3D vision SLI vs. non-SLI performance Is there a advantage in 3D drivers for SLI systems?
1 / 7
I'm wondering if there might be an advantage for a SLI setup compared to just one card with similar performance.
I.e. if I were to use a high-end card or lower spec cards in SLI, which setup would be most efficient when it comes to 3D performance?
Is there by any chance a slight advantage in 3D drivers for SLI systems, due to perhaps the parallell rendering of two off-angle images from the same scene?
I'm wondering if there might be an advantage for a SLI setup compared to just one card with similar performance.
I.e. if I were to use a high-end card or lower spec cards in SLI, which setup would be most efficient when it comes to 3D performance?
Is there by any chance a slight advantage in 3D drivers for SLI systems, due to perhaps the parallell rendering of two off-angle images from the same scene?
I'm wondering if there might be an advantage for a SLI setup compared to just one card with similar performance.
I.e. if I were to use a high-end card or lower spec cards in SLI, which setup would be most efficient when it comes to 3D performance?
Is there by any chance a slight advantage in 3D drivers for SLI systems, due to perhaps the parallell rendering of two off-angle images from the same scene?
I'm wondering if there might be an advantage for a SLI setup compared to just one card with similar performance.
I.e. if I were to use a high-end card or lower spec cards in SLI, which setup would be most efficient when it comes to 3D performance?
Is there by any chance a slight advantage in 3D drivers for SLI systems, due to perhaps the parallell rendering of two off-angle images from the same scene?
yes there is- NV has great scaling in SLI in 3d. almost a requirement if you want 1080p and high visual quality. dont bother with anything above 2 cards though- scaling drops dramatically beyond 2. i get 95 plus percent scaling on my sli rig.
yes there is- NV has great scaling in SLI in 3d. almost a requirement if you want 1080p and high visual quality. dont bother with anything above 2 cards though- scaling drops dramatically beyond 2. i get 95 plus percent scaling on my sli rig.
System:
Intel I7 920 overclocked to 4ghz
Asus Rampage Extreme II
2 Ge-force 480 in SLI
GTX 295 PhysX Card
12gb ddr3 2000mhz ram
Intel SSD in RAID 0
BR RW
1000w Sony surround sound
NVIDIA 3D Vision
3d displays tested:
Mitsubishi 65" DLP 3d HDTV (good old 1080p checkerboard since 2007!!!)
Panasonic VT25 (nice 2d but I returned it due to cross talk)
Acer H5360 720p on 130" screen (the best 3d)
23" Acer LCD monitor (horrible cross talk- sold it)
yes there is- NV has great scaling in SLI in 3d. almost a requirement if you want 1080p and high visual quality. dont bother with anything above 2 cards though- scaling drops dramatically beyond 2. i get 95 plus percent scaling on my sli rig.
yes there is- NV has great scaling in SLI in 3d. almost a requirement if you want 1080p and high visual quality. dont bother with anything above 2 cards though- scaling drops dramatically beyond 2. i get 95 plus percent scaling on my sli rig.
System:
Intel I7 920 overclocked to 4ghz
Asus Rampage Extreme II
2 Ge-force 480 in SLI
GTX 295 PhysX Card
12gb ddr3 2000mhz ram
Intel SSD in RAID 0
BR RW
1000w Sony surround sound
NVIDIA 3D Vision
3d displays tested:
Mitsubishi 65" DLP 3d HDTV (good old 1080p checkerboard since 2007!!!)
Panasonic VT25 (nice 2d but I returned it due to cross talk)
Acer H5360 720p on 130" screen (the best 3d)
23" Acer LCD monitor (horrible cross talk- sold it)
[quote name='DanielJoy' post='1108206' date='Aug 24 2010, 11:57 AM']yes there is- NV has great scaling in SLI in 3d. almost a requirement if you want 1080p and high visual quality. dont bother with anything above 2 cards though- scaling drops dramatically beyond 2. i get 95 plus percent scaling on my sli rig.[/quote]
Can you support that statement? I would think the scaling efficiency of the cards has more to do with the architecture (chipset) of the cards themselves and nothing to do with the drivers..?
