I currently run 1900X1200 Resolution on my 24in LCD. Im looking at building a new PC and wondering if SLI would be worth the money in my case. I will be running a Intel Core 2 Duo E6600 Conroe 2.4GHz OC'd to 3.1 with 2g of ram. Was looking at getting a 8800gts. I play alot of MMORPG and FPS games.
Would i better off going with 2x8800GTS 640mb in SLI? or a single 8800gts 640mb? or just spend less money on a SLI board and go with the 8800GTX?
I guess what im asking is what is my best bang for the buck solution?
Edit - removed the 8800gts 320mb card as it will not perform as well at the resolution i am running.
Unless you want to shell out big money for two GTXs in SLi, I'd say skip the SLi board and get a single GTS or GTX. The GTS should be able to handle just about anything right now. Maybe not Oblivion on the highest AA settings but for all intents and purposes it'd be a great gamer.
Thanks Jeff. I just heard anything with large resolution gets a big benefit from the SLI. Will the 8800GTS 640mb or the GTX allow me to run most games at 1900X1200 resolution with a great framerate? While i love my 24in lcd, it sucks its native res is 1900X1200. Any other setting just dont look near as crisp.
rule the 320 out entirely.. SLI or otherwise. At such a high res, your biggest problem is going to be onboard video memory.
Also, remember that SLI does *NOT* double your video memory, only the processing power. With this in mind, I would suggest the GTX, as I believe the highest video memory aperature would be your highest priority. Processing should be more than adequate with only one GTX (as opposed to superior processing power of 2 GTSs), but the memory will allow you to push the boundaries further, which at your resolution, you'd be doing.
Ideally for you, SLI GTXs would be the option, but that's quite an expensive option to consider.
Notice how the GTS 320 (especially overclocked) stays right in line with the the 640 GTS and GTX and lower resolutions, but at 2048x1536 and up it DRAMATICALLY decreases. This goes right in line with what I'm saying. The processing power is right up there with the higher end cards, but the memory aperature is it's chokepoint when it comes to resolutions, which is what you are worried about.
In truth, you'd be getting the GTX more for the memory than for the processing power of the card.
Why not get a SLI mobo (P5N32-E SLI) and a 8800 GTX now, and another 8800 GTX later when you have saved some more cash and the card is cheaper and the newer games are more demanding? That's my plan, at least, I hope it makes sense...
I don't think you really need the GTX, the GTS should play pretty much everything on max quality settings (but not full AA/AF). But if you can afford the GTX, it'd definitely give better performance. I wouldn't worry about overflowing 640mb of graphics memory, by the time you get there the processing power would almost certainly be handicapping it at that point too.
As for the SLi board for an upgrade later, it's a possibility but don't bet on the GTX dropping in price. The 7800GTX never did when the 7900 series came out, it just became outdated and expensive.
I've read somewhere that the 7950 GX2 didn't do well at all in SLI mode, and the 8950GX2 is expected to have the same problem. That is, if you want serious power you are better off with two 8900 GTX in SLI rather than two 8950 GX2. It's all guesswork, of course, maybe the 8950 GX2 won't have the problem. Anyway, can hardly wait to see it
As for the SLi board for an upgrade later, it's a possibility but don't bet on the GTX dropping in price. The 7800GTX never did when the 7900 series came out, it just became outdated and expensive.
That sucks... But good to know, thanks! I guess it all depends on ATI's R600 now. If it turns out to be horrible then yeah, there's no need for nVidia to drop its prices.
Well for all I know maybe it will drop in price, I certainly hope it does because I want one. I'm just saying, that didn't happen with the 7800 so I wouldn't count on it happening this time either.
just thought i'd add my tuppence worth as reference.
i have a crossfired system and a 24" dell. whilst alot of games are fine with it, some like oblivion with max settings can still result in pretty low(around 30's).
also some games like stalker at the moment do not support crossfire(not sure about sli) so buying a dual GPU setup doesn't always work.
IMO one gtx would be better than dual gts's.
JMO of course and i personally would wait for ATI to release their offerings.
ya that sounds like a good plan. Atleast in the future i have some room for growth. But, like my current system. By the time my video card is getting dated, so it my CPU and Ram, which equals a new motherboard in most cases.
r600 is predicted to hit in may... so the 8900 would still have a whole month *after* that to come out (even though they would probably release it right at the r600 drop). Either way, EVGA still makes excellent cards... so either you have an excellent card and you're forced to keep it.. or you have an excellent card and you can trade it in. Win win, really.
I did hear that there were rumors that they would extend their step up *past* the 90 days, until they actually *did* release a better version if you bought a gtx though...
Looking at this card it would only make sense if Sapphire sticks to its preliminary pricing schedule of $300-350. R600 is due to hit next month and Nvidia is planning the next range of cards between now and R600. The possibility of being able to hook up two cards in a "QuadFire" configuration would be cool. I hope Sapphire can get it working or even better, I hope that AMD would choose to help support it.
yes, but logic and history, which seeing as how long you have been part of these forums you should know a bit about, dictate that there is always a mid range launched before a next gen or refresh.
nvidia need to lauch a successful mid range to recoup their costs rather than launch a new high reange which will not get them as much money.
seriously. the author's meaning is clear to anyone who follows the news.
Personally, I think their midrange is already here with the advent of the 8800GTS 320. I'm calling the "range" mentioned in the article their new, top of the line products; to match ATI's top of the line products.
I currently run 1900X1200 Resolution on my 24in LCD. Im looking at building a new PC and wondering if SLI would be worth the money in my case. I will be running a Intel Core 2 Duo E6600 Conroe 2.4GHz OC'd to 3.1 with 2g of ram. Was looking at getting a 8800gts. I play alot of MMORPG and FPS games.
Would i better off going with 2x8800GTS 640mb in SLI? or a single 8800gts 640mb? or just spend less money on a SLI board and go with the 8800GTX?
I guess what im asking is what is my best bang for the buck solution?
Edit - removed the 8800gts 320mb card as it will not perform as well at the resolution i am running.
If you're not in a hurry I would wait till the R600 is out and see how Nvidia counters their prices. But if you're in a hurry, then get a single 8800 GTX. One excellent card is better than two good cards in SLI. Plus when the 8800 GTX goes down in price, you can always buy another one for SLI
if you have the $$$ go sli. if you are asking the question, this means that you are willing to take the plunge. just ask yourself: "is 40-50% more performance worth $550?"
if you can, wait. no one knws what will happen in the gpu world. but if you ask me, ati has been dominant since the 9700 came out. nvidia owned all since voodoo happened. long story short: if there is competition, let them duke it out. considering how bad the x1950xtx spanks the 7900gtx, i feel it imperitive to wait for the r600. and i bet you $1.000.000 the 8900 will come out soon after.
just find out which flagship is better. the 8800gtx or the r600. then you will know. other than that, watch some jessica biel movies to tide you over.
You are about to answer a thread that has been inactive for more than 6 months. If you still wish to proceed, please ensure that your posting is original and does not duplicate or overlap any prior responses to this thread.