pcie 3.0 x8 vs x16 1080ti sli

The Ti is about 35% faster than it's predecessor I wouldn't think so but until we have 144 Hz 4k monitors we wont be able to see just how big a deal SLI may or may not be. Until it's actually put on a test bed and tested, we can only speculate

https://us.hardware.info/reviews/7270/22/nvidia-geforce-gtx-1080-ti-review-incl-sli-faster-card-for-the-same-price-gtx-1080-ti-slinperformance-per-game

look around for titan XP benchmarks in sli


they are basically the same as a 1080 ti



from me just looking around a bit seems performance loss in 8x/8x mobos on titan xp sli results in 10 - 30 % loss when compared to 16x/16x solutions

look around for titan XP benchmarks in sli


they are basically the same as a 1080 ti



from me just looking around a bit seems performance loss in 8x/8x mobos on titan xp sli results in 10 - 30 % loss when compared to 16x/16x solutions

1. There is always an "overhead" associated with SLI, some of that due to the drop to x8 x8. This small impact is for the most part offset and then some by the additional scaling as is clear;y shown in the provided link.

2. On the flip side however, w/ OP at 1440p, SLI isn't looking too good right now. TPUs scaling across their 16+ game test suite showed just 18% at 1080p and 33% at 1440p. Only 2160p showed an increase that just passed 50%. So while there are significant gains to be had at 4k, ... more at 4k 144 hz w/ next months monitors as they enable the user to use ULMB, it's hard to justify the cost investment for 33%.


Why the sudden drop off in SLI performance after stellar performance with 6xx thru 9xx series ? Could be many things.

a) Generation to generation, we saw a 50% improvement in GFX card performance this time.... we haven't really seen a tenth of that with RAM or CPUs since Sandy Bridge in 2011.

b) Driver developers are saddled with tweaking drivers for new APIs (DX12, Vulcan), new games, and SLI, which is now only supported on 3 cards, reduces the3 % of cards out there with option to use the technology.

c) Improving SLI performance is against nVidia's financial interests. They make more money from selling a top tier card than they do from selling a pair of 1070s. With the x70s showing 70% average and > 95% scaling in the tough games, twp x70s was a less expensive option for consumers and was casting nVidia cash. However such was necessary as they had to deal with 2 AMD cards in CF being a netter option than the top 1080 / 1080 Ti so they had to do well here. With no competition from AMD at this point in time, putting time and money into improved SLI performance was doubly counterproductive as the only cards subject to suffer decreased sales was the 1080 and 10890 Ti. So it's not unreasonable to speculate that until AMD releases the next gen cards, and assuming they do provide competition in this space, nVidia has little incentive to improve things here.[/quotemsgi

I was waiting for YOUR reply....THANKS... I am going with one 1080ti (overclocked to hell and back)under water with the custom loop I am designing . I will only SLI these cards later down the line in if sell my PG278Q 1440p (not likely on this build) in favor of a 4k - IPS- 2-5ms -120mhz -35" display(LOL)... For now this path will allow me to work on my custom loop and overclocking skills. if there is a resurgence of SLI technology or a newer card with adequate improvements I will already be in position...

besides this I will upgrade this mobo, cpu, and ram before two years anyway...pcei 4.0 and ddr5 are around the corner..


THANK YOU FOR HELPING ME MAKE THS DECISION YOU HAVE HELPED ME ALOT THROUGH THE YEARS!!!!!!!!

1. There is always an "overhead" associated with SLI, some of that due to the drop to x8 x8. This small impact is for the most part offset and then some by the additional scaling as is clear;y shown in the provided link.

2. On the flip side however, w/ OP at 1440p, SLI isn't looking too good right now. TPUs scaling across their 16+ game test suite showed just 18% at 1080p and 33% at 1440p. Only 2160p showed an increase that just passed 50%. So while there are significant gains to be had at 4k, ... more at 4k 144 hz w/ next months monitors as they enable the user to use ULMB, it's hard to justify the cost investment for 33%.


Why the sudden drop off in SLI performance after stellar performance with 6xx thru 9xx series ? Could be many things.

a) Generation to generation, we saw a 50% improvement in GFX card performance this time.... we haven't really seen a tenth of that with RAM or CPUs since Sandy Bridge in 2011.

b) Driver developers are saddled with tweaking drivers for new APIs (DX12, Vulcan), new games, and SLI, which is now only supported on 3 cards, reduces the3 % of cards out there with option to use the technology.

c) Improving SLI performance is against nVidia's financial interests. They make more money from selling a top tier card than they do from selling a pair of 1070s. With the x70s showing 70% average and > 95% scaling in the tough games, twp x70s was a less expensive option for consumers and was casting nVidia cash. However such was necessary as they had to deal with 2 AMD cards in CF being a netter option than the top 1080 / 1080 Ti so they had to do well here. With no competition from AMD at this point in time, putting time and money into improved SLI performance was doubly counterproductive as the only cards subject to suffer decreased sales was the 1080 and 10890 Ti. So it's not unreasonable to speculate that until AMD releases the next gen cards, and assuming they do provide competition in this space, nVidia has little incentive to improve things here.