HardOCP Crossfire review up

[nts]

What exactly is the problem with the dongle?

I honestly don't think it matters.

 

[Conky]

If the dongle is everyone's biggest grievance against the Crossfire then I would say that is a fairly minor complaint.

What's next? Whining about the color of capacitors? :laugh:

 

[Munky]

Maybe 1 or 2 years from now I'd be able to buy any dual pci-e mobo, and then put either 2 Ati cards or 2 Nv cards and have them work together. That's what bothers me more about dual cards (besides that you have to buy 2 of them ). I dont want to be required to buy a specific mobo based on whether I think Ati or Nv will have a better multi-gpu solution, and then you're stuck with that brand unless you get a different mobo. The issue of dongle vs bridge chip is not important to me, but it does LOOK better when the connector is internal.

 

[Ackmed]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
Do you have any idea how much better xfire would appeal to consumers and reviewers alike if ATI substituted the external dongle with an internal interconnect solution? It is FAR more elegant to do so. Sure, people say "It doesn't bother them to have a dongle, who looks in the back of their computer anyway?" But then ask them, given a choice, would they prefer an internal connector or the dongle? If anyone says they prefer the dongle, then that person is absolutely full of it. But because they have NO choice currently with Xfire, and HAVE to have an external cable to connect them, then of course their response will be, "It really doesn't bother me.". I am speaking of ATI fans who want to see ATI do better than Nvidia. Xfire is sloppy in comparison in it's current incarnation. Performance seems to be there, but it's just sloppy IMHO. Maybe 1 or 2 gens of xfire down the road, and some ATI engineer will see the light.

Since you felt the need to bump it after it had fallen way off the front page.. at least attempt to replies towards you.

Originally posted by: Ackmed
Except that 3DFX's SLI used an external type of cable, and even a cable that connected the cards inside the PC. It had no competition, so I doubt it was "rushed". I understand that its your opinion it has the dongle because it was rushed, but past evidence shows that the only other previous time, it doesnt look like that was the case.

Originally posted by: Matthias99
From a technology standpoint, the way ATI is doing things may actually end up giving better performance, especially with SuperAA. Calling it a 'rush job' or 'afterthought' because it has an external connection (as opposed to internal) between the cards is a little silly.

SuperAA is much faster than SLI AA. Its not even close. Obviously the way ATi did it has some advantages.

I would like for you to sit at a table of ATi engineers and help them "see the light", as you put it.

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: Ackmed

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
Do you have any idea how much better xfire would appeal to consumers and reviewers alike if ATI substituted the external dongle with an internal interconnect solution? It is FAR more elegant to do so. Sure, people say "It doesn't bother them to have a dongle, who looks in the back of their computer anyway?" But then ask them, given a choice, would they prefer an internal connector or the dongle? If anyone says they prefer the dongle, then that person is absolutely full of it. But because they have NO choice currently with Xfire, and HAVE to have an external cable to connect them, then of course their response will be, "It really doesn't bother me.". I am speaking of ATI fans who want to see ATI do better than Nvidia. Xfire is sloppy in comparison in it's current incarnation. Performance seems to be there, but it's just sloppy IMHO. Maybe 1 or 2 gens of xfire down the road, and some ATI engineer will see the light.

Since you felt the need to bump it after it had fallen way off the front page.. at least attempt to replies towards you.

Originally posted by: Ackmed
Except that 3DFX's SLI used an external type of cable, and even a cable that connected the cards inside the PC. It had no competition, so I doubt it was "rushed". I understand that its your opinion it has the dongle because it was rushed, but past evidence shows that the only other previous time, it doesnt look like that was the case.

Originally posted by: Matthias99
From a technology standpoint, the way ATI is doing things may actually end up giving better performance, especially with SuperAA. Calling it a 'rush job' or 'afterthought' because it has an external connection (as opposed to internal) between the cards is a little silly.

SuperAA is much faster than SLI AA. Its not even close. Obviously the way ATi did it has some advantages.

