Quick 8800GTS SLI question

K

kirk121

Limp Gawd
Joined
Sep 20, 2007
Messages
159
I just got my first sli system going I have been running a single 8800GTS 640MB, now I finally was able to get another one. But I am wondering if my AM2 dual core processor running at 2.86GHz is going to be enough to keep them happy and not bottle neck them, at least not too much. This is my first time going sli so I am fairly new to this area, I have noticed that Crysis is not running a whole lot faster, but I under stand that very few if any systems can run that at a fast speed with the settings turned up.

I did get a good bump in 3DMark 2006, up from 5800 to almost 10,000, so I know that I am getting a speed increase from the second card. And I also know that 3DMark is not something to rely on for real world performance.

Also I need to get a water block for my second card, because my poor sound card has less than a quarter of a inch of clearance from my second video card
 
u could OC ur cpu

or get a new one lol

and sli only shows its power at high resolutions
 
to tell you that's a shame you made an sli with this cards ? i wont say that
enjoy what you have .
I really really dont think your CPU bottle necks the card , you have a fine dual core with a nice speed.
shouldn't be a problem . ofc you will get a better performence with a better cpu , but bottle necks? not likely
 
A 2.8GHz x2 will give you approx 80% of the performance from a stock clocked 8800GT and overclocking the card reaps no benefit.
Due to this I believe your CPU will be a fair bottleneck.
My 120% overclocked 8800GT is driven to its max by my C2D E8400 when at 2.8GHz in case it helps.
 
Your 3D Mark score isnt bad at all, I have the 8800GT in SLI and I score 11500, so you arent too far off for sure.
 
bender said:
Your 3D Mark score isnt bad at all, I have the 8800GT in SLI and I score 11500, so you arent too far off for sure.
Click to expand...

Thats quite bad really, I'm running a single 8800GT with an E8400 (both clocked) and score 14,000 in 3DM06.
 
Thats quite bad really, I'm running a single 8800GT with an E8400 (both clocked) and score 14,000 in 3DM06.
Click to expand...



Yeah, we are comparing apples to apples here, not apples to oranges.
 
I don't have an SLI score yet for my pair of 8800GTS 640MB cards, but my best single GPU score was 11,400.

Of course that is with a 3.3Ghz e6600 and DDR2-1066 feeding my A3 stepping card @ 675/1620/1080. At stock CPU and GPU clocks (2.4Ghz, and 513/1188/793) I got ~8700. I think something isn't quite right. Not exactly sure what (CPU, drivers, driver settings).

What is your CPU score in 3DMark06? I got ~2090 at stock 2.4Ghz, but more like 2700 when overclocked.

Oh, I have never run 3DMark06 on this system using anything but 32-bit Vista, BTW.
 
Nenu said:
A 2.8GHz x2 will give you approx 80% of the performance from a stock clocked 8800GT and overclocking the card reaps no benefit.
Due to this I believe your CPU will be a fair bottleneck.
.
Click to expand...

o rly ? Got one ?
 
I don't believe that statement about a 2.8hgz athlon only being able to push 80% out of your 8800gt unless

a) you game at resolutions less than 1280*1024
b)you'r simply comparing 3dmark, in which case the lower resolution is also likely playing in.

There's a reason why benchmarks tend to plain out at higher resolutions with the same graphics cards across different gpus. If you're playing at something 1920*1080 then I would say the 8800gts's are definitely going to be the bottleneck, not the cpu.
 
R-Type said:
I don't believe that statement about a 2.8hgz athlon only being able to push 80% out of your 8800gt unless

a) you game at resolutions less than 1280*1024
b)you'r simply comparing 3dmark, in which case the lower resolution is also likely playing in.

There's a reason why benchmarks tend to plain out at higher resolutions with the same graphics cards across different gpus. If you're playing at something 1920*1080 then I would say the 8800gts's are definitely going to be the bottleneck, not the cpu.
Click to expand...

Take it or leave it.
You can read other peoples experiences too and they all report similar.
 
I actually once did a test with my 5200 Windsor about this.

I was debating on whether or not my 3.0ghz windsor was really holding back my 8800 GT's (not GTS's) Anyway.

Playing COD4 completely maxed out (AA/AF also) at 1920x1200 I ran on average 30-45 FPS as the ship was sinking at the very end of the level it stayed at a dead 30fps and didn't budge.

I disabled SLi and actually physically removed the card to make sure SLi would not have a factor at all in the above test.

So for the second test I put the Second 8800 GT back in and enabled SLi and enabled Multi GPU support in COD4. I was now getting 60-85 FPS sometimes even into the 100's still. and at the end of the level with the ship sinking it was at a dead as a rock 60 through the whole scene.

Made me decide that I didn't need to upgrade my CPU =D
 
R-Type said:
I don't believe that statement about a 2.8hgz athlon only being able to push 80% out of your 8800gt unless

a) you game at resolutions less than 1280*1024
b)you'r simply comparing 3dmark, in which case the lower resolution is also likely playing in.

There's a reason why benchmarks tend to plain out at higher resolutions with the same graphics cards across different gpus. If you're playing at something 1920*1080 then I would say the 8800gts's are definitely going to be the bottleneck, not the cpu.
Click to expand...

+ 1
 
3dMark06 is a horrible tool for measuring performance. So the fact someone is telling you that your system is performing horribly, when the scores that are being used are the default test settings, is simply stupid.

Coming from a person who had 2x8800GTS 640mb in a 939 X2 system (3.0GHz) then went to a Q6600 system, I can tell you that if you are gaming at 1650x1080+ with AA & AF, the difference is small and not worth mentioning. I also have the full version of 3dMark06 (ty Asus) and when using my 939 system the score at 1280x1024 was roughly the same as my score at 1920x1200 (roughly 11K, give or take a few hundred points). What does that tell you exactly? well the bottleneck is obviously there but at lower resolutions and when you increase the resolution the bottleneck becomes a less of a factor
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top