This happens every time there is a generation release. Its so much fun. I am happy to wait and see the real benchies!! :)

Guys. There's no reason to harass EVGA over this. I'm sure they are going to let everyone know all the dirty details when they can based on the NDAs they had to sign from Nvidia. The card isn't even for sale until the end of the month, so knowing now versus a week before release isn't going to change anything.

Originally Posted by Hilbert Hagedoorn
Nvidia does indeed stop supporting 3 and 4-way SLI for Pascal and newer products. But there actually will be a way to do 3 and 4 way SLI, I'll explain it in the upcoming 1080 article.
 
http://forums.guru3d.com/...272651&postcount=5

HeavyHemi
Originally Posted by Hilbert Hagedoorn
Nvidia does indeed stop supporting 3 and 4-way SLI for Pascal and newer products. But there actually will be a way to do 3 and 4 way SLI, I'll explain it in the upcoming 1080 article.

http://forums.guru3d.com/...272651&postcount=5

What's the point in hacking it to work when it won't be optimized? 

Sajin

HeavyHemi
Originally Posted by Hilbert Hagedoorn
Nvidia does indeed stop supporting 3 and 4-way SLI for Pascal and newer products. But there actually will be a way to do 3 and 4 way SLI, I'll explain it in the upcoming 1080 article.

http://forums.guru3d.com/...272651&postcount=5

What's the point in hacking it to work when it won't be optimized? 

The same argument with the *officially* unsupported SLI configs for the 700 and 900 series. Or people who use Nvidia Inspector to force AA and HBAO techniques not *officially* supported. Whats the point in doing anything that isn't officially supported? Those kooky enthusiasts! There ought to be a law...
Anyhow, it appears it is possible just not *officially* supported.

Goobers
@Xavier Zepherious
3-way doesn't work that way. As you can actually use three 2-way SLI bridges (at least one has to be flexible!)
 
Card 1, FINGER 1 goes to C2-F1
C2-F2 -> C3-F1 (or F2)
C1-F2 -> C3-F2 (or F1, if F2 was already used)
 
Think of it as "Round Robin."
 
4-way SLI... is NOT round robin like 3-way... but instead a "2-way-2-way SLI."
 
