SLI Primer 275
GFXguy writes "If you are looking to catch up on some hardware learning you may want to check out "SL Why?". It is a short article that goes over the basics of SLI graphics. The article goes over some strengths and weaknesses of this technology as well. It looks like one video card is not going to cut it any more, at least for the hardcore gamers out there. "
Voodoo (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Voodoo (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Voodoo (Score:3, Interesting)
The old 3dfx 'SLI' thing involved not one but two Voodoo 2 cards, in addition to the conventional 2D graphics card - unless you happened to hijack a second, matching 3D card, you won't have had SLI...
Re:Voodoo (Score:2)
Dual voodoo2 with an overclocked celeron 300->450
smokin!
Oh Yeah! (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Oh Yeah! (Score:3, Funny)
Considering how much heat modern graphic cards generates, if you put two in there I bet you will see clouds coming from your computer in no time!
Re:Voodoo (Score:3, Informative)
So when.... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:So when.... (Score:2)
Re:So when.... (Score:2)
Wikipedia's wrong, and it's *never* authoritative (Score:2)
Wikipedia is great for getting wide coverage of content, but it's not the place to go when you want an Authoritay you can Respeck. It's often very good, and does better on contemporary material than traditional dead-tree single-editor encyclopedias, but the only times it's authoritative are when an article's written by somebody who's actually the authori
Re:So when.... (Score:2, Funny)
Maybe RAEVC.
Figure that one out urself I'm not telling
Single video card not going to cut it? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Single video card not going to cut it? (Score:2, Insightful)
Now, having said that...I can see the potential in the future for better performance, but since SLI is still very much in it's infancy, we'll have to wait.
Re:Single video card not going to cut it? (Score:3, Interesting)
Even for a single 6800 ultra, the figures you see are *slightly* lower than ATI X800 in most benchmarks because the ATI deals *slightly* better with being CPU-limited. Those results have usually got nothing to do with maximum GPU performance because they often test at stupidly low res's like 640x400 or 800x600.
Instead, look at the figures at the highest resolutions, where Nvidia still creams ATI.
Actually the
Re:Single video card not going to cut it? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Single video card not going to cut it? (Score:2)
Check your prices...I can get a X850 for around 525...two 6800's will run you up to like 800.
Re:Single video card not going to cut it? (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Single video card not going to cut it? (Score:2, Interesting)
Amazing how everything old is new again. Everything under the sun.
Re:Single video card not going to cut it? (Score:5, Funny)
wait...
Re:Single video card not going to cut it? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Single video card not going to cut it? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Single video card not going to cut it? (Score:4, Interesting)
But Intel's very latest onboard graphics chipset is fairly good, and the latest onboard graphics from nVidia's motherboard chipsets are getting fairly good, too. Now, if we can just get VIA to upgrade their onboard graphics....
Re:Single video card not going to cut it? (Score:3, Interesting)
"for the hardcore gamers out there" (Score:2)
From TFA:
"It looks like one video card is not going to cut it any more, at least for the hardcore gamers out there."
This article obviously is not about the average consumer with their onboard video. It's about gamers who buy add-in 3d cards. The average user who only reads email and browses the internet won't be buying a $300 video card, let alone two $300 video cards to run in SLI mode.
Re:"for the hardcore gamers out there" (Score:2)
Well then, allow me to rephrase the parent's comment. SLI is overkill for 80-90% of gamers who buy add-in 3D cards. Spending $2-300 on a 3D video card is one thing, buying *2* $3-400 cards AND and SLI capable system is quite another.
Re:Single video card not going to cut it? (Score:3, Insightful)
I don't know how many PCs are out there, but I did read somewhere that there are 80 million Windows users. 10% of Windows users is 10 million PCs. Whether or not on-board video is good enough for 90% of the PCs out there, there' still a very large number to go after.
Re:Single video card not going to cut it? (Score:2)
Ah dammit. I had rewritten that paragraph a couple of times and forgot to update that sentence. Sorry about the dumb math error.
AFR / SFR error (Score:4, Informative)
Re:AFR / SFR error (Score:2, Interesting)
I'm one of those people who believe that this rush for graphical perfect will be dying slowly over the n
In the near future... (Score:5, Funny)
Noob (Score:3, Funny)
Now that's serious gaming.
