Anyone here SLI yet? - DFWstangs Forums
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
post #1 of 22 (permalink) Old 01-10-2005, 01:50 PM Thread Starter
fuckcanada
 
Roliath's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: fuckcanada
Posts: 5,325
Anyone here SLI yet?

Just wondering..
if anyone here is thinking about going SLI, or is SLI, already, and what do you think of it (if you are SLI).

Roliath is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 22 (permalink) Old 01-10-2005, 02:27 PM
Time Served
 
97GTLunatic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Little Elm/Frisco
Posts: 893
I wish

I wish I was but dont have the $800 to buy 2 6800's right now. I also dont have a PCI-X board either.
97GTLunatic is offline  
post #3 of 22 (permalink) Old 01-10-2005, 04:09 PM
¯\(º_o)/¯
 
AbecX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Las Colinas
Posts: 25,373
That shit will never catch on.

AbecX is offline  
 
post #4 of 22 (permalink) Old 01-10-2005, 05:15 PM
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 5,831
Quote:
Originally Posted by AbecX
That shit will never catch on.

it will on those stupid G5's
trey85stang is offline  
post #5 of 22 (permalink) Old 01-10-2005, 05:50 PM
Googlist-Wikipedian
 
Hunt4m3x's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: de_aztec
Posts: 4,814
Thats cool. I need to raid this fucking raptors.

2005 Infiniti G35 Sedan Ivory Pearl Premium

2006 Infiniti FX45 Liquid Platinum

2010 Polaris Ranger RZR S Orange Madness







Ban count: 2
Hunt4m3x is offline  
post #6 of 22 (permalink) Old 01-12-2005, 07:17 PM
Time Served
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: DFW
Posts: 936
I am setting here right now getting ready to order an Athlon 64 but cannot decide whether to go PCI-E for the motherboard. They are much more expensive and I already have a 6800GT (AGP) so it would be useless. I would have to sell it and upgrade the video card meaning taking a huge loss on it and paying more for the PCI-E card than I paid for the AGP card. I just can't see that it is worth the perfomance increase right now. I run all my games at 1600x1200 with max settings without a problem and the Athlon 64 will only make it better. I would love to see a system in person with this setup and make a real world comparison.
dmh165638 is offline  
post #7 of 22 (permalink) Old 01-12-2005, 07:47 PM Thread Starter
fuckcanada
 
Roliath's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: fuckcanada
Posts: 5,325
Here are some pics of an SLI setup
click here
the server wont let me hotlink the images

Roliath is offline  
post #8 of 22 (permalink) Old 01-12-2005, 10:01 PM
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 5,831
what monitors support SLI??? now that I am thinking about this
trey85stang is offline  
post #9 of 22 (permalink) Old 01-13-2005, 12:33 AM Thread Starter
fuckcanada
 
Roliath's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: fuckcanada
Posts: 5,325
monitors?
every one supports it, they seem to have some issues with Wide Screen Monitors, and a problem with DVI and 1600x1200 resolutions. Not real big, but something Nvidia needs to address.
Click here for more info on the "problem"

Roliath is offline  
post #10 of 22 (permalink) Old 01-13-2005, 03:01 AM
You lookin' at mah EYE?!
 
DarkWolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 8,316
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roliath
Here are some pics of an SLI setup
click here
the server wont let me hotlink the images
Wow, what a waste of 5 slots

I've yet to see any game that would vastly improve do to SLI (and damn, I thought the SLI fad died with the Voodoo 2). High end graphics/3d workstations could benefit from SLI, but for everyday computer use, including gaming, no. It's hype, pure and simple. Does it improve framerates? Sure it does, but not enough to warrant ~$600-$1000+ in video card hardware. When the current top end cards already run the most punishing games at 60+ fps, pumping out a few more fps isn't going to be noticable in normal playing (and anyone who believes differently needs to educate themselves on how the human eye percieves motion).

Your only hope of benefitting from SLI would be in the marginal benefit of not having to upgrade your video card when the "next big thing" in video games hits the market, that will cripple the current line of video cards. However... you did just spend twice as much for your setup, which could end up being more than if you just got the one card, and upgraded when that "next big thing" hits.

DarkWolf
Graphic Design / Photography / Web Design
DarkWolf is offline  
post #11 of 22 (permalink) Old 01-13-2005, 07:09 AM
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 5,831
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roliath
monitors?
every one supports it, they seem to have some issues with Wide Screen Monitors, and a problem with DVI and 1600x1200 resolutions. Not real big, but something Nvidia needs to address.
Click here for more info on the "problem"

I thought the main reason for the dual video cards was so that ythe monitor would have two incoming connections??

