3-Way NVIDIA SLI Takes Extreme Gaming To A Whole New Level

[[I.R.A]_FBi]

ok if NV is only doing tri-sli why do boards like the ASUS L1N64-SLI WS Dual L have 4xsli slots

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813131146

teh ppu?

 

[cdawall]

teh ppu?

you are spending money on 3 god damn cards and you still have to get a PPU?!?!?! what a a waste of money that they cant incorp it into the cards!

 

[PVTCaboose1337]

Wow a whooping 1 PCI slot... I use 2 so... there goes that.

 

[JrRacinFan]

I think he means Tri-SLI with an Ageia PhysX PCI-e based ppu.

 

[craigwhiteside]

that sure is a scary looking motherboard

 

[cdawall]

I think he means Tri-SLI with an Ageia PhysX PCI-e based ppu.

i sitll dont see why they cant just add it to one of the NV cards? ATi cards can function as a PPU why cant NV do the same thing?

 

[craigwhiteside]

maybe because nvidia is brewing something dark and sinister for physics processing

 

[Fitseries3]

if you water cool your 8800gtx/ultras the only take up one slot each if you use the right water block.

 

[[I.R.A]_FBi]

if you water cool your 8800gtx/ultras the only take up one slot each if you use the right water block.

so in addition to buying 3 ultras, a PSU to power them, ill have to buy 3 water blocks and tubing and associated rads and pumps?

its for teh very rich.

 

[surfsk8snow.jah]

Ok so far I completely agree with everything in this post, in that buying a new system with 3x GPU in Tri-SLI is ridiculous. HOWEVER, think of the possibility for potential upgrade in the future (if you're not one who buys a brand new GPU every 3-6mo).
Say I start my build with (1) 8800gtx. In a year, when the price for 8800gtx is down by 1/2-1/3 the current price, I buy a second, and put them in SLI. This brings my graphics up to 1.7x what it was before, for less than half the price of a new card. Then in 2 years, I buy a third 8800gtx for 1/4 of the original price or less, and have 2.8x my original graphics capability.

That is, instead of buying a brand new video card for the same original price each year that gives me about 1.5x-2x my previous graphics. $875/3years vs $1500/3years; almost half the $.

I think people are missing the logical possibility for upgrade.

It's still stupid that it would take up all your PCI slots, and all the room in your Case. I had a hard enough time as it is fitting my firewire, usb, and audio header cables around my 8800gtx w/ Thermalright Hr-03+ =/

As far as cooling, very impractical. They should create an air cooler designed for cooling 3x cards. I'm sure Thermalright's thinking something up right now for it, and it'll have 20 heat pipes haha.

And as far as Nvidia goes, they're really smart in doing this, because what did it cost them: Creation, No MODification of an existing sli driver, and the production of a Triple Connector (vs the current double connector). This was SUPER cheap for them to do, took very little of their design/programming/marketing time, so why not for them? Gains>Cost.
Practicality for the consumer, little.

 

[DarkMatter]

Ok so far I completely agree with everything in this post, in that buying a new system with 3x GPU in Tri-SLI is ridiculous. HOWEVER, think of the possibility for potential upgrade in the future (if you're not one who buys a brand new GPU every 3-6mo).
Say I start my build with (1) 8800gtx. In a year, when the price for 8800gtx is down by 1/2-1/3 the current price, I buy a second, and put them in SLI. This brings my graphics up to 1.7x what it was before, for less than half the price of a new card. Then in 2 years, I buy a third 8800gtx for 1/4 of the original price or less, and have 2.8x my original graphics capability.

That is, instead of buying a brand new video card for the same original price each year that gives me about 1.5x-2x my previous graphics. $875/3years vs $1500/3years; almost half the $.

I think people are missing the logical possibility for upgrade.

It's still stupid that it would take up all your PCI slots, and all the room in your Case. I had a hard enough time as it is fitting my firewire, usb, and audio header cables around my 8800gtx w/ Thermalright Hr-03+ =/

As far as cooling, very impractical. They should create an air cooler designed for cooling 3x cards. I'm sure Thermalright's thinking something up right now for it, and it'll have 20 heat pipes haha.

