ATI tries to downplay SLI

[jiffylube1024]

Personally, I was unaware that NForce4 would have dual PCI-e (nor was I aware of any mainstream, affordable dual PCI-e 16X boards on the near horizon).

With that said, if dual PCI-e 16X boards do come out this fall at an affordable price (ie not way higher than single PCI-e 16X solutions), then 'SLI' will be a viable alternative.

However, there are a few issues that make it not as simple as the Voodoo2 boards, and I think some people forget that.

1. Voodoo2 SLI used PCI cards and virtually every board had 5-6 PCI slots back then. GeForce6 SLI will use dual PCI-e 16X slots, of which zero mainstream boards are out right now and only some will have this feature in the future. And the price of these boards is still unknown.

2. Increased power consumption. I don't think this will be much an issue for people with 450W+ brand name PSU's, but when overclocking a powerhungry CPU along with two power hungry GPU's, it will put much more strain on the PSU, for sure. Plus the added heat.

3. Possible incompatibility with top-end cards due to dual slot design. This is just a logistical issue - most 6800Ultra's are dual-slot designs, and therefore it probably wouldn't be possible to link them up since the PCI-e 16X slots would have to be side by side. And if they did design PCI-e SLI with a 1-slot space between PCI-e cards, then that means the two PCI-e 16X slots would take up four (out of 6) brackets on the back of your PC.

Who are the people most likely to be able to afford SLI? Probably the same people who can afford the higheset priced cards.

4. Performance is still unknown. I have full confidence in Nvidia delivering excellent performance in 'SLI' mode, but true 2X performance wouldn't be possible due to overhead, interfacing, etc.


Personally, I'm intrigued by GF6 'SLI,' especially if Nvidia can pull it off in a sucessful top-to-bottom fashion (ie it would be possible using 6800 and 6600 series cards; with dual 6800nu's and dual 6600GT's looking to be the best bang/buck). However, it's not here yet, it will require a motherboard upgrade from everyone (will this even be possible using an Intel CPU - ie. are there dual PCI-e 16X boards for Intel on the horizon?), and there will be some inevitable kinks to work out in drivers. Also, if Nvidia runs with SLI, then they will have to keep excellent driver support for it up to date.


And regardless if everyone here goes out and buys a dual 6600GT/6800nu/6800GT setup when available, ATI's claim of:

The truth is that these kind of exotic arrangements are of interest to only a tiny minority of gamers.

Will still be 100% correct, because the vast majority of gamers are still running GF4 MX setups, as well as other DX7/8 configurations.

A final note - is this configuration even called "SLI" (scan-line interleaving?) I thought that was 3dfx's solution of getting one V2 board to render one scan line and the other board to render the next line, in an alternating fashion, while Nvidia's solution gets one card to render the top half of the screen while the other card does the bottom. Either way, this is just a semantics issue .

Rollo, what did you honestly expect ATI's stance to be on GF6 'SLI' - a feature they have no counter to (yet?)? "We strongly support Nvidia SLI and we think it is an excellent technology to look into?" Puh-lease!

Just look at Intel's complete 180 on 64-bit extensions for a reference in a similarly competitive field! Intel spent 2+ years downplaying 64-bit only to covertly slip it into their new chips under a confusing name. Double speak and downplaying the competitors is the name of the game!

 

[Insomniak]

Originally posted by: Pete
SLI is cool in theory, but I don't see what's wrong with Orton's quote. Everyone here keeps saying they'll just buy two nV cards and SLI them, but you won't do that. You'll buy two SLI cards, then a MB with dual PEG slots, then a beefier PSU to support both cards. This isn't as simple as Voodoo 2's plug and play.

It's definitely a nice option for those who can afford it, but is its cost spread out to everyone who buys an nV card? I doubt SLI will become mainstream anytime soon. It seems like a lot of effort for something most people won't use. nV is certainly right to try to attract a steady base of big spenders who're willing to shell out big bucks for SLI systems, but this doesn't seem very cost-effective for the vast majority of people, at least not until huge PSUs and dual-PEG MBs become standard fare.

Rollo, there was nothing wrong with all the statements you quoted. Of course ATi PRmeisters will try to spin you their way, but those quotes are all perfectly reasonable. You're just interpreting them from the lofty viewpoint of someone who can spend upwards of $1K/yr on video cards. Most ppl keeping their upgrades under $200 want their cards to last as long as possible, and SLI and SM3.0 don't seem to add much beyond "plain" SM2.0, IMO.