I read an article about Apple's HD Cinima display... it required two ADC connectors and obviously two pci-x video cards... maybe I have this SLI thing wrong. I will go read about it now.
trey85stang is offline  
post #12 of 22 (permalink) Old 01-13-2005, 07:10 AM
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 5,831
Quote:
Originally Posted by DarkWolf
Wow, what a waste of 5 slots

I've yet to see any game that would vastly improve do to SLI (and damn, I thought the SLI fad died with the Voodoo 2). High end graphics/3d workstations could benefit from SLI, but for everyday computer use, including gaming, no. It's hype, pure and simple. Does it improve framerates? Sure it does, but not enough to warrant ~$600-$1000+ in video card hardware. When the current top end cards already run the most punishing games at 60+ fps, pumping out a few more fps isn't going to be noticable in normal playing (and anyone who believes differently needs to educate themselves on how the human eye percieves motion).

Your only hope of benefitting from SLI would be in the marginal benefit of not having to upgrade your video card when the "next big thing" in video games hits the market, that will cripple the current line of video cards. However... you did just spend twice as much for your setup, which could end up being more than if you just got the one card, and upgraded when that "next big thing" hits.

Video editing is what I thought would be the main benefit of these types of cards... at least thats the rationale given when I first read about this setup 1-2 years ago...

Of course when video card technology is released the game world is always right there to jump on the bandwagon.
trey85stang is offline  
post #13 of 22 (permalink) Old 01-13-2005, 05:13 PM
You lookin' at mah EYE?!
 
DarkWolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 8,316
Quote:
Originally Posted by trey85stang
Video editing is what I thought would be the main benefit of these types of cards... at least thats the rationale given when I first read about this setup 1-2 years ago...

Of course when video card technology is released the game world is always right there to jump on the bandwagon.
Video editing would fall into the high end graphics/3d workstation catagory

SLI simply splits the way an image is rendered on the screen. One card renders all the even lines, while the other card renders all the odd lines. The theory is that with both cards only doing half the work, that it would double the overall speed. But it never actually worked like that. The new "definition" of SLI is exactly the same thing, just worded differently so that it doesn't seem so simplistic. It's still splitting the rendering workload 50/50 between the two cards. The old Voodoo 2 SLI was accomplished by a pigtail, while the new way of doing it is a circuit board connecting the two cards (which Matrox did with their own SLI cards some 5 or 6 years ago)

The reason any monitor will work, is because you only need to connect one of the cards up to a monitor. The other card is connected via the circuit board. However, both cards can be hooked up to multi-input monitors, to do essentially the same thing but with potentially better results due to not needing to wait for the secondary card to send it's half to the main card to then be sent out. However that could also introduce a number of synchronization problems.

DarkWolf
Graphic Design / Photography / Web Design
DarkWolf is offline  
post #14 of 22 (permalink) Old 01-13-2005, 07:09 PM Thread Starter
fuckcanada
 
Roliath's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: fuckcanada
Posts: 5,325
I think i'm pretty sure, but if you have your cards set up in SLI, monitors will only recieve input from the First card and not the second, so i don't think you could 4 monitors simutaniously (sp).
and SLI is great for the Upgrade features, you buy one card now, and buy a second one later on down the road.

Roliath is offline  
post #15 of 22 (permalink) Old 01-13-2005, 09:08 PM
You lookin' at mah EYE?!
 
DarkWolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 8,316
Correct, if the cards are set up for SLI via the connector, then the monitor will only recieve input from one of them. If you don't connect the cards together, then you can use both cards to output to a monitor that has dual inputs (such as the Apple HD cinema displays). The other way would be to make a card that has two gpu's on it, with two outputs. One card essentially working in SLI with itself.

DarkWolf
Graphic Design / Photography / Web Design
DarkWolf is offline  
post #16 of 22 (permalink) Old 01-13-2005, 09:45 PM Thread Starter
fuckcanada
 
Roliath's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: fuckcanada
Posts: 5,325
Roliath is offline  
post #17 of 22 (permalink) Old 01-13-2005, 10:26 PM
Lifer
 
1994SilverGT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Garland, TX
Posts: 1,975
just so u know, in some games it is actually useful to have higher than 60 fps.

for example the quake three engine operates best at 125 fps. whether it is visually better or not i dont know, but it does allow for thing su cant do with lower fps.

95' Red Mustang GT.

Slow.
1994SilverGT is offline  
post #18 of 22 (permalink) Old 01-14-2005, 05:35 PM
You lookin' at mah EYE?!
 
DarkWolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 8,316
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1994SilverGT
just so u know, in some games it is actually useful to have higher than 60 fps.

for example the quake three engine operates best at 125 fps. whether it is visually better or not i dont know, but it does allow for thing su cant do with lower fps.


I'm sorry that you believe that nonsense. Most games will benchmark higher than they actually run. Meaning that most games you can benchmark them at 125fps (which is an odd enough number as it is), but while you're actually playing the game, it's capped at 60fps. Games that allow you to play at higher fps than 60, often run into the problem of playing the game in fast forward. It then becomes too fast for your hand/eye coordination and reaction time.

The point of benchmarking is to say "look! this card's so good, it can go this fast!", it's not to be mistaken with the performance you'll get while actually playing. It's also used as a means to determine if you'll be able to play the game at it's highest graphical settings, without any significant slowdown.

