The ideal Graphics Card

[Rizzo]

so specific to Nvidia cards

[skimike]

Originally Posted by Zanaionic

Will SLI do anything negative when playing on say 1440x900 res?

SLI adds latency to the entire process of displaying an image. It's entirely possible that SLI will be slower at low resolutions than a single card. SLI's main benefit is at higher resolutions where processing power and memory bandwidth become constrained resources. Note that 1440x900 (1296000 pixels) is "low resolution". The low/high resolution boundary where SLI starts to pay off is somewhere right around 1600x1200 (1920000 pixels) if you're turning on all the bells and whistles and 1920x1200 (2304000 pixels) if not. For comparison's sake, 2560x1600 is 4096000 pixels. You can then start figuring out how much bandwidth you need by taking this pixels, multiplying them by your color depth, and desired frames per second and suddenly you get an idea why 141.7GB/sec memory bandwidth might be necessary.

SLI basically has 2 modes of rendering (3 in reality but only 2 are truly unique): Split-frame rendering and alternate frame rendering. In SFR, the driver dynamically allocates part of the screen to be rendered by one card and part of the screen to be rendered by the other card (for sake of discussion, we'll assume only 2 cards are being used), attempting to evenly balance out the workload. This doesn't mean that each card renders exactly half the screen - the driver watches how much changes on each part of the screen and will divide the workload up appropriately. This is the less desirable of the two modes as the video driver can consume a significant amount of CPU trying to decide what part of the screen each card needs to render.

The other mode is AFR where each card renders alternating frames. This can speed things up a great deal but doesn't necesarily always work depending how a game is coded - there are certain transparency methods that can cause this mode to result in unusual behavior in terms of what gets rendered in a game.

[Waterelfo]

So ti will just work with Nvidia cards?! Not with intels? (((((

[Cyroth]

yes it is nvidia specific and intel dont make graphics cards

[Waterelfo]

no? I think I ahd a computer with them! O.o... damn.. then I can't play aion :/

It was Intel(R) GMA 950.
Maybe not a graphic card because I'm noob at it...

[Howling]

lol, with Mike back I hardly need to say anything now - he's said basically (though more in depth) what I wanted to say.

Just to re-iterate, but in shorter and simpler words. You don't need SLi unless you run over 1900x1200 res, it'd likely have a negative impact on performance at lower resolutions, not to mention SLi compatibility issues with various games.

Originally Posted by Waterelfo

no? I think I ahd a computer with them! O.o... damn.. then I can't play aion :/

It was Intel(R) GMA 950.
Maybe not a graphic card because I'm noob at it...

integrated graphics chip on the motherboard, you don't have a graphics card.

[Calindor]

You arent going to be playing any MMO other than Runescape with an Intel(R) GMA 950.

[Waterelfo]

WOOT?! I played 9D I played DOMO I played GE O.o. 9D had awesome graphics!!
Optimal System:

GeForce FX 4Ti / Radeon9000

to Granado Espada (Sword of the New World) and it worked! .. omg... and my Macintosh runs WoW with 1.25 Ghz ...
Do I need to buy a new Macintosh to get the darn 3.0 Ghz that is needed for Aion and then for the graphcics.. it will cost ,me 1800€! omg...

[Calindor]

Macs are stupid. I guess they're good for people who know nothing of computers.

[buster]

nvidia = sli ati = crossfire right?

2 cards one machine, btw a friend of mine is getting 2 new ati cards ( 4800? just out? ) 150 euro ish each in crossfire that overpower 2 9800 gt from nvidia in sli..

im not quit sure if i got the cards right, but mabe u guys know more.

[zutto]

Originally Posted by buster

nvidia = sli ati = crossfire right?

2 cards one machine, btw a friend of mine is getting 2 new ati cards ( 4800? just out? ) 150 euro ish each in crossfire that overpower 2 9800 gt from nvidia in sli..

im not quit sure if i got the cards right, but mabe u guys know more.

4850 he is getting then, and nvidia = sli ati = crossfire, is correct.


Got 8800gts(g92), dont think aion will be a problem for it, but i doubt i got same card in 2009
i like to upgrade alot, even tought its not needed ><

[LethalGT]

Originally Posted by Howling

I've never understood the logic of SLi'ing 2 low (yes, the 8800GT is now classed as low) end cards when a single high end gpu would perform the same tasks more efficienty with less load on the system, and less of the SLi issues with various games.

To Rau: You'll be fine running on that 8800GT for Aion, but if you're still not satisfied - you said you just bought it, right? Is it possible to return it? If it's a BFG / EVGA card, are you still within their 2 month stepup program? If you can return it, I recommend the ATi 4850, it's been getting cracking reviews - cheaper than the 9800+ (4850 is ~$200 and GTX+ ~$240) and slightly better performance. If you're stuck in a step up program, then the GTX+ is the obvious choice. If you have a little more cash then the GTX260 looks fairly promising.

If you can't return / step-up, then I'd just stick with the single 8800GT, if - when Aion comes out - you find you're lacking in performance you can always upgrade your card then.

Honestly I'd never recommend SLi to anyone who isn't going to be playing past 1680x1050 res.

fix'd.


10 chars

[Bornofdesire]

How about the x2 cards would low screen rez affect them the same way even tho its one card running sli???

[Howling]

lol Lethal, nice fix
By over 1900 res I meant over... 1900 is the "line" of performance dropping. Some titles will run just as well at 1900 with a single gpu than duals, but sometimes dual is needed there.. Personally I'd just drop to 1650 if I was having problems with a specific title
It's kinda 50/50 though, personally I'd just drop res on the few titles but I can see why people would SLi for 1900.

And yes born, even the X2's and GX2's aren't really very good at low resolutions. Have a browse of a site like Tom's Hardware: Hardware News, Tests and Reviews and look at their benchmarks for the new cards - it shows comparisons so you can see for yourself what the performance is like at various resolutions.

[Waterelfo]

Originally Posted by Calindor

Macs are stupid. I guess they're good for people who know nothing of computers.

No. Macs are better than Windows to work things, but windows to play things. Because Macs don't have virus and many things like that. That's why I will install windows on my Mac and have the 2