[quote name='DanielJoy' post='1108206' date='Aug 24 2010, 11:57 AM']yes there is- NV has great scaling in SLI in 3d. almost a requirement if you want 1080p and high visual quality. dont bother with anything above 2 cards though- scaling drops dramatically beyond 2. i get 95 plus percent scaling on my sli rig.
Can you support that statement? I would think the scaling efficiency of the cards has more to do with the architecture (chipset) of the cards themselves and nothing to do with the drivers..?
[quote name='DanielJoy' post='1108206' date='Aug 24 2010, 11:57 AM']yes there is- NV has great scaling in SLI in 3d. almost a requirement if you want 1080p and high visual quality. dont bother with anything above 2 cards though- scaling drops dramatically beyond 2. i get 95 plus percent scaling on my sli rig.[/quote]
Can you support that statement? I would think the scaling efficiency of the cards has more to do with the architecture (chipset) of the cards themselves and nothing to do with the drivers..?
[quote name='DanielJoy' post='1108206' date='Aug 24 2010, 11:57 AM']yes there is- NV has great scaling in SLI in 3d. almost a requirement if you want 1080p and high visual quality. dont bother with anything above 2 cards though- scaling drops dramatically beyond 2. i get 95 plus percent scaling on my sli rig.
Can you support that statement? I would think the scaling efficiency of the cards has more to do with the architecture (chipset) of the cards themselves and nothing to do with the drivers..?
well- in 2d i got great scaling with quad sli- in 3d with the exact same cards you get really poor performance that varied with each driver release. i didnt know i would have to prove my observations on a forum when i had quad sli so i have no way to replicate my observations (i have 480 sli now) with tri or quad gpu rigs in 3d and 2d. a search will yield lots of people complaining about 3x+ gpu scaling in 3d. plus i have observed two generations now that suffer from poor 3d performance beyond (quad sli 295 and now the fermi series) two gpu's.
im not purely speculating- this is based off of observation. however, this is by no means a fact. i could have observed something wrong (me and every one else posting about poor scaling)
plus this could change with more mature drivers. supposedly quad sli scaling has improved since i ditched it in late april- but it still seems poor IMO.
well- in 2d i got great scaling with quad sli- in 3d with the exact same cards you get really poor performance that varied with each driver release. i didnt know i would have to prove my observations on a forum when i had quad sli so i have no way to replicate my observations (i have 480 sli now) with tri or quad gpu rigs in 3d and 2d. a search will yield lots of people complaining about 3x+ gpu scaling in 3d. plus i have observed two generations now that suffer from poor 3d performance beyond (quad sli 295 and now the fermi series) two gpu's.
im not purely speculating- this is based off of observation. however, this is by no means a fact. i could have observed something wrong (me and every one else posting about poor scaling)
plus this could change with more mature drivers. supposedly quad sli scaling has improved since i ditched it in late april- but it still seems poor IMO.
System:
Intel I7 920 overclocked to 4ghz
Asus Rampage Extreme II
2 Ge-force 480 in SLI
GTX 295 PhysX Card
12gb ddr3 2000mhz ram
Intel SSD in RAID 0
BR RW
1000w Sony surround sound
NVIDIA 3D Vision
3d displays tested:
Mitsubishi 65" DLP 3d HDTV (good old 1080p checkerboard since 2007!!!)
