Being a college student, my funds are quite limited (~$1000). At first I was looking into a definite SLI-build but realized that two GPUs would almost set me back half of my fund. Of course, my goal is a gaming system.
So I have three options (from least to most expensive):
A - Build a non-SLI, non-SLI upgradeable system.
Cheapest, standard budget gaming system. Not neccessarily "worse" than SLI systems.
B - Build a non-SLI, SLI-upgradeable system.
My preferred option so far. I am able to build an SLI-capable base (certified mobo, single gpu for now, etc.) with the money i have now and leave room for upgrade to SLI at a later, more suitable time.
C - Build a SLI system.
Most expensive, would need to accumulate more cash later. Upgrades would be expensive as both GPUs as well as RAM and CPU would preferably need to be replaced/added.
The fundamental question is this:
Is it too early to switch over to dual GPU processing (SLI/Crossfire) when taking into account price versus significant and noticeable performance gain?
So I have three options (from least to most expensive):
A - Build a non-SLI, non-SLI upgradeable system.
Cheapest, standard budget gaming system. Not neccessarily "worse" than SLI systems.
B - Build a non-SLI, SLI-upgradeable system.
My preferred option so far. I am able to build an SLI-capable base (certified mobo, single gpu for now, etc.) with the money i have now and leave room for upgrade to SLI at a later, more suitable time.
C - Build a SLI system.
Most expensive, would need to accumulate more cash later. Upgrades would be expensive as both GPUs as well as RAM and CPU would preferably need to be replaced/added.
The fundamental question is this:
Is it too early to switch over to dual GPU processing (SLI/Crossfire) when taking into account price versus significant and noticeable performance gain?