people with 19" screens dont need dual cards. sli or crossfire. most 19" panels max out at 1280x1024. a single card handles that fine.
crossfire is completely pointless if its really limited to 1600x1200, at any hz.
people with 19" screens dont need dual cards. sli or crossfire. most 19" panels max out at 1280x1024. a single card handles that fine.
crossfire is completely pointless if its really limited to 1600x1200, at any hz.
Originally posted by: malG
What does notebooks have to do with ATI Crossfire? Please enlighten us, which recent (2000-2005 models) LCDs (NOT notebooks) that has 50Hz native refresh rate
Technically LCD's don't have refresh rates because they don't refresh! That's CRT lingo where it mattered. LCD's don't flicker so refresh rates mater less. LCD's are measured in response time. A 20ms response time equivalent to 50hz. So to answer your question, go look up all the LCD's with 20ms response times (hint, there's an assload of them). Anything with 16ms response times runs up to 60hz. So running above 50hz refresh rate on a 20ms LCD is pointless... you're wasting bandwidth.
You're wrong...if true then why is my Dell 2405FPW (16ms) natively supported refresh rate is 70Hz?
Try playing F.E.A.R at that res without SLI and theres alot more games the same there in the first link above.
In the article that started this post it clearly states LCD wouldn't be affected. primative CRT'S only
its also a pretty erronous review too, so it holds less weight....theres mistakes all over that thing, i had a thread on it, and people picked it apart.
and so far i can see no where where SLI doesnt help. sure a single gtx some times beats it out in no AA and AF modes, but thats due to overheads, that soon corrects itself once the IQ is turned up
and well im not gonna go rummaging through, if you want to prove something , direct link to the proof would be nice
also jasonja is completely wrong....response time hasnt anything to do with refresh rate
response time is the time it takes a pixel to change not the time it takes to be refreshed, and well theres no set standard for measuring it so companies will jus post the fastes response they can get.
refresh is simply the number of times the screen is refreshed, nothing to do with pixel response
60hz for all LCD's is fine because LCD's refresh the whole picture at once, and dont do any painting of horizontal lines
well buddy SLI is here to stay, its available now and provides the best possible performance if you want it. and its only getting stronger with every driver release.
if you want me to believe that at this moment in time SLI doesnt work in all games in some way, then you better show me links, from different sources, showing it not working in the same game
How the hell am I wrong ? If the pixel can only change every 20ms and you're refreshing the output to the LCD every 16ms; it's pretty damn obvious that the pixel isn't going to change every 16ms. Internal it's just dropping some of those refreshes on the floor.. thereby wasting bandwidth. So you can refresh the screen as fast as you want to... but the pixels aren't going to update any faster than the response time.
ok
look here and go down to Refresh rate, response time, flicker and motion-blur
Refresh rate is the rate at which the electronics in the monitor addresses (updates) the brightness of the pixels on the screen (typically 60 to 75Hz). For each pixel, an LCD monitor maintains a constant light output from one addressing cycle to the next (sometimes referred to as 'sample-and-hold'), so the display has no refresh-dependent flicker.
There should be no need to set a high refresh rate to avoid flicker on an LCD.
Response time relates to the time taken for the light throughput of a pixel to fully react to a change in its electrically-programmed brightness. The viscosity of the liquid-crystal material means it takes a finite time to reorientate in response to a changed electric field. A second effect (which has a rather more complicated explanation) is that the capacitance of the LC material is affected by the molecule alignment, and so if a step change is brightness is programmed, as the LC realigns the cell voltage changes and the brightness to which it settles is not quite what was programmed. Unless 'overdrive' (which tries to pre-compensate for this effect) is employed, it may take several refreshes before the light output stablises to the correct value. Response rate for dark-to-light is normally different from light-to-dark, and is often slower still between mid-greys. VESA and others define standard ways of measuring response time, but a single figure rarely tells the whole story.
