OC3D Review: Nvidia GTX295 Quad SLI

[JN]

"Have the problems of linking four GPU's been ironed out? Was heat still an issue? How do they scale? Is it a worthy purchase. Find out in our Quad SLI GTX295 review..." - by webbo

Nvidia GTX295 Quad SLI

 

[Brooksie]

holy crap at the fps it gives

insane price though, maybe if i win the lottery lol

 

[VonBlade]

Tis a strange set of results. Part of me, the "more power" part, loves that the Quad SLI scales at insane resolutions and allows for the AA and AF to be cranked up whilst still providing enormous frame-rates in everything on the planet.

The "I'm a pauper" part of me is surprised that as a single 295 still provides fully playable frame-rates (over 60fps) in everything so I wonder why anyone would bother paying for another one to Quad it. Even the 30" brigade have no real need to go Quad-SLI.

So I'm in absolute awe of the results, demonstrating that PC hardware has reached a peak we couldn't have possibly forseen a year ago. But I'm still aghast that anyone would even consider going Quad for anything other than bragging rights.

Phenomenal all around. And 4.2ghz on air! You hero

 

[GavX]

Lovi'n the "Balls to teh Wall" section, nice touch

Good review, but I agree with VB, 30fps is ample, as nice as 260 or something ludicrus in CoD4 is, my 4870 can make that game playable.

Still, if I also won the lottery...

 

[FarFarAway]

Great review as usual. This looks to be the peak in performance at the moment and whilst I have never been a fan of multiple card setups, it is insane

 

[w3bbo]

Need and want are always going to be debatable points when it comes to the pinnacle of hardware.

Do we really 'need' 4ghz CPU's and quad sli - I doubt it. Wanting however is another matter entirely and with that thought Jim is going to have to move hell and earth to get me to return these cards.

Do I need them? No, I'm quite happy with my 280SLI rig thank you very much, do I want them...too bloody right I do.:yumyum:

 

[monkey7]

600w mains draw? Less than I actually expected, assuming 85% efficiency that's 510w system draw. My 700w real power could even handle that.

Good review with even better hardware, and other ace review to add to OC3D's collection

Btw: you don't happen to have a pic of the rig with 2*gtx295 and a gtx285?

 

[w3bbo]

Test rig pics never look pretty m8 as I have little time for cable tidying etc when reviews need to be written.

 

[Ham]

Get some of them scores up on hwbot!:whack: I can see at least 15 points there.

Nice review anyhow. £800 really is just too much though...

 

[zak4994]

So I'm guessing that it si good but with current limitations of CPU, its not being utilised fully.

Well i7 let us down

Hoping Larrabee will come useful.

 

[Bungral]

Nice review Rich. It looks like the drivers have come on some since the first Quad SLI 295 reviews came about so fair play to Nvidia on that one.

One lil question though. On the normal phase of testing you have CoD4 with results of:

1680x1050 – 295 188fps and quad 295 236fps

1920x1200 – 295 151fps and quad 295 208fps

2560x1600 – 295 114fps and quad 295 170fps

But then when it comes to the ball to the wall the results look a bit odd as the standard clock results change to: :S

1680x1050 – 295 188fps and quad 295 194fps then OC 295 227fps

1920x1200 – 295 151fps and quad 295 165fps then OC 295 221fps

2560x1600 – 295 114fps and quad 295 126fps then OC 295 174fps

See what I mean?? The original standard clocked quad SLI 295 results were much higher than the standard clocked quad SLI 295 results in the BTTW graph.

Even the original standard clocked quad SLI 295 results at 1680x1050 are better than the BTTW OC results at the same resolution.

Please correct me if I’m being dumb anyone as it’s quite possible, and I’m pretty tired but if it’s not just me, what caused it?

 

[Sleekit]

Must have been amazing to test these out, maybe one day....maybe just

 

[FarFarAway]

But then when it comes to the ball to the wall the results look a bit odd as the standard clock results change to: :S

1680x1050 – 295 188fps and quad 295 194fps then OC 295 227fps

Not CPU limited - random FPS difference

1920x1200 – 295 151fps and quad 295 165fps then OC 295 221fps

CPU limited, more FPS

2560x1600 – 295 114fps and quad 295 126fps then OC 295 174fps

CPU limited, more FPS

My explanation for this difference. 1680 x 1050 puts more on the cards than the CPU and I would think it's just a random FPS difference.

 

[w3bbo]

Please correct me if I’m being dumb anyone as it’s quite possible, and I’m pretty tired but if it’s not just me, what caused it?

Nah m8 you were bang on, for whatever reason I uploaded the single overclock GTX295 scores instead of the standard GTX SLI. Thx for the heads up. Corrected the review now.

Must have been amazing to test these out, maybe one day....maybe just

I would be lying if I said I didn't get a kick out of it

 

[zak4994]

Call of Duty 4 on drugs....

lawlz.

 

[Saviour]

where's the 4870x2 and 4870x2 crossfire comparison results ?

nice review but i agree on this one, completely unnecessary upgrade even for 30"ers

a friend in the states was running this setup but swapped one of the gtx 295's for a phase change system

and hes got it up to 4.5ghz on air

 

[w3bbo]

The 4870x2 Crossfire results will be coming soon hopefully.

 

[BiscuitCookie]

I would love to see that tested on this

www .sharp. net.au/ product-catalogue/ products/ LB1085/

(remove spaces)

 

[stevej696]

Unbelievable frame rates! Nvidia rules!

 

[Rastalovich]

w3bbo gets all the great kit

(posted here twice already I'm sure)