Panasonic VT25 (nice 2d but I returned it due to cross talk)
Acer H5360 720p on 130" screen (the best 3d)
23" Acer LCD monitor (horrible cross talk- sold it)
well- in 2d i got great scaling with quad sli- in 3d with the exact same cards you get really poor performance that varied with each driver release. i didnt know i would have to prove my observations on a forum when i had quad sli so i have no way to replicate my observations (i have 480 sli now) with tri or quad gpu rigs in 3d and 2d. a search will yield lots of people complaining about 3x+ gpu scaling in 3d. plus i have observed two generations now that suffer from poor 3d performance beyond (quad sli 295 and now the fermi series) two gpu's.
im not purely speculating- this is based off of observation. however, this is by no means a fact. i could have observed something wrong (me and every one else posting about poor scaling)
plus this could change with more mature drivers. supposedly quad sli scaling has improved since i ditched it in late april- but it still seems poor IMO.
well- in 2d i got great scaling with quad sli- in 3d with the exact same cards you get really poor performance that varied with each driver release. i didnt know i would have to prove my observations on a forum when i had quad sli so i have no way to replicate my observations (i have 480 sli now) with tri or quad gpu rigs in 3d and 2d. a search will yield lots of people complaining about 3x+ gpu scaling in 3d. plus i have observed two generations now that suffer from poor 3d performance beyond (quad sli 295 and now the fermi series) two gpu's.
im not purely speculating- this is based off of observation. however, this is by no means a fact. i could have observed something wrong (me and every one else posting about poor scaling)
plus this could change with more mature drivers. supposedly quad sli scaling has improved since i ditched it in late april- but it still seems poor IMO.
System:
Intel I7 920 overclocked to 4ghz
Asus Rampage Extreme II
2 Ge-force 480 in SLI
GTX 295 PhysX Card
12gb ddr3 2000mhz ram
Intel SSD in RAID 0
BR RW
1000w Sony surround sound
NVIDIA 3D Vision
3d displays tested:
Mitsubishi 65" DLP 3d HDTV (good old 1080p checkerboard since 2007!!!)
Panasonic VT25 (nice 2d but I returned it due to cross talk)
Acer H5360 720p on 130" screen (the best 3d)
23" Acer LCD monitor (horrible cross talk- sold it)
[quote name='DanielJoy' post='1108359' date='Aug 24 2010, 04:55 PM']well- in 2d i got great scaling with quad sli- in 3d with the exact same cards you get really poor performance that varied with each driver release. i didnt know i would have to prove my observations on a forum when i had quad sli so i have no way to replicate my observations (i have 480 sli now) with tri or quad gpu rigs in 3d and 2d. a search will yield lots of people complaining about 3x+ gpu scaling in 3d. plus i have observed two generations now that suffer from poor 3d performance beyond (quad sli 295 and now the fermi series) two gpu's.
im not purely speculating- this is based off of observation. however, this is by no means a fact. i could have observed something wrong (me and every one else posting about poor scaling)
plus this could change with more mature drivers. supposedly quad sli scaling has improved since i ditched it in late april- but it still seems poor IMO.[/quote]
Very good, that's why I was asking. Lots of times people will just see some heresay on the internet and then repeat it as fact. Like you said your observations are not necessarily scientific but they appear to be sound observations.
[quote name='DanielJoy' post='1108359' date='Aug 24 2010, 04:55 PM']well- in 2d i got great scaling with quad sli- in 3d with the exact same cards you get really poor performance that varied with each driver release. i didnt know i would have to prove my observations on a forum when i had quad sli so i have no way to replicate my observations (i have 480 sli now) with tri or quad gpu rigs in 3d and 2d. a search will yield lots of people complaining about 3x+ gpu scaling in 3d. plus i have observed two generations now that suffer from poor 3d performance beyond (quad sli 295 and now the fermi series) two gpu's.
im not purely speculating- this is based off of observation. however, this is by no means a fact. i could have observed something wrong (me and every one else posting about poor scaling)
plus this could change with more mature drivers. supposedly quad sli scaling has improved since i ditched it in late april- but it still seems poor IMO.
Very good, that's why I was asking. Lots of times people will just see some heresay on the internet and then repeat it as fact. Like you said your observations are not necessarily scientific but they appear to be sound observations.
