VeeshanVault

I've been looking at hardware review sites all day, and none of them seem to do testing of video cards in SLI (or xfire for ati) configs. Is SLI dead?

Reason I ask: it's time for me to upgrade my video card. I can buy 2 8600GT for much less than 1 8800GTS. I have a mobo that supports true 16x SLI, so it's not like I'll lose video bandwidth by doing it.

But will the performance be anywhere close? I've checked all the usual suspects: anand, tom's, ect. but none of them seem to run tests with cards in SLI.

I have SLI. I regret buying two cards instead of one. Too many coders are way too lazy to utilize them properly.

Thanks for sharing your feelings, Sally. Care to provide any hard info, or did you just want a hug?

I'm not a fan of SLi.

Just buying the most expensive card you're comfortable paying for and then totally replacing it down the road (at which point you'll probably be getting a new CPU and motherboard as they'll have been upgraded as well by then as well) has worked well for me with very few driver/game hassles (ever since dumping Ati several years back)

Winnow wrote:I'm not a fan of SLi.

Just buying the most expensive card you're comfortable paying for and then totally replacing it down the road (at which point you'll probably be getting a new CPU and motherboard as they'll have been upgraded as well by then as well) has worked well for me with very few driver/game hassles (ever since dumping Ati several years back)

Thanks for the info that has nothing to do with my question!

Go Suns!

SLI is not dead. New motherboards are coming out that support it. There is a comparison on Toms that does test SLI vs SLI. Let me see if I can find it!

Personally I'd just spring for the 1 card that's more powerful. Less heat issues, etc...


http://www23.tomshardware.com/graphics_sli2007.html for SLI benchmarks. Doesn't look like there's a good way to directly compare to non-SLI so you'll just have to do it twice. That is use the first link for SLI and http://www23.tomshardware.com/graphics_2007.html for non-SLI.

---

Oh. Dont see 8600GT SLI tested though. Must be too old. Sorry, can't help you!

masteen wrote:Thanks for sharing your feelings, Sally. Care to provide any hard info, or did you just want a hug?

What the fuck more do you want? I told you they aren't utilized by coders well enough to be worth buying.

I could just spam the thread with worthless unrelated photos if you prefer, dick.

vg sucks lol owned

Crossfire > SLI

Apparently I didn't do enough (any) research when I put together my newest system. I got a SLI motherboard and two GeForce 7900 GS Extremes. It runs great but according to other people a single 8800 would outperform it, with the option to upgrade to 2 in the future...

That "option to upgrade later" doesn't exactly work in practice. Even the same type of card bought 6 months later will probably have a faster memory clock, ect. and (if my understanding of how SLI works is correct) that will mess shit up.

masteen wrote:That "option to upgrade later" doesn't exactly work in practice. Even the same type of card bought 6 months later will probably have a faster memory clock, ect. and (if my understanding of how SLI works is correct) that will mess shit up.

Yeah, that was the route I had initially intended to go when I built my last machine. I ended up hearing enough (no links anymore, sorry) about the REAL increase in performance not being as great as just going with one "better" card, and I broke down and went with an 8xxx series card instead of buying another to go SLI. Most of what I remember reading applied to motherboards with only one 16x PCI-E slot though, which is one reason I still planned (originally) to go SLI. The board I have has two 16x slots.

masteen wrote:That "option to upgrade later" doesn't exactly work in practice. Even the same type of card bought 6 months later will probably have a faster memory clock, ect. and (if my understanding of how SLI works is correct) that will mess shit up.

Another reason that Crossfire > SLI
You don't need to have the same card!

They only have to be the same basic chipset.
You can have a x1950 crossfire edition and link it with any x19** from a x1900CF to a x1950XTX.
Manufacturer, clock speed and memory configuration is all irrelevant.

Apps/games don't have to be coded to support Crossfire!

ATI drivers play real nice with Vista too!
Much nicer than NVidia.

miir wrote:

masteen wrote:That "option to upgrade later" doesn't exactly work in practice. Even the same type of card bought 6 months later will probably have a faster memory clock, ect. and (if my understanding of how SLI works is correct) that will mess shit up.

Another reason that Crossfire > SLI
You don't need to have the same card!

They only have to be the same basic chipset.
You can have a x1950 crossfire edition and link it with any x19** from a x1900CF to a x1950XTX.
Manufacturer, clock speed and memory configuration is all irrelevant.

Apps/games don't have to be coded to support Crossfire!

