Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

9800GTX vs 2 x 9600GTX SLI

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
May 11, 2008 10:05:24 AM

Hi,

I'm getting a new machine at the moment, and am trying to get the most performance for my money graphics-wise. The decision I'm stuck on is whether to get the GeForce 512MB 9800GTX or to get two 512MB 9600GTXs and run them in SLI.

Has there been any performance tests running two of one against one of the other? The price difference between the two configurations is negligible, so if there's a bit performance benefit to either then I'd like to exploit it.

Thanks for your help. :-)

(other machine specs, in case they're relevant...

Intel® Core™ 2 Quad Q9450 Quad Core Processor(2.66GHz,12MB Cache,1333MHz)
PCI-Express Mainboard - SLi nForce 750i SLi - Intel Core2Duo/Quad Core - ATX
Vista Home Premium
4GB DDR2 800MHz Memory (2x 2GB)

In the first instance I want to be able to run Assassin's Creed looking all gorgeous.)

More about : 9800gtx 9600gtx sli

May 11, 2008 10:54:19 AM

First of all, there are no 9600GTX..
Then, If i were you I'd choose ONE powerful card rather than 2 adding up.
Then, I'd like you to wait for the 4800s and the 9900s
May 11, 2008 11:15:10 AM

"First of all, there are no 9600GTX.. "

Aha, yes - my fault getting the name wrong.

I don't know how far off the 4800s and 9900s are, but I got back from a trip away to find my main PC's motherboard had burned out, so I'm kinda in need of buying my machine now.

Thanks for the advice though. The 9800 it is.
Related resources
May 11, 2008 11:53:35 AM

Thanks for that - reading through the FAQ now, pretty damn comprehensive!

I don't play at particularly high resolutions at the moment. I'll be connecting up to a 32" LCD display - 1368 x 768, and sometimes a 1440x900 display.
May 11, 2008 12:33:19 PM

certainly wouldn't bother with SLI below 1680x1050, and I'd go for a single card anyway.
May 11, 2008 2:12:21 PM

You will complicate things, consume more power and add yet another area of troubleshooting to your system.

Your best bet is a single high end card, simple efficient, quiet still fast.
May 11, 2008 2:33:11 PM

For $100 less, and very nearly identical performance across the charts of the 9800GTX, you want a 8800GTS (G92) 512 meg.
May 11, 2008 3:57:57 PM

+1 on the 8800GTS G92 (512MB). You could probably overclock it just as high. It's pretty much the same as the 8800GTX vs. Ultra argument.
May 11, 2008 4:01:57 PM

KyleSTL said:
+1 on the 8800GTS G92 (512MB). You could probably overclock it just as high. It's pretty much the same as the 8800GTX vs. Ultra argument.
http://en.expreview.com/2008/04/03/geforce-9800gtx-revi...
8800 beats 9800 clock per clock. The g92 core runs at 650mhz stock, and 675mhz as tested. It can reliably oc up to 750mhz without artifacting or heat problems, with many people pushing to 800mhz.

a b Î Nvidia
May 11, 2008 4:02:48 PM

yep for that resolution dont go with SLI, its a waste IMO

so go for a 8800GTS 512 or 8800GTX(since it has dropped its price alot)
May 11, 2008 4:05:48 PM

Maziar said:
yep for that resolution dont go with SLI, its a waste IMO

so go for a 8800GTS 512 or 8800GTX(since it has dropped its price alot)

The cheapest 8800gtx on Newegg is still $379.99. You can get two g92 8800gts with that. And they perform about the same. :p 
http://en.expreview.com/2008/04/02/g80-vs-g92-hi-end-ge...
a b Î Nvidia
May 11, 2008 4:32:37 PM

if that is so, then go for 8800GTS 512 but $379.99 quite cheap for 8800GTX i got my OCZ 8800GTX one for $650 when it was out
May 11, 2008 6:15:04 PM

get a 8800GTS and OC it.
a b Î Nvidia
May 12, 2008 9:26:21 AM

u even dont need to OC it, its powerful enough :) 
May 12, 2008 12:32:27 PM

Maziar said:
u even dont need to OC it, its powerful enough :) 

But it can be as fast as an Ultra if you oc it, so why not? :p 
May 12, 2008 12:35:16 PM

I'm going to disagree with alot of what has been said. 9600GT SLI will more often than not beat a single 9800GTX, even at that 14x9 resolution. So priced the same without doubt 9600GT SLI is the better solution in my eyes for a good 75% of the games out there.

As an example, Take a look at 9600GT SLI in Oblivion outdoor gameplay:
http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/geforce_9600_gt_sli...

Take a look at 9600GT SLI vs a 9800GTX in all these games they test:
http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/nvidia_geforce_9800...

High res, but this review uses all actual gameplay not scripted benchies. As you can see 9600GT SLI beats the 1GB OC'ed 8800GTS in 8 out of 10 games. http://www.driverheaven.net/reviews.php?reviewid=551&pa...

And this 1GB 8800GTS beast used above happens to beat the 8800GTX and 9800GTX, yet lost to the 9600GT SLI above.
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/video/display/gainward...


Anyway, I feel it's important to let people know just how good 9600GT SLI is. Depending on the prices of your 9600GT, it can be an excellent option. (I paid $110 AR for my 9600GT).

But, I agree that a single G92 8800GTS, can do extremely well at that resolution, and save you money too with current available bargains. Only Crysis would you really get a playable difference in favor of the 9600GT SLI. (1440x900 2xaa all high should be playable throughout the entire game. - where A single GPU would have alot lower FPS in the most GPU demanding parts of Crysis) Otherwise the 9600GT SLI combo would get the better performance in most games, but both solutions would be more than playable anyway.
a b Î Nvidia
May 12, 2008 2:42:25 PM

dagger said:
But it can be as fast as an Ultra if you oc it, so why not? :p 


but still u wont get the 768MB +384bit :D 
May 12, 2008 11:16:45 PM

Maziar said:
but still u wont get the 768MB +384bit :D 

Who cares about specifics as long as it perform better. The g92 core is just more powerful, even bandwidth crippled as Nvidia made the cards.

And of course 9600gt sli will beat a single 9800gtx. A single 8800gts beats a single 9800gtx. It's just sad. :na: 
http://en.expreview.com/2008/04/03/geforce-9800gtx-revi...
!