I would like for you to sit at a table of ATi engineers and help them "see the light", as you put it.

SuperAA is much faster than SLI AA? Congratulations! Is the external dongle required for SuperAA? I thought it was done through the PCI-e bus no? So what does SuperAA have to do with the dongle?

3dfx now belongs to Nvidia, and Nvida didn't even use the external dongle even though they aquired the original SLI technology from 3dfx. What does this tell you?

If you could arrange it with your buddies, I would love to have a sit in with ATI engineers, so you just let me know what strings you can pull to make it happen.

 

[Munky]

I believe SuperAA is done by the compositing engine on the master card. It shouldnt depend on the connector type (dongle/bridge), but doing it over pci-e bus would most likely be slower than through a dedicated connection.
http://www.techreport.com/reviews/2005q4/radeon-x1800-crossfire/index.x?pg=2

 

[Ackmed]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
SuperAA is much faster than SLI AA? Congratulations! Is the external dongle required for SuperAA? I thought it was done through the PCI-e bus no? So what does SuperAA have to do with the dongle?

3dfx now belongs to Nvidia, and Nvida didn't even use the external dongle even though they aquired the original SLI technology from 3dfx. What does this tell you?

If you could arrange it with your buddies, I would love to have a sit in with ATI engineers, so you just let me know what strings you can pull to make it happen.

Because the master card needs the dongle, and SuperAA is so much more efficient because of the master card. Otherwise is wouldnt be as fast, as you can see in NV's solution. SLI AA is much, much slower than SuperAA. Sure I would rather have an internal solution like NV's, if I had the choice. But given that NV's method is a lot slower when doing higher than normal AA, ATi's solution looks to be better.

It doesnt tell me anything, what does it tell you? Why avoid my point? 3DFX was not rushed with SLI, and they had an external cable, and internal cable. You saying that ATi rushed Crossfire out the door, and thats why it has the dongle doesnt look to be true. I understand its your opinion, and Im not trying to change it. Im just giving you another point of view.

They are not my buddies. You just come off as thinking you know whats better, than ATi does. Saying that they do not see the light, is pretty funny to me is all.

 

[Keysplayr]

What does it tell me? It tells me that this was the height of technology. Ten years ago. That was how 3dfx was able to SLI at the time. It tells me that ATI's implementation is even worse than 3dfx's Ten years ago, because even 3dfx did not require a "master" card. Only two cards from the same manufacturer were required. So in effect, Xfire is even more primitive than 3dfx's SLI a decade ago. I'm talking of course about the implementation, not the technology in the cards themselves.

So, yes. I believe Xfire was a rush to market to have something to "appear" like it had something to offer against Nvidia's SLI. Nobody is avoiding your point Ackmed. You seem to have neatly avoided one of mine about the sit down with ATI engineers. Sometimes it takes a layman, like me, to make the geeks, see the obvious.

 

[Wreckage]

Originally posted by: Ackmed
SuperAA is much faster than SLI AA. Its not even close. Obviously the way ATi did it has some advantages.

There have been many people saying that it's faster but does not look as good. It tops out at 14X compared to 16X for SLI.

Personally anything above 8X is a waste to my eyes, but some people must play some slow games where they have time to stop and stare.

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: munky
I believe SuperAA is done by the compositing engine on the master card. It shouldnt depend on the connector type (dongle/bridge), but doing it over pci-e bus would most likely be slower than through a dedicated connection.
http://www.techreport.com/reviews/2005q4/radeon-x1800-crossfire/index.x?pg=2

I believe Rollo linked to an article discussing the 4 types of rendering Xfire is capable of.
AFR, SFR, SuperTiling, and SuperAA. If I read this correctly, SuperAA communication is handled through the PCI-e bus and not the dongle.

