I couldn’t really find any numbers on the internet about it. Some games scale better than others even with SLI forced, so I am curious about GZ.
Not sure if anyone has tried it. I don’t think GZ is SLI supported and even if it was, I don’t think it would make to much of a difference. Plus SLI drivers are starting to get uncommon (from what I hear, I could be wrong).
I have actually had luck forcing SLI on games that didn’t natively support it like Doom 2016. Nvidia has an option to force SLI in their control panel.
1 Like
SLI isn’t worth it gaming wise.
With two GPUs, you’ll get double the power consumption, double the heat production but you will not get double the performance output.
If lucky (game supports SLI), you’ll get some performance boost. But if unlucky (no SLI support), single GPU would be much better off.
Oh believe me I know the negatives of it. Problem is I need an analog output which new cards do not have. My cheapest and fastest option at the moment is another card of mine (980 Ti). The only way to make a new card worthwhile is if I go with an nvidia 2000 series + the cost of a digital to analog adapter which is far more expensive than just buying another 980 Ti. Anything under the Nvidia 2000 series is not worth the bump in performance from 1 980 Ti.
I have run SLI in games several times for 10+ years. Even with games that do not support SLI, Nvidia has a “force SLI” option in their control panel which has never let me down. I have never been dissatisfied with SLI.
1 Like
This is one of the most graphic hungry games I’ve run on my pc. It has nice visuals but not nice enough to run every ounce of vram I have in my opinion. Never benchmarked this game but I’ve watched one card run at 98% while the other sometimes runs around 24 to 30 % in sli mode while my cpu holds at 35 to 45%. . This game will run all the power you can give it if you let it. I run twin 1080 it’s on a 144hz monitor with vsync on and still hit 100 plus fps. It is a bit overkill cuz one card is more than enough. I’ve run reg 980’s on a previous set up and could hit around 90 fps tweeking from my nvidia panel. It’s a weird game.
At what resolution, though? I run 2304 x 1440 @ 80hz. My lowest frame rate is in the 40s during large explosions. I average around 50-60fps depending on the scenery, and I can top around 70-80fps or so at times like at night. My 1 980 TI is always pegged above 95+%, and my old 3770k cpu usually hovers around 40-50%.
And the 1080s have 12GB of vram, and yours gets used up? I have 6GB, but about 5 or 5.1 gets used. I figured well maybe they don’t use it all to have some cushion.
For comparison: I lock my frames to 62 using RTSS and run about 70-90% usage with a max of 5596Mb Vram on my single gtx1080 + i9 9900k + 32gb/3200mhz Ram @ 2560x1440 on Ultra settings.
(Gpu dropping to 40ish% use when in menys, a good place to afk if your rigg is running hot).
A few occasional drops to 58fps when doing quick ADSing or fast meny work but other then that my frametime graph is super stable.
I can go to an equally stable locked 85fps(ULMB) if I lower Scene complexity one notch and OFF on the eyecandy.
Cpu is hardly used with my combo @ 1440p jumping around at 14-30% usage.
Looking forward to the 3000s cards coming soon. =)
My 980 Ti being in the 40 fps range at the lowest (rarely, though) and your GTX 1080 being at its lowest at upper 50s doesn’t make it a worthwhile upgrade imho. I want to be able to at least get a singular card that will give me 30+ more frames by itself, and buying a 2080 with the digital to analog adapter that I need points me in a price rangeI don’t want to be in. But dual 980 Ti would make me rather comfy, and it would be cheaper and faster than buying a 1080.
I’m not running 4k. Waiting for prices to come down just a wee bit more on the monitors. Just reg ol 1920x 1080. I run an acer that’s gsync compatible. It does the job and is crystal clear.