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.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
60 Comments
View All Comments
kilkennycat - Monday, June 5, 2006 - link
Just to reinforce another poster's comments. Oblivion is now the yardstick for truly sweating a high-performance PC system. A comparison of a single GX2 vs dual 7900GT in SLI would be very interesting indeed, since Oblivion pushes up against the 256Meg graphics memory limit of the 7900GT (with or without SLI), and will exceed it if some of the 'oblivion.ini' parameters are tweaked for more realistic graphics in outdoor environments, especially in combo with some of the user-created texture-enhancements mods.Crassus - Monday, June 5, 2006 - link
That was actually my first thought and the reason I read the article ... "How will it run Oblivion?". I hope you'll find the time to add some graphs for Oblivion. Thanks.TiberiusKane - Monday, June 5, 2006 - link
Nice article. Some insanely rich gamers may want to compare the absolute high-end, so they may have wanted to see 1900XT in Crossfire. It'd help with the comparison of value.George Powell - Monday, June 5, 2006 - link
Didn't the ATI Rage Fury Maxx post date the Obsidian X24 card?Also on another point its a pity that there are no Oblivion benchmarks for this card.
Spoelie - Monday, June 5, 2006 - link
Didn't the voodoo5 post date that one as well? ^^Myrandex - Monday, June 5, 2006 - link
For some reason page 1 and 2 worked for me, but when I tried 3 or higher no page would load and I received a "Cannot find server" error message.JarredWalton - Monday, June 5, 2006 - link
We had some server issues which are resolved now. The graphs were initially broken on a few charts (all values were 0.0) and so the article was taken down until the problem could be corrected.ncage - Monday, June 5, 2006 - link
This is a very cool but what would be a better idea if nvidia would use the socket concept where you can change out the VPU just like you can a cpu. So you could buy a card with only one VPU and then add another one later if you needed it....BlvdKing - Monday, June 5, 2006 - link
Isn't that what PCI-Express is? Think of a graphics card like a slot 1 or slot A CPU back in the old days. A graphics card is a GPU with it's own cache on the same PCB. If we were to plug a GPU into the motherboard, then it would have to use system memory (slow) or use memory soldiered onto the motherboard (not updatable). The socket idea for GPUs doesn't make sense.DerekWilson - Monday, June 5, 2006 - link
actually this isn't exactly what PCIe is ...but it is exactly what HTX will be with AMD's Torrenza and coherent HT links from the GPU to the processor. The CPU and the GPU will be able to work much more closely together with this technology.