ATI drivers play real nice with Vista too!
Much nicer than NVidia.

I didn't realize that Crossfire was not as restrictive when it came to which cards you used together. I had so many issues with ATI drivers in XP that I never even considered those cards as an option in my last build. I have not had any driver related issues with the nVidia card I am using in Vista yet though.

I'm interested to see how the next generation of AMD/ATI xfire mobos work out, but for now I'm stuck with le nVidia. I can't afford a whole new system yet.

That's because you need two ATI cards to match the power of one nvidia card!

Personally I think SLI is overrated. I have a MB with SLI but doubt I'll bother with two video cards. By the time I feel like spending that much on a new video card the next generation will be out.

Well I had a nice long post typed up extoling the vitues of ATI when fucking safari crashed.
Macs never crash my ass....
I guess I'll go back to good ole XP for this post.


Anyway.
I used to be a big nvidia fan.. for the past 5-6 years.
My new system has 2 1950's and I have no desire to ever buy another nvidia card.
I'd rather have ridiculously superior image quality than a few more frames per second.

I'm running two 7800GT's in SLI and I don't really feel that it makes that much of an improvement. Marginally, at best.

miir wrote:Well I had a nice long post typed up extoling the vitues of ATI when fucking safari crashed.
Macs never crash my ass....
I guess I'll go back to good ole XP for this post.


Anyway.
I used to be a big nvidia fan.. for the past 5-6 years.
My new system has 2 1950's and I have no desire to ever buy another nvidia card.
I'd rather have ridiculously superior image quality than a few more frames per second.

From what I can tell.. and I don't use Safari often, I use Firefox as my primary browser... both are pretty unstable on the Mac OS. That said... was it your Mac that crashed or the application? I'd be shocked if Safari (or anything from what I've seen) took down your whole OS.

Just the app crashed.
I used to use Firefox on this mac but it crashed way too often.

It's weird... Firefox's instability doesn't surprise me, but I hear even from hardcore Mac guys that Safari is real unstable. I don't really get that. You'd think Apple would address that.

One nice thing about Firefox...
If it crashes and you're in the middle of a forum post, the text you typed should still be there when you recover after a force close.

miir wrote:One nice thing about Firefox...
If it crashes and you're in the middle of a forum post, the text you typed should still be there when you recover after a force close.

Oh hell yes. That's a feature of windows Firefox that I love. I lost many posts using IE or IE powered browsers by accidentally clicking a back link or another link. Firefox preserves the text even if you close the window and use "open recently closed tabs"...and it even preserves the back button link history which IE also doesn't do if you close a tab accidentally.

Firefox atm (with Super DragAndGo and Tab Mix Plus add-ons)

2x 8500GT = $170-180
1x 8600GTS = $170-190

So I guess my question boils down to which is better: more video RAM or more megahurts?

How about more stability.

Single card!

Generally nvidia cards are quality while ATI, eh, not so much.

Mr Bacon wrote:Generally nvidia cards are quality while ATI, eh, not so much.

When was the last time you owned an ATI card.
I'm aware that ATI has a (well documented) history of questionable and unstable drivers but complaints about the quality of their hardware have been few and far between. In the past 5 years I've had to deal with 5 dead nvidia cards. All of those were replaced or refunded (2 DOAs) in a very timely manner. Many of the companies that manufacture nvidia boards have exceptional customer support... but so-so QC.

Over the years, I've only had to deal with a single dead ATI card, and that was about 3-4 years ago. It was a Sapphire. I was not overly impressed with their RMA service but I have had no issues with any of their cards since.

miir wrote:

Mr Bacon wrote:Generally nvidia cards are quality while ATI, eh, not so much.

When was the last time you owned an ATI card.
I'm aware that ATI has a (well documented) history of questionable and unstable drivers but complaints about the quality of their hardware have been few and far between. In the past 5 years I've had to deal with 5 dead nvidia cards. All of those were replaced or refunded (2 DOAs) in a very timely manner. Many of the companies that manufacture nvidia boards have exceptional customer support... but so-so QC.

Over the years, I've only had to deal with a single dead ATI card, and that was about 3-4 years ago. It was a Sapphire. I was not overly impressed with their RMA service but I have had no issues with any of their cards since.

Seconded.

The only current problems with ATI cards is that they're slower than the NVIDIA cards.

noel wrote:

miir wrote:

Mr Bacon wrote:Generally nvidia cards are quality while ATI, eh, not so much.

