wow took you only an hour to get something that simple.
-
Competitor rules
Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.
Tempted by some cheap GTX460 SLI action? Might want to check this out first before laying down your
- Thread starter An Exception
- Start date
wow took you only an hour to get something that simple.
Actually it's you who's been having a hard time 'getting it'.
i will say it for the last time: micro stuttering at 30 or below fps very apparent and it actually looks like stuttering. micro stuttering at 60 or below fps less apparent and it just looks like slightly less fps. micro stuttering at 60fps+ disappears due to monitor limitations.
However sli scaling offsets the % of the micro stuttering giving you a smoother experience. for example gtx 460 sli >>>>>> gtx 460 even if you take micro stuttering into account.
Soldato
Because I want to play at 2560*1600 res, and want the performance bump from a multi-GPU setup
I know that microstutter is there with all multi-GPU setups, and that it reduces their performance, but the performance of a multi-GPU setup is still better than a single GPU setup in almost all cases.
As a rough example; SLI adds around 85-90% extra fps over a single GPU setup (at 2560 res). Microstutter usually takes away around 15-25%, depending on the game. That still leaves me with a decent improvement over a single GPU setup. [My gripe with nvidia / ATI is that this performance loss is unneccesary. By adding in tiny delays to the output of frames where needed, a regular and "smooth" game scene could be presented, with only a couple of percent reduction in performance.]
The case where microstutter is most important is the one you mention in the title: Doubling up slower GPUs. I would never go for a dual-GPU setup if there was a single GPU available which was anywhere near as fast. In this case, I would not consider SLI GTX260s when I could get a 5870 or a GTX480 instead. Microstutter eats away enough performance to make the single faster GPU a better bet in the real world.
Last edited:
I've always said that folks should buy a single fast GPU rather than two slower ones, it's just inviting unnecessary problems otherwise.
For me Crossfire/SLI is only worth considering should I need more performance than is available from the fastest single GPU solution, which until now I haven't.
P.S. The multiscreen in that video is awful as well both screens have totally different tones to one another.
For me Crossfire/SLI is only worth considering should I need more performance than is available from the fastest single GPU solution, which until now I haven't.
P.S. The multiscreen in that video is awful as well both screens have totally different tones to one another.
Soldato
unless there is a massive price difference.
When pigs fly.
It says so in description or comments, he had a TH2G before he got the 5870, and he doesn't have a DP>DVI adapter.
Micro-stutter over 30fps still looks like stutter even with frame-rates double that... It just depends on how much frame-rate variation you have to how 'stuttery' your gaming experience is perceived.
However there is a general correlation with higher frame-rates making micro-stutter less perceptible, but there is differences between systems and Apps that have different amounts of frame-rate variation.
A system running at over 70FPS with a large frame-rate variation could show more perceptible micro-stutter than a system running at 50fps with less frame-rate variation.
In short, because a system has a very high FPS, it doesn't always mean it has less micro-stutter than a somewhat slower machine or different app. running a lower FPS, but on average the more powerful system is 'likely' to show less micro stutter than a slower one.
Some people actually say there system feels much better after having removed their second GPU, even with less FPS.
Last edited:
Not even then...
Because I want to play at 2560*1600 res, and want the performance bump from a multi-GPU setup
I know that microstutter is there with all multi-GPU setups, and that it reduces their performance, but the performance of a multi-GPU setup is still better than a single GPU setup in almost all cases.
As a rough example; SLI adds around 85-90% extra fps over a single GPU setup (at 2560 res). Microstutter usually takes away around 15-25%, depending on the game. That still leaves me with a decent improvement over a single GPU setup. [My gripe with nvidia / ATI is that this performance loss is unneccesary. By adding in tiny delays to the output of frames where needed, a regular and "smooth" game scene could be presented, with only a couple of percent reduction in performance.]
The case where microstutter is most important is the one you mention in the title: Doubling up slower GPUs. I would never go for a dual-GPU setup if there was a single GPU available which was anywhere near as fast. In this case, I would not consider SLI GTX260s when I could get a 5870 or a GTX480 instead. Microstutter eats away enough performance to make the single faster GPU a better bet in the real world.
Ok, fair enough, but I used to game at that res until I sold my 5870 to get a new camera (will probably & shamefully get a PS3 for gran turismo 5 instead now).
Anyway I found that all the games I found actually worth playing, a single 5870 was enough.
I'm just a little surprised even overclocked 480 isn't enough for you?
Soldato
It wasn't too bad... But I'm a bit of a framerate whore
I had a 4870x2 until a few weeks ago. That was starting to show its age, so I went for SLI 480s. I upgraded my CPU, motherboard, RAM and PSU at the same time, so it fit in with the overhaul. I won't try to justify it in terms of value, but I'm happy with my system as it is now.
5870is £300
460 is £112 even sli is only £224
the 460 was run on a higher resolution anyway
whats the point in this thread?
if it was a fair comparison it would be worth talking about but as the res is diffrent in both tests its worthless
460 is £112 even sli is only £224
the 460 was run on a higher resolution anyway
whats the point in this thread?
if it was a fair comparison it would be worth talking about but as the res is diffrent in both tests its worthless
Soldato
Agree with Cupra, pointless thread. I can only understand it being posted if the OP hasn't heard of Micro stutter before. It's bloody pointless trying to compare a single card at low res, then try to force the other card down, and then say it's crap. It's a well known issue the article has just tried to reinvent.
Who is realistically going to be trying to run that sort of res on budget cards?