[quote name='DanielJoy' post='1108359' date='Aug 24 2010, 04:55 PM']well- in 2d i got great scaling with quad sli- in 3d with the exact same cards you get really poor performance that varied with each driver release. i didnt know i would have to prove my observations on a forum when i had quad sli so i have no way to replicate my observations (i have 480 sli now) with tri or quad gpu rigs in 3d and 2d. a search will yield lots of people complaining about 3x+ gpu scaling in 3d. plus i have observed two generations now that suffer from poor 3d performance beyond (quad sli 295 and now the fermi series) two gpu's.
im not purely speculating- this is based off of observation. however, this is by no means a fact. i could have observed something wrong (me and every one else posting about poor scaling)
plus this could change with more mature drivers. supposedly quad sli scaling has improved since i ditched it in late april- but it still seems poor IMO.[/quote]
Very good, that's why I was asking. Lots of times people will just see some heresay on the internet and then repeat it as fact. Like you said your observations are not necessarily scientific but they appear to be sound observations.
[quote name='DanielJoy' post='1108359' date='Aug 24 2010, 04:55 PM']well- in 2d i got great scaling with quad sli- in 3d with the exact same cards you get really poor performance that varied with each driver release. i didnt know i would have to prove my observations on a forum when i had quad sli so i have no way to replicate my observations (i have 480 sli now) with tri or quad gpu rigs in 3d and 2d. a search will yield lots of people complaining about 3x+ gpu scaling in 3d. plus i have observed two generations now that suffer from poor 3d performance beyond (quad sli 295 and now the fermi series) two gpu's.
im not purely speculating- this is based off of observation. however, this is by no means a fact. i could have observed something wrong (me and every one else posting about poor scaling)
plus this could change with more mature drivers. supposedly quad sli scaling has improved since i ditched it in late april- but it still seems poor IMO.
Very good, that's why I was asking. Lots of times people will just see some heresay on the internet and then repeat it as fact. Like you said your observations are not necessarily scientific but they appear to be sound observations.
just trying to help others make sound choices. i was quite annoyed when i discovered quad sli's poor performance in 3d.
i seriously hope they get 3-way SLI working better with 3d vision surround! this would be the optimum GPU configuration for surround IMO. so far all users have reported it works great in 2d, but in 3d the performance is poor.
just trying to help others make sound choices. i was quite annoyed when i discovered quad sli's poor performance in 3d.
i seriously hope they get 3-way SLI working better with 3d vision surround! this would be the optimum GPU configuration for surround IMO. so far all users have reported it works great in 2d, but in 3d the performance is poor.
System:
Intel I7 920 overclocked to 4ghz
Asus Rampage Extreme II
2 Ge-force 480 in SLI
GTX 295 PhysX Card
12gb ddr3 2000mhz ram
Intel SSD in RAID 0
BR RW
1000w Sony surround sound
NVIDIA 3D Vision
3d displays tested:
Mitsubishi 65" DLP 3d HDTV (good old 1080p checkerboard since 2007!!!)
Panasonic VT25 (nice 2d but I returned it due to cross talk)
Acer H5360 720p on 130" screen (the best 3d)
23" Acer LCD monitor (horrible cross talk- sold it)
just trying to help others make sound choices. i was quite annoyed when i discovered quad sli's poor performance in 3d.
i seriously hope they get 3-way SLI working better with 3d vision surround! this would be the optimum GPU configuration for surround IMO. so far all users have reported it works great in 2d, but in 3d the performance is poor.
just trying to help others make sound choices. i was quite annoyed when i discovered quad sli's poor performance in 3d.
i seriously hope they get 3-way SLI working better with 3d vision surround! this would be the optimum GPU configuration for surround IMO. so far all users have reported it works great in 2d, but in 3d the performance is poor.
System:
Intel I7 920 overclocked to 4ghz
Asus Rampage Extreme II
2 Ge-force 480 in SLI
GTX 295 PhysX Card
12gb ddr3 2000mhz ram
Intel SSD in RAID 0
BR RW
1000w Sony surround sound
NVIDIA 3D Vision
3d displays tested:
Mitsubishi 65" DLP 3d HDTV (good old 1080p checkerboard since 2007!!!)
