Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Two 6600s in SLI or one ~$200 card??

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
September 2, 2006 5:05:49 AM

Since I can get 6600s for $60, which would have better game play: two 6600s or one ~$200 card? I have 7 PCs on my home network so I have to be real careful of cost and upgrade path.

Thanks!

More about : 6600s sli 200 card

a b U Graphics card
September 2, 2006 5:30:00 AM

One $200 X1800XT would be far better than two 6600's.
a c 164 U Graphics card
September 2, 2006 5:35:38 AM

Check both out on the interactive charts on this website. The x1800xt spanks the 6600GTs in SLI, its often not even close. (I did find some questionable results, many times a single 6600GT was as fast as the SLI setup. I've seen some other questionable results using those charts. Anyone else notice this?)
Related resources
September 2, 2006 1:12:25 PM

Single card like 7900GT/X1800XT (both around $200) will totally kill two 6600s. Plus, you probably won't notice a difference if you add another crap-card.
September 2, 2006 2:49:23 PM

Thats exactly why I'm asking.... I borrowed another 6600 and ran it with mine in SLI and there was a significant difference. I've not seen comparisons done between two lowend cards in SLI and a middle level card. Anyone know where I can find such a review?

AM2 3500
MSI w/ 1gig
a c 164 U Graphics card
September 2, 2006 4:47:27 PM

Go back and read Msg 3, I told you where to find the review.
September 3, 2006 5:38:35 AM

I review research in real life and I'm telling you that the way the interactive comparisons are done you can't be sure you're getting a fair comparison.

I wanted to hear from someone who had some experience, instead I get an "opinion" based on questionable material you read.

In fact, with two 6600, I was able to turn on 4xAA with bloom and maintain mid 50 frame rates in Oblivion. Where as with just one 6600 I had to turn off AA and bloom to keep the frame rate up.

...nuff said here. End of thread.....
a b U Graphics card
September 3, 2006 6:34:08 AM

if you want 2 6600s go for it. you can always split them up later

i say this because you mentioned you have more pc,s
in your home

also i have experience in this <sli thing>
2 68gts vs. 1 vs. a 76gt vs. x800xl and so on

not just something i read

sli with 6 series cards=heat
a lot

sli with 76gt,s equals much less heat
September 3, 2006 12:18:06 PM

Why SLI with 7600GTs in the first place?
September 3, 2006 12:52:24 PM

How about two 7300 GT in SLI? How would they perform compared to a single 7900 GT?

TIA
September 3, 2006 1:21:13 PM

badly. the 7900gt is a much better card than two card.

low range SLi is a myth. its not the best idea and often a single more powerful card is MUCH better.
a b U Graphics card
September 3, 2006 1:24:21 PM

Everyone seems to hope they can stumble onto a magic SLI price/performance combination of a pair of lesser cards in SLI to outperform/equal a 7900GT...

To sum things up...

Ain't happenin'!
September 3, 2006 1:44:37 PM

single ~$200 card will be better for now and for future. you can think about sli with your single card for next upgrade.
September 3, 2006 1:46:58 PM

one sub $200 card would do you much better than 2 6600's the 6600 has older technology and sli isnt very reliable when it comes to performance. Sure you will get better performance but 2 6600's in sli will be raped by one 7600gt or one 1600xt
September 3, 2006 2:47:49 PM

so you're saying that what they do at Toms is "questionable" and "oppinionated"? It looks to me like they use almost the exact same system for every card out there, only changing when they need to do things like crossfire if they were using a non crossfire board.

But if you want to buy two 6600s and run them in SLI, you can go right ahead, it's just less powerful than a single 7600, x800 or 1800gt.
a b U Graphics card
September 3, 2006 3:17:29 PM

i would rather have 2 76gts than the 2 toasterovens<68gts>
that i have now. lol.
September 3, 2006 3:40:25 PM

Quote:
How about two 7300 GT in SLI? How would they perform compared to a single 7900 GT?

TIA


rofl
September 3, 2006 3:52:09 PM

People need to understand what SLI is about...

SLI should only be considered an option if you find yourself in the following situations:

1. Say you bought a 7900GT 5 months ago. After 1.5 years you find it not performing as well as it used to with the new games that are coming out. In this case, you may want to consider buying another 7900GT (which should be very cheap in 1.5 years) and SLI for a performance increase.

2. But the situation where I find SLI more 'useful' is when you are capable of spending over $500 on just video cards and you like playing at high resolutions with AA and AF turned on. If you want to SLI, make SURE you pick two of the high end cards. At this time it'd be 7900GT and everything above.
Other SLI setups like 2x 7600GT are easily outperformed (or matched) by 1x 7900GT. Not to mention SLI also requires a better PSU and it consumes more power than single card solutions.