As for articles like these swaying you to pimp nV, that's a pretty weak excuse. This is nowhere near as bad as nV's 3DM03 cheating, yet that didn't exactly sway you to ATi for long.

Nice high-school insults, BTW. Care to take a stab at Newell while you're at it?

I don't see any of this as relevant, for multiple reasons:

1) Dual PEG boards will cost, what, $70, $80 more than a single PEG high end graphics board? That's not much.

2) The cards that people will SLI will be the mid-range stuff - 6600GTs on down. I myself, am actually favoring a dual 6600GT setup. Someone who wants a bit more power will probably go for dual 6800s, but anyone who wants more than that will get a 6800GT and 6800Ultra singular, because as you said, SLI for a GT or Ultra doesn't make financial (or performance) sense.

The type of stuff that will see SLI, again, is mid-range stuff - pick up one $200 card now, and then 12 to 18 months down the line when it's not longer doing it for you, pick up another at half the cost and plop it in there. Bingo! Instant upgrade for very little cost.

Bear in mind that this is IF, and it's a big if, the tales of "90% performance gain" are actually true.


3) Mid-range level cards like the 6600GT, from what I'm hearing, won't even require rails from the PSU - they'll be able to pull enough power through the PEG slot itself, so the PSU issue is moot, unless you go for dual 6800s, which still shouldn't be any problem for a PSU of 420W or more.



I place the realistic total cost of an SLI setup at around $400 for a dual 6600GT system. $200 for the first card, $100 or so for the second, and another $100 for the dual PEGs. If you go SLI as soon as the cards are introduced, bump it to $500. That's still about the same as a high end video card, and the performance (BIG IF) would be about the same.


SLI isn't targeted towards high end people who upgrade regularly - it's targeted towards people like me - the cash-strapped college gamer who likes to get 2.5 - 3 years out of a system before building a new one. The option of doubling my video performance 12 or 18 months down the line for very little cash is an extremely appealing one.

 

[Insomniak]

Originally posted by: ronnn
Thanks Rollo, I now know why you flog Nvidia - its the interviews!! I think dual sli may be a very nice solution - but right now more than I would want to spend (ok, I am cheap). Still I can see others spending the cash to have the fastest, but keeping it quiet and cool may be a challenge. The idea of getting a 6600gt one year and and upgrading with another the next year doesn't appeal at all to me. Why use 2 6600gt, when one 6800 ultra or x800pe will do the same thing? And by the time next year rolls around, I will be getting close to a total system upgrade and likely the 6600gt will be old news. So for the top line, sli is a great thing, but for the mid range it is just a gimmick - but gimmicks often sell.

You've got it backwards. SLI is great for the mid range. For the top end, it's a gimmick. See my post above.

 

[jiffylube1024]

As another point (and this is purely speculation), one feature that I would be strongly interested in while running PCI-e SLI would be triple/quadruple monitors.

I have read nothing on this issue and am just pulling this out of thin air, but you would think that when not running in 3d mode (ie Windows usage), with 4 VGA/DVI solts and 4 RAMDACS split between two cards (and appropriate driver support - hint, hint Nvidia ), triple or quadruple head displays would be possible.

All the connections are there for it. That would be another killer feature for 'SLI' PCI-e, IMO .

 

[Insomniak]

Originally posted by: jiffylube1024
As another point (and this is purely speculation), one feature that I would be strongly interested in while running PCI-e SLI would be triple/quadruple monitors.

I have read nothing on this issue and am just pulling this out of thin air, but you would think that when not running in 3d mode (ie Windows usage), with 4 VGA/DVI solts and 4 RAMDACS split between two cards (and appropriate driver support - hint, hint Nvidia ), triple or quadruple head displays would be possible.

All the connections are there for it. That would be another killer feature for 'SLI' PCI-e, IMO .

Talk about appealing to a minority...

 

[jiffylube1024]

Originally posted by: Insomniak


I don't see any of this as relevant, for multiple reasons:

1) Dual PEG boards will cost, what, $70, $80 more than a single PEG high end graphics board? That's not much.

It adds up. $70 for a higher-end board with another slot, another $70-100 for a top end PSU (if necessary) and then the cost of a second video card into the mix adds up.

2) The cards that people will SLI will be the mid-range stuff - 6600GTs on down. I myself, am actually favoring a dual 6600GT setup. Someone who wants a bit more power will probably go for dual 6800s, but anyone who wants more than that will get a 6800GT and 6800Ultra singular, because as you said, SLI for a GT or Ultra doesn't make financial (or performance) sense.