Panasonic VT25 (nice 2d but I returned it due to cross talk)
Acer H5360 720p on 130" screen (the best 3d)
23" Acer LCD monitor (horrible cross talk- sold it)
SLI scaling in 3D Vision is generally excellent as others have indicated, however, in some games its quite a bit less and the most annoying part is that many of those games are where additioal performance is needed the most. Typically however, SLI will negate the 50% performance hit that you would see with a single-GPU, so if 3D Vision halves your FPS then SLI would double it again giving you what you would expect from a single GPU in non-S3D. There are some exceptions however, particularly in DX10/11 titles where scaling is less than expected and less than DX9. Personally I think these SLI scaling are issues with the 3D stereo driver's efficiency, so hopefully they continue to tweak them.
If I had to recommend an ideal rig today for 3D Vision I would start at 2xGTX 460 1GB, which should be a good bit faster than GT200 in SLI and enough to run most games at 1920x1080 in 3D Vision at close to 60FPS per eye. GTX 470/480 in SLI would be ideal however. 2x460 would also be better than 1x480 for 3D Vision in most games however, although you will run into a few games that don't scale as well in SLI so a single 480 might be slightly better.
[quote name='DanielJoy' post='1108377' date='Aug 24 2010, 05:21 PM']just trying to help others make sound choices. i was quite annoyed when i discovered quad sli's poor performance in 3d.
i seriously hope they get 3-way SLI working better with 3d vision surround! this would be the optimum GPU configuration for surround IMO. so far all users have reported it works great in 2d, but in 3d the performance is poor.[/quote]
I know this was the case for a long time but I've read numerous reports that one of the more recent drivers, maybe CD 1.33 with the 258.96 drivers fixed 3-way and 4-way 3D Vision scaling performance.
SLI scaling in 3D Vision is generally excellent as others have indicated, however, in some games its quite a bit less and the most annoying part is that many of those games are where additioal performance is needed the most. Typically however, SLI will negate the 50% performance hit that you would see with a single-GPU, so if 3D Vision halves your FPS then SLI would double it again giving you what you would expect from a single GPU in non-S3D. There are some exceptions however, particularly in DX10/11 titles where scaling is less than expected and less than DX9. Personally I think these SLI scaling are issues with the 3D stereo driver's efficiency, so hopefully they continue to tweak them.
If I had to recommend an ideal rig today for 3D Vision I would start at 2xGTX 460 1GB, which should be a good bit faster than GT200 in SLI and enough to run most games at 1920x1080 in 3D Vision at close to 60FPS per eye. GTX 470/480 in SLI would be ideal however. 2x460 would also be better than 1x480 for 3D Vision in most games however, although you will run into a few games that don't scale as well in SLI so a single 480 might be slightly better.
[quote name='DanielJoy' post='1108377' date='Aug 24 2010, 05:21 PM']just trying to help others make sound choices. i was quite annoyed when i discovered quad sli's poor performance in 3d.
i seriously hope they get 3-way SLI working better with 3d vision surround! this would be the optimum GPU configuration for surround IMO. so far all users have reported it works great in 2d, but in 3d the performance is poor.
I know this was the case for a long time but I've read numerous reports that one of the more recent drivers, maybe CD 1.33 with the 258.96 drivers fixed 3-way and 4-way 3D Vision scaling performance.
I.e. if I were to use a high-end card or lower spec cards in SLI, which setup would be most efficient when it comes to 3D performance?
Is there by any chance a slight advantage in 3D drivers for SLI systems, due to perhaps the parallell rendering of two off-angle images from the same scene?
I.e. if I were to use a high-end card or lower spec cards in SLI, which setup would be most efficient when it comes to 3D performance?
Is there by any chance a slight advantage in 3D drivers for SLI systems, due to perhaps the parallell rendering of two off-angle images from the same scene?
I.e. if I were to use a high-end card or lower spec cards in SLI, which setup would be most efficient when it comes to 3D performance?
Is there by any chance a slight advantage in 3D drivers for SLI systems, due to perhaps the parallell rendering of two off-angle images from the same scene?
