Arguing against SLI

[Pariah]

Originally posted by: Regs

Uhh, hello? The dual core boards like the Gigabyte board linked above are SLI on a board graphics cards, just like the Quantum 3D products from years ago. The SLI implementation isn't the same, but the concept is.

I must of been confused, but I think I get it now. So what you are saying is that using today's implementation of SLI (a combo of SFR and AFR determined by Nvidia engineers themselves)will make dual core SLI work properly?

It should work just as well as 2 seperate cards in SLI. All these cards are is 2 boards stuck on one with the physical SLI link between the cards moved onboard the single card. No one is reinventing the wheel here. If NVidia can get their SLI implementation working well, the dual core cards should work just as well. Quantum 3D proved it could be done successfully even if the cards didn't sell well. ATi proved it could be screwed up if not properly supported. I would wager that NVidia gets closer to Quantum 3D's results than ATi's, as early reviews are already far more promising than the junk ATi had with the MAXX cards.

 

[Edward Lee]

quote:

Originally posted by: JackBurton

"You just didn't ask that, did you?

Now I'm just going out on a limb here but, higher resolution with all visual settings maxed? "



And that's an advantage over a dual core processor because?..... Now I'm just going out on a limb here.. You spent more money?

 

[JackBurton]

Originally posted by: Regs

Originally posted by: JackBurton

Originally posted by: Regs
My theory in technology is that its actually suppose to take up lesser space and use less mass in the future. Especially if you apply this to a desk top computer. Memory modules increasing in density and size, other than using up over 2 slots. CPU die's are shrinking. 2 CPU cores on one die. Even some motherboard manufactures are supplying only two or three PCI slots. Onboard Sata, onboard LAN, onboard Sound. The list goes on, and this is only in a short time span. It's almost an absolute if you follow the time line.

SLI is going to be an ugly duckling in the year to come.

Yeah, I heard dual and quad CPUs are the ugly ducklings of the server world.

However I still don't see many here playing games with server towers. And the server world highly appreciates only using one tower, than using 4 towers to get the same demandable performance which they require to run a functional server.

SLI is to the gaming world, as multiple CPUs is to the server world. Gaming is more visually demanding, and server apps are more CPU/memory/hard drive demanding.

 

[Zebo]

Originally posted by: DAPUNISHER

Originally posted by: Zebo
I believe gigabyte has a dual 6800 GPU card...watch for it..

Most of us will opt for dual ultra card with single PCIe.

Fvck nV, ATI's multi-GPU scheme allowing different GPUs without a bridge is going to hopefully thrash SLI in sales :evil: Yeah I'm still bitter about the PVP debacle

a dual 800XL for about $550 would destory nV IMO...

The XL is supposed to cost $300 put two on one PCB gets cheaper....Is that thier plans though and can they deliver?


I still can't believe we're talking seriously about spending this kind of dough on cards.. How about you? Got my tnt for about $85, GF2 something OC to ultra for $86, Ti200 for $150, 5900 past 5950 for $165 etc..... Over $200 was just dumb.. now $400 get's you playable.

 

[JackBurton]

Originally posted by: Zebo

Originally posted by: DAPUNISHER

Originally posted by: Zebo
I believe gigabyte has a dual 6800 GPU card...watch for it..

Most of us will opt for dual ultra card with single PCIe.

Fvck nV, ATI's multi-GPU scheme allowing different GPUs without a bridge is going to hopefully thrash SLI in sales :evil: Yeah I'm still bitter about the PVP debacle

a dual 800XL for about $550 would destory nV IMO...

The XL is supposed to cost $300 put two on one PCB gets cheaper....Is that thier plans though and can they deliver?


I still can't believe we're talking seriously about spending this kind of dough on cards.. How about you? Got my tnt for about $85, GF2 something OC to ultra for $86, Ti200 for $150, 5900 past 5950 for $165 etc.....

You know it's funny you should mention that. I remember when GF2 Ultras were going for $550+.

 

[Zebo]

Originally posted by: JackBurton

Originally posted by: Zebo

Originally posted by: DAPUNISHER

Originally posted by: Zebo
I believe gigabyte has a dual 6800 GPU card...watch for it..

Most of us will opt for dual ultra card with single PCIe.

