Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

SLI with Different cards?

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
January 26, 2008 10:10:06 PM

I purchased in early November an EVGA Nvidia 8800 GTS KO ACS(320) because it had higher clock speeds then the Standard GTS or even the OC'ed GTS i was looking at. I figured I would SLI eventually, unfortunatly it has become very hard to track down this specific card, and at the price I can find it for (400$) I could easily get a larger(640 meg)
Would SLI even work with two cards running different sized memory appetures, and at different clock speeds? Do they have to be exactly Identical cards. wondering if anyone had any experience with this.

More about : sli cards

a b Î Nvidia
January 26, 2008 10:26:33 PM

AFAIK it should work. The faster card would work at the lower clock of the other one, and each card would use 320MB.

Read about it on nVidia's Web page, that's where I got this info some months ago.
January 26, 2008 11:27:45 PM

you would be best off just getting an 8800gt 512. just my opinion. I upgraded from a 320mb gts to a 512gt and there is a huge jump in performance.

edit: plus adding another gts would draw a lot more power than a single 8800gt 512mb. and you would see minimal gains from sli'd gts 320
Related resources
January 27, 2008 12:44:16 AM

"you would be best off just getting an 8800gt 512. just my opinion. I upgraded from a 320mb gts to a 512gt and there is a huge jump in"

These are in the 300$ price range obviously, but dual 8800GTS has to beat single 8800GT. I have the power with very stable 12v rails. Maybe I will stick with the single GTS and just poor all my money into x38 Chipset and 3ghz Quad core intel chip.
January 27, 2008 12:57:40 AM

nope, sli doesnt scale well at lower resolutions. 1 8800gt 512 at 1280x1024 will beat 2 8800gts 320 at 1280x1024. benchmarks speak for themselves.
January 27, 2008 1:01:04 AM

Thanks Eagles!
January 27, 2008 1:02:58 AM

1 8800gt 512 vs 1 8800gts 320 in bf2142 1280x1024

http://www23.tomshardware.com/graphics_2007.html?modelx...

1 8800gt 512 vs 2 8800gts 320 vs 2 8800gts 640 in bf2142 1280x1024

8800gt 512 = 92

8800gts 320 = 115

8800gts 640 = 108

sorry but sli gts not worth the money or the power consumption. just my opinion.
January 27, 2008 1:03:53 AM

no problem. oh and btw, sli gt 512 beat sli 8800 ultras :D 
January 27, 2008 1:11:35 AM

but then again, that quad core would be nice...im not saying the gts 320 is a bad card, just not worth sli. hmm upgrading to quad core would be nice but would cost more than 400.
January 27, 2008 4:57:54 AM

Not gonna do Quad Core, Still thinking alone the lines of the E8400 in the next few weeks.
January 27, 2008 3:39:51 PM

eagles4538 09 was right, but with the wrong card. Instead of an 8800 GT get the new 8800 GTS G92 512mb edition, it crushes the GT, and performs neck and neck with a GTX at lower res, and slightly worse at higher. At about 30 bucks more you can get a great card that murders 2 8800 GTS 320mbs and an 8800 GT.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
a b Î Nvidia
January 27, 2008 3:50:48 PM

eagles453809 said:
no problem. oh and btw, sli gt 512 beat sli 8800 ultras :D 

wrong, 8800ULTRA > 8800GTX > 8800GTS 512 > 8800GT 512
January 27, 2008 3:58:21 PM

Maziar said:
wrong, 8800ULTRA > 8800GTX > 8800GTS 512 > 8800GT 512


Wrong.

You might want to justify that with Benchmarks, considering the GTS beats the GTX and Ultra in some.
January 27, 2008 4:22:49 PM

cnumartyr said:
Wrong.

You might want to justify that with Benchmarks, considering the GTS beats the GTX and Ultra in some.

Actuall the 8800GTX is better than the 8800GTS 512MB.

Here's a stock 8800GTX vs. an OC'ed 8800GTS 512MB:
http://www.hardocp.com/article.html?art=MTQzMSw4LCxoZW5...

Quote:
NVIDIA’s new 65nm GeForce 8800 GTS 512MB retakes the GTS crown and spaces it properly between the 65nm 8800 GT and 90nm GTX in terms of retail marketing. The GeForce 8800 GT delivers a great gaming experience at its price range, but the GeForce 8800 GTX and Ultra are still the fastest cards on the block at high resolutions and of course you will still pay for that. The new GTS does not offer a better gaming experience than you can already get on the year old GeForce 8800 GTX.


Which means...

Quote:
If you have a GeForce 8800 GTX or Ultra already, you still have the cream of the crop. No single-GPU video card has yet beaten the GTX or Ultra for gaming performance.


But then again, the 8800GTS 512MB OCs higher so...
January 27, 2008 4:26:59 PM

There are even some benches in that one that the GTS wins!
January 27, 2008 4:35:10 PM

cnumartyr said:
There are even some benches in that one that the GTS wins!

By 1-2fps? That's within marginal error. Also looks at the settings carefully. HardOCP doesn't do apples to apples test.
a b Î Nvidia
January 27, 2008 8:29:48 PM

Guys, does it really matter? Yeah, the GTX wins in most benchmarks over the GTS G92, but considering it's $200 more and how close the two cards are, it's kind of silly to buy a GTX (or Ultra) now IMO.

The only possible reason to buy a GTX or Ultra these days is if you get a 780i board and do Triple-SLI. The GTS G92 doesn't support that.
January 27, 2008 8:43:14 PM

aevm said:
Guys, does it really matter? Yeah, the GTX wins in most benchmarks over the GTS G92, but considering it's $200 more and how close the two cards are, it's kind of silly to buy a GTX (or Ultra) now IMO.

The only possible reason to buy a GTX or Ultra these days is if you get a 780i board and do Triple-SLI. The GTS G92 doesn't support that.

And also the 8800GTS 512MB OCs higher, so it really isn't worth getting the 8800GTX. However, if you can find a good deal on it...
January 27, 2008 9:17:09 PM

im happy with my gt so...
!