Card 1 <-> 2 get a 2-way bridge
Card 3 <-> 4 get a 2-way bridge
 
pair 1+2 <-> pair 3+4 gets the third 2-way bridge (either 1 to 3 or 2 to 4).
 
~~~~~
 
As for this whole thing about master and slave... it's actually set in software.

Ah...the old *flexible* 3-way bridge routine.... I sense a come back...
 

 
 

HeavyHemi

Sajin

HeavyHemi
Originally Posted by Hilbert Hagedoorn
Nvidia does indeed stop supporting 3 and 4-way SLI for Pascal and newer products. But there actually will be a way to do 3 and 4 way SLI, I'll explain it in the upcoming 1080 article.

http://forums.guru3d.com/...272651&postcount=5

What's the point in hacking it to work when it won't be optimized? 

The same argument with the *officially* unsupported SLI configs for the 700 and 900 series. Whats the point in doing anything that isn't officially supported? Those kooky enthusiasts! There ought to be a law...
Anyhow, it appears it is possible just not *officially* supported.

Yeah, it may be awesome to get it working, but if it isn't giving you any higher performance in game it's pointless.

CoercionShaman

stalinx20
This does make complete sense for them to do this. The market value for people going 3x 4x SLI was not way up there. More coding, more SLI support means more money they pay their engineers. So, cut that back, and more money for the wise guys. Yep... Jen Hsun coming home with a fatter check and paying engineers less money. lmao...

That's often the hard part.  You have to remember that this is a business and it is costly.  Putting on the game developers where it should be has never worked out, either.
 
Sajin is a very intelligent individual along with many others here.  They get this, they just don't like it.  It is difficult when your area of use is 'attacked'.  In this scenario, there is no chance of it working itself through because they have now made it physically impossible with physics of the card and HB bridge.  We have to wait and see what they do with the higher end Pascal.

I wasn't really "attacking" anybody. Was only speculating that it makes sense to me they would cut back on going with 3x or 4x SLI. There is just not a lot of profit from the public to continue providing the feature(s). Their numbers probably showed a very small margin in sales with people going 3x or 4x SLI. For many people, it's not worth it. I personally wouldn't mind getting another 980 to go 3x, honestly...
 
For argument sake, it might matter for benchmarking to get the numbers, but from a gaming world, it's all about how much each GPU is being used. Lower gpu usage is better. It was always the argument that 3x or 4x does not scale well. Of course it wont. Look at the GPU usage on the other hand, and you will see a huge difference. You don't want your GPUs overworking themselves.

stalinx20

CoercionShaman

stalinx20
This does make complete sense for them to do this. The market value for people going 3x 4x SLI was not way up there. More coding, more SLI support means more money they pay their engineers. So, cut that back, and more money for the wise guys. Yep... Jen Hsun coming home with a fatter check and paying engineers less money. lmao...

That's often the hard part.  You have to remember that this is a business and it is costly.  Putting on the game developers where it should be has never worked out, either.
 
Sajin is a very intelligent individual along with many others here.  They get this, they just don't like it.  It is difficult when your area of use is 'attacked'.  In this scenario, there is no chance of it working itself through because they have now made it physically impossible with physics of the card and HB bridge.  We have to wait and see what they do with the higher end Pascal.

I wasn't really "attacking" anybody. Was only speculating that it makes sense to me they would cut back on going with 3x or 4x SLI. There is just not a lot of profit from the public to continue providing the feature(s). Their numbers probably showed a very small margin in sales with people going 3x or 4x SLI. For many people, it's not worth it. I personally wouldn't mind getting another 980 to go 3x, honestly...
 
For argument sake, it might matter for benchmarking to get the numbers, but from a gaming world, it's all about how much each GPU is being used. Lower gpu usage is better. It was always the argument that 3x or 4x does not scale well. Of course it wont. Look at the GPU usage on the other hand, and you will see a huge difference. You don't want your GPUs overworking themselves.

 
I meant Nvidia 'attacking' their usage by not supporting it or making it impossible, stalin.   I did not mean you.  Apologies for the misunderstanding.

CoercionShaman

stalinx20

CoercionShaman

stalinx20
This does make complete sense for them to do this. The market value for people going 3x 4x SLI was not way up there. More coding, more SLI support means more money they pay their engineers. So, cut that back, and more money for the wise guys. Yep... Jen Hsun coming home with a fatter check and paying engineers less money. lmao...

That's often the hard part.  You have to remember that this is a business and it is costly.  Putting on the game developers where it should be has never worked out, either.
 
Sajin is a very intelligent individual along with many others here.  They get this, they just don't like it.  It is difficult when your area of use is 'attacked'.  In this scenario, there is no chance of it working itself through because they have now made it physically impossible with physics of the card and HB bridge.  We have to wait and see what they do with the higher end Pascal.

I wasn't really "attacking" anybody. Was only speculating that it makes sense to me they would cut back on going with 3x or 4x SLI. There is just not a lot of profit from the public to continue providing the feature(s). Their numbers probably showed a very small margin in sales with people going 3x or 4x SLI. For many people, it's not worth it. I personally wouldn't mind getting another 980 to go 3x, honestly...
 
For argument sake, it might matter for benchmarking to get the numbers, but from a gaming world, it's all about how much each GPU is being used. Lower gpu usage is better. It was always the argument that 3x or 4x does not scale well. Of course it wont. Look at the GPU usage on the other hand, and you will see a huge difference. You don't want your GPUs overworking themselves.

 
I meant Nvidia 'attacking' their usage by not supporting it or making it impossible, stalin.   I did not mean you.  Apologies for the misunderstanding.

Sorry, my mistake.