I.e. if I were to use a high-end card or lower spec cards in SLI, which setup would be most efficient when it comes to 3D performance?
Is there by any chance a slight advantage in 3D drivers for SLI systems, due to perhaps the parallell rendering of two off-angle images from the same scene?
System:
Intel I7 920 overclocked to 4ghz
Asus Rampage Extreme II
2 Ge-force 480 in SLI
GTX 295 PhysX Card
12gb ddr3 2000mhz ram
Intel SSD in RAID 0
BR RW
1000w Sony surround sound
NVIDIA 3D Vision
3d displays tested:
Mitsubishi 65" DLP 3d HDTV (good old 1080p checkerboard since 2007!!!)
Panasonic VT25 (nice 2d but I returned it due to cross talk)
Acer H5360 720p on 130" screen (the best 3d)
23" Acer LCD monitor (horrible cross talk- sold it)
Samsung 65D8000
System:
Intel I7 920 overclocked to 4ghz
Asus Rampage Extreme II
2 Ge-force 480 in SLI
GTX 295 PhysX Card
12gb ddr3 2000mhz ram
Intel SSD in RAID 0
BR RW
1000w Sony surround sound
NVIDIA 3D Vision
3d displays tested:
Mitsubishi 65" DLP 3d HDTV (good old 1080p checkerboard since 2007!!!)
Panasonic VT25 (nice 2d but I returned it due to cross talk)
Acer H5360 720p on 130" screen (the best 3d)
23" Acer LCD monitor (horrible cross talk- sold it)
Samsung 65D8000
Can you support that statement? I would think the scaling efficiency of the cards has more to do with the architecture (chipset) of the cards themselves and nothing to do with the drivers..?
Can you support that statement? I would think the scaling efficiency of the cards has more to do with the architecture (chipset) of the cards themselves and nothing to do with the drivers..?
i7-6700k @ 4.5GHz, 2x 970 GTX SLI, 16GB DDR4 @ 3000mhz, MSI Gaming M7, Samsung 950 Pro m.2 SSD 512GB, 2x 1TB RAID 1, 850w EVGA, Corsair RGB 90 keyboard
Can you support that statement? I would think the scaling efficiency of the cards has more to do with the architecture (chipset) of the cards themselves and nothing to do with the drivers..?
Can you support that statement? I would think the scaling efficiency of the cards has more to do with the architecture (chipset) of the cards themselves and nothing to do with the drivers..?
i7-6700k @ 4.5GHz, 2x 970 GTX SLI, 16GB DDR4 @ 3000mhz, MSI Gaming M7, Samsung 950 Pro m.2 SSD 512GB, 2x 1TB RAID 1, 850w EVGA, Corsair RGB 90 keyboard
im not purely speculating- this is based off of observation. however, this is by no means a fact. i could have observed something wrong (me and every one else posting about poor scaling)
plus this could change with more mature drivers. supposedly quad sli scaling has improved since i ditched it in late april- but it still seems poor IMO.
im not purely speculating- this is based off of observation. however, this is by no means a fact. i could have observed something wrong (me and every one else posting about poor scaling)
plus this could change with more mature drivers. supposedly quad sli scaling has improved since i ditched it in late april- but it still seems poor IMO.
System:
Intel I7 920 overclocked to 4ghz
Asus Rampage Extreme II
2 Ge-force 480 in SLI
GTX 295 PhysX Card
12gb ddr3 2000mhz ram
Intel SSD in RAID 0
BR RW
1000w Sony surround sound
NVIDIA 3D Vision
3d displays tested:
Mitsubishi 65" DLP 3d HDTV (good old 1080p checkerboard since 2007!!!)
Panasonic VT25 (nice 2d but I returned it due to cross talk)
Acer H5360 720p on 130" screen (the best 3d)
23" Acer LCD monitor (horrible cross talk- sold it)
Samsung 65D8000
im not purely speculating- this is based off of observation. however, this is by no means a fact. i could have observed something wrong (me and every one else posting about poor scaling)
plus this could change with more mature drivers. supposedly quad sli scaling has improved since i ditched it in late april- but it still seems poor IMO.
im not purely speculating- this is based off of observation. however, this is by no means a fact. i could have observed something wrong (me and every one else posting about poor scaling)
plus this could change with more mature drivers. supposedly quad sli scaling has improved since i ditched it in late april- but it still seems poor IMO.
