AMD 4x4 and Nividia SLI or ATI Crossfire
Sledgehammer70
California Icrontian
Well with all the benefits that a dual CPU system can bring I want to point out how exciting this is for the graphics side of things.
As most fo you know the performance cap of both SLI and Crossfire hit home in the CPU department. Nvidia just kicked off its 7950GX2 series GPU's which acts like an SLI setup but in one PCI-E Slot. The trouble with this is when you get 2 of these side by side or even just one you become CPU bound. Being CPU bound means the CPU can't send enough data to the GPU core, making it so the GPU can't function at its top speeds. Now with AMD 4v4 we will have 2 CPU's that can feed data to SLI or dual core single slot designs. This will increase the data that will be sent to the GPU's allowing much faster times from your GPU.
Now this is a huge win for Nvidia as they have the best option for a Physics engine. With onboard Physics in a SLI setup with 2 physical CPU's they will have enough data to drive there product forward without spending extra cash for a physics card.
Makes me think the Nvidia and AMD are working together in this venture of 4x4.
As most fo you know the performance cap of both SLI and Crossfire hit home in the CPU department. Nvidia just kicked off its 7950GX2 series GPU's which acts like an SLI setup but in one PCI-E Slot. The trouble with this is when you get 2 of these side by side or even just one you become CPU bound. Being CPU bound means the CPU can't send enough data to the GPU core, making it so the GPU can't function at its top speeds. Now with AMD 4v4 we will have 2 CPU's that can feed data to SLI or dual core single slot designs. This will increase the data that will be sent to the GPU's allowing much faster times from your GPU.
Now this is a huge win for Nvidia as they have the best option for a Physics engine. With onboard Physics in a SLI setup with 2 physical CPU's they will have enough data to drive there product forward without spending extra cash for a physics card.
Makes me think the Nvidia and AMD are working together in this venture of 4x4.
0
Comments
I think it has alot of potential though...but I'm not really sold on 4xSLI yet until games start supporting it =D
4 GPUs and 2 dualcore CPUs? I mean, come on, that's disgusting. It literally makes me sad. It's gone beyond unnecessary into flat-out disturbing, seriously.
I could understand wanting that kind of performance in one chip of each, but the fact that these companies are able to milk everyone for so much is horrifying. Damn.
Think if 2 AM2 3800 X2's, run better than a top of the line Conroe, you inturn save a ton of cash. It makes sence!
People are pitching fits about the Ageia PPU (that costs ~$200) since there aren't any games out supporting it, what makes you think these same people people are going to shell out that kind of cash for a very limited benefit.
If AMD had wanted to really kill with the whole 4X core thing they should've held out until there were apps (read games) aplenty that could take advantage of the tech. As it stands right now the 4X core setup is more of a curiosity and rich boys toy than a true "Enthusiast solution".
One defense might be that new technology always lowers "old" technology. Sure. But therein lies the problem - this is not new technology. It's simply more of the old stuff, which does NOTHING to reduce costs. Instead of being revolutionary with every advance, all the companies are simply finding more and more ways of kicking the consumer's ass.
and i think this whole 4x4 thing is a panicked response from AMD to counter conroe. seems like a very last minute, OMG what can we do sort of thing.
sledge, why do you think nvidia has the better physics option right now? i am not going to be interested in PPU untill nvidia or ati makes it available on a single card as part of the gpu. or maybe it could be handled by a 2nd cpu core instead. untill then, PPU seems like a ripoff.
and i really don't like ati's recently announced 3-way physics thing. no mobos even exist with an ati chipset and 3 16xpcie lanes. now if they could figure out how to make the physics thing work on current crossfire boards...where you have one gpu (x1900) accelerating the game, and a 2nd gpu (x1600) doing the physics, then it would be a better solution and much more affordable.
I'm talking the high end conroe chips, Intel has only been showing off it's best which is set around $900. The lower chips are cheaper but so are the lower end AMD chips...
and i think this whole 4x4 thing is a panicked response from AMD to counter conroe. seems like a very last minute, OMG what can we do sort of thing.
I think the 4x4 wasn't last minute. AMD is bringing server power to the gamer. We have had servers for years running more than 2 CPU's why not for gamers? especially since AMD is opening its architecture Game developers and prgram developers will be abel to make there programs make use of this new Technology. Either way you look at it Intel or AMD you have to buy a new system to get the stuff so the cost is about equal.
sledge, why do you think nvidia has the better physics option right now? i am not going to be interested in PPU untill nvidia or ati makes it available on a single card as part of the gpu. or maybe it could be handled by a 2nd cpu core instead. untill then, PPU seems like a ripoff.
