I'm running i5 overclocked, SSD, 16GB RAM and GTX970 graphics card. I picked the i5 because it seemed like diminishing returns for the money based on my understanding of the numbers and wondered if I'd have the same experience with SLI. I play Planetside 2, Warframe, Killing Floor, and a few others. Who has tried SLI? Would you recommend it? What worked? What didn't?
I've been using SLi for over a year now since I got this new system, in some games I haven't noticed much of a differance but in others I have. Planetside 2, Warframe, Skyrim, and a few others show a good boost in performance when I use SLi. On the other hand, games like AC:U, Portal 2, Fable, and others that don't show much of a boost or have poor performance with it active.
To be honest, I can't really say whether its worth it.
Clock speed on i5? and with a GTX970, you should already be able to run all the games on high (if not max, depends on cpu) without issue at at least 60fps (which max a 60Hz refresh) As far as I'm aware, Nvidia cards are required to be the same make (same #'s.. ex 2 GTX970's or 2 GTX760's). PS2 would see minimal benefit since it should be CPU bound when in a fight (using a GTX970).
Another thing to think about, is it actually worth it? If your fps is higher that your refresh rate (in Hz, this is not the same as response time which is measured in ms), then a boost in fps (through sli) will make NO DIFFERENCE (as your monitor is the limiting factor, not what your system can produce). If you wanted a small boost without paying, and your cooling can handle it, OCing your GPU is another option.
(as a side note, if you're looking for FPS increase,at least in PS2, remember that the graphics are packaged at their highest settings, and the cpu is asked to lower them, so GPU heavy setting for PS2 should be set higher if possible to lower cpu load <<this is my understanding from alot of searches, just do a search if you want to know which settings are CPU heavy, but mostly shadows>>)
In a semi-related question, I haven't built my computer yet and I was wondering if I should go for a GTX 980 or two GTX 970s in SLI. These two options are about the same price. Which one would be more effective for most gaming?
More power out of the sli, but the 980 could be sli'ed later when its actually needed for much cheaper than sli'ing them now
Thanks people! I think this answers my question. I'll wait until my GPU starts popping up as the bottleneck for my gameplay quality and go for it then.
If starting with a new setup then SLI is not worth it. When using SLI your are gambling on wether it performs better on a particular game but if you have a better single card you are guarenteed that it will perform better.
My personal experience has been, when a new game comes out, I would have to wait a month or two for AMD or Nvidia to come out with an optimized profile for the game. By the time the game supports crossfire, mantle, SLI, or Physx properly, I ended up finishing the game.
Also, dont forget the "micro stuttering" that plagues most games in SLI or crossfire. (look it up if you havent heard of this yet)
That's interesting - I hadn't heard of that problem. Most of the time, I'm not playing games on the bleeding edge of their release, so the first issue shouldn't be much of a problem.
Anyone looking to get a new video card, go with the 2x 970s. They provide much more power than 1 980. If you have the money to spare, buy another 970 and SLI it. Right now, this is pretty much BiS.
Apparently Mantle is producing significantly more draw calls on the Crytek engine than Nvidia too, and there's still no word on AMD sharing Mantle with Nvidia either. Having always purchased Nvidia cards over the last decade I might make the switch if Mantle continues to develop.
Another thing worth mentioning since you're in Miami, is that with two high end cards it actually can heat up a small room.
I've had SLI 7800GTs, GTX260s, and GTX760s, and of those, the 260s and 760s were real room heaters. It's a great thing for an upstate ny winter, but in the summer, it can be a bear, and I would often find myself disabling SLI in like July/August. You figure 2 high end cards is about 400-500 watts...that's like a space heater at 1/3 capacity.
In my experience as IT Consultant, implementing SLI is solely based on a client's peculiar goal defined by the 'user'. The caveat here is high-end computing platforms, cost is not an issue, and the target audience is usually convention goers, developers, gaming studios, marketing departments, and CGI activities. Of course, gamers are clients as well, although those with deep pockets (My consulting fee doesn't really cater to casual gamers).
My two-cents on SLI - stick with single card when using mid-range technology components. The gain in performance is negligible when using mid-range platforms. Even those applications where SLI is measurable, we're talking about a couple games. If your bandwidth is on par with remarkable FPS, GPU output is only as good as the network capable of rendering best gaming state. In most cases, a single card will reproduce the same FPS tied to gaming response that SLI is capable of, albeit, sharper kill/death scenes - it's just a prettier picture of the same environment.
That's my two-cents.
Which of these two builds would you recommend? They should be identical except for SLI vs. higher performance single card.
http://pcpartpicker.com/user/brokenbow1/saved/Nm6NnQ
http://pcpartpicker.com/user/brokenbow1/saved/3bjbt6