Parallel graphics processing (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Parallel graphics processing (Score:2)
Maybe something I'll look into (Score:2)
A point that has been concerning me is that SLI operation cannot be forced in non-compatible games.
That is worrisome..., but as the article mentions, the major games are supported now.
I especially like t
Re:Maybe something I'll look into (Score:5, Informative)
same revision, same card almost?
ever tried to add a 2nd CPU to a multi CPU system 18 months later?
Re:Maybe something I'll look into (Score:3, Interesting)
The same thing might happen with graphics cards. If you can use two mediocre cards instead of one big beefy card, it's possible you might be able to save yourself some money.
Other upgrades (Score:4, Informative)
Even just adding a second fast hard drive and placing your paging file on that with your OS on your first hard drive would give most users a big bump in speed.
I could go on, but I think on a list of 10 things to do, taking advtange of SLI is probably number 9 or 10.
Re:Other upgrades (Score:2)
Even just adding a second fast hard drive and placing your paging file on that with your OS on your first hard drive would give most users a big bump in speed.
Yup. And getting more regular oil and filter changes would give most users better gas mileage.
But neither upgrade is going to increase their video ga
Re:Other upgrades (Score:4, Informative)
Just run Performance Monitor (or Performance or whatever your version of Windows calls it) and add the following metrics:
Pages/Sec from the Memory Object
Average Disk Queue Length (total) from the physical disk object
Even if your memory used is nowhere near what your physical memory is, you will notice two things:
1. Your system still consistently uses the paging file
2. Every time your system uses the paging file, your disk queue length spikes
The moral of the story is, you need a fast disk subsystem for your paging file because Windows will use it even if you have 4 gigabytes of physical ram and are only using 256 megs.
As for RAID 0 vs RAID 5 in speed, what you say is true for writes, but not reads.
Re:Other upgrades (Score:2)
Re:Other upgrades (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Other upgrades (Score:2)
1. Your system still consistently uses the paging file
2. Every time your system uses the paging file, your disk queue length spikes"
Yes, you are right.
Microsoft Research have tried this experiment: they bought a lot of RAM, and made a build of Windows with virtual memory turned off to see what happened. They expected it to go much faster. But it doesn't work. The problem is that lots of developers don't trus
Re:Other upgrades (Score:2)
Re:Other upgrades (Score:2)
They are called 'out of memory errors'
[/smartass-mode]
If I run anything less than about 1.5GB RAM w/V-Mem off I run into them-pesky out-of-memory errors on some midrange linear algebra problems I run. I *Always* run into them on the large models. So the only time I bother to enable v-mem is when I am running the huge models.
With 2GB of RAM and no V-mam I don't have any problems, and that is running MySQL, Apache, Tomcat, and Crystal reports servers.... And World of Warcraft on occasi
What about... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:What about... (Score:2)
Agreed - and, in a manner similar to those audiophiles, these 'hardcore gamers' seem to spend far more time discussing framerates and hardware upgrades than they do on the games themselves...
Although I do have to thank them for making medium-range PC kit affordable for the rest of them. Early adopters with bottomless wallets, we salute you!
Re:What about... (Score:2)
Re:What about... (Score:4, Insightful)
There's one of you in every thread about something new or high-end:
"A cellphone with a camera and flamethrower? What about those of us who just want to make a call?!"
"A GPS that drives for me? What about those of us who just want to download directions ?!"
"A computer with two graphics cards? What about those of us who just want to play minesweeper and read email?!"
I don't get it; does it really bother you so much that there are some people who want more or different performance levels than you?
Do you not realize that the very existence of high-end products helps drive down prices for the lower-end stuff you so desire?
Re:What about... (Score:2)
Re:What about... (Score:2)
You also completely neglect the fact that it makes a lot of sense to pick up an SLI motherboard and one video card, and then later on down the line when new games come ou
Re:What about... (Score:2)
And their money funds Nvidia's research so you can play minesweeper cheaper in any case.
If other enthusiasts blow their money on penis-extending toys its their own friggin problem.
