Motherboards Memory Storage Cases/Cooling/PSUs IT Computing Displays Mobile Mac CPUs & Chipsets Video Digital Cameras Linux Gadgets Systems Trade Shows Guides Home Increase Font Size Decrease Font Size Change Page Size
Quad SLI with 9800 GX2: Pushing a System to its Limit
Quad SLI with 9800 GX2: Pushing a System to its Limit
Date: March 25th, 2008
Topic: Video Card
Manufacturer: NVIDIA
Author: Derek Wilson
 
 

Sometimes it’s the little quirks in life that sneak up on you and change the way you look at the world. The past couple weeks have done that in testing all this new high end gear. Sure, we’ve had our problems testing bleeding edge stuff before, but in putting all of this from CrossFireX through 9800 GX2 Quad SLI to the test, we’ve gotten ourselves lost in some other dimension of existence. It’s the only explanation really. Like Holmes would have said … whatever remains, however improbable … But I’m getting ahead of myself.

Skulltrail (the D5400XS Intel board we’re using that runs both CrossFire and SLI) rivals Frankenstein’s monster. From the 2x LGA775 sockets, FB-DIMMs, and NVIDIA nForce 100 PCIe chips, it’s not for the feint of heart. We’ve been determined to test on a single platform to compare CrossFire and SLI and trying to work out some kinks has given us a little trouble. AMD and NVIDIA and Intel have all worked with us to try and make things go more smoothly (thanks everyone), but there are still some things that we just can’t explain going on.

After loads of nearly useless testing and many conversations with different people, we set out on a trail of mystical discovery that has unlocked secrets of the universe here-to-fore untold. We’ll get to that in a bit, but first we’ve got to stop and take a look at what we are covering today.

Quad SLI. NVIDIA would like us to tell you it’s the new hotness. Certainly, without even opening a page of this review you should all know that this is the top of the top of the line and nothing is faster right now. But we do need to answer a few key questions about this $1200 setup: how does it scale from two GPUs to four, how does scaling compare to CrossFireX, and what kind of performance and value does this solution actually offer.

Honestly, we also have to acknowledge from our previous review of the 9800 GX2 that a single card is enough to run almost any game at maximum settings … that is, with the glaring exception of Crysis. Can Quad SLI change that? From what we saw in our CrossFireX testing from AMD, we would have thought not. However, NVIDIA has managed to get Crysis to scale across all four GPUs despite the interframe dependencies that make it so difficult. Is it enough to run Crysis at a decent resolution with all the eye candy turned on?

Let’s find out …

The Setup and The Test   Next Page

 
  Index

Tools Share
Find lowest prices Find the lowest prices
Digg   del.icio.us   E-mail  
Print This Article Print this article  

53 Comments - Last by DDH III, 474 days ago
Username:
Password:
Re Quad sli by cactusjack, 686 days ago
Nvidia should go back to making good stable video cards with good IQ instead of flexing their e muscles with crap like this that no one will ever want or need. Nvidia had problems with power issues and vista driver issues on 8 series cards (G92)that they should be working on.

Reply
RE: Re Quad sli by Layzer253, 686 days ago
No, they shouldnt. It works just fine

Reply
RE: Re Quad sli by raymondse, 686 days ago
Crysis this, Crysis that. SLI this, CrossFire that...

After reading almost a dozen reviews of SLI, Tri-SLI, Quad-SLI, and CrossFire running Crysis and handful of other games, it seems that there is something terribly wrong with the all the benchmarks. Test results show that raw multi-GPU horsepower, even when coupled with multi-CPUs, just isn't delivering the kinds of numbers that most of us were expecting. The potential computing power that this kind of hardware can deliver just doesn't show in the numbers. Something is really, really wrong with one of these components thats disrupting the whole point of going for more than one CPU/GPU.

What I'd like to see is some definitive study showing where the problem(s) is and who to blame. Is it the CPU? GPU? Memory? System Bus? PCI-E? Drivers? DirectX? Windows? or the game/application itself?

After all these tests and benchmarks run by really, really smart people, someone out there ought to be able to deduce who messed up in all this business.

Reply
RE: Re Quad sli by piroroadkill, 686 days ago
I agree with this, there's a doubling of raw power with two cards (and a doubling of the price), and until I see double the performance in scaling, SLI and CF can go to hell

Reply
RE: Re Quad sli by Das Capitolin, 678 days ago
What I dislike about many reviews, is that they test Crysis on "HIGH" settings. There's a major difference between "HIGH" which doesn't use AA, and HIGH with 16x Q AA.

