Is it worth going SLI ?

[willhub]

Crossfire does NOTHING enhancing for crysis at present.

It must do he said he gets like double the fps

 

[MumboJumbo]

Can't belive it took 15 posts before anyone offered the correct advice.

Easy to the rescue yet again!

actually i presumed he was buying a new mobo as well. Thought it was obious its not an sli board. People should know their hardware better

And we had already established he would need a new board to go sli:

And they would work in his present motherboard.

If the cooler on the new AMD cards is anything like the one on the HD2900XT's then I wouldn't fancy two of them in my system! (well maybe for a couple of days benching but not as a permanent set-up).

 

[paradigm]

It must do he said he gets like double the fps

He's lying.

As much as I'd like it to be true, and for my dual 3870's to give me a decent framerate in crysis, it just doesn't happen yet.

Infact, its quicker with one card removed.

 

[Big.Wayne]

Infact, its quicker with one card removed.

Don't you just love modern technology?

 

[Tooks]

He's lying.

As much as I'd like it to be true, and for my dual 3870's to give me a decent framerate in crysis, it just doesn't happen yet.

Infact, its quicker with one card removed.

What OS are you running?

 

[MumboJumbo]

dont think there is a difference. It isn't supported by crytek and therefore wont work until ati work some drivers out but without the support of crytek. SO its unlikely they will be as optimized as nvidia.

 

[paradigm]

What OS are you running?

Which one do you want me to run?

I've got a vista 32-bit install, a vista 64-bit install. And "could" install XP if I knew it would make a difference (which it won't).

 

[MumboJumbo]

What percentage increases are you seeing from single to dual in other games paradigm? Such as cod4, obivion etc?

 

[Tooks]

Which one do you want me to run?

I've got a vista 32-bit install, a vista 64-bit install. And "could" install XP if I knew it would make a difference (which it won't).

Hey, no need to sound quite so uptight about it?!

I was only asking in case it was a 32/64 bit driver thing?

Now I know it isn't!

It's a crysis thing then?

 

[J.D]

How oftern do you see a game saying "runs best on ATi". I would go nvida just because of the extra support. Plus the fact they are the fastest gpus currently means its more likely big game titles will be aimed at them.

If everyone had your view m8, AMD would be gone and that new system you are building would be four times the price. You'd then wait 2 or 3 times longer for new tech which would be very pricey.

I'm not saying you are wrong Dave as you're correct for now but you seem to have a very short memory or are severely misinformed regarding the two graphic card giants. ATI only got knocked off top spot 1 year ago and since then haven't really competed in the top flight enthusiasts market which only makes up around 5% of PC users. Now the GT is Nvidia's best thing they've done for price vs performance for a long time but it's only been out a few weeks and stock..... well you know the score on that one. All I'm trying to say is that you show some resentment towards AMD/ATI at times but without them all of our hobbies would become less enjoyable. This graphic card section would really take a hit also and you know the rest, delayed tech, prices etc, etc.

Yes, I have been an ATI user for 95% of my time with PC's but after testing my m8's 8800GTX I have easily been tempted over to the green side and my next card will most likely be Nvidia. I will still however intervene like I've just done so now as without competition then we'd all be in hot water.

 

[paradigm]

What percentage increases are you seeing from single to dual in other games paradigm? Such as cod4, obivion etc?

Get a good 30-40% more in COD4, don't play oblivion Most games see a 30-60% increase, then there are the odd few that don't benefit at all (like crysis).

It's a crysis thing then?

Unfortunately so.

 

[MumboJumbo]

If everyone had your view m8, AMD would be gone and that new system you are building would be four times the price. You'd then wait 2 or 3 times longer for new tech which would be very pricey.

I see no reason why i should buy an ati card when they are the inferior product as far as performance goes and nvidia seem to be monopolizing the market so that nvidia cards are getting supported better. Well certainly in terms of crysis.

If everyone had my view its true amd would go down. But im not going to by amd because of their mistakes, thats just silly.

I'm not saying you are wrong Dave as you're correct for now but you seem to have a very short memory or are severely misinformed regarding the two graphic card giants. ATI only got knocked off top spot 1 year ago and since then haven't really competed in the top flight enthusiasts market which only makes up around 5% of PC users. Now the GT is Nvidia's best thing they've done for price vs performance for a long time but it's only been out a few weeks and stock..... well you know the score on that one. All I'm trying to say is that you show some resentment towards AMD/ATI at times but without them all of our hobbies would become less enjoyable. This graphic card section would really take a hit also and you know the rest, delayed tech, prices etc, etc.