Did you crystal ball tell you this? On paper, dual 6600GT's do look intriguing (mainly because of the 500Mhz core speed on these cards), but remember that this will still only be a 16-pipeline solution with more core speed and less memory bandwidth than a 6800GT. Throw in the overhead to run SLI and it may not be faster than a 6800GT, which costs the same as two 6600GT's but is less of a hassle.

On paper, dual 6800nu's would be the first setup that would give you something new - 24-pipelines between the two cards should, in theory, be faster than any single 6800 card, with only 16-pipes.

The type of stuff that will see SLI, again, is mid-range stuff - pick up one $200 card now, and then 12 to 18 months down the line when it's not longer doing it for you, pick up another at half the cost and plop it in there. Bingo! Instant upgrade for very little cost.

I agree there, picking up a $200 card now and then the same card for closer to $100 down the road (although certainly sooner than 18-months!) looks interesting. But even still this is not 'very little cost'. Plus, a new-design $100-200 card 12-18 months later may be faster than two of the $200 current cards.

I place the realistic total cost of an SLI setup at around $400 for a dual 6600GT system. $200 for the first card, $100 or so for the second, and another $100 for the dual PEGs. If you go SLI as soon as the cards are introduced, bump it to $500. That's still about the same as a high end video card, and the performance (BIG IF) would be about the same.

Again, this will only give you a 16-pipeline solution, which will probably be a similar performer to the 6800GT. And for $500 you can get a 6800GT, save some cash and have less hassle.

SLI isn't targeted towards high end people who upgrade regularly - it's targeted towards people like me - the cash-strapped college gamer who likes to get 2.5 - 3 years out of a system before building a new one. The option of doubling my video performance 12 or 18 months down the line for very little cash is an extremely appealing one.

I agree that it's always good to have the option. However, I disagree with your view that it will be viable (or commonplace) alternative for most users.

 

[Gamingphreek]

Jiffylube you have 1 thing wrong in your post. THe Nforce 4 will not incoporate dual PCI-E x16 interfaces as that would take up all PCI-E's 32 lanes. Instead there will be an X16, X12 or X8, X4's.

Also one thing that no one has brought up so far is CPU bottlenecking. Right now with 1 card we are already bottlenecking our shiny new video cards. Imagine if we stick in 2 highend video cards or even 2 midrange cards, our processors are going to limit the improvements a lot. I think Nvidia is banking on Intel and AMD getting dual core processors out of the door fairly soon.

-Kevin

 

[jiffylube1024]

Originally posted by: Gamingphreek
Jiffylube you have 1 thing wrong in your post. THe Nforce 4 will not incoporate dual PCI-E x16 interfaces as that would take up all PCI-E's 32 lanes. Instead there will be an X16, X12 or X8, X4's.

Also one thing that no one has brought up so far is CPU bottlenecking. Right now with 1 card we are already bottlenecking our shiny new video cards. Imagine if we stick in 2 highend video cards or even 2 midrange cards, our processors are going to limit the improvements a lot. I think Nvidia is banking on Intel and AMD getting dual core processors out of the door fairly soon.

-Kevin

If this is true than how is GF6 SLI even possible?

Definately CPU bottlenecking will be more of a problem (now it has to keep 2 cards fed). I just lumped all of this into the 'increased overhead' category, which we have no idea what the true impact will be yet.

 

[Gamingphreek]

Well they are opting for a slower PCI-E lane which shouldn't hamper performance at all because we aren't even close to saturating the bandwidth of an X16 bus. So it will just run on a slower bus.

CPU bottlenecking will be a very real problem for us gamers. Unless someone has some serious OCing with some exotic cooling (like 5ghz clockspeed), we aren't going to reap the benefits.

I keep hearing about 8 pipe cards SLIing to become 16 and 12 to become 24 however remember though we call this SLI it really isn't SLI. Back in the Voodoo days this was true however Nvidia made this technology so each card renders half of the screen. We aren't combining anything on the card, though we like to think of it that way. Basically 1 card renders half of the screen the other card renders the other half of the screen.

-Kevin

 

[Insomniak]

Originally posted by: jiffylube1024
It adds up. $70 for a higher-end board with another slot, another $70-100 for a top end PSU (if necessary) and then the cost of a second video card into the mix adds up.

