Best Bang for Buck for SLI or Crossfire?

[hicurt]

Hey Everyone, I am building a rig for gaming and I am curious as to what the best bang for the buck would be for a dual GPU setup? I am switching from console gaming to desktop gaming, any help would be welcome. 

 

ASUS Prime 470x MoBo

Ryzen 7 2700x

TridentX 16GB 2x8GB 3200 

[LukeLinusFanFic]

It would be not getting a dual GPU setup. It doesn't work on most games, and when it does it's pretty shitty. If you have cash to spare, get a better GPU. What's your budget?

[hicurt]

600ish but if it is worth it in the long run I could see spending 1000.

[goto10]

sli? crossfire?

 

 

nvlink?

 

all dead for games, so few games support two gpus, and those few can support it with lots of problems

 

if you have a slow gpu, sell it and buy a single faster gpu, two gpus on use on one game days are gone

[Leanora]

Look at the 5700xt once they are released ( next month ) with proper coolers or either the 2080 TI or 2080 super

 

 

Forget about dual GPU, hardly any support and worse micro stuttering compared to single card.

[Princess Luna]

SLI and Crossfire are dead, invest your money on the single best GPU you can afford.

[celerystruct]

5 hours ago, hicurt said:

600ish but if it is worth it in the long run I could see spending 1000.

If you're down to pay a grand for gpu then just get the 2080 ti. It'll beat any dual GPU config you can get for the same price even if SLI or Crossfire were viable.

[Mick Naughty]

A pair of used 1080ti's would beat anything, period. But most games are shit, so unless you play good once it wont matter. Also that cpu isn't gonna keep up with a top tier card or a pair of mid range cards.

[Leanora]

2 hours ago, Mick Naughty said:

A pair of used 1080ti's would beat anything, period. But most games are shit, so unless you play good once it wont matter. Also that cpu isn't gonna keep up with a top tier card or a pair of mid range cards.

People are way too scared of bottlenecks on this forum.  There is always a bottleneck. If there is no bottleneck then you would be playing on infinitively high fps.

 

Go watch this video:

 

 

[Mick Naughty]

1 minute ago, Leanora said:

People are way too scared of bottlenecks on this forum.  There is always a bottleneck. If there is no bottleneck then you would be playing on infinitively high fps.

 

Go watch this video:

 

 

Not sure what that supposed to show here. Didn't mention a bottleneck, unless playing with a shitty experience is preferred thing. 

[Leanora]

1 minute ago, Mick Naughty said:

Not sure what that supposed to show here. Didn't mention a bottleneck, unless playing with a shitty experience is preferred thing. 

Guess we have a language barrier here, are not you saying the CPU will bottleneck the 2080 TI with the following statement:

 

2 hours ago, Mick Naughty said:

Also that cpu isn't gonna keep up with a top tier card or a pair of mid range cards.

 

If you do not then do you not see the 2080TI as a top tier card?

Also what do you mean by ' unless playing with a shitty experience is preferred  ' exactly? 

 

[Mick Naughty]

Just now, Leanora said:

Guess we have a language barrier here, are not you saying the CPU will bottleneck the 2080 TI with the following statement:

 

 

If you do not then do you not see the 2080TI as a top tier card?

Also what do you mean by ' unless playing with a shitty experience is preferred  ' exactly? 

 

It will, as all games aren't the same. Some random youtube video doesn't mean much. Unless you play benchmarks or got a top tier card just to get 160 frames on 1080p in single player with a 60hz panel.

I mean a shitty experience as playing with the lag or stutter that can be associated with it. 

[Leanora]

3 minutes ago, Mick Naughty said:

It will, as all games aren't the same. Some random youtube video doesn't mean much. Unless you play benchmarks or got a top tier card just to get 160 frames on 1080p in single player with a 60hz panel.

I mean a shitty experience as playing with the lag or stutter that can be associated with it. 

Right... You saying anything means even less than you providing a video that is showing a CPU bottleneck while using 1080P to extra stress the CPU.

 

As for the stutter, the incidents that I could find pretty much all got resolved by a change in firmware, power config, faulty connection or game setting.

 

Anyhow enough with this side conversation.

The OP has his answer,  enjoy.

[Mick Naughty]

2 minutes ago, Leanora said:

Right... You saying anything means even less than you providing a video that is showing a CPU bottleneck while using 1080P to extra stress the CPU.

 

As for the stutter, the incidents that I could find pretty much all got resolved by a change in firmware, power config, faulty connection or game setting.

 

Anyhow enough with this side conversation.

The OP has his answer,  enjoy.

People saying anything doesn't mean much. As everyone says something different. I make a post all the time waiting for the internet experts to fix my issues but none proved any info. Just links to youtube showing a benchmark. Quite helpful indeed. 

[hicurt]

Thanks for all of the insight!!!!

[Ebony Falcon]

I swapped from sli 980ti to 2080 which were about the same performance in games that supported sli 

but it is dead the amount of games that just don’t even have it is ridicules 

and the new games that do scaling is shit

 

its not like when crisis 3 launched and we had 85 percent scaling 

[Jon Jon]

No reason to go multi-gpu unless you want dual RTX 2080tis so you can max out a 144hz 4K monitor, and that's if the games support it.

