Note that I do realize that there have already been similar posts, none of which answered the fallowing question. One notably similar to be found here: http://forumz.tomshardware.com/har [...] 85825.html
 
The situation:
I am getting a Matrox Tripplehead2Go
       all you really need to know is that this device takes one vga output and fools the computer into thinking that three of your monitors are actually one. The soul purpose of this is of course surround gaming. This gives an insain resolution of 3840x1024.
   On a side note, has anybody gotten a Dualhead2Go to span 3 monitors and utilize the Matrox surround gaming features? This option would cost $100 less should somebody figure it out.  
 
So the problem is that not only do I feel my X800pro does not have the balls to handle that resolution, but also ATI has tremendously large issues with the tripplehead2Go making it a very dire option.  
 
Stipulations:
1) motherboards are not to be an issue as you can buy either option at whatever price your heart desires. We are only considering graphics cards here.  
2) price of graphics card(s) not to total more than $300
3) calling somebody stupid only diminishes your credibility as you suddenly bear a resemblance to a child. So don’t do it.  
4) I don’t want to hear any analogies about anybody buying a Porsche because they think its faster than everything else. Case in point, I paid 4,500 for my bike and it just so happens to smoke the expensive Porsche. Point being, there is always a bargain out there. The more something costs usually has little to do with overall performance/satisfaction. I’m not looking to show off my system here. I simply want to better enjoy my gaming experience with the resources I have available to me.
 
The question:
2 X (7600GS 256mb @ 400mhz 12pipes @ $110)      = 512mb 24pipes $220
            or
2 X (7600GS 512mb @ 400mhz 12pipes @ $150)      = 1GB 24pipes $300
            or
1 X (7900GT 256mb @ ~500mhz 24pipes @ ~$275) = 256mb 24pipes w/hella-faster memory
 
 
Things to consider:
THE RESOLUTION, 3840x1024:
   Though it can be argued else wise, my overall impression is that the 7900 does have more overall GPU power.
   However, this massive resolution brings a new case to point, It obviously requires more memory. Though the 7900 has faster memory, it does seriously lack in quantity.  
   I HATE it when I have to turn eye candy off!
   I will be playing both old and new games. Good examples are: Serious Sam Second Encounter requires little to no processing power; Serious Sam 2 runs full settings on current system but could use the extra power for the new; same with Farcry; Oblivion runs great with all eye candy turned on but only 2xAF, it could obviously use the extra power; Fear….well..lets just say it could use a supercomputer.  
   7600GT and 7900GTX cost too much, not an option.  
 
Current system includes:
   64 3000+ venice stock 1.8Ghz but running at 2.7, I don’t consider processor to be the bottleneck just yet. Though the x2 is awful tempting, it’s out of my price range.  
   1GB DDR running at 600Mhz, will probably double it soon.

Never go with SLI unless you can get two high-end cards such as two 7900GTs.  Single 7900 will perform better than two 7600s.

do you think 256mb is enough memory for 3 screens?

Yea, I wouldn't worry about it.  Ever thought about a X1800XT?

the x1800xt can't run high resolutions like that, for some reason ATi hasn't allowed for it or implemented it, not sure why tho, while the Geforce's can run to ultra high resolutions

Get the two 7600 GTs or a single 7900 GTX. If you can afford it, the GTX would be the best option, but it'll be about $200 more. At that high a resolution, you'll need as much video RAM as possible, and the 7900 GT just can't provide it unless there were two of them. That would be the ideal SLI scenario.
 
At normal resolutions, the 7900 GT would be a better option than two 7600 GTs.

In my opinion you should get the best single GPU you can before considering SLi. It'll always pay dividends.
 
That 7900 will do just fine, and the extra investment in the 7600s will only impede performance.

Actually though, in this situation the 7600GTs should outperform the 7900GT.

I realize that I wrote a book, but I do encourage everyone to read the whole thing before posting.  
 
I can't use an ATI because of the lack of support
I can't afford two 7600GT's or 7900gtx, got to draw the line somewhere
Also notice that the 7600GS sli setup costs considerably less than the 7900gt
 
I do believe that the 7900GT does in fact have more processing power.
So “probably” the real question is weather or not 256 video memory is enough, or will 512 to 1G split between two cards at a slower memory speed be the overall advantage?
 
So far I’ve seen some great advise, lets keep it coming

Ok, I only voted, didn't reply because I didn't like your stipulations, but at this point in time all bets are off since you follow down the same path and act equally pedantic about the reading.
 