The PSU I do not see as an issue. I plan on throwing a 480W in my next rig, and I don't plan but to have one $200-$400 video card (again, depending on SLI performance). I don't include it in the cost because a gaming rig with or without SLI would have the type of PSU we're talking about here. People don't buy top end components and then skinch on the PSU unless they are, to be frank, stupid.

Originally posted by: jiffylube1024
Did you crystal ball tell you this? On paper, dual 6600GT's do look intriguing (mainly because of the 500Mhz core speed on these cards), but remember that this will still only be a 16-pipeline solution with more core speed and less memory bandwidth than a 6800GT. Throw in the overhead to run SLI and it may not be faster than a 6800GT, which costs the same as two 6600GT's but is less of a hassle.

No, logic told me that. As many have pointed out, doing an SLI setup for 6800GTs or Ultras is cost prohibitive, heat difficult, and power tricky...which is to say, not likely to occur.

Now, when you get the mid-range, the heat, power, and cost issues all disappear, and you get ROUGHLY the same performance, IF Nvidia's claims are true. You seem to be missing key points here. I said "about" the same performance, and the "about" is there for a reason. I said "IF" because Nvidia's claims could all be BS. The "if" is there for a reason.

Originally posted by: jiffylube1024
On paper, dual 6800nu's would be the first setup that would give you something new - 24-pipelines between the two cards should, in theory, be faster than any single 6800 card, with only 16-pipes.

I'm not contesting this at all. But who says we're trying to build something more powerful than a current generation high end card?

I see SLI as the application of performance when you need it. If a single 6600GT (rumored to be about 20% faster than a 9800Pro - again, a big IF) meets my needs, then why pay more? I can wait until I need the extra performance, and get it for less money than if I'd bought a "future proof" card back at the start. SLI seems to eliminate the need for future proofing which, again, is a godsend to the cash-strapped college gamer.

Originally posted by: jiffylube1024
I agree there, picking up a $200 card now and then the same card for closer to $100 down the road (although certainly sooner than 18-months!) looks interesting. But even still this is not 'very little cost'. Plus, a new-design $100-200 card 12-18 months later may be faster than two of the $200 current cards.

What's wrong with 18 months? I'm using a two year old Ti 4400 now and it plays Doom 3 just fine at medium quality, medium resolution.

And if there's a $200 card faster than a 6800GT in a year, a lot of people are going to be pissed.

Originally posted by: jiffylube1024
Again, this will only give you a 16-pipeline solution, which will probably be a similar performer to the 6800GT. And for $500 you can get a 6800GT, save some cash and have less hassle.

Again, so what? This is exactly what I want - a 6800GT for less money. Observe:

Plan A - Buy a 6800GT + New Mobo:

$500 or so.


Plan B - Buy a 6600GT + New Mobo + 6600GT 8-12 months later:

$400 or so.


If the performance is roughly equal? The SLI setup wins the cost/performance bout.

Originally posted by: jiffylube1024
I agree that it's always good to have the option. However, I disagree with your view that it will be viable (or commonplace) alternative for most users.

This is because most gamers upgrade some component every 6 - 12 months. Alot of us don't have that luxury. I built the system I'm using now in July of 2002, and I haven't added a single thing except a sound card since then. So the option of waiting a year, and then going "I need the amount of performance that card provides added to my system" and popping it in for circa $100 is very cost effective. If I could SLI this GeForce 4 Ti right now, I'd be set for another year at least I think. The majority of the market is using an 8x1 or 4x2 card right now, and I'd effectively have an 8x2 card in that theoretical situation - plenty of juice.

 

[Insomniak]

Originally posted by: jiffylube1024

Originally posted by: Gamingphreek
Jiffylube you have 1 thing wrong in your post. THe Nforce 4 will not incoporate dual PCI-E x16 interfaces as that would take up all PCI-E's 32 lanes. Instead there will be an X16, X12 or X8, X4's.

Also one thing that no one has brought up so far is CPU bottlenecking. Right now with 1 card we are already bottlenecking our shiny new video cards. Imagine if we stick in 2 highend video cards or even 2 midrange cards, our processors are going to limit the improvements a lot. I think Nvidia is banking on Intel and AMD getting dual core processors out of the door fairly soon.

-Kevin

If this is true than how is GF6 SLI even possible?

Definately CPU bottlenecking will be more of a problem (now it has to keep 2 cards fed). I just lumped all of this into the 'increased overhead' category, which we have no idea what the true impact will be yet.