 

I am personally going to dabble in crossfire, but that is because one of my buddies gave me an RX 580 8GB for free.

 

Free is for me, why not play with it and see how it works.

 

I would NOT buy two RX 580s though when for that money you can just get an RTX 2060 Super or RX 5700 XT.

[Jon Jon]

19 hours ago, Mick Naughty said:

People saying anything doesn't mean much. As everyone says something different. I make a post all the time waiting for the internet experts to fix my issues but none proved any info. Just links to youtube showing a benchmark. Quite helpful indeed. 

Absolute performance is still owned by Intel + NVIDIA.

 

I think people forget that and get wrapped up in price/performance ratios.

[celerystruct]

1 minute ago, Jon Jon said:

Absolute performance is still owned by Intel + NVIDIA.

 

I think people forget that and get wrapped up in price/performance ratios.

That's only true for gaming.

 

Also of course people are going to get wrapped up in price/performance. Not everyone is going to be able to afford a 9900k/2080ti combo but if you can get something that performs similarly to a lower end intel/nvidia build for cheaper why wouldn't you go for it?

[Jon Jon]

1 minute ago, celerystruct said:

That's only true for gaming.

 

Also of course people are going to get wrapped up in price/performance. Not everyone is going to be able to afford a 9900k/2080ti combo but if you can get something that performs similarly to a lower end intel/nvidia build for cheaper why wouldn't you go for it?

These are valid statements, but aren't applicable when it comes to the best performance you can get.

 

Price/performance means nothing with that conversation.

 

I would even make the argument that it would also be true for content creation depending on your specific workloads and requirements.

 

Xeons and Quadros honestly reign supreme at the high end of professional workloads, again ignoring price/performance.

[Mick Naughty]

Most of the comparisons I’ve seen are horrid. But I must be the only person who doesn’t play tomb raider and gta and watch benchmarks all day. I’ll shell out for better stuff if I can. Doesnt matter either way of the game development isn’t good. 

[celerystruct]

7 minutes ago, Jon Jon said:

These are valid statements, but aren't applicable when it comes to the best performance you can get.

 

Price/performance means nothing with that conversation.

 

I would even make the argument that it would also be true for content creation depending on your specific workloads and requirements.

 

Xeons and Quadros honestly reign supreme at the high end of professional workloads, again ignoring price/performance.

My first point about intel being only at the top when it comes to gaming still apply. The new 3900x has been shown to beat the 9900k in multicore performance and even in some games just performs better than the 9900k.

 

Best performance is SUPER subjective since even in categories like games and productivity you still have different software that were optimized differently.

 

Also you mentioned Xeons and Quadros are the top for "high end" work loads but the threadripper 2990wx offering more cores and threads and a higher clock speeds than a $12,000 Xeon platinum at a fraction of the price and it's been shown to perform better than the Xeon in certian categories.

 

https://www.cpu-monkey.com/en/compare_cpu-intel_xeon_platinum_8180-820-vs-amd_ryzen_threadripper_2990wx-886

 

So absolute performance isn't a thing since it depends heavily on use case.

[celerystruct]

1 minute ago, Mick Naughty said:

Most of the comparisons I’ve seen are horrid.

Why? Because they don't fit your perceived narrative of intel being better?

 

2 minutes ago, Mick Naughty said:

But I must be the only person who doesn’t play tomb raider and gta and watch benchmarks all day.

I think most of us on here play other things than Tomb Raider and GTA. And I'm fairly certain I speak for everyone when I say no one watches Benchmarks all day, especially since there aren't infinitely many benchmarks to view.

 

3 minutes ago, Mick Naughty said:

I’ll shell out for better stuff if I can. Doesnt matter either way of the game development isn’t good.

So you'll throw money away just to get a slight increase in performance but also agree that the way a game is optimized is a factor and not just the hardware? That's contradictory.

[Jon Jon]

6 minutes ago, celerystruct said:

My first point about intel being only at the top when it comes to gaming still apply. The new 3900x has been shown to beat the 9900k in multicore performance and even in some games just performs better than the 9900k.

 

Best performance is SUPER subjective since even in categories like games and productivity you still have different software that were optimized differently.

 

Also you mentioned Xeons and Quadros are the top for "high end" work loads but the threadripper 2990wx offering more cores and threads and a higher clock speeds than a $12,000 Xeon platinum at a fraction of the price and it's been shown to perform better than the Xeon in certian categories.

 

https://www.cpu-monkey.com/en/compare_cpu-intel_xeon_platinum_8180-820-vs-amd_ryzen_threadripper_2990wx-886

 

So absolute performance isn't a thing since it depends heavily on use case.

They do trade blows and you are right.

[Mick Naughty]

13 minutes ago, celerystruct said:

Why? Because they don't fit your perceived narrative of intel being better?

 

I think most of us on here play other things than Tomb Raider and GTA. And I'm fairly certain I speak for everyone when I say no one watches Benchmarks all day, especially since there aren't infinitely many benchmarks to view.

 

So you'll throw money away just to get a slight increase in performance but also agree that the way a game is optimized is a factor and not just the hardware? That's contradictory.

I don’t care which is better. If the results don’t help me pick, they are useless. 

 

I get what I’ve seen to be better. Which has always been the case.