Nvidia went SLI because they can't compete?
- Thread starter Redeemer
- Start date
- Status
Pete said:
No it doesn't have one negative. Again I have to repeat myself, it doesn't work with all games. Yes throwing more money into the equation can reduce the heat and noise, but it cannot reduce power and in fact will add to the power requirements. There is no be all end all solution.
I simply think the disadvantages far outweight the benefits. What is so damn hard to understand about that? I feel sorry for those who think me explaining my position equals bitching and complaining when they themselves can't accept someone may have a different opinion from their own.
Considering your own statements like:ANova said:
You don't sound like you're just talking about yourself.
I mean, I personally don't plan on purchasing an SLI system, as it isn't worth the money for me. But that doesn't mean I can't understand that it might be worth it for some people.
Come on, what's the point of taking this issue from the practical to the theoretical domain?Chalnoth said:
You know damn well why, as do I.
* The cost of doubling fillrate at those performance levels is very low, roughly 50 bucks.
* The practical game-play value of increasing the fillrate a factor of two at those levels is much higher. For SLI'd 6800 we add the cosmetic advantage of (at best) another resolution step, we are not in the business of making otherwise unplayable games playable.
* The cost of doubling fillrate at those performance levels is a 10+ Watts, not just under 100.
If you want to say what other category you fit in, feel free to do so. As I said, those were the categories I could see.ondaedg said:
But I think you presume too much about the readership of Beyond3D. Yes, we are interested in 3D. Yes, many of us are adults with jobs and a fair bit of disposable income. But how many out of this fairly extreme 3D audience have bought an SLI rig, even though we can?
It's not a problem to me that there are people who somehow find value in getting an SLI rig. But it could become a problem to me if reviewers somehow created the impression that these represented a viable portion of the market. In short, I don't want a vanishingly small fraction of the market to infuence game development. They are perfectly free to enjoy their perceived benefits of their SLI rigs. But skewing market perceptions by insisting on putting an SLI rig at the top af every chart would be a disservice, in my book.
I think I'll be doing SLI'd 6600GT's for now. This may not offer a great performance step up above on 6600GT but it will allow for something right now. It may not work the absolute best in regards to value but it is something that can be had cheaper than two 6800GT's. Might as well upgrade to a NEW system when the new version of Windows comes out.
First of all, buying 2 6600GT rather than one 6800GT is just plain ignorant. It's been shown the differences are slight in those programs that use SLI....slim as those are, and downright sad in those that don't. And, if you plan on using FSAA, the 128 meg of memory on the 6600's cannot come close to what a single 6800GT with 256 meg can do.
Second, why is anyone even trying to "reason" with Chalnoth? We are talking about someone who complained to no end about ATI's driver install - remember the whining about having to reboot twice? You can't reason with a zelot, don't even try. He will twist logic to his own viewpoint - and he has no ability or want to even try to view anything from an objective position.
Second, why is anyone even trying to "reason" with Chalnoth? We are talking about someone who complained to no end about ATI's driver install - remember the whining about having to reboot twice? You can't reason with a zelot, don't even try. He will twist logic to his own viewpoint - and he has no ability or want to even try to view anything from an objective position.
Entropy said:
And by extension you'd hate to have overclocked, cherry picked ultra boards being targeted by developers too... right? Isn't having benchmarks dominated by top-end AMD/Intel systems and Ultra-level GPUs a disservice? How many of a developer's audience have $3000-5000 alienware systems? Developers have, and always will, target the biggest chunk of the market, so your fears are completely irrelevent. However, they usually leave in the possibility for people to boost game settings past what any machine can handle. Most games today has a setting which is unplayable on a top-end CPU/GPU combo.
SLI allows people to step up, and no matter how you slice it, being able to jump up a level in AA and resolution does have value. I like running with all settings at maximum, and I don't like running below my LCD monitor's native res, nor do I like disabling AA.
It comes down to time preference. There are always people who will pay a premium for immediate gratification rather than future gratification. Trying to argue that SLI holds no value is illogical. I own a $20,000 home theater system. This system holds a lot of value for me, even though you might feel your Walmart HDTV and Stereo is "good enough"
I had that happen at Warp2search yesterday, someone was claiming that using the PS/2 port for your mouse over USB was a pain in the ass because you had to (gasp) reboot to have it recognized!martrox said:
DemoCoder said:
It's about perception.