Audiophile insanity vs. gamer insanity (Score:5, Interesting)
You're kidding, right? Audiophiles are off the deep end. I don't think you have ever seen an *actual* audiophile-- you're mixing them up with people who like stereos. Audiophiles do things like buy $3000 cables. Or put all their components on 200lb. granite blocks or $600-per-component magnetic levitation dampers to ease vibration. Power conditioners. Huge stacks of tube amps. Subwoofers that require special basement rooms to be built to act as the box.
In the worst cases, the quest for perfect audio goes so far as to become pointless. There's an article I wish I could find for you about one particularly off-the-deep-end audiophile who paid so much for the system he used to listen to classical recordings that had he kept the money, he would have had enough to bring the *actual orchestra* to his house to play for him regularly, for years. Say what you want about huge stereos, but if it gets to the point where you can afford to bring the source home with you, you don't need reproduction.
The worst gamers can't hope to touch this. The most expensive rig on the market with a massive hang-on-the-wall plasma or whatever as your huge monitor is still just a drop in the bucket compared to people who will spend $3000 on three feet of speaker cable. And unlike some of the audiophile quackery, at least a fast machine has measurable performance gains. Try convincing a real engineer that your $1000 power cable makes a detectable difference in sound quality.
For your reference, as a guide to the levels this insanity can reach:
$23,000 for a pair of 8-foot speaker cables [consumerreview.com]
$75,000 per speaker [wisdomaudio.com]
$40 silver-plated electrical outlet [audiophilia.com] (because... ummm... you can't just use any old outlet with the next item:)
$1000 5-foot AC power cable [audiophilia.com]
There's much worse. Try pricing out monoblock tube amps. Keep in mind they're not just going to buy one per channel (the minimum), but probably one per *driver* (as in, three per speaker if you have a woofer, mid, and tweeter).
Re:Audiophile insanity vs. gamer insanity (Score:3, Insightful)
My stereo will clearly play great audio long after I trash my current rig, and a few components after that, too. Until you can purchase an ear upgrade, anyway. The next FPS down the pike will make my PC a paperweight...
200-pound granite blocks are great! (Score:4, Interesting)
I had that room the following year and used the slate as a plant stand :-)
Re:Audiophile insanity vs. gamer insanity (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Audiophile insanity vs. gamer insanity (Score:2)
Much of the crazier a
Some strange claims... (Score:5, Interesting)
I'm running a $160 motherboard with two 6800GTs that I picked up for a good price at my local shop. They did not have a single PCIe 6600 or 6800 board there that wasn't SLI compatible.
Re:Some strange claims... (Score:2)
Why SLI? (Score:2, Interesting)
- Cary
--Fairfax Underground [fairfaxunderground.com]: Where Fairfax
Scalable Link Interface? (Score:2)
Re:Scalable Link Interface? (Score:5, Informative)
Upon further investigation it seems that nVidia's SLI stands for "Scaleable Link Interface", but you are correct in noting that it used to stand for "Scan Line Interleaving". They likely wanted to keep the acronym so that people would know what the technology's function was, but Scan Line Interleaving would be non-despcriptive, as their cards don't interleave at all, each renders approximately half of the screen.
Re:Scalable Link Interface? (Score:2, Insightful)
In a nutshell, one SLI'ed card will (attempt) to draw the top half of the screen while the other card draws the bottom half. Now, there are exceptions to this, and this is the biggest change.
If say, the top half of the screen does not have as high a polycount as the bottom half the underperforming card will pick up some of the slack f
I prefer the one card, multiple GE method ... (Score:2)
I'd much prefer to have a single video board with multiple GEs rather than multiple video boards.
Asinine (Score:4, Interesting)
What a stupid comment.
Currently, the best video performance out there is a pair of 6800 Ultras in SLI, it's true, but that's also well over $1000 in video hardware alone.
Meanwhile, single-card solutions like the X850XT PE are capable of chewing through anything you can throw at them with admirable performance.
SLI is a lot like the tablet PC: a solution in search of a problem. Sure, it's a cool idea, but in practice, not terribly useful and very much overpriced.
Compare, for instance, a pair of 6600GTs running SLI:
$175 for each card; $350 total. Another $50 for the premium on a SLI mainboard.
Now you've got additional heat, additional power draw, two seperate cards, and the hassle of dealing with SLI drivers when, for $100 less, you could purchase a single X800XL and enjoy superior performance [tomshardware.com].
SLI may become worthwhile in the future, but for now, it's the exclusive domain of chumps and the e-penis crowd.
Superior... (Score:2, Interesting)
And Inferior Performance [tomshardware.com].
Same article, two pages earlier.
Oh yeah, and the cheapest you can find an X800 XL is $350, not $200/300.
Re:Superior... (Score:3, Interesting)
Point being, the 6600 GT is the most credible instance of an SLI implimentation. The cost/performance of a pair of 6800 GTs or 6800 Ultras compared to a single X850XT PE is just laughably bad.
Re:Superior... (Score:2)
IMO, MSRP is the only dollar figure that should be discussed when doing price comparisons.
Re:Asinine (Score:4, Insightful)
I bought an SLI mobo (MSI K8N Platinum SLI)... put the slowest 939 pin Athlon64 I could find (3500+) (the price ramps up significantly passed this point).... then I bought _ONE_ Geforce6800 GT and 1GB of RAM in two sticks (leaving two slots open)... and finally a 535 watt SLI power supply.... Then hooked it all up to a new 19" Flat Panel.
All in all I paid about $1600... which is a little bit but let's look at the upgradeability.
First of all there's the obvious SLI slot. In about a year when 6800GT's are $150... I'll be able to nearly DOUBLE my performance in games. That's a pretty good upgrade.
I left two RAM slots open so I can jam another set of 1GB sticks in there in a year and have 3GB.
The newly announced dual core chips from AMD will work in my current 939 socket... with a BIOS upgrade... so I will be able to again almost DOUBLE my CPU performance (blah threads, blah, I do a lot of compiling and stuff so it will be a big upgrade for me)
So there you have it. I didn't spend a million dollars... but my computer is REALLY future proof. I probably won't do another $1500 upgrade until about 3 to 4 years from now... and like I mentioned I'm a fairly heavy computer user.
So for me SLI is future proofing my system, and I, for one, am grateful!
Friedmud
Re:Asinine (Score:3, Interesting)
Your 19" LCD is native to 1280x1024, which is a fairly low resolution. By adding a second 6800 GT, even with AA and AF cranked up, you can't hope to get anything near double the performance. If you get even an extra 15% to your framerate, I'd be amazed.
And again, dual core CPUs won't be coming anywhere near doubling your performance. They're essentially SMP on a single chip. They'll help with compiling, yes, but gaming? It amounts to a lot of nothing.
Re:Asinine (Score:2)
Besides, although SMP might not help much for gaming, it will help with a variety of other tasks; when I have a variety of software running (esp. Photoshop and anything else), I often wish I had two processors.
Re:Asinine (Score:4, Funny)
I think in fact, that SLI was a solution to a VERY SPECIFIC problem;
GFX Card Company Guy #1; we can't get away with $1000 for a video card...
GFX Company Guy #2; No, but for TWO video cards... (Evil Laugh)
Re:Asinine (Score:2)
I learned a new word today!
PC vs Console - TCO (Score:2, Insightful)
Contrast with purchasing a console, hooking it up to the TV, popping in the
Re:PC vs Console - TCO (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:PC vs Console - TCO (Score:5, Interesting)
I suppose this may be true if you are a fan of Grand Turismo. However, aside from that, consoles just don't cut the muster. MMORPG and FPS games don't play very well on consoles when compared to their PC counterpart. Even the "greatest" console FPS, Halo, is just mediocre on the PC.
As far as console first development goes...
Here's a list of PC games that are still not released for the consoles: Doom 3, Half-Life 2, World of Warcraft, Everquest 2, Far Cry, Painkiller.
Re:PC vs Console - TCO (Score:2, Informative)
Did you intentionally mix this metaphor? If not, you probably meant 'pass muster'. Alternatively, you might have meant 'cut the mustard'. Either way, you don't 'cut the muster'.
