Featured Articles

Hands on: Nvidia Shield Tablet with Android 5.0

Hands on: Nvidia Shield Tablet with Android 5.0

We broke the news of Nvidia's ambitious gaming tablet plans back in May and now the Shield tablet got a bit…

More...
Nokia N1 Android tablet ships in Q1 2015

Nokia N1 Android tablet ships in Q1 2015

Nokia has announced its first Android tablet and when we say Nokia, we don’t mean Microsoft. The Nokia N1 was designed…

More...
Marvell launches octa-core 64-bit PXA1936

Marvell launches octa-core 64-bit PXA1936

Marvell is better known for its storage controllers, but the company doesn’t want to give up on the smartphone and…

More...
TSMC 16nm FinFET Plus in risk production

TSMC 16nm FinFET Plus in risk production

TSMC’s next generation 16nm process has reached an important milestone – 16nm FinFET Plus (16FF+) is now in risk production.

More...
Nvidia GTX 970 SLI tested

Nvidia GTX 970 SLI tested

Nvidia recently released two new graphics cards based on its latest Maxwell GPU architecture, with exceptional performance-per-watt. The Geforce GTX 970…

More...
Frontpage Slideshow | Copyright © 2006-2010 orks, a business unit of Nuevvo Webware Ltd.
Monday, 29 October 2007 07:57

Tom's hardware has three-way SLI setup

Written by test
Image

Scales well at high res

Tom's Hardware Taiwan has scored some early three-way SLI numbers and they've got a real setup based on an MSI P7N Platinum motherboard, which aparently still uses the 680i chipset.

They've tested with three 8800 GTX cards and they've got the new SLI bridge, which for some strange reason is a hard bridge that doesn't seem to fit when you use three 8800 Ultras; at least not judging by the pictures on the site.

The scaling in the benchmarks was really best above 1,600x1,200, but once you started going above 1,920x1,200 the real benefits of three-way SLI seems to really appear with the performance scaling being 2.3 to 2.7 times that of a single card.

The results in 3DMark06 weren't that impressive, and at 1,280x1,024 the benefit was about 1,500 points, while at 2.560x1,600 the difference was between 4,752 3DMarks and 10,145 3DMarks, which is quite impressive.

You can check out the full story with more benchmark figures here, although the text is in Mandarin.
Last modified on Monday, 29 October 2007 18:50
blog comments powered by Disqus

 

Facebook activity

Latest Commented Articles

Recent Comments