BleepingComputer.com: SLI or Upgrade more cost-effective?

Generally, if I bought a high-end card today, would I get better FPS for my dollar if I SLI in the future when games start to run at lower FPS? Or would it be better to simply upgrade to a newer card when the old one starts getting slow? I'm trying to decide what kind of motherboard to purchase for a new build, and whether or not I will need SLI capabilities is a major factor in my decision. I am okay with running games at mid-range resolution, if that makes any impact on the decision.

Also, if I SLI an older card, would video memory potentially become an issue?

Thanks!

This post has been edited by AlfaWolf04: 12 August 2009 - 03:29 AM

If you're planning to upgrade in the near future (say a few months down the road), then going the SLI route can be a very cost effective plan. The problem with SLI is that you generally need the exact same type of card for it to work properly. The other thing to keep in mind it that SLI doesn't scale all that well. It's entirely dependant on the game and drivers you're running with. MOST users are better off by going the single card route and spending a decent chunk on one good card rather than trying to deal with the hassle of setting up an SLI system.

These days there's also a lot of really good performing cards at the mid-range level. Specifically the nVidia GTX 260 and the Radeon 4850/4890 come to mind.

SLI or Crossfire works well with some games. Not all games scale well with multiple cards so it is suggested you blow you cash on one high-end card. If you have the extra cash, a second GPU can improve things a bit. Also, you can get graphics cards that are already SLI'd or Crossfired so you don't have to worry about if it is supported or not. ATI's X2 cards and NVidia's x95 cards are two that come to mind.

Sounds a lot safer and like a lot less hassle to deal with one card at a time, so I'll go that route. Thanks!