System:
Intel I7 920 overclocked to 4ghz
Asus Rampage Extreme II
2 Ge-force 480 in SLI
GTX 295 PhysX Card
12gb ddr3 2000mhz ram
Intel SSD in RAID 0
BR RW
1000w Sony surround sound
NVIDIA 3D Vision
3d displays tested:
Mitsubishi 65" DLP 3d HDTV (good old 1080p checkerboard since 2007!!!)
Panasonic VT25 (nice 2d but I returned it due to cross talk)
Acer H5360 720p on 130" screen (the best 3d)
23" Acer LCD monitor (horrible cross talk- sold it)
Samsung 65D8000
im not purely speculating- this is based off of observation. however, this is by no means a fact. i could have observed something wrong (me and every one else posting about poor scaling)
plus this could change with more mature drivers. supposedly quad sli scaling has improved since i ditched it in late april- but it still seems poor IMO.[/quote]
Very good, that's why I was asking. Lots of times people will just see some heresay on the internet and then repeat it as fact. Like you said your observations are not necessarily scientific but they appear to be sound observations.
im not purely speculating- this is based off of observation. however, this is by no means a fact. i could have observed something wrong (me and every one else posting about poor scaling)
plus this could change with more mature drivers. supposedly quad sli scaling has improved since i ditched it in late april- but it still seems poor IMO.
Very good, that's why I was asking. Lots of times people will just see some heresay on the internet and then repeat it as fact. Like you said your observations are not necessarily scientific but they appear to be sound observations.
i7-6700k @ 4.5GHz, 2x 970 GTX SLI, 16GB DDR4 @ 3000mhz, MSI Gaming M7, Samsung 950 Pro m.2 SSD 512GB, 2x 1TB RAID 1, 850w EVGA, Corsair RGB 90 keyboard
im not purely speculating- this is based off of observation. however, this is by no means a fact. i could have observed something wrong (me and every one else posting about poor scaling)
plus this could change with more mature drivers. supposedly quad sli scaling has improved since i ditched it in late april- but it still seems poor IMO.[/quote]
Very good, that's why I was asking. Lots of times people will just see some heresay on the internet and then repeat it as fact. Like you said your observations are not necessarily scientific but they appear to be sound observations.
im not purely speculating- this is based off of observation. however, this is by no means a fact. i could have observed something wrong (me and every one else posting about poor scaling)
plus this could change with more mature drivers. supposedly quad sli scaling has improved since i ditched it in late april- but it still seems poor IMO.
Very good, that's why I was asking. Lots of times people will just see some heresay on the internet and then repeat it as fact. Like you said your observations are not necessarily scientific but they appear to be sound observations.
i7-6700k @ 4.5GHz, 2x 970 GTX SLI, 16GB DDR4 @ 3000mhz, MSI Gaming M7, Samsung 950 Pro m.2 SSD 512GB, 2x 1TB RAID 1, 850w EVGA, Corsair RGB 90 keyboard
i seriously hope they get 3-way SLI working better with 3d vision surround! this would be the optimum GPU configuration for surround IMO. so far all users have reported it works great in 2d, but in 3d the performance is poor.
i seriously hope they get 3-way SLI working better with 3d vision surround! this would be the optimum GPU configuration for surround IMO. so far all users have reported it works great in 2d, but in 3d the performance is poor.
System:
Intel I7 920 overclocked to 4ghz
Asus Rampage Extreme II
2 Ge-force 480 in SLI
GTX 295 PhysX Card
12gb ddr3 2000mhz ram
Intel SSD in RAID 0
BR RW
1000w Sony surround sound
NVIDIA 3D Vision
3d displays tested:
Mitsubishi 65" DLP 3d HDTV (good old 1080p checkerboard since 2007!!!)
Panasonic VT25 (nice 2d but I returned it due to cross talk)
Acer H5360 720p on 130" screen (the best 3d)
23" Acer LCD monitor (horrible cross talk- sold it)
Samsung 65D8000
i seriously hope they get 3-way SLI working better with 3d vision surround! this would be the optimum GPU configuration for surround IMO. so far all users have reported it works great in 2d, but in 3d the performance is poor.
i seriously hope they get 3-way SLI working better with 3d vision surround! this would be the optimum GPU configuration for surround IMO. so far all users have reported it works great in 2d, but in 3d the performance is poor.
System:
Intel I7 920 overclocked to 4ghz
Asus Rampage Extreme II
2 Ge-force 480 in SLI
GTX 295 PhysX Card
12gb ddr3 2000mhz ram
Intel SSD in RAID 0
BR RW
1000w Sony surround sound
NVIDIA 3D Vision
3d displays tested:
Mitsubishi 65" DLP 3d HDTV (good old 1080p checkerboard since 2007!!!)
Panasonic VT25 (nice 2d but I returned it due to cross talk)
Acer H5360 720p on 130" screen (the best 3d)
23" Acer LCD monitor (horrible cross talk- sold it)
Samsung 65D8000
If I had to recommend an ideal rig today for 3D Vision I would start at 2xGTX 460 1GB, which should be a good bit faster than GT200 in SLI and enough to run most games at 1920x1080 in 3D Vision at close to 60FPS per eye. GTX 470/480 in SLI would be ideal however. 2x460 would also be better than 1x480 for 3D Vision in most games however, although you will run into a few games that don't scale as well in SLI so a single 480 might be slightly better.
[quote name='DanielJoy' post='1108377' date='Aug 24 2010, 05:21 PM']just trying to help others make sound choices. i was quite annoyed when i discovered quad sli's poor performance in 3d.
i seriously hope they get 3-way SLI working better with 3d vision surround! this would be the optimum GPU configuration for surround IMO. so far all users have reported it works great in 2d, but in 3d the performance is poor.[/quote]
I know this was the case for a long time but I've read numerous reports that one of the more recent drivers, maybe CD 1.33 with the 258.96 drivers fixed 3-way and 4-way 3D Vision scaling performance.
If I had to recommend an ideal rig today for 3D Vision I would start at 2xGTX 460 1GB, which should be a good bit faster than GT200 in SLI and enough to run most games at 1920x1080 in 3D Vision at close to 60FPS per eye. GTX 470/480 in SLI would be ideal however. 2x460 would also be better than 1x480 for 3D Vision in most games however, although you will run into a few games that don't scale as well in SLI so a single 480 might be slightly better.
[quote name='DanielJoy' post='1108377' date='Aug 24 2010, 05:21 PM']just trying to help others make sound choices. i was quite annoyed when i discovered quad sli's poor performance in 3d.
i seriously hope they get 3-way SLI working better with 3d vision surround! this would be the optimum GPU configuration for surround IMO. so far all users have reported it works great in 2d, but in 3d the performance is poor.
I know this was the case for a long time but I've read numerous reports that one of the more recent drivers, maybe CD 1.33 with the 258.96 drivers fixed 3-way and 4-way 3D Vision scaling performance.
-=HeliX=- Mod 3DV Game Fixes
My 3D Vision Games List Ratings
Intel Core i7 5930K @4.5GHz | Gigabyte X99 Gaming 5 | Win10 x64 Pro | Corsair H105
Nvidia GeForce Titan X SLI Hybrid | ROG Swift PG278Q 144Hz + 3D Vision/G-Sync | 32GB Adata DDR4 2666
Intel Samsung 950Pro SSD | Samsung EVO 4x1 RAID 0 |
Yamaha VX-677 A/V Receiver | Polk Audio RM6880 7.1 | LG Blu-Ray
Auzen X-Fi HT HD | Logitech G710/G502/G27 | Corsair Air 540 | EVGA P2-1200W