Is Quad SLI worth it?

jimbonkers · 10 Apr 2006 at 01:32

I am think about getting quad SLI because i am going to buy a dell 30" and want to have games playing in full rez...

For this case is it worth it?

Arterion · 10 Apr 2006 at 01:42

I won't claim to be an expert on the subject, but I very much doubt there will be any games which could possibly utilise the power of four such GPUs in the near future, as very few make full use of the standard 2 as it is, even at the whopping res' available to larger monitors. You've also gotta consider that very few games will be coded to run at the resolutions you're talking about- I certainly can't think of a game which can run anywhere near 2560 x 1600.

BigDom · 10 Apr 2006 at 01:46

I'd have expected Dual X1900XT's to be more than enough.

jimbonkers · 10 Apr 2006 at 01:46

so why are companys even bothering selling quad SLI? if it isn't worth it?

BigDom · 10 Apr 2006 at 01:54

jimbonkers said:
so why are companys even bothering selling quad SLI? if it isn't worth it?

There's a certain Gimic factor. Plus they came out before the X1900 and 7900.

Arterion · 10 Apr 2006 at 01:56

jimbonkers said:
so why are companys even bothering selling quad SLI? if it isn't worth it?

They're looking to the [what they think is the near] future. Future proofing is generally considered to be a good idea, but I can't help but find a fundamental flaw in making quad-SLi a reality with the current GPU's available. In the time it takes for any game to come even close to utilising that much power, we will probably be into a whole new generation of graphics hardware- there will be new technologies which we will be wanting on our cards somewhere down the line making the current ideas defunct. Couple this with the fact that no game or forseeable future game will require the kind of juice which quad-SLi will yield (2Gb of dedicated video ram!), I think it's nothing more than going way over the top just because they can- bit of a gimic really. Benchmarkers may find a use for it, but I dont realistically see it being a necessary thing.

thefranklin · 10 Apr 2006 at 02:41

can't you force some games to run at different resolutions? In Oblivion you can run any resolution that the desktop runs, so technically you could run it at 2560*1600. I am not too sure that 2 x1900's could run that.

Traducer · 10 Apr 2006 at 02:55

Arterion said:
They're looking to the [what they think is the near] future. Future proofing is generally considered to be a good idea, but I can't help but find a fundamental flaw in making quad-SLi a reality with the current GPU's available. In the time it takes for any game to come even close to utilising that much power, we will probably be into a whole new generation of graphics hardware- there will be new technologies which we will be wanting on our cards somewhere down the line making the current ideas defunct. Couple this with the fact that no game or forseeable future game will require the kind of juice which quad-SLi will yield (2Gb of dedicated video ram!), I think it's nothing more than going way over the top just because they can- bit of a gimic really. Benchmarkers may find a use for it, but I dont realistically see it being a necessary thing.

Well said mate.

Zefan · 10 Apr 2006 at 02:59

thefranklin said:
can't you force some games to run at different resolutions? In Oblivion you can run any resolution that the desktop runs, so technically you could run it at 2560*1600. I am not too sure that 2 x1900's could run that.

Only if you have an ancient CRT or a TFT bigger than I've ever seen. Most people with quad SLI will have a 20"+ TFT hence uber huge massive resolutions wont be possible. You'd need above 24" to get that sort of res. There really is no point in quad sli at the moment, apart from keeping your room very warm.

breadturbo · 10 Apr 2006 at 04:12

hm, wonder if it be cheaper than running my central heating? hehe

mrthingyx · 10 Apr 2006 at 09:16

jimbonkers said:
so why are companys even bothering selling quad SLI? if it isn't worth it?

To make people buy the stuff. You didn't really think companies sold stuff because it wants to offer sensible solutions?

harris1986 · 10 Apr 2006 at 09:27

correct me if i'm wrong but at the minute quad sli can only be bought through stupidly expensive systems anyways can it not? i configured one on another online e-tailor but set everything else to cheapest possible solution (other than the gfx card) and it still came out well over £2000

** VALUE FOR MONEY? i think not

Arterion · 10 Apr 2006 at 10:40

Traducer said:
Well said mate.

Thanks

mrthingyx said:
To make people buy the stuff. You didn't really think companies sold stuff because it wants to offer sensible solutions?

Yeah, I think you're dead right here. Ironic that, when it comes to CPU's, most computer enthusiasts know that a bigger number isnt necessarily the best performer, but in the case of GPU's a lot of people seem to think this IS the case.

Arterion · 10 Apr 2006 at 12:12

I just thought, why isnt this topic in the Graphics Card forum?!

bbreezeuk · 10 Apr 2006 at 15:17

yeah why isnt it in graphics card forum