And as far as Nvidia goes, they're really smart in doing this, because what did it cost them: Creation, No MODification of an existing sli driver, and the production of a Triple Connector (vs the current double connector). This was SUPER cheap for them to do, took very little of their design/programming/marketing time, so why not for them? Gains>Cost.
Practicality for the consumer, little.

You are right there. It's just that most of us count the money that we can get for the old one. So it's more like ---> 500+(500-250)+(500-250) so that would be 1000 for a 4x increase in total (following the trend lately, 2x increase each gen).
The others, just as me, have 3 PCs that are subsequentialy upgraded, when I upgrade the main PC the part replaced goes to the second one that is used to play older online games like CSS. The third one is at town where we go some weekends. The one replaced in this one is for non gamer friends or family, that pay me the gift with many things money can't buy.

 

[Fitseries3]

it just sucks they couldn't have released this a year ago when the 680i was still new. here we are less than 6 months away from the 9800gtx and they release TRI-SLI. it will be insane to see 3x 9800gtx's in tri-sli. are we gonna see 300+FPS in crysis by this time next year?

 

[AsRock]

I'll beleave it works as good they say it does when i see some hard facts that it does.

 

[Easy Rhino]

6 years old PC can't, 4 years old can. 2 Years old PC is mine, and it can play everything at Max except Crysis. Back in 2004, almost 4 years ago, with a 6 years old PC (bought in May 2002 for 900€) I could run Farcry, Doom3 on medium/high and HalfLife2 at Max. Farcry/HalfLife2/Doom3 PC on medium >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Any PS2 game. What's your point?

And you are right the same will happen with the PS3.
2008 PC games will demostrate this. Crysis demostrates this now.

EDIT: Anyway, it's funny how you went from "console hardware is better" to developers optimize better on lesser hardware on consoles" to "they continue making games on legacy hardware" (even if they are not offering nothing new and are crap compared to next gen).

i dont know how we got down this road i think that for games consoles are the better choice because that is what they are made for and you dont have to shell out money to upgrade every year to keep up with the best graphics. with the ps3 you get great graphics at 60 fps for the next 5 years AND ps3 games will continue to improve as more developers become familiar with the cell processor. i dont necessarily think console hardware is better, but i do think that it has an advantage because of how it is engineered. the ps2 was and still is an amazing console for the money. you dont need tri sli to play fun games. most games for the PC are coded terribly and hamper the ability of the PC. that doesnt happen nearly as much with consoles. the ps3, from what ive heard developers say, is very hard to code for because of the cell processor but at this point the possibilities are limitless. and i dont think you can fairly compare a PC that has the same gpu as the ps3. obviously there are far more to it than that. and i still dont think a PC from 4 years ago competes on the level of ps2 games from 2003. just no chance. look at metal gear solid 3 and tell me a 4 year old pc can play that on high settings. anyway, i digress. in my eyes id rather pay 500 bucks for a system that does HD gaming and not have to upgrade for the next 5 years than pay 2000 for a top end system that will not be able to play top end games above 30 fps next year.

 

[[I.R.A]_FBi]

but then after x amount of years you'd have 3 outdated heatpumps in ur pc ...

 

[DarkMatter]

i dont know how we got down this road i think that for games consoles are the better choice because that is what they are made for and you dont have to shell out money to upgrade every year to keep up with the best graphics. with the ps3 you get great graphics at 60 fps for the next 5 years AND ps3 games will continue to improve as more developers become familiar with the cell processor. i dont necessarily think console hardware is better, but i do think that it has an advantage because of how it is engineered. the ps2 was and still is an amazing console for the money. you dont need tri sli to play fun games. most games for the PC are coded terribly and hamper the ability of the PC. that doesnt happen nearly as much with consoles. the ps3, from what ive heard developers say, is very hard to code for because of the cell processor but at this point the possibilities are limitless. and i dont think you can fairly compare a PC that has the same gpu as the ps3. obviously there are far more to it than that. and i still dont think a PC from 4 years ago competes on the level of ps2 games from 2003. just no chance. look at metal gear solid 3 and tell me a 4 year old pc can play that on high settings. anyway, i digress. in my eyes id rather pay 500 bucks for a system that does HD gaming and not have to upgrade for the next 5 years than pay 2000 for a top end system that will not be able to play top end games above 30 fps next year.

