Is SLI / Xfire really needed?

SixTwoSix · 20 Nov 2007 at 16:18

Is there really any need to have a dual graphics card setup? Or can you get the same kind of performance with just a slightly more expensive single card setup?

Also, what sort of resolutions actually require a dual card setup?

EDIT: I am talking in terms of gaming!

Chimerical · 20 Nov 2007 at 16:27

No. Dual card setup's are a waste of time and money. Its just a method of getting people to pay double the amount. If you've got money to blow on a second card, you'd be better of buying more RAM or a better motherboard instead.

Only 24"/30" screens could ever "require" a dual card setup.

Arcane · 20 Nov 2007 at 17:05

Sorry but i totally disagree. I'd like to see what motherboard and RAM would increase framerates better than a second video card.

Scougar · 20 Nov 2007 at 17:08

You don't 'need' a dual card setup, but if you already have say, an 8800gtx/ultra or an 2900xt/3870 and want the games to have better frames per second, or want to use higher quality settings (i.e. AA (Anti Aliasing [removes jaggies]/AF [better texture quality basically] or just able to use a higher res) then it fits the bill perfectly.

It also means if you can't afford a better card 'right now' then you can get a cheaper one and buy a 2nd/3rd/4th card later to improve things.

Be aware that all the issues still haven't been ironed out so really are more for enthuthiasts than anything else as it can require a lot of fiddling with drivers and settings to get the best out of the hardware with a particular game. Sometimes it means a game won't support crossfire so your stuck with using 1 card in a game.

To say it's a waste of money is a bit OTT really. It depends what you want it for.

EDIT: It however probably not sensible to try and crossfire 2 budget cards, as for the cost of two cheap cards you can get the higher rated one which will have no problems in most games unlike crossfire/sli.

Matthew

Chimerical · 20 Nov 2007 at 17:13

I don't mean framerates. I just mean for everyday computing, which is far more important. Basically, why in God's name would most people waste a load of money two/four GPU's that'll be completely obsolete within six months to play some poxy videogame. The whole idea is crazy and actually a lot less people buy into the technology than ATi/Nvidia would like to have us think (see the Steam dual graphics survey). Cleary, having two GPU's boosts framerates by about 40/60% but at 100% of the price. Not only that, you need a more powerful PSU, a crappy nForce board to run it all and an extra paperweight of a graphics card. This is all obvious stuff of course, but I'd like to hear a decent arguement For dual graphics.

MumboJumbo · 20 Nov 2007 at 17:42

SLi and crossfire are not a waste.

Benchmarks show with optimized games you can get up to around 85 to 90% increase in frames. Thats a good turn around, while some arn't as well coded and will only show 40-60% and some as low as 20%. But in gamse which only show 20% they probably just dont really need it anyway.

Currently the 8800 GT and 3870s are cheap as hell. People will pay over 400 quid for a bramd new single card. Like the 8800 GTX. If someone said they were buying that 6 months ago at those high prices youd of been sure yeah good buy. But people buying 2x 8800 GT for 320quid which is far faster then a GTX and you claim its a waste?

Its easly aforderble right now.

Also there isn;t so much trouble with games. Driver updates contain the profiles needed to be able to run it in a game, some times you will have to wait a month or two to get a fully optimized one to get the most out of your dual set up. But its worth it and still better then everyone else running on 1 card or in worst case if it doesn't support it at all your still the same as all the others with 1 card.

Final8y · 20 Nov 2007 at 17:42

Scougar said:
You don't 'need' a dual card setup, but if you already have say, an 8800gtx/ultra or an 2900xt/3870 and want the games to have better frames per second, or want to use higher quality settings (i.e. AA (Anti Aliasing [removes jaggies]/AF [better texture quality basically] or just able to use a higher res) then it fits the bill perfectly.

It also means if you can't afford a better card 'right now' then you can get a cheaper one and buy a 2nd/3rd/4th card later to improve things.

Be aware that all the issues still haven't been ironed out so really are more for enthuthiasts than anything else as it can require a lot of fiddling with drivers and settings to get the best out of the hardware with a particular game. Sometimes it means a game won't support crossfire so your stuck with using 1 card in a game.

To say it's a waste of money is a bit OTT really. It depends what you want it for.

EDIT: It however probably not sensible to try and crossfire 2 budget cards, as for the cost of two cheap cards you can get the higher rated one which will have no problems in most games unlike crossfire/sli.

Matthew

Most of the comments about problems with crossfire & sli are made by people who don't own ether.
40 games on my setup 2 dont see any gains from crossfire atm but that my change with updates.
Nothing is perfect so don't demand it im not sorry in the slightest nor am i upset about the fact that a tiny percent of games dont work with it.

MumboJumbo · 20 Nov 2007 at 17:44

My thoughts exacly they just simply havn't tried it and dont know.

Arcane · 20 Nov 2007 at 18:02

SixTwoSix said:
I am talking in terms of gaming!

