To all you SLI Fans..

[Edward Lee]

quote:
Originally posted by: Chaotic42



quote:
Originally posted by: Edward Lee
SLI is like putting a large sail on an aircraft carrier. The ship might run faster but how practical is it?



I don't see how you got that analogy out of SLI.

Here are the benchmarks of moderns systems running modern games. Notice how as the resolution increases, the power of SLIed video cards becomes more and more apparent.

http://www20.graphics.tomshard...ic/20041222/index.html



Thanks for the link... I never saw these benchmarks before. But this just proves to me what a waste SLI is. You have own 2 6800 Ultras to see even a less than a 10% difference in overall performance from a 6800 Ultra or X800... Shouldn't twice the money = twice the performance? Or at least something noticable?

It's not even worth looking at a 6600 GT SLI.. There's NO performance gain over a single 6800 Ultra...

 

[coejus]

There really isn't much of a point to SLI right now, unless you shell out for two 6800 Ultras and don't plan to buy another video card in a long, long time.

 

[Actaeon]

It's not even worth looking at a 6600 GT SLI.. There's NO performance gain over a single 6800 Ultra...

Whoa, so you're telling me that two $200 cards cannot be faster than a single $500 card? No way!

Your thread sucks.

 

[silverpig]

Less than 10%?

I don't know anyone who would buy two 6800GTs in SLI so they could play 1024x768 with no fsaa or aniso...

 

[gimp0]

its amazing how much you dont know about the cpu bottle necks in lower resolutions.

the power in higher resolutions where the cpu is not the bottle neck is worth it if you like to play in super high resolutions.

and its not double, they stated anywhere from 70-100 percent.

 

[Mik3y]

Originally posted by: Actaeon

It's not even worth looking at a 6600 GT SLI.. There's NO performance gain over a single 6800 Ultra...

Whoa, so you're telling me that two $200 cards cannot be faster than a single $500 card? No way!

Your thread sucks.

2 6600gt's perform on par with a single 6800 gt. getting 2 6600gt's right now for sli is plainly stupid when you can a single 6800 gt. why? because by getting a single 6800 gt, that gives you the option to upgrade later on.

 

[Chaotic42]

Like I pointed out in the other thread, the difference in 6800U and 6800U SLI can be as high as 76%. Also, like I pointed out, the difference comes in at higher resolutions.

Why do you hate SLI so much?

 

[shinotenshi]

If the op was a first year assiocate he would be fired. Really people need to learn to read and analyze facts properly. you notice as the resolution increases that sli performace is better. its gets near double at 1600x1200 imagine 2048x1536.

 

[Edward Lee]

Originally posted by: Chaotic42
Like I pointed out in the other thread, the difference in 6800U and 6800U SLI can be as high as 76%. Also, like I pointed out, the difference comes in at higher resolutions.

Why do you hate SLI so much?

Wrong. Based on these benchmarks the average performance gain between a 6800 GT SLI and the next highest non SLI card is only 16.7% at 1600x1200 Resolution. It gets worse for SLI at lower resolution.

Again, at 1600X1200 Resolution the 6800 Ultra BEATS 2 6600 GT SLI.

Enough with your futile attempts!

 

[Chaotic42]

Originally posted by: Edward Lee
Wrong. Based on these benchmarks the average difference between a 6800 GT SLI and the next highest non SLI card is only 8.33% at 1600x1200 Resolution. It gets worse at lower resolution.

Again, at 1600X1200 Resolution the 6800 Ultra BEATS 2 6600 GT SLI.

Enough with your futile attempts!

Uh, ok.

I don't remember saying that 6600GT SLIs are that fast. All of the comparison posts I've made are comparing a 6800U to 6800U SLI.

 

[Edward Lee]

Originally posted by: Chaotic42

Originally posted by: Edward Lee
Wrong. Based on these benchmarks the average difference between a 6800 GT SLI and the next highest non SLI card is only 8.33% at 1600x1200 Resolution. It gets worse at lower resolution.

Again, at 1600X1200 Resolution the 6800 Ultra BEATS 2 6600 GT SLI.

Enough with your futile attempts!

Uh, ok.

I don't remember saying that 6600GT SLIs are that fast. All of the comparison posts I've made are comparing a 6800U to 6800U SLI.

Read the comments.. I made a correction it's 16.7% for 2 6800 GT I don't even want to
bring up 6600 GT's anymore.

 

[Chaotic42]

Originally posted by: Edward Lee
Read the comments.. I made a correction it's 16.7% for 2 6800 GT I don't even want to
bring up 6600 GT's anymore.

That's fine, but again, I'm talking about 6800 Ultras.

 

[Edward Lee]

Originally posted by: Chaotic42

Originally posted by: Edward Lee
Read the comments.. I made a correction it's 16.7% for 2 6800 GT I don't even want to
bring up 6600 GT's anymore.

That's fine, but again, I'm talking about 6800 Ultras.

Ultra will add less than 3% more to that difference. I still don't see the 70-100% difference in performance.

I have a question. You work for Nvidia or something? Why are you so defensive?

 

[LtPage1]

Originally posted by: Actaeon

It's not even worth looking at a 6600 GT SLI.. There's NO performance gain over a single 6800 Ultra...

Whoa, so you're telling me that two $200 cards cannot be faster than a single $500 card? No way!

