Gaming Across Three Screens: GTX 460, GTX 480, And Quad-SLI

Page 4 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
I think I now understand what you're trying to say. A 1600x1200 monitor and a 1920x1200 have the same vertical resolution but because the 1920x1200 is wider it "feels" like it's compressed/smushed vertically?
 
Hmmm....
Now do it with AMD/ATI so I can find it interesting...
When Nvidia came out with Geforce 256 it was the bomb...
I wouldn't buy an Nvidia today for a 50% discount... too hot, too power hungry... And IMO the quality on the AMD parts is better... again IMO...
 

Yeh, really I sit around two feet from the screen and a 24" 1980x1080 monitor looks rather short at that distance. It's really hard to sit closer to the screen when you have monitors to the side, it does something weird to your focus.
 
[citation][nom]Crashman[/nom]Actually had to wait for three months to put this article together since the parts were not on hand when it was first thought up. Looking forward to applying a little pressure on ATI for a similar article in the future, but hard to say how long it will take to get all the right parts in all the right places.If you're interested in legacy configuration tests, please supply the legacy parts[/citation]
Hmm... Wasn't there already a 4x GTX480 vs 2x 5970 comparison that the 5970's won? Pretty sure its been done before by Chris I think. The 5970's pulled a slight edge on performance, even more so on power, and really killed in the overall price department.
 
Seems like a three way is what you want, in a foursome one usually gets left out most of the time.
You can quote me on that.
And get your mind out of the gutter, I am obviously talking about hardware.
 
[citation][nom]sandmanwn[/nom]Hmm... Wasn't there already a 4x GTX480 vs 2x 5970 comparison that the 5970's won? Pretty sure its been done before by Chris I think. The 5970's pulled a slight edge on performance, even more so on power, and really killed in the overall price department.[/citation]That was three, and as with this article two of the cards were borrowed.
 
Author doesn't like the fact that you can't look up and down on a 16:9 monitor and would prefer at least 16:10 to begin with. Having monitors that make it easy to see a little to the side makes the fact that you can't look up and down even more noticeable. Chris is probably right in that this would be great if we had some HUGE 4x3 monitors.
Click to expand...

Why not huge 5:4 monitors? Why does 5:4 never get any love?

I just want 5:4 to get some love...
 
so they kept mentioning that SLI 460 would work well for x...but I don't remember ever seeing a result on the chart for it. Can you drop single460 and put SLI 460 in there at least?
A 5850/5870 for comparison would also be nice
 
You can Clearly see that the Creator of this Article didn't realize what he was saying when he said "Putting aside special circumstances where the four-way SLI configuration took a commanding lead, its overall performance looks worse than that of three-way SLI. "

Its Not the GPU's But the CPU.

It's Obvious the CPU/Memory bandwidth Can't Handle 4 = 480's.
 
[citation][nom]Zerk[/nom]You can Clearly see that the Creator of this Article didn't realize what he was saying when he said "Putting aside special circumstances where the four-way SLI configuration took a commanding lead, its overall performance looks worse than that of three-way SLI. " Its Not the GPU's But the CPU. It's Obvious the CPU/Memory bandwidth Can't Handle 4 = 480's.[/citation]If you read the entire page, it says that.
 
My Monitor is 16:10 and does 1920x1200 like most monitors. What we need is monitors with larger aspect ratios such as super wide large monitors.
 
[citation][nom]Crashman[/nom]If you read the entire page, it says that.[/citation]

Yes, it does, but the test system also uses some of the highest end components available for desktop systems to date, so unless the conclusion comes from the future it can be considered flawed.

It doesn't mean that it isn't true, you just can't do anything about it at this time, four way SLI with such high end cards just seems wasteful. You threw at it an overclocked six-core i7 CPU, arguably one of the best motherboards available, some nice sticks of RAM and up to date software (OS, drivers, apps, games).

Technically the conclusion is true, but realistically it's really not. Unless you can prove to us that a dual socket workstation-style system will take advantage of the fourth GTX480.
 
You talk as though multi-screen gaming is something new.

Lest we forget that id Software's Doom was doing this in the mid-nineties: albeit running on separate computers, slave computers and displays could connect as the -left and -right views of a master computer expanding the player's view.
 
[citation][nom]Crashman[/nom]If you read the entire page, it says that.[/citation]

Which is astonishing, given the 6 core CPU with industry leading bandwith. Stop slacking intel.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom