View Full Version : Is SLI worth it?

10-01-2007, 08:12 PM
Can anyone tell me if they see much of a difference using two cards in SLI? I have a Geforce 7950 GT, AMD Athalon 4000 with 2 gig of memory. I was thinking about buying another 7950 GT if I can find one.


10-01-2007, 09:26 PM
Firstly, does your mobo have two true 16x PCIx slots? If so you will certainly see a difference but you could always sell the card you have and get a 8800GT/GTX or 2900XT. I actually just sold my 7950GT to a community member.


I should add that my 7950GT ran this sim in perfect mode at 1680x1050 with ansiotropic enable in setup and 4xAA with flying colors. So if your not interested in any new titles coming down the pipe then go ahead and pick up another one.

10-02-2007, 03:55 AM
The 7950GT is a great card and possibly all that IL2 really needs. I also run an overclocked AMD 4000 and I really think that my bottlenecks are my value series RAM (4x512MB) and a motherboard that is slow (supports only SATA 1.5 and doesn't seem to do that very well). Unless you are running resolutions higher than 1200 x XXX, then I'd say a second 7950 is probably not going to give you a big performance increase. Flight sims are very CPU intensive.

10-02-2007, 04:58 AM
If your running a 19" monitor and you have a 7950GT then no. If your running a 24" or bigger and using 1920x1200 then its worth looking at certainly.

There are down sides to sli, allot of games don't support it, especially older ones and you can only use single monitor support. Theres also your electricity bill. GFX cards these days need nuclear power to get them running.

10-02-2007, 04:23 PM
Thanks for the feedback.
I have just recently bought a 22" widescreen. Res at 1620x1050. The game looks really good but I do have a slow down when there are a lot of planes or when over towns. I was also wonder if the CPU isn't keeping up because when I use "time skip" (when the monitor goes blank and the program speeds up) there is a big difference from one mission to the next depending on how much is going on in the mission. Sometimes the elapsed time you see on the screen seems really slow.
VMF-214_HaVoK, what kind of cpu is needed to get full use out of a 8800GT. I have thought about buying the 8000 series card but herd that if the CPU isn't high end, you will not get all the card has to offer.

Thanks for info

10-03-2007, 08:15 AM
Definitely not!

There was a study at simhq. A dual rig doesn't noticibly boost performance and even causes a drop in performance on almost all flightsims.

Flight sims are different from FPS and RTS type games (most video card features are not used).

If you want a good flight sim rig go for a good CPU and above all else RAM. The biggest improvements that I have noticed have come from ram upgrades (more flyable aircraft, better fps, easier flight).

10-03-2007, 09:10 AM
All depend of witch resolution 1600 1200 you will period.

10-03-2007, 09:11 AM
You would be able to run the eye candy maxed out without a hit on fr's. At least this was my experience. You would also be able to run at super high resolutions without a hit on performance. That's about it, and is enough of a reason for some to want to run SLI. But from a few reviews and comparative tests I have seen\read about, a single 8800GTX gives the same performance & abilities as two 7900GTX's running in SLI.

If a performance increase is what you are after, you would be better off getting yourself an Opteron 185 & oc'ing it to 3.0GHz or better. And I only mention the Opty 185 because they can be had cheaper than the FX-60. Of course the multiplier is locked from going up on the Opty 185 so any oc'ing will have to be done via the HTT(FSB). But most memory can handle at 232MHz, which would put you right at 3.0GHz with an Opty 185.

10-03-2007, 09:17 AM
When I built my current rig a year or so back,I deliberately got an SLI mobo (MSI K8N),but since then have used,and been totally happy with,an ATI X800XL card.I doubt I will bother going SLI,as single cards these days have,I think, rendered it pretty much obsolete.

10-03-2007, 09:22 AM
Personally I think right now that my QX6700 is my bottleneck. Messing around with the clock speed on it was the only way (once I got my conf.ini and settings in the Nvidia control panel nailed down) to see any performance gains. Il2 LOVES CPU clock speed. ONLY when I overclocked the CPU is when I noticed a FPS increase on the Black Death track when things got really heavy. Even then it goes down to around 30 at times. I went from 2.67 to 3.2GHz but cannot go any further till I get that baby liquid cooled. I will do that soon.