Hey, st00pid smartguy, read about SLi first before you chose, just like you tell them to read before posting! That should be easy for 'somesmartguy' about to spend some money.    
 
SLi does not add the memory it duplicates the information into each buffer. So you still only have 256MB and 512MB on low powered card, not 512 and 1GB.
 
The single GF7900GT is at worst equal to the 2 GF7600GSs in most SLi-friendly situations, and in the 'most case' scenario is better with less hassle. 2 7600GTs might be worth considering, but not GSs.
 
Also to everyone else, this Matrox ATi issue is well known, and while a software not a hardware limitation, will likely not change until they play nice. Remember ATi and Matrox are competitors. nV's existing support is legacy support for stereoscopic display in the workstation market which is no longer even being widely implemented IIRC; so I wonder if even they would've added it if it weren't already there.

SLI works this way:
If you have 2x 7600GS with 256Mb, then you´ll get 2x core-speed but ONLY 256Mb grahpics memory... The it will only copy the same data into the too cards. You will not get 512Mb...
 
The 7900GT is faster than the 7800GTX and as you can see in charts the 7800GTX smashes down ATI X1800XT... So don´t buy any X1800xx cards, maybe X1900xx cards but I don´t know if they can handle huge resolutions...
 
The best for you would be 2x 7900GT in SLI or one 7900GT.

Actually, the X1800 XT outperforms the 7900GT in shader intense titles and also usually performs better with antialiasing and higher resolutions.

 
what are you smoking, the x1800xt is a better card than the 7800gtx, lol. in any case, go for the 7900gt... i guess. or save for the gtx.

LOL you guys are funny!
 
I knew somebody would break out the name calling at one point so I guess I’ll let it slide.  
 
I have definitely read up on my sli. One of the better articles can be found here: http://www.pcmech.com/show/internal/817/1/
 
I do not claim to know it all but it is my current understanding that the purple ape is only half right. There are two rendering methods that nVidia uses in their SLI configurations. The first is called Split Frame Rendering (SFR). The second SLI rendering method is called Alternate Frame Rendering (AFR). By default, nVidia likes to use AFR. I don’t like the sound of AFR do to the latency between mouse and screen amongst a certain other reason    and plan to use a hack to force SFR. I’ll let the purple monkey read that article to figure out for himself which one better utilizes the memory pool. With an attitude like that it sounds like he could use all the enlightenment he can get.  
 
I would also like to point out the reason for the use of the screen name somesmartguy. It is merely a simple tool that I use to weed out the hard headed stuckups. Way to be that guy purple ape   . I am a senior triple majoring in IST, Psych, and Bus. Sometimes I like to have some fun with it so try not to take it too personal.

Dude, noones gonna help you if your such an @ss.
 
And seeing as you appear to know what to do in the first place, don't bother asking for help.

Actually I’m leaning towards the 7900, I was just hoping somebody had some xp in this area. Opinions are always welcome as long as they come from legitimate sources. When somebody calls me stupid I’m not gonna just sit there and twiddle my pinkies.

Edited to fix quotes

 
SFR and AFR, ooooh you were able to read tha cronyms, step up from original. Reality is you still need to do more research, heck stop reading crap sites like that first of all (that site is like reading Vogue to learn how to fix a car). Well the radio works!    
 
Just read nV's on developer material or even a reputable site, and learn how the buffer stores axact copies. People have told you this already in this thread but still you ignore. Whatever, I knew that the moniker fit.
 
 

 
Seriously dude, come see me when your references aren't provided by Sesame Street and the number 0.
 

 
Irony, like Tiny / Little John?
Vanity?
 

 
Be better if your posts were able to do that, picking that nickname from the start shows you're a tool from the time you register.
 

 
Senior? OOhh Ahhh!  
 
I'm sure that impresses someone, but not me. It simply show that your school has low standards. *yawn*
 

 
And I like to have fun with the feckless n00bs, try not taking it personal either.  
 

 
Actually that was 'st00pid' , you could at least get that right!  Maybe READ before posting?  

 
Senior? OOhh Ahhh!  
 
I'm sure that impresses someone, but not me. It simply show that your school has low standards. *yawn*
   

 
what are you smoking, the x1800xt is a better card than the 7800gtx, lol. in any case, go for the 7900gt... i guess. or save for the gtx.
 
http://www23.tomshardware.com/graphics.html
Sorry looked at GTX SLI...
But the 7800GT SLI can handle the same as the X1800XT OCed, then the 7900GT in SLI would outperfom the X1800XT like hell...