Is Multi-GPU (for gaming) really dying? Or are people just saying that?

[bystander36]

I've taken it one step further sometimes. I want to play games on Ultra, with mods. I haven't touched GTA 5 because I'm waiting for a fully retextured GTA 5 to come out.

I'm not playing AC Unity until 4k/60 fps.

Although I think certain settings can be lowered within reason if it adds no visual fidelity that I can see, but I really have held back on a LOT of games until I could play at 4K resolution.

This is the extreme of what I've mentioned. All you are doing is depriving yourself of enjoyable games until some date way into the future that you can manage to play maxed out.

 

[alcoholbob]

Uh.. SLI works in window mode and now recently DSR is also possible with SLI enabled, just because AMD is trash with their crossfire implementation doesn't mean multi gpu is "dead"

Except frame pacing doesn't work outside of fullscreen so you might as well turn off SLI if you are going to run windowed.

 

[Raising]

Except frame pacing doesn't work outside of fullscreen so you might as well turn off SLI if you are going to run windowed.

Gsync ?

 

[moonbogg]

The point most people miss is that once texture quality is maxed, games do not look much worse on lower settings than Ultra. The rest are just fluff, extra lighting or shadow that you rarely notice because you are focused on gameplay. But those extra effects drop your performance in half.

Some of those effects also lowers image quality, by adding blurs, blooms, chromatic aberration (this is an error of film, why are you wasting GPU resources adding it?!)...

A single OC 980Ti is very capable of 4K gaming, max texture, normal settings and you will get 60 fps. By going for Ultra, all you are doing is adding to your cost of gaming.

As a result, your "gaming enjoyment per dollar" drops like a brick.

I have always loved my overkill dual GPU adventures, but I am finding it hard to argue with the above. I know games often have settings that have no meaningful impact on visual fidelity. They will tank your performance though. I can actually feel my mind being changed in this thread. It tickles.
If I go the single GPU route, that's about $800 (after water blocks and all that stuff) that can be used for a different upgrade, like sweet new peripherals, headphones, hell, even a monitor for crying out loud. Hmm...maybe a single GPU man is blossoming within me.

 

[VulgarDisplay]

I have always loved my overkill dual GPU adventures, but I am finding it hard to argue with the above. I know games often have settings that have no meaningful impact on visual fidelity. They will tank your performance though. I can actually feel my mind being changed in this thread. It tickles.
If I go the single GPU route, that's about $800 (after water blocks and all that stuff) that can be used for a different upgrade, like sweet new peripherals, headphones, hell, even a monitor for crying out loud. Hmm...maybe a single GPU man is blossoming within me.

$800 gets you a HTC Vive.

 

[wahdangun]

actually the only problem with current games is why is all about visual and not about enhancing gameplay, and it get me bored really fast.

since right now our game fidelity is quite high and barely noticeable between AAA games , i want the developer to focus on gameplay like destruction, sound positioning, and good physic.

 

[RussianSensation]

I have always loved my overkill dual GPU adventures, but I am finding it hard to argue with the above.

It's not clear cut. For every AAA game that may have broken SLI/CF support, there will always be that one game that you may want to play maxed out and it scales very well with 2-3 cards. There are also gamers with 1440p 144-165Hz monitors.

Besides, monitor tech will not stand still either and games will get more GPU demanding over time.

A lot of enthusiasts with high-end dual/triple cards may say now it's not worth it after seeing a barrage of poorly optimized DX12/DX11 console ports with broken SLI/CF support. Next time there is a next gen PC game and there is 80-90% SLI/CF scaling and say they end up getting a 120Hz 4K monitor, or upgrade to a 165-170Hz 1440p one, they will get a 2nd card.

There will always be a group of gamers with $999-1499 8-10 Core Intel i7s and 2-4 Big GPU die cards. I cannot imagine that someone who is used to such level of performance will suddenly go down to a $350 i7 and a single GPU...sure, sure.

 

[moonbogg]

LOL RS is right. Who the hell am I kidding? LOL

 

[Silverforce11]

LOL RS is right. Who the hell am I kidding? LOL

Yes, RS is correct, to a point. There will always be people with more money than sense.

Like they buy Hermies or LV handbags that are $30K, made in a factory alongside $50 handbags in China.

The question is do you want to be part of those?

ie. Paying for 2x Titan X or something, when many games don't even work with multi-GPU. Total waste. When it DOES work, the scaling is subpar.

Try it now, test your games with max texture settings, lower other settings down to high/normal and see if your enjoyment of the game is less.

 

[RussianSensation]

ie. Paying for 2x Titan X or something, when many games don't even work with multi-GPU. Total waste. When it DOES work, the scaling is subpar.

That's not what I meant though. Sometimes there are clear situations where 2 cards are better on average or the cost to get a 2nd card results in a superior average price/performance vs. a single more expensive card.

HD6950 unlocked CF / GTX560Ti 448 core SLI vs. GTX580
HD7950 CF vs. GTX680 4GB
HD7970Ghz CF vs. Original Titan
R9 290 CF vs. 780Ti
GTX970 SLI / R9 295X2 vs. GTX980
GTX980Ti SLI / Fury CF vs. Titan X

In these 6 scenarios as an example, I'd pick 2 cards over 1 card. That's because even if SLI/CF doesn't work, you'd still get 85-90% of the performance anyway. Obviously if the majority of the time someone plays games that don't support CF/SLI at all, well save your $ and get 1 card.