Cut the mustard [yaelf.com]
Pass Muster [usingenglish.com]
Please don't flame me. I'm just trying to help; I'm not intending any disparagement whatsoever. You are, of course, free to ignore my advice entirely.
Re:PC vs Console - TCO (Score:2)
Are any of these games worth the extra $2000 you'd have to spend to upgrade a modest but competent home computer to a bleeding-edge "gaming" computer?
If I answered "yes" to that question, I'd seriously reconsider what my priorities were.
Re:PC vs Console - TCO (Score:2)
Which is often a lot cheaper than a console.
Interface (Score:3, Interesting)
Show me a mouse that ships with a keyboard and mouse so console developers can *rely* on them being present, and I might care about console games. Hell, just the mouse would do, though mouse-and-controller would be more than a tad clumsy
As it is, I find most games I care about (RTS, strategy games, and games like Deus Ex and System Shock II) either don't exist fo
Re:Interface (Score:2)
Same here. Unless I can plug the mouse and keyboard into a console and play Q3A I'm not going to consider them seriously.
Re:PC vs Console - TCO (Score:2)
Computers rule for gaming on three fronts: FPSs, MMORPGs, and Flight simulators. At everything else, consoles beat the crap out of PCs for gaming. It's all determined by
Fighting, racing, sports, platform, etc. Check out your local Game Crazy (or GameStop...or...EB) and compare the plethora of console titles (for a single system even) to PC titles.
Try to play Ninja Gaiden on a PC, how about Soul Calibur, Monkey Ball, Burnout 3, any Mario game, Metriod, Legend of Zelda?
FUD Biased Article with Inaccuracies (Score:5, Insightful)
#2) CPU issue is overblown. I'm not even sure if any additional information is truly sent to the processor.
In AFR, the data for each frame is sent to alternating graphics cards. Since the frames would have been processed anyway, there is not any additional load on the CPU than there would be for an identical system with a video card that is twice as powerful as in an SLI system.
In SFR, the same data is sent to two graphics cards. This would be more data, but seemingly require only a smidgen more CPU power. The video cards send the data between each other over a dedicated bridge, and the video cards handle the task of reassembling the image into a single frame.
#3) SLI card cost. 6600GT AGP cards cost more than their PCIe counterpart. 6800 AGP cards cost less. This has more to do with the amount of time in the market than anything else. In 3 months, the prices will be equal.
#4) Stability. "...certain older cards that are said to be SLI compatible have serious stability problems when used with SLI, but, for example, not all 6800 GT cards can be used with SLI". To date, I have not seen a PCIe 6600GT or 6800GT card released which is not SLI compatible. Not all 6800GT cards can be used with SLI, but that has more to do with the fact that many cards are AGP based and older than two months (when the first SLI motherboards were released).
#5) No benefit. "From what I heard, more than a few games realize no FPS gains at all from the addition of a second video card". First, this is rumor. Many games realize no benefit at low resolutions (640x480, some at 800x600) because the games are more CPU bound than video card bound. All the games that are SLI compatible definitely realize solid FPS gains. Moreover, those gains can be "converted" into graphics enhancements (i.e. no need to go from 60fps to 95 fps, but now you can turn on 8xAA or up the screen resolution, etc.)
#6) Dual GPU cards. The author obviously doesn't know what he's talking about here. The Gigabyte dual GPU card is just an SLI solution on a single graphics card. It's (almost) exactly the same as having 2x6600GT cards. It uses the same technology and produces the same results. So what's this viable new technology on the horizon he is talking about?
#7) SLI cannot be forced. Of course it can! The default mode is "no SLI". This can be changed in the configuration options for the card.
Re:FUD Biased Article with Inaccuracies (Score:4, Informative)
Relative to the cost, the performance gain for SLI is negligable. Take a look at the benchmarks [tomshardware.com] - for the $1100+ you'd spend on a pair of 6800 Ultras, or the $750+ you'd spend on a pair of 6800 GTs, you could obtain nearly identical performance with a $525 X850XT PE, with far less wattage and heat.
That Gigabyte single-board SLI implimentation? It's a big piece of crap [anandtech.com].