It works like so:

Nforce 4 has a switch between the two PEG lanes. Basically, it can run a single PEG in x16 or both PEGs in x8. However, each lane of a PEG provides 250MB of bandwidth, so in other words, even with a PEG bus running in x8, it still has 2GB of bandwidth, which is the same as a current 8x AGP slot.

Seeing as how games have not even saturated the 4x AGP bus and it's 1 GB of bandwidth yet, this is a non issue for another 2 years at least.

 

[jiffylube1024]

Originally posted by: Insomniak

Originally posted by: jiffylube1024
I agree there, picking up a $200 card now and then the same card for closer to $100 down the road (although certainly sooner than 18-months!) looks interesting. But even still this is not 'very little cost'. Plus, a new-design $100-200 card 12-18 months later may be faster than two of the $200 current cards.

What's wrong with 18 months? I'm using a two year old Ti 4400 now and it plays Doom 3 just fine at medium quality, medium resolution.

And if there's a $200 card faster than a 6800GT in a year, a lot of people are going to be pissed.

Well, I'm using a 9800 Pro on a 3GHz PC and IMO it doesn't play D3 as smoothly as I'd like at either 800X600 or 1024X768, and from benchmarks, the GF4 series plays at about half the frames as the 9800 cards (and with no AF). So in my opinion, I'd call the Ti4xxx cards unplayable with D3.

 

[Insomniak]

800x600, Medium Quality, 2xAA here, and I get 30-35 FPS most of the time. Plenty playable.


That's the problem with most gamers - spoiled

 

[CaiNaM]

Originally posted by: Rollo
http://www.oc-zone.com/modules.php?name=Articles&rop=conteudo&id=65

The truth is that these kind of exotic arrangements are of interest to only a tiny minority of gamers. Almost all of the X800 boards that are sold will go into a standard PC. Putting several chips onto one board, or several boards into one machine makes the system very expensive and most people won?t go there.

Also note that the SLI system from NVIDIA is another example of an unbalanced design. It will draw an amazing amount of power (for most people that will necessitate a new power supply) and will generate a massive amount of heat and noise. As a technology demonstration it is interesting, but as a gaming setup - it?s crazy!

Hmmm. Apparently Huddy doesn't remember V2 sli. It was OBSCENELY expensive for it's time, but EVERYONE got one.

very few ppl had v2 sli, and i agree with ati here. again, it's a niche market, and while i personally think it's nice to have an sli option, the impact is minimal, and i see it more advantageous to a prof. gfx workstation than i do a gaming rig. and seriously, these cards require 350-500w power supplies; what will 2 require? and 1 nv40 is loud enough (tho i know noise makes minimal impact for you, personally, but most of would rather do w/o it).

it's kind of like doom3 - as a technology demo it's interesting, but as a game, it's .....

 

[Gamingphreek]

CaiNaM do you even own a Geforce 6 series... well neither do i however every review site out there says they are dead quiet. Every say they are quieter than the 9800Pros in some cases. Also reports have proven that these cards run fine on quality 250Watt PSU (ie SFF PC's). If you have a good Antec True Power or Enermax or OCZ powerstream PSU youll be absolutely fine.

-Kevin

 

[CaiNaM]

yea, i do. and it's louder than my x800, and generates quite a bit more heat.

as far as power, i have a 480w tt silent purepower, and neither card gives me an issue. i am however, only running one at a time; my comment was concern over running two.

 

[Creig]

Well, personally I'd agree that it's a niche market when compared to the total number of systems sold worldwide. It's mostly just the power users like us who get excited over things like this. The average Joe/Jane on the street doesn't have a clue what SLI is or what it's good for.

 

[Gamingphreek]

Originally posted by: CaiNaM
yea, i do. and it's louder than my x800, and generates quite a bit more heat.

as far as power, i have a 480w tt silent purepower, and neither card gives me an issue. i am however, only running one at a time; my comment was concern over running two.

Well maybe there is something wrong with your as all of the ones i have seen and heard running run extremely quiet. Both cards generate a lot of heat however, yes the Geforce 6 series generates a lot more due to no low-k dielectric, and SM3.0 support which drastically increased transistor size.

You might be fine however TT is going down the tubes these days as they are going for more flashy looks than quality hardware. Now an Antec Enermax or OCZ at that rating SHOULD be able to handle SLI without a problem.