Man you are worrying me.
You must be totally blind if you tell me Metal Gear Solid 3 has better graphics than DOOM3, Farcry, HL2 or FEAR for example. I played those at mostly everything high with the PC purchased in 2002 for 900€:
P4 2.5Ghz, GF4800, 1024MB DDR. Hell even RTCWolfenstein or No One Lives Forever >>>>>>>>>>MGS3. And played them on Athlon TBird 1Ghz, Voodoo3, 512MB ddr.
That and the fact that PS2 games didn't improve to my eyes in the last 4 years.

Another one, consoles at 60FPS????? Look them ROFLing.
And bad coding on PC vs superb in consoles? In which world do you live my friend? Last time I checked most next gen console games have needed a patch to work propperly, just as PC ones.

And if you tell me PS3 and XB360 do HD... Well, I suppose I've been doing HD gaming since 1997 on PC.

 

[Easy Rhino]

Man you are worrying me.
You must be totally blind if you tell me Metal Gear Solid 3 has better graphics than DOOM3, Farcry, HL2 or FEAR for example. I played those at mostly everything high with the PC purchased in 2002 for 900€:
P4 2.5Ghz, GF4800, 1024MB DDR. Hell even RTCWolfenstein or No One Lives Forever >>>>>>>>>>MGS3. And played them on Athlon TBird 1Ghz, Voodoo3, 512MB ddr.
That and the fact that PS2 games didn't improve to my eyes in the last 4 years.

metal gear solid 3 looks just as good and today people are still making games for the ps2. your athlon tbird is not playing games made for today is it?

Another one, consoles at 60FPS????? Look them ROFLing.

yes...60 fps...atleast the ps3 does... i thought that was common knowledge...

And bad coding on PC vs superb in consoles? In which world do you live my friend? Last time I checked most next gen console games have needed a patch to work propperly, just as PC ones.

the coding to PC games is inferior because of all the ridiculous things they have to code for. so you hamper your $2000 machine just by playing games. and you run games on windows. how sad.

And if you tell me PS3 and XB360 do HD... Well, I suppose I've been doing HD gaming since 1997 on PC.

next gen consoles do HD gaming, ie at 720p-1080p. that is important because people play their consoles generally on televisions, not pc monitors. why is that funny?

 

[hat]

No, that board is either gonna be 3 video cards or 2 with a PPU. It is a wasted PCI-E slot.

If you had 3, the cooler would cover up the last PCI slot.

 

[DarkMatter]

metal gear solid 3 looks just as good and today people are still making games for the ps2.

It doesn't look as good, it doesn't come close, not even in your wettest dream PS fanboy.

your athlon tbird is not playing games made for today is it?

Nor it is the PS2. The ones that come out today for the PS2, I wouldn't call them games of today. I don't care about those crappy games, I left caring back in 2003.

yes...60 fps...atleast the ps3 does... i thought that was common knowledge...

Say 30 FPS with serious slowdowns to 15 better, in the actual games, wich is what we are talking about, and not Sony PR BS. We both have played the games...

the coding to PC games is inferior because of all the ridiculous things they have to code for. so you hamper your $2000 machine just by playing games. and you run games on windows. how sad.