Who is realistically going to be trying to run that sort of res on budget cards?
Soldato
As said a pointless thread, it's common knowledge that xfire as well as SLI setups microstutter at low FPS so basically this thread is scare mongering. It's not as if this effects the majority of people that go 460 SLI unless you use surround and play crysis on max at the res in the vid.
Last edited:
As an owner of multipe 5850's, 5870's and 460's I may be a reasonable judge.
At the "reasonable" resolution of 1920x1200 I cannot tell the difference between either of the above cards when playing real games. I have not experienced stuttering on any of these cards and all games play fine on max settings (except for Crysis which struggles even with 5870 SLI). The 5850 and 460 definately offer the best overclocking potentional with all 3 of my V1 5850's hitting 1000MHz+ and both of my 460's hitting 900MHz+.
Drivers are pretty much equal. I think I just about prefer ATI's Catalyst, but Physx compensates for this in the few games that support it.
Perhaps on multiple monitors and at very high resolutions the 460 is found wanting, but how many people use 3 monitors for gaming anyway?
One point I will add is that a lot of my games require more than 768MB when run at 1920z1200 with AA. I do not see this as a problem because my 460's are 1024MB, but the 768MB cards may hiccup a bit at this res. For example, Dirt 2 running with 8xAA shows 860MB GDDR usage within Afterburner. And yes, you can play Dirt 2 at 1920x1200 with max settings plus 8xAA and get smooth framerates on a single 460.
At the "reasonable" resolution of 1920x1200 I cannot tell the difference between either of the above cards when playing real games. I have not experienced stuttering on any of these cards and all games play fine on max settings (except for Crysis which struggles even with 5870 SLI). The 5850 and 460 definately offer the best overclocking potentional with all 3 of my V1 5850's hitting 1000MHz+ and both of my 460's hitting 900MHz+.
Drivers are pretty much equal. I think I just about prefer ATI's Catalyst, but Physx compensates for this in the few games that support it.
Perhaps on multiple monitors and at very high resolutions the 460 is found wanting, but how many people use 3 monitors for gaming anyway?
One point I will add is that a lot of my games require more than 768MB when run at 1920z1200 with AA. I do not see this as a problem because my 460's are 1024MB, but the 768MB cards may hiccup a bit at this res. For example, Dirt 2 running with 8xAA shows 860MB GDDR usage within Afterburner. And yes, you can play Dirt 2 at 1920x1200 with max settings plus 8xAA and get smooth framerates on a single 460.
Last edited:
Soldato
It's a bigger issue than "don't buy 460's". Ridiculous to try and tarnish a card like this.
Close thread perhaps? lol.
Close thread perhaps? lol.
One thing that you missed though:
The single 5870 was only running at around 30 fps at a much lower resolution. The dual GTX 460 was still managing better FPS at 4000x+ resolution, despite the microstutter.
You are also taking the cards far out of their league. Even with a crossfire / SLI setup, most people still only play at 1080p resolution, the reason for having two cards is to get much higher FPS, and tonnes of extra AA in their games. The FPS in just about any game at 1080p is never going to fall low enough on a dual GTX 460 setup to notice any microstutter.
At the resolution the OP tested them at, you would only be able to get close to smooth performance with 2, or 3 2 Gb 5870s. It is not an accurate test when you purposefully push an SLI GTX 460 setup up to that kind of resolution, then record the microstutter in Crysis, because hardly anyone with these cards is going to be playing Crysis across three monitors at that kind of resolution.
Also, I can definately say after having owned crossfire 3850s, 4850s, 4870s, 5770s, and SLI GTX 460s, that I have NEVER seen any kind of microstutter in any game running at around 60 fps or higher. I dont think that anyone else has either, the only time you notice micostutter is when your FPS falls to around 30 fps, and I have no idea how that is going to happen on a dual GTX 460 setup.
Also, on any dual card setup, you should have a quad core CPU overclocked as far as you can to reduce CPU bottlenecking. Since I've been running all my dual card setups on both an E8400 @ 4050 Mhz, and then an I7 920 @ 4200 Mhz is probably a large contributing factor to why I never see any microstutter.
The single 5870 was only running at around 30 fps at a much lower resolution. The dual GTX 460 was still managing better FPS at 4000x+ resolution, despite the microstutter.
You are also taking the cards far out of their league. Even with a crossfire / SLI setup, most people still only play at 1080p resolution, the reason for having two cards is to get much higher FPS, and tonnes of extra AA in their games. The FPS in just about any game at 1080p is never going to fall low enough on a dual GTX 460 setup to notice any microstutter.
At the resolution the OP tested them at, you would only be able to get close to smooth performance with 2, or 3 2 Gb 5870s. It is not an accurate test when you purposefully push an SLI GTX 460 setup up to that kind of resolution, then record the microstutter in Crysis, because hardly anyone with these cards is going to be playing Crysis across three monitors at that kind of resolution.
Also, I can definately say after having owned crossfire 3850s, 4850s, 4870s, 5770s, and SLI GTX 460s, that I have NEVER seen any kind of microstutter in any game running at around 60 fps or higher. I dont think that anyone else has either, the only time you notice micostutter is when your FPS falls to around 30 fps, and I have no idea how that is going to happen on a dual GTX 460 setup.
Also, on any dual card setup, you should have a quad core CPU overclocked as far as you can to reduce CPU bottlenecking. Since I've been running all my dual card setups on both an E8400 @ 4050 Mhz, and then an I7 920 @ 4200 Mhz is probably a large contributing factor to why I never see any microstutter.