I am swayed only by the performance of what im buying not by the badge. Has it not almost been 2 years now since the 8800 came out? I cant actually remeber but every since dx10 ati havn't brought out anything which from a performance point of view has been worth buying. I dont mind paying the higher prices. I know full well that enthusiasts are the minority and ati is concentrating on the mid to low end. I had been tellign people for a while to get a 1950 over any dx10 card as its a great deal for a budget gaming pc. Although now i think the 2600 may take the lead in that. The 8600 i think is a terrible acrd and wouldn't adivce people to get.

Im not quite sure how i show resentment? I think it may just be the way i fraze things. Im not a nvidia fanboy and if the 3870 was the same performance as the 8800GT id probably actually buy it even if it was the same price because of it being quieter, less power etc.

But from an enthusiast point of view it seems like amd are just failing at almost every hurdel they come to. The 3870 is definitly a success and from an enthusiast point of view probably the only good thing they have come out with since dx10. But even still i think many people would take a GT or even the new GTS (if it ever comes) over the 3870 so once again its almost there but not close enough. The 2900 was a failure and only made back some reputation due to the Pro being released at a price that Nvidia couldn'ty compeate with, but in performance they still did.

So going back to your point as i think i strayed. What am i ment to do about the fact taht if amd go down then we will end up paying premiums etc. Start telling people to buy the phenom even though its far to expensive and currently has troubles over 2.4 till b3 stepping comes out when the Q6600 is cheaper and overclocks a hell of a lot better?

If amd's crossfirex proves to work well that could tempt me over but their phenom pushs me straight back to the intel/nvida boards.

Id like 3870s to be better as i dont really want an nvidia board because of all the problems with them.

Yes, I have been an ATI user for 95% of my time with PC's but after testing my m8's 8800GTX I have easily been tempted over to the green side and my next card will most likely be Nvidia. I will still however intervene like I've just done so now as without competition then we'd all be in hot water.

MM not sure what you are saying, are you saying youd liek to go back to ATI? i dont understand this point of view. a lot of people say oo they would like tio have an amd cpu again. Why does it matter who makes it?

 

[MumboJumbo]

Get a good 30-40% more in COD4, don't play oblivion Most games see a 30-60% increase, then there are the odd few that don't benefit at all (like crysis).

MM, how about quake wars and company of heros. I beleive they reach up to 90% on sli. But this was with high resolutionas. I think on a 24" it was around 70-75%

 

[J.D]

I see no reason why i should buy an ati card when they are the inferior product as far as performance goes and nvidia seem to be monopolizing the market so that nvidia cards are getting supported better. Well certainly in terms of crysis.

Please read my posts before making such comments . I never once said that you should buy anything. Nvidia monopolizing isn't really a great thing either. We all want the games to run fairly on both cards. Wouldn't you agree?.

If everyone had my view its true amd would go down. But im not going to by amd because of their mistakes, thats just silly.

The only thing that is silly is you thinking I want you to buy AMD?.

Also the cards and CPU's aren't dire by any standards. CPU side of things is still fairly in Intel's pocket but on the card market it's not so black and white. If the GT was ready available then yes Nvidia would make a killing with this GT card at least but it's not yet and with the current Crysis benchmark numbers (without AA) that will also help sell the HD cards even though they are the weaker product.

In fact when prices die down the HD cards will be cheaper than the GT to match the price vs performance and we all know that the mid/lower end makes the money. It's all down to what the end user wants. I've seen countless posts from people with amazing systems that don't care about AA. With this kind of thinking then the HD cards suddenly become more attractive.

AMD's mistakes aren't as bad as you keep making out if you really think about it. The enthusiasts percentile is very small and the GT and HD are just out. The HD card is still a good card and from some reports, gamers are happy with the card.

I am swayed only by the performance of what im buying not by the badge. Has it not almost been 2 years now since the 8800 came out? I cant actually remeber but every since dx10 ati havn't brought out anything which from a performance point of view has been worth buying. I dont mind paying the higher prices. I know full well that enthusiasts are the minority and ati is concentrating on the mid to low end. I had been tellign people for a while to get a 1950 over any dx10 card as its a great deal for a budget gaming pc. Although now i think the 2600 may take the lead in that. The 8600 i think is a terrible acrd and wouldn't adivce people to get.

