It sounds great, and early benchmarks show that it performs admirably, just the kind of quality one would expect from the graphics leader, Nvidia.

I would definitely jump on it if it trickles down to the more affordable 8800GT, coupled with 45nm Intel Quad-Cores and I've got myself a system that BLASTS games (except crysis) to pieces. YAY

Technology seems mature, unlike the "late" quad-SLI, and the performance scaling is good under the right circumstances.

Drawback is that it's really for the ultra hard core people with lots and lots of money, for two reasons:
1) only available on ultra high-end cards, so if one is not willing to spend at least $1500 on graphics cards alone, nothing.
2) only makes sense if you are playing on a monster screen at 2560*1600 with 4 or 8x AA and 16x AF, at which settings 3-way SLI gives 2-2.7 times the performance of a single card. Already at 1920*1200, the "gain" compared to standard SLI is between -10 and +25% (the only exception probably being Crysis).

How came 3-SLI delivers 2.8X performance, if standard SLI with two GPUs, delivers around 1.7x. I would expect that adding the third card is going to lower perfomance .

This Tri-SLI crap is a waste of money and it's really ridiculious!

What about a single video card with mult-core gpus?
If cpus can do it then why can't gpus?

Also what't the point of having all these extra slots if they going to get blocked off by those massive dual slot cooler. Motherboard manufacutres should just make 2 types of boards. One with just 3 PCIe x16 slots for Tri-SLI wannabes (They can save a lot by remove those extra unused slots). And the other who knows how to use a computer to it's full potential instead of just playing games all day like a dickhead.

The ONLY reason NV are pushing tri sli is because using two NV cards in SLI is nowhere near as efficient as crossfire

Where are my single slot 3-way-SLi compatible cards? geez, it'll be pretty tight with 3 x 2 slot cards..... I can't wait to put them in my shuttle box... oh wait I CANT! :)