Very nice and that's allot of screen shots....

movieman
"I'm only just pushing over 20FPS in TRI SLI (QUAD SLI Averaging 60FPS!) Using 3.6GB VRAM."

i don't understand how adding one card jumps from 20-60fps..That is crazy!

3.6GB VRam (3.0)^(-1) = 1.2 GBs VRam per graphic card.  It's listed as 3.6GBs VRam because OSD for Precision and MSI Afterburner adds all three VRam usages up together evenly.  If he was using only 1 graphic card, then most likely, it will list around 1.2GBs VRam usage or allotted resources.  Do keep in mind, lets say you had 6 1-slot graphic cards that had 6 GBs VRam each, and OSD displayed a usage of 5.6 GBs VRam.  That means that less than 1.0 GBs VRam is being used from each graphic card.
 
In just about any game, if you stare at a wall, or the ground, or the sky, it's possible to have 60 FPS or more, showing...  It takes less processing power to render a wall that has no depth or moving parts in it.  If you look at the OP's last picture, this is proven true.  He's looking at a wall, and his OSD shows he's getting 60 FPS.  When he's looking in between two buildings, out into the distance, OSD displays 45 FPS.
 
If a third card actually added 40 FPS--which I doubt, and we assume there's no bottle neck at the CPU with two or three graphic cards, then it's possible.  In this case, the lack of graphic cards would be holding back peak performance...
 

@ OP,
 
nice pics.

Hawaiiboi808

3.6GB VRam (3.0)^(-1) = 1.2 GBs VRam per graphic card.  It's listed as 3.6GBs VRam because OSD for Precision and MSI Afterburner adds all three VRam usages up together evenly.  If he was using only 1 graphic card, then most likely, it will list around 1.2GBs VRam usage or allotted resources.  Do keep in mind, lets say you had 6 1-slot graphic cards that had 6 GBs VRam each, and OSD displayed a usage of 5.6 GBs VRam.  That means that less than 1.0 GBs VRam is being used from each graphic card.

 
VRAM in SLI/CF is mirrored. So the load is 3,6Gb on each card, not 1.2gb per card as you say there.
 
If he was using one card he would have shown still 3,6Gb but a lot lower framerate.
 
@OP: nice system, thanks for the pics!

Hawaiiboi808




3.6GB VRam (3.0)^(-1) = 1.2 GBs VRam per graphic card.  It's listed as 3.6GBs VRam because OSD for Precision and MSI Afterburner adds all three VRam usages up together evenly.  If he was using only 1 graphic card, then most likely, it will list around 1.2GBs VRam usage or allotted resources.  Do keep in mind, lets say you had 6 1-slot graphic cards that had 6 GBs VRam each, and OSD displayed a usage of 5.6 GBs VRam.  That means that less than 1.0 GBs VRam is being used from each graphic card.

 

 
This is not true at all. Every card's VRAM is mirrored in SLI mode. No matter how many cards you have it would use the same amount of VRAM. The difference being that with less GPUs you wouldn't be able to push as many pixels so you wouldn't be able to run with such high AA, therefore using less VRAM. But no, it doesn't work like that. The paragraph above is completely false.
 
Edit: Just noticed AlexisRO corrected this already a few posts up from me. I didn't read past this post. lol

larsoncc

Which AA mode looks better?  I thought that TXAA was supposed to look better than MSAA...  At least according to  NVidia.

EDIT - never mind, found other screenshots to compare... 

 
SMAA