Here's an example of the difference it makes.

Reply
RE: Re Quad sli by Das Capitolin, 678 days ago
What I dislike about many reviews, is that they test Crysis on "HIGH" settings. There's a major difference between "HIGH" which doesn't use AA, and HIGH with 16x Q AA.

Here's an example of the difference it makes.

http://benchmarkreviews.com/index.php?o...;Itemid=1&limit=1&limitstart=9

Reply
Nice review by chizow, 686 days ago
Nice job on the review Derek, looks like you ran into some problems but I'd guess testing these new pieces of hardware make it worthwhile.

It really looks like Quad SLI scaling is really poor right now, do you think its a case of drivers needing to mature, CPU bottleneck, or frame buffer limitations? I know Vista should be maxed at 4 frame buffers, but there seems to be very little scaling beyond a single GX2 in everything except Crysis (and COD4). In some games, performance actually decreases with the 2nd GX2.

Also, seeing the massive performance difference between Skulltrail and 780i, is it even worthwhile to continue using Skulltrail as a test platform? I understand it makes it more convenient for you guys to test between different GPU vendors, but a 25% difference in Crysis between an NV SLI solution and Intel's SLI solution is rather drastic, and that's *after* you factor in the 2nd CPU for Skulltrail. Does ATI suffer a similar performance hit when compared against its best performing chipset platform?

I would've liked to have seen Tri-SLI compared in there. Personally I think Tri-SLI with 8800 GTX/Ultra and soon, 9800 GTX will outperform Quad-SLI as it seems the drivers are a bit more mature for Tri-SLI and scaling was better as well. SLI performance with those parts is slightly better already than the GX2 and adding that third card should give Tri-SLI the lead over Quad-SLI.

Lastly, how was your actual gameplay experience with these high-end parts? Micro-stutter is a buzz word that has been gaining steam lately with multi-GPU solutions. Did you notice any in your testing? It looks like frame buffer size really kills all of these 512MB parts at 2560, would you consider games at that resolution unplayable? It seems many who considered 2-GX2 or 2-X2 would have done so to play at 2560. If that resolution is unplayable, you're looking at an even smaller window of consumers that would actually buy and benefit from such an expensive set-up.

Reply
RE: Nice review by seamusmc, 685 days ago
chizow check out Hard OCP's review in regards to 'micro' stutter. They do a great job of presenting the issue and how it affects gameplay.

They feel the problem is due to the smaller amount of memory/memory bandwidth on the GX2 as opposed to an 8800 GTX/Ultra.



Reply
RE: Nice review by DerekWilson, 684 days ago
in my gameplay experience, i had no difficulty with micro stutter and the 9800gx2 in quad sli.

i will say that i have run into the problem on crossfirex in oblivion with 4 way at very high res. it wasn't that pronounced or detrimental to the overall experience to me, but i'll make sure to mention it when i run into this problem in the future.

Reply
Throw skull trail out of the mix when benchmarking video cards by tviceman, 686 days ago
How many people own skull trail platforms and have dual 9800GX2's? Ten. There are ten people that have this setup. For everyone else, it's a pipe dream so far fetched I think I'd have better chances winning the local lottery than owning this kind of system.

Seriously though, there are significantly more cons than pros when using skull trail to benchmark video card performance. The raw power of 8 CPU's is great in theory but it's not translating in real world gaming applications (in some cases it's hurting).

Video card reviews would be served better with the fastest quad core CPU available, accompanied with the highest performance motherboard out, and an excellent CPU cooler to allow for maximum overclock.

Reply
Comments Page 1 of 6

Deliver Rich Interactive Experiences
Engage more viewers with Adobe® Flash® Media Interactive Server 3.5
Vinpower DVD Duplicator
Manufacturer of quality disc duplication systems. Drop shipping available. Become a reseller today.
Unlicensed Software at Your Last Company
Anonymously Report Unlicensed Software with Our Form Now. Get Up to $1 Million.
Special Offer from The Economist
Get 12 issues of The Economist for $12. US subscribers only.
Unlicensed Software at Your Last Company
Anonymously Report Unlicensed Software with Our Form Now. Get Up to $1 Million.




Latest news by
DailyTech

 February 9, 2010

Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank

 February 8, 2010

Blank


more Video Card Discussions



pipeboost
Copyright © 1997-2010 AnandTech, Inc. All rights reserved. Terms, Conditions and Privacy Information.
Click Here for Advertising Information