
GTX..............73

Call of Duty 2
GTS SLI.......67
GTX.............56

HL2 Lost Coast HDR
GTS SLI.......110
GTX..............89

Company of Heroes
GTS SLI.......117
GTX..............84

Quake4
GTS SLI.......113
GTX..............84

Stalker
GTS SLI.......54
GTX.............48

Far Cry with AA+HDR
GTS SLI.......131
GTX..............96

So, the question isn't "is the SLI faster?" because it obviously is. The question is-- how much faster is it compared to the increase in cost/power/driver issues?

By my quick calculations, that's an average of 31% faster in those games at that given resolution. I'm guessing you paid about 20% more for the 2 GTSs than a single GTX.

It could end up as a good purchase on your part. Naturally, as prices drop, it will affect the overall price/performance ratio. The 640megs of memory vs the 768 might end up playing a part in the future... but it obviously didn't hurt any of these games.

The fact that the game is somewhat dependant on drivers for SLI makes it a little bit of a gamble, but, just about every single recently-released title has taken advantage of SLI. I don't forsee the trend disappearing.

People like to dog SLI for its power requirements, lack of a true 100% return in doubling framerates, and overall driver stability. The truth is that it comes down to a price-to-performance ratio in the end. If you get better performance for equal price, and already have enough power to handle it, I say it makes sense then.

I've seen benches where the SLI 320mb just about equals the GTX in many benches. So, it costs about the same and performs the same... I say get a single card then. But, in your case, your 20% increase in $$$$ translates to 30% increase in performance. Not too bad of a deal. My only criticism is that, even with just a GTX, the framerates on these games are very good as-is. Nowhere does the SLI GTSs turn the game from being unplayable to playable. So, saving $100 might have been better in that regard.

 

[nitromullet]

My guess is that once you get the system put together and you get SLI working, you'll forget that you ever had this doubt...

 

[Rimnet]

Hey guys, I would just like to say that I really really appreciate the input. This community is truely amazing =)

I have decided to stick with the SLI setup for a few reasons. Since I havn't used SLI in the past, this will be a learning experiance for me more then anything. Secondly, I can always go with the single card solution next time around... maybe a year and a half from now? We'll see.

You guys all put me at ease, whether you agreed with the decision I made or not, through your thorough explanations behind your advice. Once again, thank you!

Next up: Putting together my rig and taking 3dMark benchmarks... then seeing how much I can overclock

 

[Bartokomus]

I've used SLI for over a year now, and all in all i have to say i wish i had a single card. SLI causes problems which really don't seem to be outweighed by the performance differential.

My 2c

 

[terentenet]

Originally posted by: Bartokomus
I've used SLI for over a year now, and all in all i have to say i wish i had a single card. SLI causes problems which really don't seem to be outweighed by the performance differential.

My 2c

Your 2c.
My 2c, stick with SLI. I never had a problem with it, aside 2 games that see no benefit from it. But that's only 2 poorly coded games. Benefits are 20-30% up to 80% in games that actually can use SLI.
This is not a question of "even with just a GTX, the framerates on these games are very good as-is. Nowhere does the SLI GTSs turn the game from being unplayable to playable." as deadseasquirrel pointed. Because, those extra FPS allow you to turn on higher AA/AF levels and still have as many FPS as a single GTX at lower settings.

Go SLI and never look back. That's what I did. Now I can't imagine how gaming would be on a single card. My 2c, that's not even gaming!

 

[tuteja1986]

terentenet ... you lie !! "SLI. I never had a problem with it,"

Your SLI phony or don't play many games... Anyways nice system.

 

[SniperWulf]

You should ditch SLI and opt for the single card. As others have stated, SLI works good..... when it works... but when it doesn't, you will probably find yourself wondering (like I and many others have) just why did I buy 2 cards if I can't always get at least a consistant 80% performance increase for 100% more cost? True enough it varies from title to title, but there are some out there where it just doesn't work well at all. True enough you can play and tinker and maybe create a profile that works well.... but not only is that play time lost, but hell, thats what we pay nvidia all that moolah for these cards in the first place.... right? I know thats how i felt after trying it twice

 

[Matt2]

Are these 640mb or 320mb? Are you using Vista or XP?

as long as you got a good deal on the 2x8800GTS 640mb and you are using XP, then I think you made the right choice and will be happy.

The biggest plus for me regarding SLI is not the average FPS increase, but the outstanding minimum framerate increase. SLi often times gives 100% or more increase in minimum framerate when the average framerate only increases by 60% or so.