-Kevin

 

[CaiNaM]

Originally posted by: Creig
Well, personally I'd agree that it's a niche market when compared to the total number of systems sold worldwide. It's mostly just the power users like us who get excited over things like this. The average Joe/Jane on the street doesn't have a clue what SLI is or what it's good for.

but now all "power users" like noise and heat ( i certainly don't). my rig sits to the right of me on my desk, and i actually do quite a bit of work on it as well, (a poweful gaming rig also means a powerful destop for working in applications, especially multiple ones) so i prefer a quiet rig.

heat affects overall system performance; in particular overclockability, so high temps concern me as well.

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: Creig
Well, personally I'd agree that it's a niche market when compared to the total number of systems sold worldwide. It's mostly just the power users like us who get excited over things like this. The average Joe/Jane on the street doesn't have a clue what SLI is or what it's good for.

SLI is going to benefit the WORKSTATION graphics marketplace IMMEDIATELY . . . and if it is "niche" it is "niche" with UNlimited money to spend on HW.

:roll:

gamers will benefit as a "side" . . sli is the "future" and ati better get with it or get left behind

:roll:

Originally posted by: Gamingphreek

Originally posted by: CaiNaM
yea, i do. and it's louder than my x800, and generates quite a bit more heat.

as far as power, i have a 480w tt silent purepower, and neither card gives me an issue. i am however, only running one at a time; my comment was concern over running two.

. . .
You might be fine however TT is going down the tubes these days as they are going for more flashy looks than quality hardware. Now an Antec Enermax or OCZ at that rating SHOULD be able to handle SLI without a problem.

-Kevin

Nonsense, tt is Fine.

:roll:

 

[Creig]

Don't forget that us "power users" also do a lot of modding/customizing. If we're plunking down serious $$$ on the card/mobo, a lot of people won't stop there. There are many aftermarket cooling products out there that are more effective and quieter than the stock cooling.

 

[CaiNaM]

Originally posted by: Gamingphreek

Originally posted by: CaiNaM
yea, i do. and it's louder than my x800, and generates quite a bit more heat.

as far as power, i have a 480w tt silent purepower, and neither card gives me an issue. i am however, only running one at a time; my comment was concern over running two.

Well maybe there is something wrong with your as all of the ones i have seen and heard running run extremely quiet. Both cards generate a lot of heat however, yes the Geforce 6 series generates a lot more due to no low-k dielectric, and SM3.0 support which drastically increased transistor size.

You might be fine however TT is going down the tubes these days as they are going for more flashy looks than quality hardware. Now an Antec Enermax or OCZ at that rating SHOULD be able to handle SLI without a problem.

-Kevin

quiet is relative. compared to the x800, the 6800 is considerably louder. having 2 of them would compund the issue. and there's nothing "wrong" with mine, there's plenty of comments from other users regarding the fan noise. to me it's not noisy to the point of distraction, and one could certainly get used to it, however everyone has a different level of tolerance for such things. the fact is it's noticeably louder compared to the x800. whether that's a "bad" thing depends on the individual.

as for my ps, it rates quite well, thank you, and actually maintains voltage better than the antec 420 (also rated quite highly) in my other rig.

 

[jiffylube1024]

Originally posted by: Gamingphreek
CaiNaM do you even own a Geforce 6 series... well neither do i however every review site out there says they are dead quiet. Every say they are quieter than the 9800Pros in some cases. Also reports have proven that these cards run fine on quality 250Watt PSU (ie SFF PC's). If you have a good Antec True Power or Enermax or OCZ powerstream PSU youll be absolutely fine.

-Kevin

250W on a SFF PC can't be compared to a 250W on a regular PC because SFF motherboards draw less power, they run fewer fans in them then regular PC cases and fewer components usually (only 1 ROM drive, 1 HD, etc).

You definately can get by with a quality 350W (Enermax, Antec, etc) PSU in a normal case, even with today's video cards. However, when overclocking the CPU a lot, the voltage rails can still dip a bit.

 

[Todd33]

ATI is 100% right. Hardly anyone buys $400 video cards and even less will buy two. While the geeks that hang here might buy SLI, 99.7% of the general computing public won't and are happy with their 9200SEs.

So, the market is very very small for SLI.

 

[Gamingphreek]

I never said anything against your PSU im just syaing TT is going more flashy than quality.

Also not so sure about fans, shouldn't be considerably louder than the X800's fans unless you have somethign like leadtek which uses enormous high speed fans. They should be on par with 9800Pro. How do you know nothing is wrong with your fans

-Kevin