I am getting sick of graph optical illusions. by starting the graph at "80%" it makes it look as if the nvidia setups are two or three times faster than the ati offerings. If the graphs started at 0%, as they should, then it would look as it should; the nvidia setups are only 30-80% faster. There is a big difference between 300% faster and 80%.

Unfortunately I don't think my electrical circuits can handle the wattage requirements of a 6 monitor, triple GPU gaming system. Nor could my power bill. I am excited for the ability to dedicate an old GPU to PhysX though -- does anyone know if you still have to "extend my desktop onto this display" with the second GPU in order to use it for PhysX (you did with the 178.xx drivers)?

Looks like Nvidia is going to charge (tax) $5 for each motherboard 'license' 

http://en.expreview.com/2008/10/21/s...-per-mobo.html

Market is the king! 

Thanks to Free market!

Sylvie, 

"Messy? Well, what do you expect after a big bang?"

How do you know that is true?
Ok, forget I asked.

the link {here} actually takes you to the Vista 64 bit download - not the 32 bit which is {here} http://www.nvidia.com/object/winvista_x86_180.42_beta.html {NOT} the page does a 404 - page not found...

So the Inq is wrong as are NVidia...go figure, good job I'm running x64 then :)

Multi monitor is certainly a good development (although, will it be easy to switch between SLI and plain multi monitor?)

'this is the first time we’ve enabled SLI on an Intel chipset, it’s really exciting for us' takes the biscuit though. Nvidia knows full well the only reason SLI hasn't worked on an Intel chipset up until now is because they've hacked the drivers not to support it..