Dual GPUs, SLI revisited?

[malcore]

Alienware to offer Dual PCI-E Graphics (http://www.pcper.com/article.php?aid=43).:eek:

[pave_spectre]

in search of something to make our jaws drop

I'll say!

That must be a bit costly.

[Orion]

Saphalline was telling me this weekend that Dell was doing the same thing.

sounds interesting. something about one card for the top half one card for the bottom half, I'll have to look into it. I wonder if that will be the future trend, since expansion cards aren't all that necessary in many systems that have a motherboard with everything included. Promising.

Orion

[superdrumr]

Although i must agree that the technology sounds interesting, i believe that for most people (enthusiasts included) all we will be able to do is hear about it. Each of the graphics cards will likely be very high end (read expensive) as will the intergration card (from what i have read, both cards feed into a third output card where the monitors are connected). Based on current prices of high end cards, i don't see how a system like that could go for less than ~$800.
Maybe im wrong, after all its just a hunch. If anyone has any contradictory data id be very interested in hearing about it.

[Variable]

lower than 800? lol, It will cost a lot more than that : )
The lower end "performance" model currently runs over 1600 and thats with current technology, no dual PCI express here ...for the system in the article I would think 3 grand or so.

http://www.alienware.com/system_pages/area-51.aspx

[superdrumr]

i was saying 800 minimum for the graphics card system alone

[Variable]

Yea, well the graphics cards alone will run about 400-500 each plus the new intergration card, whatever that costs, several hundred I would bet.. The whole system is not possible unless you are using PCI Express, so that will have to be figured into the price of doing it. The thing I don't understand about all this is that are there any games that actually perform a great deal better with this rig? I still think the benchmarks showing 160 frames per second are pretty stupid because I don't think there's much game play difference between 100 and 160 fps, at least none I can tell.

V

[superdrumr]

Well considering the human eye can detect only about 27 fps give or take, there really isnt a difference between that and 160.

[Variable]

well thats not true with video games, You can tell a big difference between 30 FPS and say about 70. In games, the action moves much to fast, and without a lot of FPS objects can look like they skip around or "teleport" the games are not as fluid and have a jumpy feel. This can be disorienting.

[deddard]

The cost is always heavy to start with.
Anyone who remembers 10 years ago's prices for high-end graphics cards knows how the story goes.
This is new technology being implemented at the cutting edge.
The prices will fall soon enough, by which time all the bugs associated with it should start to be addressed (well you don't expect it to be a bug free system do you:D ) and software manufacturers will have written something to take advantage of it.