Keep saying that again and again, maybe someday it will end up being true nowadays. Wich is sad is that today consoles DO use OS that are on par with windows, in crappiness that is. Also games on next gen consoles are programed on DX9 and OpenGL with heavy use of shaders (preprogramed functions) wich are the same for PC and consoles. Game engines are the same, there isn't any difference RIGHT NOW. Forget about what was true in year 2000, it's almost 2008. No one gives a shit about PS2. And there's also the saddest thing, the PS3 has been desingn as a media center and not a gaming machine. If you were suporting a real console at least...
And the last thing about $2000 PC, as I said like 100 times. I have been playing games at max with PCs a lot less pricey. Indeed in my whole gaming history 1993-2007 I have spent ~$4000
and that's because I wanted to play at much better games than consoles. If had go mainstream instead of performance, it have been ~$2000.

next gen consoles do HD gaming, ie at 720p-1080p. that is important because people play their consoles generally on televisions, not pc monitors. why is that funny?

I've been playing 1024x768 --> 768p since 1997. 1280x960 --> 960p since 2002. As I said most games on consoles run at 720p, most of the ones at 1080p are upconverted from a lower res. So it's been needed 10 years for consoles to catch up in here. That's funny.

Give up. You are not convincing anyone on this forum. PCs are way superior 90% of the time, being the console somehow superior the first 6 months, when the PC components that are better than the ones on the consoles are still expensive. The rest of the lifetime PCs are waaaaaay superior. They are more expensive? Of course dude, Ferraris are better, so they are priced acordingly. But unless Ferraris, Pc components get really cheap in a year. Any PC today is superior to PS3 if you put in it a HD3850 or better graphics card. That is the truth, live with it.

 

[Fitseries3]

at least i can fix my pc when something goes wrong. i dont have to wait 6 weeks to send in my computer because it has a stupid red light on the front and wont work. i also dont have to put in a dvd/blueray disc everytime i want to play a different game. i can also do A LOT more with my computer than some POS console that cant even be upgraded.

 

[Scrizz]

at least i can fix my pc when something goes wrong. i dont have to wait 6 weeks to send in my computer because it has a stupid red light on the front and wont work. i also dont have to put in a dvd/blueray disc everytime i want to play a different game. i can also do A LOT more with my computer than some POS console that cant even be upgraded.

amen

 

[btarunr]

3x 8800 GT > 4x HD3870. You'll see this happen pretty soon.

But by Q1 2008, this will be confirmed for sure:

3x 8800 GTX >> 4x HD3870

 

[cdawall]

Man you are worrying me.
You must be totally blind if you tell me Metal Gear Solid 3 has better graphics than DOOM3, Farcry, HL2 or FEAR for example. I played those at mostly everything high with the PC purchased in 2002 for 900€:
P4 2.5Ghz, GF4800, 1024MB DDR. Hell even RTCWolfenstein or No One Lives Forever >>>>>>>>>>MGS3. And played them on Athlon TBird 1Ghz, Voodoo3, 512MB ddr.
That and the fact that PS2 games didn't improve to my eyes in the last 4 years.

Another one, consoles at 60FPS????? Look them ROFLing.
And bad coding on PC vs superb in consoles? In which world do you live my friend? Last time I checked most next gen console games have needed a patch to work propperly, just as PC ones.

And if you tell me PS3 and XB360 do HD... Well, I suppose I've been doing HD gaming since 1997 on PC.

i didnt want to get into this but my ti4200/axp setup played a lot of todays games just fine

my current rig not that much later on in tech terms but it plays ALL of todays games!

 

[niko084]

This is for nothing short of bragging rights.... A complete waste of time/money/power....

This is one of those things, 1 guy from 1 group will do to set a record, or to show off 100fps maxed in crysis.... Whoopty do you can dump $5000 worth of parts into a computer and make it useful to play games and in reality overkill to play games...

Lets be realistic here, I'm already considering dumping my 2nd 3870, sick of the heat and everything runs so great on one...

 

[btarunr]

ok if NV is only doing tri-sli why do boards like the ASUS L1N64-SLI WS Dual L have 4xsli slots

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813131146

That was part of NVidia's ambitious Quad-SLI plans. Unfortunately, they're shelved as of now. We'll have to see how the ATi Crossfire X performs. If it's able to assert superiority as a competent multi-GPU platform, then we can expect Quad SLI to rise from its grave.