When was the last time you owned an ATI card.
I'm aware that ATI has a (well documented) history of questionable and unstable drivers but complaints about the quality of their hardware have been few and far between. In the past 5 years I've had to deal with 5 dead nvidia cards. All of those were replaced or refunded (2 DOAs) in a very timely manner. Many of the companies that manufacture nvidia boards have exceptional customer support... but so-so QC.

Over the years, I've only had to deal with a single dead ATI card, and that was about 3-4 years ago. It was a Sapphire. I was not overly impressed with their RMA service but I have had no issues with any of their cards since.

Seconded.

The only current problems with ATI cards is that they're slower than the NVIDIA cards.

Will they allow you to play INTENSE 3D APPZ in Vista?!!!????!?!???!?!?!

On every PC in the US except for Leonaerd's.

The last time I personally bought an ATI card was three years ago. The house I'm sitting in right now has 2 ATI cards running (not including computers in the closet) and 4 nvidia cards running. Generally speaking, the nvidia manufacturers are of higher quality and, in my experience, nvidia provides better drivers.

I've never had an nvidia card die out on me, and until that happens, I seriously doubt I'll ever try another ATI card.

The way I look at it is: Quality vs Wow factor - Nvidia is the brand you know you can trust, while ATI is that weird guy down the street who yells at you as you drive by to 'try his product.' Sure, it's fast, but you just bought it off some guy's lawn.

The way I look at it is: Quality vs Wow factor - Nvidia is the brand you know you can trust, while ATI is that weird guy down the street who yells at you as you drive by to 'try his product.' Sure, it's fast, but you just bought it off some guy's lawn.

That doesn't make much sense.
ATI has been making quality video cards long before Nvidia.
They have consistently held a higher market share.


I don't really want to get into an argument about which is better. Both brands have their advantages and disadvatages which have been discussed ad nauseum... but trying to say that ATI has poor quality boards is really quite nonsensical.

miir wrote:

The way I look at it is: Quality vs Wow factor - Nvidia is the brand you know you can trust, while ATI is that weird guy down the street who yells at you as you drive by to 'try his product.' Sure, it's fast, but you just bought it off some guy's lawn.

That doesn't make much sense.
ATI has been making quality video cards long before Nvidia.
They have consistently held a higher market share.


I don't really want to get into an argument about which is better. Both brands have their advantages and disadvatages which have been discussed ad nauseum... but trying to say that ATI has poor quality boards is really quite nonsensical.

Well, that's been your experience, but it is not the same for everyone. I have personally had problems with every ATI card I used, and I have never had a problem with an nVidia card. Apparently Rellix has had similar experiences. For you, it was the opposite.

I have personally had problems with every ATI card I used

With hardware or drivers?
Which brand?
How long ago?

Hardware and driver (mostly driver issues)

multiple brands since I did not buy the same one twice

I think it would be easier to say that my last card was an ATI Radeon....9700? can't remember right now and have no time to look it up, but I have not gone back to ATI since then.

I had an awesome ATI card for a long time while playing EQ. I think it was a 9800 pro something. I had zero issues with it and it ran like a champ. I got an (I think) ATI X300, but I returned it because the fan noise was ridiculous.

That said, there's really nothing wrong with ATI cards. They're in a lot of laptops, a lot of Wii's and a lot of PCs running just fine.

I think I had more problems with my last ATI card and EQ than with any other game. I remember 2boxing was a pain in the ass because the machine with the ATI card would lock up and go to the desktop with driver errors multiple times each day.

I was not saying that all ATI cards suck, I was just saying that "my experiences" with ATI cards sucked.

Boogahz wrote:Hardware and driver (mostly driver issues)

multiple brands since I did not buy the same one twice

I think it would be easier to say that my last card was an ATI Radeon....9700? can't remember right now and have no time to look it up, but I have not gone back to ATI since then.

So probably about 4 years ago?
Yeah, I can understand the driver issues you might have had then.
That was around the same time I made the move to nvidia.

Don't bother with the SLI route. I've done it a couple of times and it's really not worth it for the price you pay. You are far better off for performance by going the route of a faster / more expensive card.

As for the 'I can add a 2nd card down the road' route, most people tend to never do that.

Maybe in another 3 or 4 years down the road if it becomes a standard and coders actually take advantage of the 2 cards then it might be worth it, but otherwise it's just not worth the the $ spent.