Manufacturers 'response times' rarely tell the whole story.
Unless combined with a strobing backlight, response times much below 16ms are likely to be of only marginal benefit, owing to more-dominant 'sample and hold' effects (see below),
there you go
also a another good link explaining the differences
here
unless of course i may have the wrong end of your stick here. did you mean to say that 20ms = roughly 50Hz, so a pixel can change 50x a second (for one measurement since black to white takes a different amount of time than white to black, and again grey to grey takes a different time too) so theres no point in redrawing the screen above 50hz?
refresh doesnt really matter for LCD anyway, its mearly there because of the analogue outputs that still exist, these work at a frequency. like that link says i think refresh is simply refreshing the brightness. not really the colour
So whats the point of linking if people are going to go into denial and skew thae facts. LOL
Well done Olispunkmeyer. So cross fire works just fine if your using a modern LCD with good response times.
Well done Olispunkmeyer. So cross fire works just fine if your using a modern LCD with good response times.
In the above review links . Your saying to many mistakes to be taken at face value could you explain those mistakes and which games your referring to
good catch....reading now :beer:
hmm it makes sense but theres still trade offs, hes talking about blanking, and goes on to explain that only half the bandwidth is needed anyway in scissor mode. Atis scissor mode will be just like NV's SFR (only not dynamic, therefore needing to be pre programmed per game) which isnt used a an awful lot. AFR is best because of geometry scaling and with AFR u need to transport the whole image so the bottleneck still stands
will read it a few times though to get my head round it
Let's move on to a higher end CRT or LCD that can display 2048x1536. In Scissor mode each card has to render 2048x768 pixels, and at 60 Hz that comes out to be 94 Mpps. Again, this is well below the maximum 115 Mpps that the receiver can handle. The maximum fps that the receiver can handle in this mode is 73 fps. While this is short of the 75 fps that is needed to run with v-sync enabled at 75 Hz, it isn't terribly far off either! Most users will not notice much of a difference (this is again assuming the cards can run the application at that speed).
i mean scissor mode at that hi-res and you cant run 75Hz if you want to for Vsync. i know refresh really is a non issue on LCD's but people do like to have higher refreshes. and when vsyncs involved then it really is a difference between 60fps and 75 fps. hes going by theory which he has no choice but to, but theory doesnt always = practice
Now, things do change around a bit when using alternating frames. At 1920x1200 the receiver can handle a maximum of 50 fps (1920x1200 at 50 Hz, assuming the Sil chip can be programmed as such). At 2048x1536 the maximum rate is 37 fps (2048x1536 at 37 Hz). In alternating frame mode the CrossFire solution will have a max FPS of 100 when used at 1920, or a max FPS of 75 when used with 2048. We are essentially just dealing with bandwidth, as the pixel information transmitted basically contains color information (RGB) and location (clock). As such, the ways with dealing with this information can be pretty flexible. This of course assumes that the Sil 1161 is running at 165 MHz all the time.
now here hes assuming that you can up the res and drop the frequency, but we dont know that for sure. if it can then looks like crossfire will be able to provide 2048x1536@ 75Hz
so good assumptions, just need to wait and find out if they are correct
yeah it doesnt, it may do with Vsync on since that locks on to your monitors refresh rate. but if you dont play with it on then it doesnt matter.
x-fire is only for bragging rights, it's not going to be a major volume seller (on the contrary) as it makes very little sense to invest in such a setup considering the required mobo, "master" cards, etc, all of which will be quite expensive because of the fact that they'll be only small numbers produced.
R520 as a single card is a different story, but I doubt it's going to be able to outrun my 7800GTX OC.
R520 as a single card is a different story, but I doubt it's going to be able to outrun my 7800GTX OC.
I game at 1920x1200 (see sig) with a single 7800 GTX which is perfectly capable of maintaining high FPS (above 50 avg) in most of the games that I play, even with all details maxxed out including 4xAA/16xAF.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter