PDA

View Full Version : Quad support on the 9th


Pages : [1] 2

lee63
08-02-06, 07:38 AM
http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=33418 I know its the Inquirer, but lets hope it true and theres 64 bit drivers to (pirate)

Venturi
08-02-06, 07:55 AM
schwing shcwing!(nana2)

(Garth)


...if we can believe the inquirer...

K007
08-02-06, 08:21 AM
Considering the massive boost we saw on prey..i really really cant wait to see quad sli in action.

And i hope nvidia will release a more friendly info guide for the gx2..atm i know the card works..it uses its 2 gpus..but..i want to know exactly how it works what settings to touch..etc..

Hope the next driver will be more sweet.

Either way..Quad SLI is looking sweet and i might pick up a second gx2 later down the road.

badboy64
08-02-06, 09:50 AM
http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=33418 I know its the Inquirer, but lets hope it true and theres 64 bit drivers to (pirate)
We can only hope for 64-bit drivers. Also your 3DMark06 is way too high for a single GPU. Unless you have 2x7800GTX's.

Greeno
08-02-06, 11:45 AM
We can only hope for 64-bit drivers. Also your 3DMark06 is way too high for a single GPU. Unless you have 2x7800GTX's.

He's got 2x 7950GX2's

shungokusatsu
08-02-06, 12:15 PM
Finally! Sweet! (nana2) Wow, Quad and SLI even work on Crossfire boards lol.

SH64
08-02-06, 05:20 PM
Hope its true!

DarkJedi664
08-02-06, 05:25 PM
Quad SLi only shows it's strength at 2560x1600, anything else, it really doesn't help at all. Look at Firing Squad's article to see what I'm talking about. If you are playing at 1600x1200 or less, a 7900GTX will be sufficient, or SLi. Even at 1920x1200, Quad SLi doesn't show it's strength.

SH64
08-02-06, 05:54 PM
Quad SLi only shows it's strength at 2560x1600, anything else, it really doesn't help at all. Look at Firing Squad's article to see what I'm talking about. If you are playing at 1600x1200 or less, a 7900GTX will be sufficient, or SLi. Even at 1920x1200, Quad SLi doesn't show it's strength.
I disagree.
If the game is slow @1280x1024 on a GTX (see Call of Juarez or Oblivion max settings for ex.).. then QuadSLI should help even at that res.
i'm feeling the QuadSLI's strength @1600x1200,noAA,SS on FEAR & @1280x1024,8xAA on BF2 .. its clear as the sun in the middle of the summer.

we just need that QuadSLI support .. until now only like 3-5 games are Quad supported while the others are not at all.

DarkJedi664
08-02-06, 06:30 PM
"should" does not mean does. Read this:

http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/geforce_7900_7950_gx2_quad_sli_update/page4.asp

At 16x12, F.E.A.R. is the only title that takes advantage of our Quad setup. As you can see, everywhere else the GeForce 7900 GX2 Quad is outgunned by GeForce 7900 GTX SLI and Radeon X1900 XTX CrossFire (with the exception of Quake 4), in fact the 7900 GX2 Quad barely outpaces the single GeForce 7950 GX2: in fact performance is tied in Quake 4 and Half-Life 2: Lost Coast. Driver overhead may be playing a bit of a role here, but it’s surprising to see nevertheless. We weren’t able to complete our tests with the CrossFire rig in Far Cry at 1600x1200 for some reason.

Under the greater demands of 2560x1600, the situation improves a little for Quad SLI, Quake 4 is now showing an advantage of nearly 30% over GeForce 7900 GTX SLI, while the Quad card outruns 7900 GTX SLI by 14% in F.E.A.R.

All isn’t rosy for GeForce 7900 GX2 Quad however, as everywhere else the SLI and CrossFire rigs are still delivering better performance. Again, part of this is due to the Quad cards lower clocks, and extra driver overhead may be playing a role. It also looks like the Quad card may be falling back to 2-way SLI in some tests.

In order to really see where a Quad SLI rig shines, you’ve got to turn the settings up a little higher. Let’s crank the AA up to 8x.

SH64
08-02-06, 06:38 PM
Well , how do you explain the extra performance i get on QuadSLI @1280x1024 on BF2 then ?

also .. if it can happen in FEAR , it should be possible for any other game .. i dont see why its not.

DarkJedi664
08-02-06, 06:41 PM
AA and AF settings, as those eat up video memory like no other. but why are you playing at 1280x1024 with a nice rig like that? if you can spend the money on quad SLi, you can get a nice monitor that goes beyond that res. just a suggestion.

SH64
08-02-06, 06:46 PM
AA and AF settings, as those eat up video memory like no other. but why are you playing at 1280x1024 with a nice rig like that? if you can spend the money on quad SLi, you can get a nice monitor that goes beyond that res. just a suggestion.
1) I was just comparing performance between regular 7800GTX SLI setup vs. QuadSLI @1280x1024 res (just to see if Quad is doing anything at that res) .. of course , i'm playing BF2 @1600x1200,8xAA+SSTAA,16xAF on my Quad setup now & its smooth as butter :)
(i have a 19" monitor btw & thinking about going to some 24" widescreen in the near future , but thats another story).

2) As i added above .. if FEAR can take advantage of QuadSLI @1600x1200 i cant see why other games cant or would not. i think its all a matter of drivers optimizations & support.

shungokusatsu
08-02-06, 06:57 PM
AA and AF settings, as those eat up video memory like no other. but why are you playing at 1280x1024 with a nice rig like that? if you can spend the money on quad SLi, you can get a nice monitor that goes beyond that res. just a suggestion.
Quad is excellent for 1600x1200 using all settings AA and AF. It's difficult to go by a review that doesn't even use the official drivers that nvidia claims can produce an extra 3000+ points on 3D06.

HighTest
08-02-06, 07:03 PM
If it's true about the CrossFire motherboards being allowed to utilize SLI, the I hope that AMD/ATI open up CrossFire on nVIDIA chipsets.

This would level the playing field for motherboards and allow them to compete on a feature basis, not just on which mult-GPU platform you wanted to use.

If it doesn't open up evenly, it may give nVIDIA the leg up as you'd be able to do SLI on any of the platforms.

SH64
08-02-06, 07:03 PM
AA and AF settings, as those eat up video memory like no other.
& i think you already answered yourself here .. AA & AF settings .. thats all what i want . i want to play my games at best possible res (for my case 1600x1200) with max possible number of AA & AF samples . its ok to trade higher res (2560x1600) with lower res(1600x1200) + high AA/AF as long as you get sharp & clear picture with all other features turned on.
& notice that in FEAR i got great performance improvement @1600x1200,noAA,SS,16xAF ... so thats a performance increase even without AA .. again thats compared to regular SLI setup.
i can give you some numbers if you are interested.

snilloconator
08-02-06, 07:15 PM
Quad is excellent for 1600x1200 using all settings AA and AF. It's difficult to go by a review that doesn't even use the official drivers that nvidia claims can produce an extra 3000+ points on 3D06.

Exactly what I was going to reply about the drivers shung. We will see great things from quad with better drivers.:D

badboy64
08-02-06, 08:22 PM
He's got 2x 7950GX2's
Look at his linked score. It says 7800GTX. He doesn't have a 2x 7950GX2 score from what I did with the his compare score.

shungokusatsu
08-02-06, 08:49 PM
Look at his linked score. It says 7800GTX. He doesn't have a 2x 7950GX2 score from what I did with the his compare score.
Lee has Quad SLI.

shungokusatsu
08-02-06, 08:56 PM
Exactly what I was going to reply about the drivers shung. We will see great things from quad with better drivers.:D
That's for sure :D Nvidia even had Quad SLI running at it's Intel Conroe event where they said they were getting the highest benchmarks they had ever seen. Can't wait for it :headbang:

snilloconator
08-02-06, 10:38 PM
I just have to save up for the other 7950....:D

snilloconator
08-02-06, 10:41 PM
oops double post!

squall_leonhart
08-03-06, 02:25 AM
remember padawans. the higher the resolution, the less aa/af needed ;)

Venturi
08-03-06, 08:08 AM
remember padawans. the higher the resolution, the less aa/af needed ;)

While at 2560x1600 I don't use AA, there is huge visual increase from AF, especially 16x. AF does indeed improve the image at even high resolutions.

AA is a tremendous tax on the system at 8x and 16x. The visual gain from 2x, 4x, and S is so negligeable, that you would be hard pressed to find it.
the visual gain at 8x and 16x and 32 x seems not worthwhile, at that resolution.

I find the best experience is maxed visual quality at 2560x1600 without bothering with AA at all. AF does definitly contribute to the eye candy at 2560x1600.

lee63
08-03-06, 08:24 AM
Look at his linked score. It says 7800GTX. He doesn't have a 2x 7950GX2 score from what I did with the his compare score.Yea that score is old, it was with my old 512s, I dont have Quad score yet :D