And if you do a little research, you'll see that Doom 3's engine is actually capped at 60fps, just like most other games on the market. Even if you alter it to force it to go higher, all it does is double frames as necissary to compensate for the higher fps, to keep from running into the "fast forward" effect. So even if you're actually playing at 120 fps as you claim, all it's doing is doubling each frame... effectively running at 60fps.

John Carmack of id sofware: "The game tic simulation, including player movement, runs at 60hz, so if it rendered any faster, it would just be rendering identical frames. A fixed tic rate removes issues like Quake 3 had, where some jumps could only be made at certain framerates. In Doom, the same player inputs will produce the same motions, no matter what the framerate is."

Games are coded to run at 60fps, because it synchs up with the 60Hz standard. Games that run at 30fps (which is the point at which the Human eye percieves fluid motion) double each frame to synch up to the standard 60Hz.

You've basically been duped by the hype gods.

Edit: I misread your post as Doom 3, instead of Quake 3. Yes, the Quake 3 engine will allow you to run higher than 60fps, which produces a fast forward effect. Certainly not something you'd want from regular play, as everything is moving twice (or more) as fast as it should be. It would certainly give gamers who can accomodate this a distinct advantage over those that can't, because those that can't will essentially appear to be moving in slow motion, running at 60fps while those that can are running at 120+fps. That's one of the main reasons most games are hard coded to 60fps... to eliminate these type of hacks, especially in multiplayer.

DarkWolf
Graphic Design / Photography / Web Design

Last edited by DarkWolf; 01-15-2005 at 01:48 PM.
DarkWolf is offline  
post #19 of 22 (permalink) Old 01-16-2005, 02:52 PM
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 5,831
Quote:
Originally Posted by DarkWolf
Video editing would fall into the high end graphics/3d workstation catagory

SLI simply splits the way an image is rendered on the screen. One card renders all the even lines, while the other card renders all the odd lines. The theory is that with both cards only doing half the work, that it would double the overall speed. But it never actually worked like that. The new "definition" of SLI is exactly the same thing, just worded differently so that it doesn't seem so simplistic. It's still splitting the rendering workload 50/50 between the two cards. The old Voodoo 2 SLI was accomplished by a pigtail, while the new way of doing it is a circuit board connecting the two cards (which Matrox did with their own SLI cards some 5 or 6 years ago)

The reason any monitor will work, is because you only need to connect one of the cards up to a monitor. The other card is connected via the circuit board. However, both cards can be hooked up to multi-input monitors, to do essentially the same thing but with potentially better results due to not needing to wait for the secondary card to send it's half to the main card to then be sent out. However that could also introduce a number of synchronization problems.
Thanks for the definition, that makes perfect sense
trey85stang is offline  
post #20 of 22 (permalink) Old 01-16-2005, 04:40 PM
Lifer
 
1994SilverGT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Garland, TX
Posts: 1,975
well im gonna disagree with you.

i have my video card capped at 125 fps for call of duty. and i know as a matter of fact, every good player runs his at either 125 or 72 fps when playing. if 60 is so good why would all the best players bother going above it?

ive played the game for over a year and im fairly decent and from what i can tell having a 125 fps is helpful. u can say what u want, im going from experience and the fact that it works fine at 125.

well if ive been duped then so have tons of other Cod players, all the cal main players and all the top cal o players.

95' Red Mustang GT.

Slow.
1994SilverGT is offline  
post #21 of 22 (permalink) Old 01-16-2005, 07:24 PM
You lookin' at mah EYE?!
 
DarkWolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 8,316
You're playing in fast forward. When a game isn't hard coded to force 60fps, then the gameplay speed is increased due to faster framerates. Some people can't compensate for this... hand/eye coordination and reaction times aren't fast enough. If you can compensate for it, well good for you. However it's still a hack, and not how the game is intended to be played. It gives people that can compensate for the increased speed a major advantage over those that can't, or those that aren't aware of how to hack the game to run faster.

That doesn't make you or anyone "the best players" cause you can hack the game engine to run faster than intended. The reason people want to make the game go faster, is to give them that advantage over people who play the game as intended. It's called cheating. It's why most games are hard coded to force 60fps, to eliminate "speed hacks".

You even said yourself that it allows you to do things that you normally can't do. There's a reason you normally can't do them... because you're not supposed to be able to do them.

DarkWolf
Graphic Design / Photography / Web Design
DarkWolf is offline  
post #22 of 22 (permalink) Old 01-16-2005, 11:01 PM
Lifer
 
1994SilverGT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Garland, TX
Posts: 1,975
if it was hacking i believe the people who run the leagues wouldnt allow it, but ive yet to see anything from they saying... "you can thave a higher than 60fps on this game."

funny thing is, in cod the way u cap ur fps is through console. it has a way to display ur fps and to cap it at whatever number u want. I dont believe its hacking if its built into the game as it is.

not really my fault my comp can run cod at 125fps. and someone else cant.

95' Red Mustang GT.

Slow.
1994SilverGT is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

Bookmarks

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the DFWstangs Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in










Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Linear Mode



Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome