Which do you feel is the more efficient solution?

***Zardon*** · Apr 17, 2006, 10:18 AM

Vote and Discuss!

pr0digal jenius · Apr 17, 2006, 10:22 AM

crossfire....yes, SLi works better at the moment, but it's been around longer.

Remember all the pitfalls when it was released? How it only supported, like, 15-20 games? How it crashed doing this and that and only supported monitors if they were configred just so?

ATi had a MUCH smoother launch, even if you take the "availability" issue into account, which seems to be getting much better now.

Props to ATi for being remotely competitive with an idea nVidia has had what, 2 years now, to master.

Judas · Apr 17, 2006, 10:32 AM

Efficient? I'd have to say SLI to start with, being able to combine any 2 cards, from different manufactures... into a system in any order, and just hooking up a little connector between the 2 to get it is imo, much much more efficient. With ati's Mastercard and slave card solution, it's quite troublesome, people just consider that alone and run to nvidia.

Also, there appears to be more problems with crossfire then with sli. I don't blame ati specifically for it, as they are still working on this whole idea. SLI's been around for years, nvidia aquired 3dfx the orginal creators, and finally adapted it to nvidias own designs. So they've got a serious head start.

IF ATI can get things arranged that there is no master cards, no slaves and no special cable to hook everything up. ATI has a damn good chance.

[hobo]eclipse · Apr 17, 2006, 10:44 AM

i dont believe anyone building a crossfire or SLI rig even considers effiency. could be wrong though as using the lower end cards is gaining popularity and catching on.

Sandok · Apr 17, 2006, 11:12 AM

SLI.... more support, easier install method (no dongle) and very easy to implement (no need for a special card).

NV really played well in this domain

And it's also cheaper than Xfire

CDsDontBurn · Apr 17, 2006, 02:50 PM

As far as efficiency, I believe that nVidia's SLI solution is much more efficient than ATI's crossfire. The reason why i believe so, was stated above by what Judas had to say about there needing to be a master and slave card. In a single card solution, I would definately choose an ATI over nVidia card, but that's a different story to be told.

Richie-b · Apr 17, 2006, 04:07 PM

SLI seems to me to be the more efficient solution.
An SLI setup has 2 cards sharing the work load where as a crossfire setup has a master and slave card, the master card doing the majority of the workload.

blackdog · Apr 17, 2006, 05:23 PM

First lets remember SLI is a borrowed (hijacked) solution from 3dfx(r.i.p) so the head start was there. IMO quality of image reigns above speed

calidan · Apr 17, 2006, 06:12 PM

Wow! This poll is pretty close.

LeanWolf · Apr 17, 2006, 07:37 PM

close indeed! Didn't it used to be possible to see how individuals voted?

IamLakota · Apr 17, 2006, 07:56 PM

SLI,.....Simple Logical Intellgent,...Cudos to NV on this,..Ati has a lot of catching up to do.

Judas · Apr 17, 2006, 07:59 PM

only if that option is enabled when the poll is made....

Lowfat · Apr 17, 2006, 09:30 PM

SLI. Likely because its being around longer.

BiGBrOwNPimpsta · Apr 17, 2006, 10:07 PM

at this point SLi is more effective IMO. crossfire is coming along, but in its first gen it hasn't displayed good results and was more tricky to setup. a master card, a secondary card then dongle. SLI was more straight foward 2 cards and a connector and your set.

but BOTH were a bitch to setup i hated it....

Judas · Apr 17, 2006, 10:42 PM

i never had troubles setting up... just knowing more can go wrong quite easily....

**Vikingod** · Apr 17, 2006, 10:42 PM

I'd honestly have to say both are pretty equal. I certainly don't think either have a clear advantage tech-wise. SLI is obviously leading in sales, but that is something completely different. Neither have really impressed me, though my mobo is sli capable. I still seems the best way to get pbetter performance in the newest games is to just have one really fast card.

BWX · Apr 17, 2006, 11:11 PM

Voted SLI, just on a hunch and from what I have seen and read over the past year. I would never use a dual card solution though, I would always just upgrade to a faster single card.

Leekay07 · Apr 18, 2006, 04:49 AM

What if you have the fastest and you want to run Oblivion or Call Of Duty 2 at 50FPS on a 1600x1050 monitor or larger? Your then stuck with having to go to 2 cards like myself.

Falstaff · Apr 18, 2006, 05:36 AM

SLI at the moment, crossfire is still buggy from what I have been told. Nvidia just works almost all of the time. I purchased three 7800s for my father, my son and daughter on their machines, they work flawlessly with the latest zeropoints or any driver. ATI is a pain in the ass sometimes, I own one myself and upgrading to a 1900 soon, but Nvidia is what my kids prefer, and they use my machine for their college studies and occasionally gamingl etc.
Nvidia is on the right track, but either technology is going to be replaced soon with onboard chipsets featuring what we see now, rather than on a card...
Cards will eventually go away for mainstream I predict.

~~Alien1~~ · Apr 18, 2006, 05:48 AM

I voted SLI
SLI are more stable sollutions

but when Crossfire matures with ATI chipset sollutions beeing less buggy(maybe buggy is not the exact word for them...bad compatibility with a variety of hardware and games perhaps ?) things may change

Sandok · Apr 18, 2006, 06:05 AM

What I think is more efficient is the installation method of SLi over Crossfire. I mean, for one you just go and order two cards and hook em up but for the latter, you must go buy the card you want and then a more expensive MASTER card and hook em up with a dongle. It works, but no way near as easy and simple as SLi

BWX · Apr 18, 2006, 06:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Leekay07

What if you have the fastest and you want to run Oblivion or Call Of Duty 2 at 50FPS on a 1600x1050 monitor or larger? Your then stuck with having to go to 2 cards like myself.

See I think I would just get the absolute fastest card on the market and OC it before going to a dual card solution. No question dual cards are faster overall, but to me just not worth it at the rate new cards are coming out and the speed boosts the new cards always seem to have.

bug77 · Apr 18, 2006, 08:02 AM

Voted for SLI. You can use SLI for any game as long as you define a profile for it; you can't do that with ATI. And support... Mobos with ATI chipsets are expensive and plagued by problems.

Sandok · Apr 18, 2006, 11:49 AM

NV is exactly 60 votes ahead

Very close pole once again

Judas · Apr 18, 2006, 01:11 PM

Crossfire automatically defaults to the super tiling method when a game is loaded that no specific ati profile is available...

crossfire works on everything... it just depends if it works properly... (there will always be problems)

i've load up some fairly old games and see a massive different between non crossfire...

i mean, Darkplaces Quake 1 most likely has zero profile... defaulting to super tiling = Massive difference...

ronnn · Apr 18, 2006, 10:14 PM

I have no real opinion, as can't imagine wanting 2 cards of either solution. Ati seems to use exorbatant power and produces lots of heat, but has the better IQ. Nvidia uses only lots of power and has more mature drivers, but just can't see spending that money and settling for inferior IQ. So maybe next gen will produce 2 cards that can work in a more efficient manner than 1 card, as single cards do seem to be reaching a ceiling of feasable results versus cost of production and heat issues.

classic_leon · Apr 20, 2006, 05:46 AM

SLI is more easily installed rather than Crossfire that is designed for duo-card design. When it process Alternate Frame Rendering, the workload of two cards are not exact