Fvck nV, ATI's multi-GPU scheme allowing different GPUs without a bridge is going to hopefully thrash SLI in sales :evil: Yeah I'm still bitter about the PVP debacle

a dual 800XL for about $550 would destory nV IMO...

The XL is supposed to cost $300 put two on one PCB gets cheaper....Is that thier plans though and can they deliver?


I still can't believe we're talking seriously about spending this kind of dough on cards.. How about you? Got my tnt for about $85, GF2 something OC to ultra for $86, Ti200 for $150, 5900 past 5950 for $165 etc.....

You know it's funny you should mention that. I remember when GF2 Ultras were going for $550+.

Ya but you had options.. I got a GTSv form newegg and made an ultra for less than $100. Now, no card under $280 can come up to GT's level no matter what you do to it.

 

[Twigstir]

Originally posted by: Edward Lee

Originally posted by: Twigstir
Advantages of SLI

* you can run one or two graphics cards (your choice)
* ATI's upcoming "SLI" solution states that you can run two different graphics cards (more choices) Nvidia might follow

- With SLI you can buy one video card now and have more choices when the next gen video card comes out. Replace the card if the performance really increases or buy a second, now cheaper, video card if performance gains don't out way replacing the one card.

- with no "same card" requirments your future choices are even greater. Instead of replacing that one card, you could add the next gen card on top of it for an even greater performance boost.

SLI gives you choices. You have all the same things as a one card system just more capability. The extra money on an SLI mother board gives you a lot more flexibility.

How is running two graphics cards an advantage?

No "Same Card" requirements.... We're not talking about future tech. What has the current tech have to offer?

I can talk about future tech all day and night. What about dual core processors? What about this what about that? Stick with the facts and don't speculate.

Two cards today, can run at a greater performance than one.

You don't have to buy two cards for an SLI mother board.

This whole thread is about the future. Your very first post talks about the future.

An SLI mother board is the exact same thing as a non SLI mother board, +. The extra money buys you the "+". The "+" is simply more options.

The fact is, SLI give you more flexibility and only has one disadvantage. The mother board is a little more expensive.

Everything else is pure speculation on how someone might or might not use the additional options SLI provides.

All other risks and costs

 

[JackBurton]

Originally posted by: Edward Lee
quote:

Originally posted by: JackBurton

"You just didn't ask that, did you?

Now I'm just going out on a limb here but, higher resolution with all visual settings maxed? "



And that's an advantage over a dual core processor because?..... Now I'm just going out on a limb here.. You spent more money?

I'm going to go out on another limb here but, you have no idea what your talking about?

And that's an advantage over a dual core processor because?.....

Let me repeat myself, higher resolution with all visual settings maxed? What the hell does dual core processors have to do with improving game performance at higher resolutions when the video card is the bottleneck?

 

[MetalStorm]

Originally posted by: Edward Lee
1) Not practical to have 2 seperate graphics cards. 1 dual processor would be better
2) CPU Bottleneck means you'll never be able to take full advantage of the power
3) Expensive to build and maintain and will never become mainstream.
4) Better graphics cards and the lack of mainstream support will make SLI obsolete again.
5) A proven failed technology of the past.
6) Once you build an SLI machine be prepared to keep it for a long time.
No one will buy it from you. The upkeep will be too much for most people to afford.

Answers to your questions:

1) For Dual processors, or even dual cores to be in anyway useful to gaming the game has to be multi threaded, practically the only game that has that is Quake 3. Because rendering is inherently massively parallel, you can run 2 cards at the same time with small overhead.
2) If you are SLIing 2 6600GTs, then that's approximately equal to 1 6800U - which means you don't have much of a CPU bottleneck with a good system. If you're SLIing 2 6800Us then you are going to be playing every game at 6xAA and 16xAF - that of course is an enthusiast setup.
3) SLI is as I said more of an enthusiast setup anyway, and what most people plan to do is get a 6800GT now, and then when there is new stuff out and they are cheaper, buy a second 680GT, that almost doubles performance for quite a bit less than double the cost of 2 GTs now. Of course there are drawbacks to that - being that you don't get the power of 2 GTs from the off, but then again, the GTs are damn fast as it is.
4)The new graphics cards will also be able to use SLI, not to mention developers - SLI is just a single workstation version of what can be done already with much more expensive hardware.
5)It might use the same acronym, but it's not the same thing, and in what sense did it fail last time, it worked wonders last time, it just happens that it was more of a single generation sort of thing and that 3dfx went out of business
6)I would say an SLI rig has much more going for it than a non SLI rig if you're trying to sell it, it's not like you HAVE to use 2 graphics cards.

Also, I can't help but say this, you sound like a bit of an ATi fanboy with all this critisizing when it is obviously quite good, if it makes you feel any better, ATi is working on a similar technology.

 

[MetalStorm]

Originally posted by: element
I will be sticking to the 1 video card solutions because if you look back 2 years ago i for example, got a geforce 4 4200 for my athlon 2400+ rig. Now imagine if that 4200 were sli capable. Would i invest in another 4200 today to double the performance? No, I'd want a newer direct x 9 card, not 2 direct x 8 cards.

I just think 2 years from now all these cards will be obsolete and you just spent ~$75 extra for nothing.

That's irrelevant.

If you look back 2 years, you also had the 9700Pro or 9500pro if they were SLI capable, then you could have a second one today, both are DX9 cards. I know you're going to say that they aren't SM3 but i know that, but that has no IQ difference as it is. I'm also aware that they are ATi cards, but ATi is also planning their own form of SLI.

 

[Randabis]

Originally posted by: Zebo
I believe gigabyte has a dual 6800 GPU card...watch for it..

Most of us will opt for dual ultra card with single PCIe.

Except for the fact that you cannot run these dual cards without an SLI motherboard. The Gigabyte 6600GT dual will cause systems without SLI to not POST at boot up.

 

[element]

Originally posted by: deveraux

Originally posted by: element
I will be sticking to the 1 video card solutions because if you look back 2 years ago i for example, got a geforce 4 4200 for my athlon 2400+ rig. Now imagine if that 4200 were sli capable. Would i invest in another 4200 today to double the performance? No, I'd want a newer direct x 9 card, not 2 direct x 8 cards.

I just think 2 years from now all these cards will be obsolete and you just spent ~$75 extra for nothing.

This in my opinion, is probably one of the better argument points in this whole thread. However, I'd have to disagree as the release of DirectX 8 and 9 were sort of "special" cases. No other DirectX release in history had as much impact on gaming as these two did. They were also badly timed as it was only 2 generations (1 year) away from each other, which added on the frustrations. And from what I know, there's not really another big release scheduled for DirectX, at least not until Longhorn (remember reading that somewhere).

And about SLIs, well, all I can say is that it is no more than an option. An option, that if memory serves, was meant for upgradeability, and not so much for dual GPUs for insane levels of performance (although it is there for those who want to shell the cash for it). I don't see why the hostility toward SLI, I mean, don't use it if you don't like the idea or think that nVidia is trying to cheat you.

element, if you want more perspective, a better comparison (excluding DirectX updates), would be say, running two GeForce FX 5900's either now, or say by next generation. Those cards are about a year ago and a half ago which can now be had for around $200 and judging from the performance of just one of these and extrapolating for dual GPU, you'd have the performance of at the very least a GeForce 6800 GT. Yes, you initially forked out $400 for the first GeForce FX 5900, but isn't forking out $200 now better than forking another $400 for the new GeForce 6800 GT?

My two cents.

First of all thank you for the compliment on my post being one of the better arguments. You also make some good points yourself. You stated a new Directx update is scheduled around the releae of Longhorn, but Longhorn is scheduled to be released sometime in 2006. That is less than 2 years away which is the time frame I was talking about. I myself generally upgrade every 2 years.

My post isn't about anyone else I'm just stating what I do. To each his own as I often say. The fact is in my case I didn't get the geforce 5900 FX, I got a geforce 4 4200 (still have it in my rig) And I'll be getting the 6600gt soon to replace it. I only run 1024x768 res on my 15" LCD (which I got for only $188 thanks to Hot Deals about a year ago) and I'm happy with it.

For people with higher end needs SLI is there as an option and I'm not against it in any way, it's just not for me is all I'm saying.

 

[flexy]

i really never really cared for performance. Not since two years or so ago. It really doesnt matter whether your fav. Game hits 80FPS or 110....

