NVIDIA Single Card, Multi-GPU: GeForce 7950 GX2
by Derek Wilson on June 5, 2006 12:00 PM EST- Posted in
- GPUs
Final Words
Price and flexibility are really the key factors in the success of the 7950 GX2. NVIDIA has set their MSRP at a range of $600 - $650 USD. This is actually right on par for the cost of two overclocked 7900 GT boards (which generally run between $300 and $330). For those who prefer a stock 7900 GT SLI solution like the one we tested for this comparison, the setup can be put together for between $550 and $600. However, it is important to remember that 7900 GT SLI requires an SLI motherboard while the 7950 GX2 will work just fine in a board with only a single X16 PCIe slot (with proper BIOS support). Those who will be running at 2048x1536 and higher with AA enabled will benefit more from the 7950 GX2 for its scaling capabilities and the fact that Quad SLI will likely be a future option.
We haven't been able to test Quad SLI for this review, but those who want the potential to scale their system up to extremely high resolutions will certainly be attracted to the 7950 GX2. There is added incentive when noting that a pair of Radeon X1900XT in CrossFire will draw more power than Quad SLI with a pair of 7950 GX2 cards. Those who want the ultra high end in graphics won't be fazed by the price, but those without monitors that support 4 or 5 megapixel resolutions might want to consider the CPU limitations apparent at resolutions below 2048x1536.
At lower resolutions, it will still be possible to enable the advanced AA features and achieve performance more or less at the 7900 GT level with twice the antialiasing. Certainly, lower resolutions gain more from increasing AA levels, but in our experience some of these incredibly high AA modes are a bit overrated. Smaller pixels, provided there aren't any performance or monitor restrictions, generally produce better image quality than increasing levels of antialiasing.
With such a hefty price tag and the extreme settings required to see a significant benefit, it is difficult to recommend the 7950 GX2 to the average enthusiast or gamer. For those who really want 7900 GT SLI, the 7950 GX2 is a better solution for the money with Gigabyte's flavor up for preorder on Zipzoomfly the day before launch at $599. This part is faster in most cases than the 7900 GTX, and in cases where performance can't compete, image quality can be improved. For those who live on the bleeding edge, this lower power, higher performing, alternative to ATI's X1900XT is a solid way to go.
Price and flexibility are really the key factors in the success of the 7950 GX2. NVIDIA has set their MSRP at a range of $600 - $650 USD. This is actually right on par for the cost of two overclocked 7900 GT boards (which generally run between $300 and $330). For those who prefer a stock 7900 GT SLI solution like the one we tested for this comparison, the setup can be put together for between $550 and $600. However, it is important to remember that 7900 GT SLI requires an SLI motherboard while the 7950 GX2 will work just fine in a board with only a single X16 PCIe slot (with proper BIOS support). Those who will be running at 2048x1536 and higher with AA enabled will benefit more from the 7950 GX2 for its scaling capabilities and the fact that Quad SLI will likely be a future option.
We haven't been able to test Quad SLI for this review, but those who want the potential to scale their system up to extremely high resolutions will certainly be attracted to the 7950 GX2. There is added incentive when noting that a pair of Radeon X1900XT in CrossFire will draw more power than Quad SLI with a pair of 7950 GX2 cards. Those who want the ultra high end in graphics won't be fazed by the price, but those without monitors that support 4 or 5 megapixel resolutions might want to consider the CPU limitations apparent at resolutions below 2048x1536.
At lower resolutions, it will still be possible to enable the advanced AA features and achieve performance more or less at the 7900 GT level with twice the antialiasing. Certainly, lower resolutions gain more from increasing AA levels, but in our experience some of these incredibly high AA modes are a bit overrated. Smaller pixels, provided there aren't any performance or monitor restrictions, generally produce better image quality than increasing levels of antialiasing.
With such a hefty price tag and the extreme settings required to see a significant benefit, it is difficult to recommend the 7950 GX2 to the average enthusiast or gamer. For those who really want 7900 GT SLI, the 7950 GX2 is a better solution for the money with Gigabyte's flavor up for preorder on Zipzoomfly the day before launch at $599. This part is faster in most cases than the 7900 GTX, and in cases where performance can't compete, image quality can be improved. For those who live on the bleeding edge, this lower power, higher performing, alternative to ATI's X1900XT is a solid way to go.
60 Comments
View All Comments
Exsomnis - Monday, June 5, 2006 - link
Since when did slapping two PCBs together = single card? *Confused.*z3R0C00L - Monday, June 5, 2006 - link
Marketing Gimmick...It's two GPU's. It's SLI. The Fastest Single VPU/GPU solution is the x1900XTX (not tested here).
The most advanced GPU/VPU is the x1900XTX as well.
I wonder if these crds will also suffer from the 50% failure rate other 7900 series cards suffer from.
Jojo7 - Monday, June 5, 2006 - link
Haha. 50% failure rate. That's comedy.Where'd you pull that number from?
Hardocp said BFG reported 3-5%, Evga reported .04-1.9%, XFX said in the last 2 weeks they reported a .5% (half of one percent) increase in RMA's.
Yea. That seems like 50% to me.
Xenoid - Monday, June 5, 2006 - link
50% failure rate might be bullshit but the fact that you completely ignored the other half of his message is also bullshit fanboy-ism.The X1900 XTX isn't on here. The X1900 XT Crossfire isn't on here either, but the 7900 GT SLI is. This review is missing 2 of the top video cards, and for what reason? It makes this review incomplete and this should be addressed.
Jojo7 - Monday, June 5, 2006 - link
Actually, I agree with both of your points. The x1900 XTX should have been included in this review in both crossfire and single card. To the same end, the 7900 GTX in sli should have been included imo.
Noise comparisons and power draws would have been nice as well.
DerekWilson - Monday, June 5, 2006 - link
this does touch on our motivation --the 7950 GX2 is a single board solution (for those uncomortable with the inclusion of 2 PCBs, think of one as a daughterboard or something). We wanted to really focus on the comparison to other single board solutions.
Right now x1900 crossfire and 7900 gtx sli are over $1000 investments, and don't really compete with the 7950 GX2 -- unless we look at the 7950 GX2 in SLI. As we couldn't get quad SLI on the 7950 GX2 working for this article, we decided we save the comparison to that copetition later. It does seem pretty clear fromt these tests that the 7950 GX2 in SLI will be able to trump any other solution in its market segment.
Also, the 7950 GX2 doesn't require an SLI board -- which is a great advantage of current multi-GPU solutions. In many cases, putting two other solutions in SLI won't be an option for users who upgrade to a 7950 GX2.
But
Please understand that I certainly appreciate the requests for the inclusion of the 1900xt crossfire and the 7900 gtx crossfire as a reference point to what is currently possible on the highest end of the spectrum. In future articles involving the 7950 GX2 we will address this issue. Thanks very much for your feedback.
poohbear - Thursday, June 8, 2006 - link
50% failure rate? dude, do u know how this percentage thing works?! that would mean 1 in 2 79XX cards fail. please, bs is a great thing and we have plenty of it on the net, but try to atleast make your bs somewhat believable.nullpointerus - Monday, June 5, 2006 - link
No, it isn't. They only wanted to reply to a particular point within his post.
Inkjammer - Monday, June 5, 2006 - link
50% failure rate? Where are you getting those numbers from?z3R0C00L - Monday, June 5, 2006 - link
I got the number from polling various website forums.. including HardOCP.eVGA, XFX and BFG claim low to non-existant issues. My polls show an avg of 48% failure rate. It's on HardOCP... go and check out the forums.