Which would be better. To 9600gt's overclocked(from factory) or 1 9800gtx. The price out about the same.
im not sure on which res im going to run either 1680x 1050 or 1900x1200( leaning towards the latter for HD)
the Gx2 is 2 underclocked 8800 GTS. lol
While the 9600 GTs in SLI would be a good investment, the 9800 GTX is about the same and you can have an option opened for 9800 GTX SLI, which is better than 2 9600 GTs
well seeing as the when I had the 9600 GT in SLi it got a bit over 1 ultra, The 9800 GTX is a bit better than the Ultra so I just assumed its about the same
Maybe at low resolution a single card seems to have an advantage. I don't know. Every Benchmark I've seen has showed 2 9600GT's as little as several FPS above the 8800Ultra, or as high as a few FPS under the 9800GX2.
http://www.anandtech.com/video/sho [...] i=3266&p=4
yes but remember that the 9800 GTX is a bit faster than the Ultra, and its single, so the advantage is, when You get a second 1.
Fast? Yes unless it is memory intense and then Ultra wins.
Yes it is Single and there are deffinitly advantages.
Yes you can get a second one but the OP asked which is better, one GTS or 2 9600gt's
Technically I am looking it at the angle of which of the 2 "performs" better. Which one is better is up for debate.
The other thing to consider is SLI the technology. It doesn't help with every game. It also doesn't always work perfectly either, weird graphical problems, random lockups, etc. So you have to weigh all the facts. Sure 2 9600GT's may outperform one 9800GTX in some benchmarks, but is it going to bring along some headaches as well? The answer to the last part is "yes", because as we all know SLI (and for that matter CrossFire) isn't perfect.
For me the less hassle the better. Also as was mentioned already, you leave the option to go SLI at a later date. To me SLI only makes sense with two high end cards, it never makes sense with two mid-range cards that perform as well as one high-end card.
well if people aren't looking to improve their Video card and don't want to spend alot, they can get 2 cheap cards and make them a little better than 1 good card
SLI is very well optimized these days and alot of games support it, UT 3 , COD 4, HL2, Quake 4, QWET, Crysis, soo I don't think its fair to say that SLI doesn't help in Every game, when there are more games that support SLI than there are that don't.
I think I would lean toward the 9800GTX. I would be willing to bet the performance is extremely close. The 98 gives you the option of adding another one in a few months when they release the latest and greatest. My understanding is they are releasing a new card some time in late Q2. So you might be able to get another one on the cheap at that point. Although I have seen any numbers on 9800GTX SLI, I bet their pretty good.
SLI is very well optimized these days and alot of games support it, UT 3 , COD 4, HL2, Quake 4, QWET, Crysis, soo I don't think its fair to say that SLI doesn't help in Every game, when there are more games that support SLI than there are that don't.
I agree with this. I am very conservative with technology. I rather go with something solid or at least wait till the kinks are worked out. 2 years ago i wouldnt have gone SLI. Now I'd consider it. Granted I did get an 8800GTS over everything, mainly because it was a single card and I have a non SLI chipset.
Honestly I'd probably get a GTX over 2 9600GTs just because its a single card and you dont need much more than that. Actually id probably still get a GTS and overclock it like i did. Its cheaper and you get gtx performance.
Thanks for they opinions every one. Considering I'm not buying until july/august I'll see whats out then, and if that is too high, I'll probably go with one 9800gtx that way in another year i could get another one cheap for a early/mid lifespan boost.
well seeing as the when I had the 9600 GT in SLi it got a bit over 1 ultra, The 9800 GTX is a bit better than the Ultra so I just assumed its about the same