What matters for me is image quality and performance with Antialiasind/Anistropic filtering etc.

SLI doesnt add anything here. If the Geforce cards have "issues" with shimmering or similiar...two cards wont solve the problem.

Also...yes...i get much more excited over new cores than just plain adding another old one and "force" raw performance...as said...latest cards are ALL fast.

A investment into a grfx-card is ALWAYS a loss...ecept the first two to four weeks or so because you can be proud to have "the latest". Then the value rapidly declines...and (usually( in 6 months something much better (feature wise) is out. With SLI you get this loss times two because you buy two cards. The price/perf/feature ratio is quite bad. IMHO

 

[ngray]

This isn't directed at anyone, I haven't read the whole thread, and I'm trying to state this very generally.

It's amazing how much logic can be mistakenly attributed to a very emotional kind of decision. How technical specifications are being spun as necessity. Do we really NEED much more than a Sempron/x300 offers? How about the performance of an XBox? *ducks*

It comes down to the fact that necessity fades away after a certain point and give way to enthusiastic want. Those with meager budgets take that want to a certain level, others go higher-end. The only difference being very escoteric points that few non-enthusiasts would be able to differentiate.

Look at it this way. I used to have a Benz. A really nice one. Late model S-class. Power everything.
I could tell you all the details. The thermal double-glazed windowglass. The dynamic service schedule that only called for the synthetic oil to be chagned every 10-15 thousand miles. The refinement of the leather. The power rear sunshade.

But really now, did it offer a better value for the features than, say, a Lexus? More to the point, *did it matter*? It's a question of want, enthusiasm, and budget. Is 1K of 6800GT's a better value than 700 of x850XTPE? Are we not out of our reasoning minds for purchasing a card over 250 in the first place? I went SLI, and I'm very happy for it. Need we pretend that these decisions are more value-oriented, refined or mature than that?

 

[Edward Lee]

Sounds like most of the SLI fans are Bush supporters as well.

 

[Zebo]

I don't understand complaining about more choices.

Either choose it or don't , but more option is always good and all SLI is is another option. Maybe not for you but the next guy.

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: Zebo
I don't understand complaining about more choices.

Either choose it or don't , but more option is always good and all SLI is is another option. Maybe not for you but the next guy.

it seems to me that the people arguing against SLI simply don't "get it".

Fine - just ignore it (please) . . . you're just irritating the rest of us who do understand the need for more upgrade options.
:roll:

and eventually everyone will have it as ATI meekly follow nVidia's lead.
:shocked:

 

[Zebo]

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: Zebo
I don't understand complaining about more choices.

Either choose it or don't , but more option is always good and all SLI is is another option. Maybe not for you but the next guy.

it seems to me that the people arguing against SLI simply don't "get it".

Fine - just ignore it (please) . . . you're just irritating the rest of us who do understand the need for more upgrade options.
:roll:

and eventually everyone will have it as ATI meekly follow nVidia's lead.
:shocked:

Well i probably won't have it only cause I hav'nt warmed up to the idea of spend $900 on video cards (IMO two at once is the only way to fly)

But I have quarter with anyone who gets it... its awesome No way to replicate that type of performance.

 

[JackBurton]

Originally posted by: Edward Lee
Sounds like most of the SLI fans are Bush supporters as well.

And just when I thought your comments couldn't get any dumber.

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: Zebo

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: Zebo
I don't understand complaining about more choices.

Either choose it or don't , but more option is always good and all SLI is is another option. Maybe not for you but the next guy.

it seems to me that the people arguing against SLI simply don't "get it".

Fine - just ignore it (please) . . . you're just irritating the rest of us who do understand the need for more upgrade options.
:roll:

and eventually everyone will have it as ATI meekly follow nVidia's lead.
:shocked:

Well i probably won't have it only cause I hav'nt warmed up to the idea of spend $900 on video cards (IMO two at once is the only way to fly)

But I have quarter with anyone who gets it... its awesome No way to replicate that type of performance.

well, me neither . . . i am almost never an "early adopter".

SLI is in its INFANCY. Expensive and finicky. But with tremendous potential as the bugs get worked out and prices drop.

Note my key word is "EVENTUALLY" . . . .