10-03-2007, 09:48 AM
A Q6700 as no extra for il2 getting 30 fps with it if not good something is wrong you should have not 30 but 300.. with this GTX.. Just wonder why

10-03-2007, 09:50 AM
The best upgrade you could do first is to make sure that everything on your PC run correctly and optimum.

10-03-2007, 10:06 AM
Originally posted by TheGozr:
A Q6700 as no extra for il2 getting 30 fps with it if not good something is wrong you should have not 30 but 300.. with this GTX.. Just wonder why

I have tried everything and I cannot get it to go any faster. Sure the Black Death will run up in the Hundreds but will go as low as 30 for short times.

10-03-2007, 11:31 AM
I am more concerned with increasing my minimum fr's instead of increasing the avg fr's. If I could get my minimum fr's as high as 30fps, I would be very satisfied. At least with minimim fr's as high as 30fps or better, no matter how busy it gets in a mission, my gameplay should be close to seamless with very little stuttering. Oc'ing my Opty 185 to 3.0GHz gets me 27fps for a minimim fr. At stock clocks of 2.6GHz, my minimum fr's run at 24fps, which is a bit stuttery.

10-03-2007, 11:39 AM
In the config are your effect=0 or 1 ? if at 1 make it 0 you will have less stutter while getting busy.
If using perfect make your water at 0 it look good and will eat less frames.
Your aniso to 4 max and aa 4x max as well no higher..
Also your sound to 22000 not higher

10-03-2007, 06:10 PM
Il2 LOVES CPU clock speed. ONLY when I overclocked the CPU is when I noticed a FPS increase on the Black Death track when things got really heavy.

Very true and a good sound card is another thing it loves as far performance goes. I actually ran this game with my e6400 3 different cards. A 7950GT 512MB, 8800GTS 640MB, and now a 2900XT. And I saw Pappys e6800 and 8800GTX in action. The difference is not what you would see if you were playing a new FPS title or RTS. This game relies so much on CPU cycles and a CPU upgrade should be first on the list for anyone trying to get more out of the game.

However I just got BoBII WoV again since I got rid of mine to early and you can see the difference when a sim can take advantage of all your bells and whistles. That game maxed out on my system just screams.


10-04-2007, 08:14 AM
I'm getting worried. On Saturday, I pick up my new Quad core/640mb 8800gtx computer. I sure hope I can expect better performance than the AGP thing I'm using now http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/sadeyes.gif

10-04-2007, 09:19 AM
You make me ill. Another friend just got an eight core uberMac.

10-04-2007, 10:59 AM
Never knew about the sound card thing. I'll have to remember that.

10-04-2007, 11:19 AM
My opinion on this is that why not get SLI to have as a future upgrade path? Sure, this game doesn't need it, but future games will most likely take advantage of it. Having an SLI board with two 16X PCI-E slots, that run in true 16X with both populated, is a nice way to be able to upgrade video in the future.

Given that one could start with, say, one 7950GT or better, by the time you'd want that 2nd card, you'll be able to get it at a much lower price most likely.

Choctaw, I'd be very disappointed if I had a Quad core system with an 8800 and still seeing a minimum FPS of 30 in The Black Death. I'm assuming that you are running everything maxed, as well as high water and effects in conf.ini, but still, even with my lowly GF4 Ti 4200 128MB, I can see 30FPS as a MIN in that track.

Granted, I run only Excellent with medium clouds, S3TC ON, no frame buffer and at 1024x768x32bit @ 100Hz refresh rate, but given that even with that kind of King Kong-sized hardware, you still see about the same, I'm wondering if it is still a problem inherent in the game and the way it loads textures or sounds. Or you have a possible bottleneck in the config of your HDD file system or other video/sound setting.

As any minor freeze or stutter will drastically reduce FPS AVG and MIN during a track. I notice that sequential runs of The Black Death track prove less stuttery and/or minimizes any subtle freezes during texture/sound loads, as I'm sure it is taking advantage of those things already being in memory from the previous run of the track.

I know some do not like to do it, but try setting VSync OFF in your video card setup and see what it does for The Black Death. I barely notice a difference in quality with it OFF and my MAX frames soar to 200+ when I look at blue sky. Of course, I am just sharing my opinions and experiences with my hardware. You may not like having Vsync OFF.