 

[Munky]

The external connector was required because the design of the r520 started before crossfire. That does not mean it's a rushed job, but it does mean that the external components are required to make it work optimally, and eventually it brings other benefits like hardware AA blending on the master card. I think eventually Ati will adopt an internal connector like SLI - maybe on the r600, but I'm not sure if they will drop the whole master/slave setup. Would you rather pay extra for a master card, or rather have all the necessary hardware be present in every card, thus increasing the cost of non-master cards? It's a trade off either way.

 

[Matthias99]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
What does it tell me? It tells me that this was the height of technology. Ten years ago. That was how 3dfx was able to SLI at the time. It tells me that ATI's implementation is even worse than 3dfx's Ten years ago, because even 3dfx did not require a "master" card. Only two cards from the same manufacturer were required. So in effect, Xfire is even more primitive than 3dfx's SLI a decade ago. I'm talking of course about the implementation, not the technology in the cards themselves.

So, yes. I believe Xfire was a rush to market to have something to "appear" like it had something to offer against Nvidia's SLI.

ATI's use of an external compositing engine was a conscious design choice that is designed to improve performance. This lead to the need for a separate 'master' card (since otherwise they would have to put the compositing engine on every card, driving up costs for people who aren't using Crossfire), and for a dedicated high-speed connection between the cards (which NVIDIA also uses; they just put it inside the case).

Somehow you're getting out of this that Crossfire is inferior to not just NVIDIA SLI, but the old 3DFX SLI (which worked completely differently)?

Is anybody understanding the logic here? Or is it just me?

Nobody is avoiding your point Ackmed. You seem to have neatly avoided one of mine about the sit down with ATI engineers. Sometimes it takes a layman, like me, to make the geeks, see the obvious.

That their solution is, from a performance standpoint, probably the best one (at the cost of some flexibility in terms of hardware)?

 

[Ackmed]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
What does it tell me? It tells me that this was the height of technology. Ten years ago. That was how 3dfx was able to SLI at the time. It tells me that ATI's implementation is even worse than 3dfx's Ten years ago, because even 3dfx did not require a "master" card. Only two cards from the same manufacturer were required. So in effect, Xfire is even more primitive than 3dfx's SLI a decade ago. I'm talking of course about the implementation, not the technology in the cards themselves.

So, yes. I believe Xfire was a rush to market to have something to "appear" like it had something to offer against Nvidia's SLI. Nobody is avoiding your point Ackmed. You seem to have neatly avoided one of mine about the sit down with ATI engineers. Sometimes it takes a layman, like me, to make the geeks, see the obvious.

3DFX's SLI and NV's SLI are two different SLI's. Comparing them isnt very valid to me. I respect your opinion that you think its rushed, I just dont agree. We'll have to agree, to disagree.

I didnt avoid your statement about a sit down with the engineers. I said I dont know any of them, and they are not my buddies. I just have serious doubt about you "showing them the light". Thats all.

Originally posted by: Wreckage

Originally posted by: Ackmed
SuperAA is much faster than SLI AA. Its not even close. Obviously the way ATi did it has some advantages.

There have been many people saying that it's faster but does not look as good. It tops out at 14X compared to 16X for SLI.

Personally anything above 8X is a waste to my eyes, but some people must play some slow games where they have time to stop and stare.

Who are these many people? From the pics I saw, they look about the same. ATi's 14x is normally faster than NV's 8x. 16x is unplayable at any sort of high res to me. I do agree that in some games its hard to tell the difference between 8x and 16x. Some games benefit from AA better than others. Farcry to me, doesnt need a lot of AA overall, while BF2 does. I cant do 16xAA in BF2, or 8x really. So I stick with 4x and TRAA most of the time. I would love to do 8x though, as I can easily see the difference, even at 1920x1200.

 

[Creig]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
What does it tell me? It tells me that this was the height of technology. Ten years ago. That was how 3dfx was able to SLI at the time. It tells me that ATI's implementation is even worse than 3dfx's Ten years ago, because even 3dfx did not require a "master" card.