And yes, I am critical of positioning cards-that-only-reviewers-have at top of charts either. Basically, I think this practise is suicidal to the industry - hyping stuff that nobody has, making the accessible parts seem lackluster and boring.
From my view-point, this is stupid. Strengthening the impression that you need to have really impractical and expensive gear to enjoy PC gaming "properly" is a good way to define yourself as a tiny niche. SLI is an extreme example of this.
And how can you get good statistics of just how many people run SLI'ed 6800s? You can't, unless Valve can somehow get the info into their database. So reviewers may spend a lot of time futzing around with setups that practically noone uses, debaters debate setups that practially noone uses, and you generate tons of buzz and teenage angst over - nothing. Just who benefits from that? You? Me?
SLI can buy you another step up in resolution under ideal circumstances. Well, that's nice, and I wouldn't begrudge anyone that if they think it's worth it, all things considered.
I'm just questioning whether it will ever amount to (or was ever meant to be) much more than a way to manipulate market perceptions. And I question whether it really is in anybodys best interests to be so manipulated.
Conversely, a rising tide raises all boats. If in seeing such performance, both in IQ and FPS, demand is stimulated for higher performance GPU’s then it has the effect of hastening the adoption of better performing solutions. Trickling down into the mainstream faster than would have otherwise happened.Entropy said:
Entropy said:
The PE and Ultra currently make low-end cards seem lackluster and boring. The next generation cards are going to make current cards seem lackluster and boring. The removal of SLI from the top of the charts will not make the slower cards any faster. The fact that they may 'seem' faster is irrelevant to someone's gaming experience.
Entropy said:
This may be a bit naive but what kind of negative impact can a more powerful solution have on the market? It can only push the envelope for developing even faster solutions and better, more immersive titles.
Well, it would help if you'd at least look at some benchmarks first:martrox said:
http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/msi_nx6800/page4.asp
...for example. Up until the highest resolutions where both cards are unplayable, the 6600 GT SLI setup is faster than the 6800 GT setup.
Resorting to personal attacks now? Lovely.
For the cost of the 6600GT's SLI, compared to the 6800GT, it's still a no brainer. Yes, the 6600SLI will "beat" the 6800GT in a very few benchmarks, but for a huge cost difference....... Pretty much a waist. The 6800 SLI is different, though. It has no competition in what it does.
As far as a personal attack, not at all.....just the facts there, Chal. You can complain that it's an attack, but please refute anything I said.
As far as a personal attack, not at all.....just the facts there, Chal. You can complain that it's an attack, but please refute anything I said.
Unless the person purchases one video card now, and may upgrade to SLI later in lieu of another graphics card. Remember that the 6800 GT PCI Express is still usually over $400. A single 6600 GT currently costs $185 on newegg, and an SLI motherboard isn't much more. In fact, I just purchased an Asus SLI motherboard because I didn't like the layout of the cheapest NF4 Ultra motherboards, and as I was looking through the more and more expensive ones, the price was just getting too close to the Asus SLI motherboard that I just decided to give myself the extra choice for later this year (or early next year) when I upgrade again. See, that's the #1 pull of SLI: it gives users an alternate upgrade path, and if you're upgrading your motherboard now, it doesn't cost much more to go SLI (on the motherboard itself).martrox said:
You know, I would, except that it has nothing at all to do with this thread. If you can't argue in this thread on the merits of the case at hand, fine.
Why this waste of bandwidth. . .er, thread. . .wasn't locked pages ago is beyond me.
SLI isn't for the average home user. Neither is water cooling. If you don't want it, aren't interested in it, that's fine. But there are power users who want what they consider to be the fastest possible system, and they will spend the $$ to buy it and to overcome any issues that may arise from using it.
SLI isn't for the average home user. Neither is water cooling. If you don't want it, aren't interested in it, that's fine. But there are power users who want what they consider to be the fastest possible system, and they will spend the $$ to buy it and to overcome any issues that may arise from using it.
- Status
Similar threads