Your thread sucks.

yep. any argument against sli is retarded. some people feel its worth it, they have enough money to buy it, so good for them! its cool! yay! what the hell is wrong with you?! since when does something have to be practical to be cool?

 

[Chaotic42]

Originally posted by: Edward Lee

Ultra will add less than 3% more to that difference. I still don't see the 70-100% difference in performance.

Are you telling me that there's only a 3% difference in the performance in an SLIed set of 6800 Ultras and a single 6800 Ultra is 3%? That link to Tom's Hardware shows something different.

I have a question. You work for Nvidia or something? Why are you so defensive?

I like the truth. If I'm wrong, I want to make sure that I learn the truth. I'm waiting for you to prove me wrong, but we seem to be talking about completely different things.

 

[masshass81]

According to those benchmarks, that <10% difference between a 6800U SLI and 6800U is skewed because they factor in 1024x768 speeds - where SLI shows little to no performance gains. SLI is meant for playing games at 1600x1200 w/ AA/AF at least. If you take the avg of the 1600x1200 AA/AF benchmarks, the 6800U SLI has a 54.13% performance increase over a single 6800U.

Yeah did the calc real quick since I was curious Either way, I personally would not go SLI since I upgrade about every 3-4 yrs so I would probably just upgrade my entire platform. But this just goes to show that SLI DOES have a nice performance increase *at high resolutions w/ AA &amp; AF on*. I don't see why anyone would run 1024x768 with an SLI rig.

Its their money, let them spend it however they want to.

 

[Rhin0]

That 850 looks pretty nice.

I like my 6800 Ultra though

 

[Edward Lee]

3% +16.7% = 19.7%

I need to make a correction.. should be 604/504 6800GT SLI/(next best non SLI) = about 20% + 3% for Ultra - 23% performance gain over non SLI cards. @ 1600x1200

Which translates to NO NOTICABLE DIFFERENCE.

 

[amol]

THG . . . ehhh . ..

why are they using a 4000+ . . . they should fx-55 it and OC the sucker! CPU is the bottleneck!

 

[magomago]

pay attention

notice how in 1600*1200 sli preformance is near double? It is because at lower resolutions the CPU is the bottleneck

That and if you buy SLI are you gaming 1600*1200 blasting AA and AF. Anything less would be absolutely idiotic.

I mean really...who spends ~1000 dolalrs on an SLI setup (assuming you need a new PSU) and games anything LESS than 1600*1200? That would be pathetic and absolutely ridiculous and a total waste of money...

 

[Spikesoldier]

Originally posted by: magomago
pay attention

notice how in 1600*1200 sli preformance is near double? It is because at lower resolutions the CPU is the bottleneck

That and if you buy SLI are you gaming 1600*1200 blasting AA and AF. Anything less would be absolutely idiotic.

I mean really...who spends ~1000 dolalrs on an SLI setup (assuming you need a new PSU) and games anything LESS than 1600*1200? That would be pathetic and absolutely ridiculous and a total waste of money...

bolded for effect. this is what i was going to post.

read and stfu, let the people who have money for SLI and who want to play at full max settings with full AA &amp; AF on their 30" super lcd at like 323489023x3024382 resolution or whatever play it.

im glad that you have done your research and figured out that SLI isn't for you, but dont spout off and spread your crap all over the place.

 

[jterrell]

Originally posted by: Edward Lee
quote:
Originally posted by: Chaotic42



quote:
Originally posted by: Edward Lee
SLI is like putting a large sail on an aircraft carrier. The ship might run faster but how practical is it?



I don't see how you got that analogy out of SLI.

Here are the benchmarks of moderns systems running modern games. Notice how as the resolution increases, the power of SLIed video cards becomes more and more apparent.

http://www20.graphics.tomshard...ic/20041222/index.html



OMG lol... Thanks for the link... I never saw these benchmarks before. But this just proves to me what a waste SLI is. You have own 2 6800 Ultras to see even a less than a 10% difference in overall performance from a 6800 Ultra or X800... Shouldn't twice the money = twice the performance? Or at least something noticable?

It's not even worth looking at a 6600 GT SLI.. There's NO performance gain over a single 6800 Ultra...

I'm sure you were the guy posting AGP is just a big waste as well.

The current sli technology is infantile and will ONLY GET BETTER.
It also clearly offers HUGE advantages at high resolutions.
Should you run SLI with a 200 dollar monitor? Of course not.
If you spent 600 bucks on a 21" lcd monitor should you run anything less than SLI? Not if you are a hardcore gamer with money to buy the best.

You are clearly bitter nforce3 guy. Its ok man, pretty soon the a8n-sli will be old too.

 

[Pnoy02]

Why stop at 1600 X 1200? Don't you crazy hardcore gamers able to afford the highest possible res. monitor? GPUs can go up to 2k res, why not go there? I'm sure there's monitors to support it, I dunno if games will though.

 

[dug777]

Stupidy Stupid I'm afraid Just reading anand's own articles should show the performance potential of SLI, sloppy or non-existent research again sinks some aggro n00b's arguments...

 

[nRollo]

Why do you have a 6800NU Edward Lee? It doesn't offer 50% more performance than a 9800P, yet they cost 50% more? (at least when they came out)

You may find this hard to believe Edward, but some people spend more just to have the fastest, even if it's not much faster.