As am I?. This rig was up and running with a x1900xt before the GTX launch last November. I've started a hobby that's taken a lot of my money in the summer and with xmas just round the corner I'm waiting till after the year to upgrade. It will most likely be a Yorksfield, new GTS or whatever's a great card to buy at the time. All I'm really trying to say to you is that I think you make AMD to be a joke half the time and it's just not the case.

Im not quite sure how i show resentment? I think it may just be the way i fraze things. Im not a nvidia fanboy and if the 3870 was the same performance as the 8800GT id probably actually buy it even if it was the same price because of it being quieter, less power etc.

But from an enthusiast point of view it seems like amd are just failing at almost every hurdel they come to. The 3870 is definitly a success and from an enthusiast point of view probably the only good thing they have come out with since dx10. But even still i think many people would take a GT or even the new GTS (if it ever comes) over the 3870 so once again its almost there but not close enough. The 2900 was a failure and only made back some reputation due to the Pro being released at a price that Nvidia couldn'ty compeate with, but in performance they still did.

You just seem overly negative about it and I've noticed this in a lot of your posting for quite a while now actually. Have a read through them yourself and you'll see what I mean. I rarely start to be that negative today at 26 years old and I was just a bundle of fun at 16, why do you care so much? If you don't then your statements make it seem like you do.

The 2900 was a bit of a failure I agree. The Pro was cheap and I thought it was a great buy as I didn't expect to see anything till around December and then it would be crazy to try and get a hold of a card then. So I hoped that nothing would come out and what do you know? (GT, HD38 ). My buy was really bad timing on my behalf but not as bad as the people who bought the 2900XT on release day.

Also the 8800GTX was launched a year ago:. The "every hurdle" is the release of 2 cards between six months.

So going back to your point as i think i strayed. What am i ment to do about the fact taht if amd go down then we will end up paying premiums etc. Start telling people to buy the phenom even though its far to expensive and currently has troubles over 2.4 till b3 stepping comes out when the Q6600 is cheaper and overclocks a hell of a lot better?

C'mon Dave. You are trying to put words in my mouth lol.

No, I'm not. In any way at all saying that you should do anything that you have just suggested. Yes, I think that your negativity could scare away potential buyers at times and I know that the GFX cards at least are half decent but I've already said that you are correct on Nvidia and Intel still having the lead for the top end. The CPU's is still in Intels court but there is still a battle going on in the graphics section. I just hope that you will be fairer in your judgements rather than just a ball of negativity at times.

If amd's crossfirex proves to work well that could tempt me over but their phenom pushs me straight back to the intel/nvida boards.

Id like 3870s to be better as i dont really want an nvidia board because of all the problems with them.

I hope things start working out for AMD. I'm not a fanboy honestly. I really do not want this company to go down though as competition is healthy.

I hope something decent happens with the Phenoms but yeah, so far it's not so good. Also the higher clocked models might have been pushed back with problems but I don't know if that was concrete or not.

MM not sure what you are saying, are you saying youd liek to go back to ATI? i dont understand this point of view. a lot of people say oo they would like tio have an amd cpu again. Why does it matter who makes it?

I've always been ATI (except 7600GT OC). Started of with a PentiumIII 450Mhz (fast CPU 8 years ago lol) but been with AMD since. I've only ever been tempted by the 8800 series and the Conroe which have not had more than a year and a half on the market. Before the Conroe and 8800 you couldn't pay me to use an Nvidia card or an Intel P4 CPU. 9800Pro was better than FX series, X800XTPE and Ultra were about neck and neck but I think Nvidia had worse image quality and scaled worse at higher resolutions, then it was the X1900XT (oc'd past XTX speeds) which was better than any 7 series card out (except the GX2) with still no HDR and AA plus much worse IQ and a high failure rate. So as you see Dave. I've not had anything to tempt me since the Conroe and 8800. I've always went with what I could afford as well try and get the best and before the 8800 series I preferred ATI for the reasons I stated above and the Conroe was only out July 24th (I think - might be completely wrong) which is only about 4 months before the 8800 card. I've already said above why I haven't upgraded yet but when I do I will be going Intel/Nvidia most likely. I will also tell people that the GT is a better card as I do not lie but will highlight the ATI cards good points too as I want competition to be healthy.