In case you hadn't noticed, video card architecture has changed quite a bit in the past 10 years. What is necessary for today's PCI-E/DX9.0c/1600x1200/4xAA/16xAF can't be directly compared to yesterday's AGP/DX6.0/800x600/no AA/no AF.

Car tires are STILL round and lightbulbs are STILL just glowing filaments as they have been since they were invented. Yet we're still using them today. Just because an idea is "old" doesn't mean it's bad.

Quit trying to compare apples to oranges.

 

[nRollo]

Originally posted by: Creig

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
What does it tell me? It tells me that this was the height of technology. Ten years ago. That was how 3dfx was able to SLI at the time. It tells me that ATI's implementation is even worse than 3dfx's Ten years ago, because even 3dfx did not require a "master" card.

In case you hadn't noticed, video card architecture has changed quite a bit in the past 10 years. What is necessary for today's PCI-E/DX9.0c/1600x1200/4xAA/16xAF can't be directly compared to yesterday's AGP/DX6.0/800x600/no AA/no AF.

Car tires are STILL round and lightbulbs are STILL just glowing filaments as they have been since they were invented. Yet we're still using them today. Just because an idea is "old" doesn't mean it's bad.

Quit trying to compare apples to oranges.

Sheesh Creig stop trying to make the proverbial silk purse out of a sow's ear. Almost all the reviewers have the same opinion as Keys about the dongle/master card/compsoiter chip- it's not like he felt out of the sky spouting Martian philosophy and nobody but him gets it. (he's pretty much in the majority)

I'd care more about that stuff too if there wasn't what I consider more important stuff: driver issues, lack of flexible defaults.

Crossfire X850 was a joke.

Crossfire X1800 is halfway there.
(half good, half bad)

 

[Paratus]

(Rollo as soon as I read that review I knew you'd let us know about it )

Anyhow, I really don't see the problem. Any enthusiast who really wants the best ATI has to offer will deal with quirks of crossfire just as they did a year ago with SLI.

Is SLI more refined: Yes.
Was Xfire a response to SLI: Yes
Is X1800 Xfire competitve with SLI : You Bet

Seriously - anyone who builds their own gaming box can handle the current issues with Xfire - especially since most can be addressed with better drivers.

Mountain out of a mole hill IMHO

 

[Pete]

Um, did 3dfx's SLI even use a dongle? I recall the dongle was for passing thru the output of your 2D card, but I think the SLI-specific chores were handled by an internal connector (albeit "dongly," unlike NV's silicon bridge). Sorry to deprive ppl of another historical "parallel."

Anyway, since we're all listing XFire X1800XT reviews, I don't know if GamePC's review has been mentioned yet. They tested with Cat 5.13. The benchmarks are only with typical settings (no SLI-specific modes).

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: Matthias99

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
What does it tell me? It tells me that this was the height of technology. Ten years ago. That was how 3dfx was able to SLI at the time. It tells me that ATI's implementation is even worse than 3dfx's Ten years ago, because even 3dfx did not require a "master" card. Only two cards from the same manufacturer were required. So in effect, Xfire is even more primitive than 3dfx's SLI a decade ago. I'm talking of course about the implementation, not the technology in the cards themselves.

So, yes. I believe Xfire was a rush to market to have something to "appear" like it had something to offer against Nvidia's SLI.

ATI's use of an external compositing engine was a conscious design choice that is designed to improve performance. This lead to the need for a separate 'master' card (since otherwise they would have to put the compositing engine on every card, driving up costs for people who aren't using Crossfire), and for a dedicated high-speed connection between the cards (which NVIDIA also uses; they just put it inside the case).

Somehow you're getting out of this that Crossfire is inferior to not just NVIDIA SLI, but the old 3DFX SLI (which worked completely differently)?

Is anybody understanding the logic here? Or is it just me?

Nobody is avoiding your point Ackmed. You seem to have neatly avoided one of mine about the sit down with ATI engineers. Sometimes it takes a layman, like me, to make the geeks, see the obvious.