CPU (Score:2)
You won't need a faster CPU for SLI, but if you don't get one (or already have a really fast one) you're unlikely to get the full benefits of the enormous truckload of money you dropped on video cards. That's my understanding, anyway.
As for dual
SLI-who needs it? (Score:4, Informative)
I run an AMD 1700, on an ABIT mainboard, with an old ATI9600. Not the pro, but the $79 budget card. I have no exotic cooling, just a nice sink and fan. I added a good copper fan unit to the videocard, which came with passive cooling. I use the features of the Abit MB to run the 1700 at 2.11Ghz, and the video got a 80Mhz bump. I see over 70fps in the CS:Source test, and average around 55-60 online. All for about the cost of one video card.
Threw in the towel (Score:2, Offtopic)
I used to be a huge upgrade-your-homebuilt-beige-box-every-6-months advocate, but the cost structure and rewards have changed. If you want to play primarily RTS and FPS games, a PC may still be your
Re:Threw in the towel (Score:2)
Theres no such thing as a good flight sim or a tactical game like Rome:Total War on a console. Thats the only reason Halo was so successful, because most other console games are lame.
On PC, Halo can't even compare to Doom3, Halflife 2 or Unreal Tournament.
Roundup (Score:2, Informative)
SLI (Score:2)
One video card will more than enough "cut it", at least until Unreal Engine 3 is released.
Also keep in mind that it will soon become a standard process to integrate multiple GPUs onto a single video card. This has the benefits of SLI performance while reducing voltage and memory requirements.
SLI Printer (Score:2)
Re:SLI Printer (Score:2)
That's great, now count me out. (Score:2)
I will never play videogames on any of my home computers and I will not upg
Beowulf Cluster (Score:2)
XYZ Computing? (Score:2)
Anandtech posted such a nice article [anandtech.com] on actual retail SLI boards and their qwirks just recently. The boards featured in that review were actually modestly priced as well, contrary to XYZ's thoughts on SLI.
Yawn. (Score:2)
Whatever (Score:2)
And since none of the OEMs support it, very few game makers will bother with it. Which means those "hardcore" gamers will be paying through the nose for very little performance gains in several applications. And don't expect your open source Linux games to get a dec
SLI (Score:2)
The article fails to mention that to go into SLI mode requires a reboot. I have dual monitors. Only one monitor can be used in SLI mode, so when I get back to work, I need to reboot again.
I've read around saying that this is a driver issue that will be addressed in a few months. But it's nonetheless annoying.
Not a primer, over all poor article (Score:3, Insightful)
SLI does have some potential advantages that this writer has not covered. In 3d rendering, real time editing or special effects work this type of setup would be a huge boost to speed and productity. The fact that this generation of cards have programmable shaders, means that in theory these cards can pull some processing functions off of the cpu. Currently people are starting to experiment on how to use these powerfull graphic cards as almost secondary cpu's.
Currently my amd 64 3200 with a 6800gt performs amazingly in doom III and HLII at large resolutions with AA and AF. Ironically esp in HLII the bottleneck is the processor as the game has to compute the large physics calcs demanded by HLII. WIth graphics getting as advanced as they are I think we will be seeing a return to proc based performance gains, and a slow down of video card performance increases. As games will be putting more of a draw on the CPU. The graphics are real, now the environment is getting real.
Personally I feel that SLI is very much like the P4EE an incredibly expensive add-on/upgrade for very very high end gamers that do not care about price, or are easily swayed by marketing. At this point SLI makes no sense. The power is not needed at this point, the price performance ratio is way out of skew, and it's future is in doubt. Nvidia has to supply the drivers for these games, and as far as I know no games are currently being written with SLI in mind. Lets check back in a year and see how it goes and where this tech has gone. And as a parting thought why has nvidia not started using this tech in the commerical sector????
Re:Just get a dual gpu card (Score:3, Funny)
If you complete the referral for me in my link, I'll reciprocate. I got the Xbox and the Ipod free - it really does work and it comes pretty quickly (hardly the 4-6 weeks).
You can email me at mattatbraynarddotcom. Good luck.
Matt