Some people hate multi-GPUs, no matter what, which isn't logical. If someone plays a wide variety of games, has a sufficiently sized PSU and case, it's almost impossible to argue that a single 980 OC is better than 970 OC SLI or R9 295X2 OC or that a single Titan X is better than Fury OC CF. I am not talking about $2000 Titan X SLI. There are clear cut cases where multi-GPU is actually the way to go, with a minimal price premium over a single card solution.

OTOH, if two mid-range cards are barely 10-15% faster than a single card, then multi-GPU is not the way to go since when SLI/CF doesn't work, you'll have 50-60% lower performance (for example GTX980TI OC > GTX970 SLI or R9 290X > GTX960 SLI).

 

[UaVaj]

LOL RS is right. Who the hell am I kidding? LOL

:thumbsup::thumbsup:

all it takes - is that one broken/beta game (bf4 :biggrin

 

[Shmee]

:thumbsup::thumbsup:

all it takes - is that one broken/beta game (bf4 :biggrin

But BF4 had good scaling I thought? I love me some mantle CF still

 

[NTMBK]

Multi-GPU is always, always going to a tiny niche in the market. That means that it is never going to be a priority for developers. You are going to be forever reliant on AMD/NVidia hacking patches into the game and driver that allow multi-GPU to kind of work, or to bribe the developer to add support (i.e. Gameworks). Most of the time the developer won't be able to justify spending resources on supporting the <1% of PC gamers who have multi-GPU setups.

 

[Erenhardt]

AMD needs a console with 2 GPUs in it. That will force Xfire compatiblity for every multi platform game from day 1.
Then design your desktop GPUs as a scaled up console GPU.

That would piss a dev or two

 

[maddie]

AMD needs a console with 2 GPUs in it. That will force Xfire compatiblity for every multi platform game from day 1.
Then design your desktop GPUs as a scaled up console GPU.

That would piss a dev or two

You might be joking, but there might be something to consider here.

We have always seen consoles as the poorer version of a PC.
The old model of consoles as walled systems has been overturned.
A new open upgradeable ecosystem is emerging.
X86 means Intel as the only potential competitor and this appears distant.
Rapidly falling PC sale numbers point to bleak GPU revenue.
Multi GPU can mean lower production costs. Everyone happy.

All of this points to AMD and console makers pushing the performance of consoles beyond their present level vs the PC. Instead of gaming laptops, we would have a reasonable laptop and a powerful console for hi-res graphics.

 

[Headfoot]

AMD needs a console with 2 GPUs in it. That will force Xfire compatiblity for every multi platform game from day 1.
Then design your desktop GPUs as a scaled up console GPU.

That would piss a dev or two

I would not be surprised if the next gen of consoles (the next full gen) moves towards having a slot or two of generic connectivity for high speed peripherals. Between the VR craze and the desire to bump specs faster than every 8 years, and NVLink + whatever AMD's fabric is called, it doesn't seem too far fetched.

 

[moonbogg]

I love talking about this stuff. What would I do without you guys? This thread has been a special emotional roller coaster for me. Deciding to go multi GPU or not is like deciding whether or not to have another child. Heavy decisions...

 

[MrTeal]

I love talking about this stuff. What would I do without you guys? This thread has been a special emotional roller coaster for me. Deciding to go multi GPU or not is like deciding whether or not to have another child. Heavy decisions...

Pretty much. Just buy one, and see how you like it. Once you're ready, buy another. Use both for awhile, and if that's too much pick the one you like best and sell the other one.

 

[moonbogg]

Pretty much. Just buy one, and see how you like it. Once you're ready, buy another. Use both for awhile, and if that's too much pick the one you like best and sell the other one.

:thumbsup:

 

[Denly]

Off topic, the title got me think can someone please explain why no one have made a dual low power card?

For example dual(or more) Polaris 11 laptop chips with some smart power management?

chip 1 active for normal desktop application, chip 2 kick in when demanding application detected like VR, games, photo/video editing, engineering program...etc

Dual Polaris 11 would be 390+ performance at 1/2 the power use?

 

[NTMBK]

Pretty much. Just buy one, and see how you like it. Once you're ready, buy another. Use both for awhile, and if that's too much pick the one you like best and sell the other one.

Is that your approach to having children too? Just get two and sell your least favorite? D:

 

[MrTeal]

Off topic, the title got me think can someone please explain why no one have made a dual low power card?

For example dual(or more) Polaris 11 laptop chips with some smart power management?

chip 1 active for normal desktop application, chip 2 kick in when demanding application detected like VR, games, photo/video editing, engineering program...etc

Dual Polaris 11 would be 390+ performance at 1/2 the power use?

Because CF/SLI still doesn't work terribly well, and low power GPUs allow an easy step up to a monolithic piece of silicon with twice the power instead.
Power savings using switchable graphics would be definitely possible, though that's currently already done in a lot of laptops using the iGPU. The requirements for desktop use are so low that you really want a really asymmetric ratio of power on your always on vs 3D GPU.

 

[MrTeal]

Is that your approach to having children too? Just get two and sell your least favorite? D:

Of course not. I've never found a place I could get a reasonable price for one of them.

 

[tential]

If you can save $800 moonbogg then you should get a 4k gsync monitor....

 

[maddie]

Off topic, the title got me think can someone please explain why no one have made a dual low power card?

For example dual(or more) Polaris 11 laptop chips with some smart power management?

chip 1 active for normal desktop application, chip 2 kick in when demanding application detected like VR, games, photo/video editing, engineering program...etc

Dual Polaris 11 would be 390+ performance at 1/2 the power use?

You'll get that with Polaris 10 without the complexity.