For now it is a rip off via Aigia and ATI but from what I have heard is that Nvidia's PPU will work on a 2nd core of a SLI setup. now you can get a SLI setup for under $300 these days using 2 6600GT's and a nice Nvidia mobo. thats almost as cheap as some of the PPu's on the market. Regardless PPu's are targeted to higher end gamers and most high end gamers dont have an extra PCI slot for a new PPu card, so nvidias soultion I think will be well adopted as it doesn't require anything other than a new driver. And tbh PPu's don't make that huge of a difference in todays games anyways. So if you have SLI it is like a free upgrade... That is why i think Nvidias soultions is better right now. Untill PPPu's are cheaper I will keep thinking that.
and i really don't like ati's recently announced 3-way physics thing. no mobos even exist with an ati chipset and 3 16xpcie lanes. now if they could figure out how to make the physics thing work on current crossfire boards...where you have one gpu (x1900) accelerating the game, and a 2nd gpu (x1600) doing the physics, then it would be a better solution and much more affordable.[/QUOTE]
This is how Nvidia is already doing it.
Dual graphics and Dual CPU's come into play with Super high end products. The main reason for the 7950GX2 was to allow you to power a 30" LCD and still get reasonable frame rates. 1 7900GTX can't power a 30" LCD with great frame rates. The 7950GX2 is solid across the board and can maintain steady solid frame rates on a 30" LCD. now running 2 7950GX2 would allow you to power 2 30" LCDs “not in SLI” and have a dual socket CPU system would allow you to overcome the bottle necking as we see in today’s computers. To be honest no 2 CPU's can’t feed enough data to today’s GPU's.. The architecture of a GPU is so much more advanced and much faster than a CPU. But in turn they are meant for 2 different things. So by adding the 2nd CPU socket would allow the bottleneck to be raised a bit and more and allow much more data to flow.
here you go:
Anandtech 7950GX2 Test vs 7900GTX and ATI 1900XTX
http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=2769&p=5
If you look at the frame rates on the cards you will see how the standard cards drop frame rates quickly as the GX2 holds its ground.
1280 x 1024
X1900XT - 95.2
7900GTX - 92.7
7800GTX 512 - 92
7950GX2 - 91.2
7900GT SLI - 90.6
1280 x 1024 4xAA
X1900XT - 91.6 "-3.6fps"
7900GTX - 91.4
7800GTX 512 - 86.7
7950GX2 - 90.4 "-.08fps"
7900GT SLI - 88.7
1600 x 1200
X1900XT - 88.7 "-2.9fps"
7900GTX - 90.2
7800GTX 512 - 85.2
7950GX2 - 89.2 "-1.2fps"
7900GT SLI - 88.3
1600 x 1200 4xAA
X1900XT - 76.3 "-12.4fps"
7900GTX - 75.2
7800GTX 512 - 68.3
7950GX2 - 86.6 "-2.6fps"
7900GT SLI - 80.7
2048 x 1536
X1900XT - 65.3 "-11fps"
7900GTX - 73.9
7800GTX 512 - 64.4
7950GX2 - 85.5 "-1.1fps"
7900GT SLI - 81.3
2048 x 1536 4xAA
X1900XT - 54.1 "-11.2fps"
7900GTX - 51.7
7800GTX 512 - 47.9
7950GX2 - 70.8 "-14.7fps"
7900GT SLI - 62.5
Overall Score or fram differance from 1280 x 1024 to 2048 x 1536
X1900XT -41.1 fps drop
7900GTX -41 fps drop
7800GTX 512 -44.1 fps drop
7950GX2 -20.4 fps drop
7900GT SLI -28.2 fps drop
As you can see the 7950GX holds the most stable at keeping a high level of FPS by over 20FPs per sec. now to me that is a awesome accomplishment. Even the 7900GTs in SLI show how SLI or 2 GPU's in one slot make a difference.
their concept sounds ok, but IMO ati's ability to pair 2 different types of gpus and having the lesser one do the physics seems better and more affordable.
mind you that it is all concept stuff now anyway, but if i have 2 7900gts and 1 only does the physics and nothing else...it is like paying for something and not getting full use of it. i mean is it a gpu or a ppu? are we going to start having special physics enabled SLI cards?
if nvidia allowed SLI/PPU with 2 different gpus, then they would have a slam dunk. i am just not going to drop another $300 on a card that doesn't get to live up to it's full potential. but if i could drop $100 on say a 6200/6600 and have that accelerate the physics i would be much more interested...
but it isn't perfect...still wish it allowed for different gpus.
it would be amazing to be able to upgrade your current card with a brand new one (i.e., 7900gt) and use your older last generation one (6600gt) for physics.
I'd like you to show me where you've found that 4X4 will support anything but FX chips. According to everything I've seen on that technology it's for the FX line and the FX line only.
THAT would be incredible.