Chimerical said:
I don't mean framerates. I just mean for everyday computing

I've lost count of the times people post on here to moan about SLI/Crossfire, none have generally tried it or seen it running, secondhand mis-information at it's finest. It gets very tiresome listening to all the "it's not worth it", everything's a "rip-off" and "you'd have to be stupid" comments, I really wonder what some people on here do for a living, a paper round?

Darkwave · 20 Nov 2007 at 18:04

8igdave said:
My thoughts exacly they just simply havn't tried it and dont know.

Could swear Tom|Nbk said that Crossfire was crap when he had an X1900XT Crossfire setup.

Final8y · 20 Nov 2007 at 18:05

Chimerical said:
I don't mean framerates. I just mean for everyday computing, which is far more important. Basically, why in God's name would most people waste a load of money two/four GPU's that'll be completely obsolete within six months to play some poxy videogame. The whole idea is crazy and actually a lot less people buy into the technology than ATi/Nvidia would like to have us think (see the Steam dual graphics survey). Cleary, having two GPU's boosts framerates by about 40/60% but at 100% of the price. Not only that, you need a more powerful PSU, a crappy nForce board to run it all and an extra paperweight of a graphics card. This is all obvious stuff of course, but I'd like to hear a decent arguement For dual graphics.

Obsolete in six months a doubt it.
My crossfired 1900xtx setup has done me proud & will still do so.
Oh the steam survey full of people who can play CSS on a very lowend PC.

MumboJumbo · 20 Nov 2007 at 18:05

Arcane said:
I've lost count of the times people post on here to moan about SLI/Crossfire, none have generally tried it or seen it running, secondhand mis-information at it's finest. It gets very tiresome listening to all the "it's not worth it", everything's a "rip-off" and "you'd have to be stupid" comments, I really wonder what some people on here do for a living, a paper round?

I did wonder why he did a back step, I presumed he just made a mistake.

MumboJumbo · 20 Nov 2007 at 18:07

Ulfhedjinn said:
Could swear Tom|Nbk said that Crossfire was crap when he had an X1900XT Crossfire setup.

Well to be honest. Crossfire and sli have been a waste up until the 8800 GT and 3870 tbh. They are so cheap why not buy two?

I think it is great news. Could see a lot more support in sli and crossfire plus better optimized games as a result!

Final8y · 20 Nov 2007 at 18:09

Ulfhedjinn said:
Could swear Tom|Nbk said that Crossfire was crap when he had an X1900XT Crossfire setup.

He has a right to his own opinion, but there is noway in hell thar i would have gotten 30" samsung at 2560x1600 with out crossfire & even with just the 21" CRT i used before hand had big gains.

Final8y · 20 Nov 2007 at 18:13

8igdave said:
Well to be honest. Crossfire and sli have been a waste up until the 8800 GT and 3870 tbh. They are so cheap why not buy two?

I think it is great news. Could see a lot more support in sli and crossfire plus better optimized games as a result!

I would not say that it was a waste before hand, but now a lot more affordable & more realistic for more people & hope that games makers will think more about the multi core cpus & gpu,s instead of nvidia & ati having to fix some at driver level making the drivers ever bigger.

MumboJumbo · 20 Nov 2007 at 18:18

Well as far as i know the suppot wasn't as good as it is now for games and it cost a lot more. But i gues if you had a 30" monitor you had no choise, but your hardly considered a normal gamer then. Id say more people have 22 and 19"s

techmonkey · 20 Nov 2007 at 18:28

Chimerical said:
(see the Steam dual graphics survey)

Believe it or not, there are many people out there who don't use Steam for buying games. I for one most certainly won't pu up with relying on a remote server to unlock games just so I can play on them. I never purchased Bioshock for the same reason.

With regards to SLi, my opinion is pretty much summed up by 8igdave's posts. I'll be picking up 8800GT 512MB cards to go with a new 24" LCD, as soon as there's more readily available stock at the retailer's end.

marscay · 20 Nov 2007 at 18:50

mutli gpu's work fine, i agree that most ppl who like to slate them don't have them and have never used them before.

i had 2 6800 GT's when they were first released and SLI was awesome, never had much bother with them at all.

haven't had dual gpu's for quite awhile but pulled the trigger on 2 3870's today as i couldn't say no @ 140 notes each.

paradigm · 20 Nov 2007 at 19:08

Chimerical said:
No. Dual card setup's are a waste of time and money. Its just a method of getting people to pay double the amount. If you've got money to blow on a second card, you'd be better of buying more RAM or a better motherboard instead.

Only 24"/30" screens could ever "require" a dual card setup.

So, given that I have 4GB of RAM, an IP35-PRO, and a 24" samsung screen, I didn't waste my time and money going xfire?

Doesn't your post contradict itself?

Chimerical · 20 Nov 2007 at 19:18

So let me get this straight. If your £450 GeForce Ultra is performing up to scratch, people seek a solution by buying another one? Right, yeah, doesn't smack of a rip-off much. It's a goddamn con, one card should be good enough for nearly half a grand, you aren't expected to stump up more money just to get Crysis running properly.