Originally Posted by Amuro
Tell them to install the hotfixes from Microsoft. BTW, that is not a SLI problem as people with single card have experienced it too.
And you're right about Everquest II. It's a 3-4 year old game based on the Star Wars Galaxies engine. You certainly don't need SLI for it. In fact, if all you play is MMOs then you probably don't need a powerful rig. You just need one with lots of RAM. And speaking of CPU depentent games, all I can think of are RTS games and flight sims.
Sigh, sometimes I wonder where people get their education.
Okay, since you're unaware of Processor performance and what it entails, I will give you a lesson. Also, please do not make assumptions based on what I "only" play, when I've never made any claim to "only" play MMORPGs.
First, under your theory, there is no reason why you'd need an X6800 and a Pentium III or 4 would net the SAME EXACT results as your processor. If this is untrue, you are incorrect. It indeed is. Infact, processor clock will net you higher frames in even FPSs!!! This has been consistent since the beginning of PC Gaming. You learn something new every day.
Hm, lets look at hard evidence to support this.
Okay! Now, we can CLEARLY see that the QX9650 clocked at 3.6 ghz over its stock 3.0ghz setting netted OVER THIRTY MORE FRAMES!!!!!!! In Quake Wars. NOTE: QUAKE WARS IS AN FIRST PERSON SHOOTER. IT IS NOT
an MMORPG, RTS, NOR IS IT A FLIGHT SIMULATION GAME.
Moving on, just for reference, this test was done using an 8800 video card. I wonder why Prey, with the SAME video card managed to net 341 FPS on a QX9650 which is ALSO clocked at 3.0ghz. Then, for some reason, some "DEFYING REASON" ( LOL ) the QX6850 got over 40+ frames LESS than the EQUALLY clocked QX9650???????? WOW. This MUST mean that EVEN in first person shooters, there is an INCREASE ( This means a greater amount ) in performance based on clock speed and processor architecture!!