What I'm trying to say is:

You should only consider SLI if you are willing to spend a lot of money just on graphic cards and 'must' play on the highest possible resolution.
a b U Graphics card
September 3, 2006 4:19:42 PM

yes i agree, i purchsed a 68gt a year or so ago for 300$
about the time the 78gts come out. so i thought cool the
68gts will drop in price not.
so found another 68gt from a <thg> forum member for 145$
i just wanted sli. but all i got was an extra space heater. :) 

fatcat said he could get the 6600s for 60$ and he said he had 7 pcs in
his home. so that seems like a good deal the 6600s are older
but still a decent card.

i have taken one of my 68gts out and it is currently setting on my desk
i have 2 arctic coolers for them one is on the 68gt in my comp
and the other i have not installed as it will not fit the bottom slot
i have a new cheap single pci-e mobo and am going to use it
for the kids.

i wanted to try sli on my32inch hdtv at 1920x180 resolution
but could not get the 68gts in sli to work correctly
what i mean is i cant get my desktop to fit cant see the start menu
and only half of the icons.

as for playing on my 19 dell monitor at 1028x768 with sli
there is no noticable diff.
i can turn the settings up more but they are already set high
with just one card anyway.

i play cod2,fear,bf2,oblivion,m.s.flightsim
fear was qiute jerky and slow with one card until i updated
from patch 1.o to 1.5 and after that it played fast and smooth
it was also brighter.
it was a bigger dif than going from 1 gig to 2 gigs of memory.
September 3, 2006 4:37:12 PM

I concur. For 99+% of users, the single card solution is best from many perspectives;

1) Cost / Performance
2) Power Consumption with resulting Heat & Noise
3) Driver Maturity & Stability resulting in erratic performance.

Tom's reviewers appear to have incountered issue #3 above when they produced their summer update of the SLI VGA charts. They appear to have many SLI platforms running in single card mode. If professional reviewers fall victim to this issue, John Q User is likely to as well.

SLI is appropriate for a select few with very specific requirnments & high quality in-house technical expertise to insure appropriate operational deployment.
September 3, 2006 5:45:07 PM

Not to pick on anybody, but I'm just going to use Vile's SLI statement as my reference.

SLI/XF imo, shouldnt be intended as an upgrade path.

Vile, your post was saying to increase performance a year & 1/2 down the road. The problem with the GPU market is that things are in constant shift. So by the time you get to purchase that 2nd card for SLI...there's a more cost effective and better performing single GPU solution by the time.

SLI /XF is meant to be purchased within a short span of time, for high resolutions and smoothest possible play.

I personally would never consider it an upgrade path due to the example I just gave. It's either instant Multi GPU or bust, because look how far we've come in the past 2 year. In 2004 it was X850/6800U. Now its X1950/7950. Idk about you, but I'd much rather have a single X1900XT in comparison to XF X850' or SLI 6800U's...

I'm not saying Multi-GPU solutions arent worth it. Hell, I'd love to play Oblivion @ 1600x1200 w/ XF X1950's.... My next (BIG) purchase will most likely be QC and XF R600's....but in all respects, its never a good idea to have a considerable amount of time pass in that type of situation.
a b U Graphics card
September 3, 2006 6:32:39 PM

another thing i just remembered
after i went sli my sys slowed down
overall i mean, from start up to loading games or whatever.
September 3, 2006 6:45:38 PM

Well, driver overhead probably took up some of your CPU utilization and memory - nothing out of the ordinary.
a b U Graphics card
September 3, 2006 6:50:37 PM

thats what i figured.
it raised my temps but i didnt think it was due to that

it was definatly noticable as i have went back to one card
its cooler and plays games the same.
a c 164 U Graphics card
September 3, 2006 7:01:48 PM

Guys, your missing something here.

Quote:
In fact, with two 6600, I was able to turn on 4xAA with bloom and maintain mid 50 frame rates in Oblivion. Where as with just one 6600 I had to turn off AA and bloom to keep the frame rate up.

...nuff said here. End of thread.....


He already has the two 6600s, he's only trying to justify his choice/mistake. He was hoping we would all think about how smart he was, and when confronted with "questionable" benchmarks, he wants to close the thread instead of doing more digging. The choice has already been made, end of thread.
September 3, 2006 7:31:27 PM

Quote:
Since I can get 6600s for $60, which would have better game play: two 6600s or one ~$200 card? I have 7 PCs on my home network so I have to be real careful of cost and upgrade path.

Thanks!


Get a single x1800xt or a single 7900gt. Would wipe the floor with 2x6600. Hell it would wipe the floor with 2 x 7600gs/gt!
September 3, 2006 7:53:59 PM

Quote:

Vile, your post was saying to increase performance a year & 1/2 down the road. The problem with the GPU market is that things are in constant shift. So by the time you get to purchase that 2nd card for SLI...there's a more cost effective and better performing single GPU solution by the time.

SLI /XF is meant to be purchased within a short span of time, for high resolutions and smoothest possible play.


I know what you're saying. That's why I said in the end :

Quote:
You should only consider SLI if you are willing to spend a lot of money just on graphic cards and 'must' play on the highest possible resolution.


What I meant to say before, about adding another card for SLI later on is for people on a budget or for those who can't easily find new video cards for sale. Where I live for example, you can't find the 7900GT anywhere. You can find the 7900GTX tho, but priced at $800 lol.

Obviously the best way to go SLI is buying 2 high end graphic cards at once and not use SLI as an upgrade path, as you mentioned.
September 3, 2006 9:37:01 PM

Quote:
Guys, your missing something here.

In fact, with two 6600, I was able to turn on 4xAA with bloom and maintain mid 50 frame rates in Oblivion. Where as with just one 6600 I had to turn off AA and bloom to keep the frame rate up.

...nuff said here. End of thread.....


He already has the two 6600s, he's only trying to justify his choice/mistake. He was hoping we would all think about how smart he was, and when confronted with "questionable" benchmarks, he wants to close the thread instead of doing more digging. The choice has already been made, end of thread.

Word.
!