# Shows sli available for 9800gtx+280gtx?



## johnspack (Oct 28, 2008)

This shows up for 177.92 and up drivers,  will this be possible maybe with big bang iis?  Although I can't see the point in this case...


----------



## btarunr (Oct 28, 2008)

Try enabling it in the Nvidia CP, let's see what GPU-Z shows. Does CP even provide the option?


----------



## johnspack (Oct 28, 2008)

No don't see it in cp,  wouldn't even know what to look for!  But no,  not showing anywhere,  just found it odd.
here,  no sli in cp:


----------



## btarunr (Oct 28, 2008)

johnspack said:


> No don't see it in cp,  wouldn't even know what to look for!  But no,  not showing anywhere,  just found it odd.



I guess it says "SLI Available"  looking at two NVIDIA accelerators and SLI-supportive platform. The driver tells GPU-Z that the platform supports SLI (in your case, nForce 590a SLI).


----------



## johnspack (Oct 28, 2008)

Darn,  now I'll have to scrape up 450+ bucks to do a real sli!  Guess it'll have to wait...


----------



## btarunr (Oct 28, 2008)

johnspack said:


> Darn,  now I'll have to scrape up 450+ bucks to do a real sli!  Guess it'll have to wait...



Spend 450 on a new CPU+Mobo, that's a better investment IMHO =)


----------



## johnspack (Oct 28, 2008)

Actually yes,  a p5q pro and an e8500 will be about 500can now after the price increases.
And I've already ordered a set of mushkin ascents pc8500 that should run me 200can after shipping and taxes...


----------



## Wile E (Oct 28, 2008)

btarunr said:


> Spend 450 on a new CPU+Mobo, that's a better investment IMHO =)



Not for gaming at 1920x1200 it isn't. His cpu will have much less to do with it than gfx. The cpu bottleneck would not be perceptible in anything except synthetic benches. Sure, and SLI setup would perform better on the OCed Intel, but with a 280GTX SLI, the framerates will already be so high at that res, that the bottleneck caused by his Athlon X2 won't even be noticeable.

But, if gaming performance isn't the primary concern, then yes, a better cpu and mobo would be beneficial.


----------



## btarunr (Oct 28, 2008)

I was making a general statement....better investment.


----------



## johnspack (Oct 28, 2008)

I believe strongly that gaming performance will be enhanced.  Intels can do sse instructions 128 bits at a time,  athlons do them 64 bits at a time,  2 cycles compared to one.  All modern games employ sse,  very useful for physics.  Plus raw cpu cycles count,  a duo running at 4ghz is going to produce higher fps than an athlon at 3.3 or even 3.5....  I watch my cpu usage,  games like fc2 run both my cores at 80+% all the time,  crysis and warhead close to 100%.  Cycles baby cycles!


----------



## Wile E (Oct 28, 2008)

btarunr said:


> I was making a general statement....better investment.



Yeah, for everything except gaming, I agree. I would buy a quad instead of a second 280, if I were in his position. lol.


----------



## johnspack (Oct 28, 2008)

I think an e8500 solution is the fastest and the cheapest...  I don't think the newer q6600s are worth the money,  I just want fast now and I'll get a good mobo later,  then a nice quad.
remember,  despite my odd video card choice,  I'm actually fairly poor,  intel stuff is expensive to me,  but I want it bad....


----------