That their solution is, from a performance standpoint, probably the best one (at the cost of some flexibility in terms of hardware)?

Of course the external compositing engine was a conscious design. It was all they had time for. They decided this with the X8xx series and are now locked into it. Now they are committed to make the pig work. Easier and faster and less costly to slap on a compositing chip than to redesign the core to support xfire natively like cores from NV since the PCI-e 5900 series.
The R520 was already well into the design period and maybe even taped out once. So it was too late to incorporate native support for xfire. And so, external it stayed. Now, no doubt R580 will be the same.

I understand the difference between 3dfx SLI (Scan Line Interleaving) and Nvidia's SLI (Scalable Link Interface). I'm not that much of a noob. The external dongle on Xfire is reminiscent of 3dfx's external dongle. Gives the impression of old technology. Not just to me, but to reviewers. Most don't like it. They don't like the Master Card's either. They like the performance, Sans the current issues that will eventually be worked out. Whether or not the performance is better with an external cable is debatable at best. Marketing at it's best.

So in conclusion:
Easier for ATI to add compositing chip than to respin the core with native xfire components.
I know they could do it. They have just committed themselves to this implementation and have invested too much in it to ditch it now.
Too late for R520 and R580 because as I understand it, these two cores were being worked on along side each other. So they are stuck with the uglies.
Rushed. Rushed. Rushed. I can almost hear the echo's of the whips crackin in the ATI development labs. One guy in a suit slashing the whip around groaning, "Work faster you insignificant nothing of a scientist!!! We have money to steal from our uninformed sheep. I don't care how you do it, JUST DO IT RIGHT THE F NOW!!!" LOL.

Thats what I see when I look at ATI's Crossfire.

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: Pete
Um, did 3dfx's SLI even use a dongle? I recall the dongle was for passing thru the output of your 2D card, but I think the SLI-specific chores were handled by an internal connector (albeit "dongly," unlike NV's silicon bridge). Sorry to deprive ppl of another historical "parallel."

Anyway, since we're all listing XFire X1800XT reviews, I don't know if GamePC's review has been mentioned yet. They tested with Cat 5.13. The benchmarks are only with typical settings (no SLI-specific modes).

I believe your right. The dongle was from the VGA card's 15 pin d-sub connector to the input d-sub connector on the Voodoo2. Then a small flex connector to connect the second Voodoo2, internally. I am looking at my 2 voodoo2's right now. Damn shame 3dfx went under. That actually makes it even worse Pete, now that you mention this. Because even 10 years ago, the 2 Voodoo2 cards were connected internally via that flat ribbon cable. The dongle was just the only practical way to get signal to the Voodoo2 as there was no other way to connect to the VGA cards output. I had a Trident card IIRC, connected to my Voodoo's.

 

[Creig]

Originally posted by: Rollo
Sheesh Creig stop trying to make the proverbial silk purse out of a sow's ear.

Sheesh Rollo, stop trying to make out like ATI is staffed by nothing but incompetent idiots.

Originally posted by: Rollo
Almost all the reviewers have the same opinion as Keys about the dongle/master card/compsoiter chip- it's not like he felt out of the sky spouting Martian philosophy and nobody but him gets it.

Is it as "elegant" as the internal Nvidia bridge? No. But as long as it works, who cares if they have 1 more cable behind their computer? It's not as if you're showing off the back of your computer case to house guests.

Originally posted by: Rollo
(he's pretty much in the majority)

Apparently he's not.

Originally posted by: Rollo
I'd care more about that stuff too if there wasn't what I consider more important stuff: driver issues, lack of flexible defaults.

The "driver issues" and "lack of flexible defaults" issues are nowhere near as bad as your soapbox rants would like to have people believe.

Originally posted by: Rollo
Crossfire X850 was a joke.

I'll mostly agree with you on that one. It seemed to be more for the benefit of their PR dept than anything else. But for people with LCDs, the refresh rate issue is meaningless. So it wasn't totally useless.

