The other factor is that the smallest psu you can really use for dual gtx is an 825w, but they recommend a 1000w. So it isn't just about adding a card, its about rethinking thermal design and power systems :)
Sent via BlackBerry from Cingular Wireless -----Original Message----- From: "Veech" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2006 09:12:44 To:"The Hardware List" <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [H] FPS question for gamers... I'm going with dual GTS in SLI. The GTX performance increase doesn't warrant the price difference, imo. I was originally going to go with dual 7950 GX2 in SLI, I wonder what the performance difference will be between the two configs. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Stan Zaske" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "The Hardware List" <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, November 09, 2006 10:29 PM Subject: Re: [H] FPS question for gamers... > Get one 8800 GTX now and buy another one in the future. One is really all > you need with current games. Read the reviews dude! This card kicks > Oblivion's ass! ;-) > > <Quote> > > The BFGTech GeForce 8800 GTX and GTS however render that grass like it > wasn’t even there! It is that fast. We were blown away when we cranked up > Oblivion to 1600x1200 with absolute maximum in-game settings and grass to > maximum with no AA. When we first started testing we saw the framerate in > the 70 FPS range with grass on! It was simply amazing. We then started > experimenting with the different antialiasing modes since all of them work > in Oblivion with HDR enabled. You do have to set the driver control panel > to “override the application > <http://enthusiast.hardocp.com/article.html?art=MTIxOCwxMCwsaGVudGh1c2lhc3Q=#> > > setting” though and force the AA level from the control panel, which is > perfectly fine since it allows you to try out the CSAA levels of 8X, 16X > and 16xQ. > > As you can see in the table with the 8800 GTX the highest playable setting > that struck a balance of image quality and performance was a very high > 1600x1200 with 8X AA (which is the CSAA mode since it is turned on in the > control panel), and 16X AF with the absolutely highest in-game settings > possible. The in-game settings literally do not go any higher; this is as > good as the game gets visually. We were pulling an average in our test of > 48 FPS, and a minimum in the lower 30’s, all very playable at such high > settings. > > <Quote> > > > > > Veech wrote: >> Those of you who enjoy fast-action PC gaming, I have a question: >> >> At what point does FPS become moot? We all know that you can tell the >> difference between 40fps and 60fps, but what about 80fps vs 100fps? >> >> Here's why I ask, I am considering an SLI configuration of GeForce 8800 >> either GTS or GTX. I have only found one site so far to show benchmark >> comparisons of the two: >> >> http://www.hothardware.com/viewarticle.aspx?page=24&articleid=903&cid=2 >> >> On it, Quake4 performance is 141fps GTS vs 148fps GTX. No difference >> essentially. >> >> FEAR is 95fps GTS vs 120fps GTX. That's a considerable difference, but >> will it be noticeable? >> >> Biggest difference is Prey: 116fps GTS vs 154fps GTX. Big difference, but >> heck isn't 116fps good enough? Will I really notice the difference? >> >> thanks for your input... >> >> Veech