. . . . the writing is on the wall.
:roll:

even ati "gets it"
:shocked:

 

[BenSkywalker]

Difference - My A64 was 150 dollars and was a lot more available than a 6800 Ultra.

I meant any x86 platform that offers more upgrade options then SLI does currently.

And since you've been in my room to benchmark my computer on D3 and HL2, I suppose you are right. My computer comes to a crawl at those games at 16x12.

Why not run them at 320x240? Personally I much prefer 2048x1536, although I certainly wouldn't try to say that is the limit of what people should use- simply that I am not aware of any consumer class monitor that offers higher resolutions. Also, 20x15 still benefits from AA in numerous games(HL2 and Mafia being the best two examples, power lines are nasty in terms of aliasing) and of course older titles with alpha texture useage need some SSAA applied so when looking for top tier visuals right now on a consumer display you are talking about 2048x1536 w/8xS AA and 16x AF- nothing a 6800Ultra SLI setup can handle let alone any single consumer graphics card.

CPU die's are shrinking. 2 CPU cores on one die.

That's contradictory you realize. Multicore is going to greatly increase the die size of processors.

My theory in technology is that its actually suppose to take up lesser space and use less mass in the future.

For a given level of performance you are right. Just like in years past however running multiple functional elements in tandem is how the top level of performance is offered. This hasn't changed.

Onboard Sata, onboard LAN, onboard Sound. The list goes on, and this is only in a short time span. It's almost an absolute if you follow the time line.

You have the option of Intel Extreme Graphics also, why aren't you using it? Or, if you would rather stick with AMD, you have the choice of nVidia's integrated GF4MX graphics- why not that?

 

[Edward Lee]

Originally posted by: JackBurton

Originally posted by: Edward Lee
Sounds like most of the SLI fans are Bush supporters as well.

And just when I thought your comments couldn't get any dumber.

Yep you're a Bush supporter...

 

[Looney]

Originally posted by: Edward Lee
1) Not practical to have 2 seperate graphics cards. 1 dual processor would be better

Practical? For $ to value wise, to you it might be impractical, but to others it would be. Just because you're a bum doesn't mean everybody else is. But the performance increase there is undeniable.

2) CPU Bottleneck means you'll never be able to take full advantage of the power

And in some systems, the GPU is the bottleneck. Again, you can't deny the real performance increase.

3) Expensive to build and maintain and will never become mainstream.

To build yes... but one of the ideas for it is to use one vidoecard now, until you need an upgrade, at which time instead of getting rid of your old one and buying a new one, all you need to do is pop in another GPU. Much better idea imo. As for 'maintenance', what the hell are you talking about?

4) Better graphics cards and the lack of mainstream support will make SLI obsolete again.

Well hell, that's like saying don't bother buying a 6800GT, or any videocard right now, because there will always be better cards in the future.

5) A proven failed technology of the past.

The technology was fantastic in the past, it was just replaced by AGP. But at the time, SLI GPUs were unsurpassed.

6) Once you build an SLI machine be prepared to keep it for a long time.
No one will buy it from you. The upkeep will be too much for most people to afford.

I don't buy machines based on how well they will sell later. And again, WTF is this 'upkeep' that you keep referring to?

 

[jterrell]

Originally posted by: JSt0rm01

Originally posted by: EvilRage


A few months? Show me an article or reference of some kind.

http://www.tomshardware.com/ha...s/20041216_115811.html

says luxery item by end fn january so give it afew more months to drop down.

You might have a point if those boards weren't 6600GTs that are SLI capable.
You can buy 1 6600 GT now and add one of those later then add a 2nd even later.
For 200 now, 425 or so in March and another 375 in say September you will remain fairly cutting edge on game performance. So that looks like an upgrade path to me and anytime to remove a card it can be sold.

Alot of people are paying 600 bucks now for a single x800xt PE.

What has next to no upgrade path is the s754 stuff with agp mobo's.

But its your money spend it how you think is best.

 

[ManDooM]

Pros: it's flippin freakin slippery fast!

Cons: everything else

You can't deny the extreme boost a game gets when played with two 6800's (see the benchies - it's awwwwsoooooome). But that's the whole point. It's not supposed to be practical. Only extreme junkies with too much money or wannabes with too much money will spring for this at the moment. It'll probably fade but the companies made their buck.