Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Graphics Software Hardware

Are nVidia's SLI Cards Worth the Investment? 98

aendeuryu asks: "So there's a lot of buzz right now about nVidia's SLI architecture, which allows for two video cards to be placed in tandem PCI-express sockets on the same motherboard to share processing. Based on the relatively low price of a PCIx 6600GT, and the promise of it dipping further, it would seem like a good idea to invest in one and an appropriate motherboard, so that one can upgrade later, right? So, for anybody who's actually got the setup at home, have SLI cards shown themselves to be worth the investment?"
"There are two problems with the current state of SLI:
  • It's hard to tell what software companies plan to take advantage of the SLI architecture when coding their games -- Doom3 and Several Benchmark software tests show a significant improvement over non-SLI setups, whereas some games like Far Cry actually show a performance hit over single video-card setups.

  • At the moment, the upgrade path actually requires two identical cards, so you'd have to choose your initial purchase extra carefully to make sure your model is still around when it's time to upgrade.
What does the future hold for SLI, or, for that matter, the ATI counterpart, AMR?"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Are nVidia's SLI Cards Worth the Investment?

Comments Filter:
  • by gl4ss ( 559668 ) on Wednesday February 16, 2005 @10:51AM (#11688542) Homepage Journal
    ok. they might be worth your investment if you're into playing hardcore simulators, using dual(or more) hires screens..

    otherwise, no, not really.

    you might think that dual 6600's are a bargain vs. 6800 ultra or whatever.. well, look at the benchies and decide then.

    if you just want to be playing buying a 6600 now and another 200$ card 2 years later is a much better investment into longevity than two 6600's now too.

  • Investment? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by lezerno ( 775940 ) on Wednesday February 16, 2005 @10:55AM (#11688571) Homepage
    How do you define investment? Get the system you need to use today. Buying computer equipment for future use is a bad "investment". By the time you want to upgrade the card the rest of the system will be outdated.
  • In my opinion? No. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Dragoon412 ( 648209 ) on Wednesday February 16, 2005 @11:09AM (#11688695)
    SLI is apparently aimed at the same market as the Pentium 4 Extreme Edition, and the Athlon 64 FX - namely, the crowd who views their synthetic benchmark scores as a sort of virtual penis. ...and the exceedingly small market of people that can build PCs without any budget limitations.

    The current crop of video cards is hideously expensive. Where the last generation's flagship models weighed in around $500 at retail (the 9800 XT and 5950 Ultra), this new batch has seen the X850 XT Plantinum Edition retailing for $700 and the 6800 Ultra going for not much less. The "average" performers for this generation are in the high $200-$300 range.

    Furthermore, SLI is a lot like SMP. First off, the game needs to actually be able to take advantage of it. Next, even if the game does, you're not seeing a linear performance boost; that is to say, if you've got a pair of 6800 Ultras, you're not going to see double performance. The rule of thumb is it'll boost performance by about 65% - sure, it's very substantial, but with the premium price on cards already, it's an even less worthwhile purpose. To top it off, you're going to be looking at an extra $50 or so on a motherboard with SLI, and who knows how much extra in cooling.

    So, from a performance standpoint, SLI is obviously the king, but from a cost effectiveness standpoint, it's about as bad as it gets.

    As for using SLI to level the performance field with mid-range and low-range cards, buying an SLI board with a pair of 6600GTs is going to run you, say, $600 ($200 for a mainboard, $200 for each card). That may actually be worth it, as you're going to drop the same amount of money on a 6800 GT & similar non-SLI board which will perform slightly worse.

    But then, here's the problem with that: not only do games need to support SLI, but nVidia needs to write their drivers to support a specific game. Play a game that flies under nVidia's radar? Too bad, no SLI for you. Additionally, while a pair of 6600GTs perform marginally better than a single 6800GT right now [tomshardware.com], what's to say there'll be a great price point on this type of card for the next generation when you go to upgrade?

    SLI's close to being worthwhile, but at the moment, I'd not bother with it. Maybe once the technology's more mature.
  • by Klowner ( 145731 ) on Wednesday February 16, 2005 @12:10PM (#11689203) Homepage
    I think you may be missing the point, the purpose of SLI is not to drive multiple heads, but rather to harness the power of two graphics cards to produce output on a single monitor by having each card perform shader operations on different regions of the screen.
  • by SpinningAround ( 449335 ) on Wednesday February 16, 2005 @08:52PM (#11695192)
    1- Your shiny new hardware from the top end of the manufacturer's range will depreciate at a rate that makes your car appear to be a excellent investment.



    2- 'Future proofing' never happens. Manufacturers and software companies invent new buses, interfaces, pin counts, slot types, power requirements, driver levels and all manner of interesting 'features' specifically so that your two year old hardware is obselete.



    3- Even if you have a 130 fps, the fastest processor on the market, a TB of disk, a massive 5.1 surround sound setup and the biggest, fastest CRT monitor out there, you will still get your ass handed to you in Counter-Strike by a spotty 12 year old who's voice hasn't broken.

I've noticed several design suggestions in your code.

Working...