Originally posted by: Rollo
Crossfire X1800 is halfway there.
(half good, half bad)

Crossfire is over 3/4 there and getting better quickly.

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: Creig

Originally posted by: Rollo
Sheesh Creig stop trying to make the proverbial silk purse out of a sow's ear.

Sheesh Rollo, stop trying to make out like ATI is staffed by nothing but incompetent idiots.
ATI did what they could in the time alotted. Nobody said ATI didn't have talent. They just didn't have the time.

Originally posted by: Rollo
Almost all the reviewers have the same opinion as Keys about the dongle/master card/compsoiter chip- it's not like he felt out of the sky spouting Martian philosophy and nobody but him gets it.

Is it as "elegant" as the internal Nvidia bridge? No. But as long as it works, who cares if they have 1 more cable behind their computer? It's not as if you're showing off the back of your computer case to house guests.
It's that same fact again. Not enough time. They had to go external compositor because it was the only thing they could have done, or knew how to do. Its the fact that they used an external cable in the first place that I can't get over. There is really no question in my book. This was thrown together the best way they knew how in a short amount of time.

Originally posted by: Rollo
(he's pretty much in the majority)

Apparently he's not.
You need to back this one up brudda. Just sayin it don't make it so. Check as many reviews as you can find. You'll change this tune quickly enough. Of course, not publicly.

Originally posted by: Rollo
I'd care more about that stuff too if there wasn't what I consider more important stuff: driver issues, lack of flexible defaults.

The "driver issues" and "lack of flexible defaults" issues are nowhere near as bad as your soapbox rants would like to have people believe.
No, they're bad. But will get worked out over time. Just as NV worked out SLI's shortcomings.

Originally posted by: Rollo
Crossfire X850 was a joke.

I'll mostly agree with you on that one. It seemed to be more for the benefit of their PR dept than anything else. But for people with LCDs, the refresh rate issue is meaningless. So it wasn't totally useless.
Ah, those silver linings.

Originally posted by: Rollo
Crossfire X1800 is halfway there.
(half good, half bad)

Crossfire is over 3/4 there and getting better quickly.
Now you're arguing in fractions? Ok, lemme try. Crossfire is 9/16 * X / compositor + dongle = 64/100*3.14 there.

 

[nts]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
...stuff...

There are pro's and con's to both solutions. Neither of them are perfect.

You don't like ATi, so don't buy their products. But just because ATi's way isn't the same as NVIDIAs way of doing things doesn't make it broken and wrong.

 

[Cookie Monster]

Personally, i find the internal connectors of the SLi system much better (Because the connector is internal and looks cool). I also like how you only need two of the same card to configure it in SLI (prices and garaunteeded 70~100% performace).

SuperAA is just also much better than SLi AA. (SLi AA seems to be a rushed job, although i would perfer 8xTR S over all other superAA/SLi AA etc).

Conclusion is that crossfire is really coming through. The most significant issue is stability issue. Other than that, its really competitive (Thanks to ATis new R520 core). However as of now, SLi looks more favorble to a consumer as most of the issues has been solved and over hundred games are supported.

 

[nRollo]

Originally posted by: Creig

Originally posted by: Rollo
I'd care more about that stuff too if there wasn't what I consider more important stuff: driver issues, lack of flexible defaults.

The "driver issues" and "lack of flexible defaults" issues are nowhere near as bad as your soapbox rants would like to have people believe.

When you spend $1000, having it default to a slower method of Multicard, and not being able to change it when it doesn't work or could work faster, is a VERY big deal. These guys aren't dropping $200 on a card- this is more than a weeks pay for most people in this country. Most games are D3d, and most aren't profiled, so this is what is forced upon you for most games.

Originally posted by: Rollo
Crossfire X1800 is halfway there.
(half good, half bad)

Crossfire is over 3/4 there and getting better quickly.

[/quote]
Until you can set the type of MultiGPU it uses, test what works best, it's not 3/4 done for me. When they change that, I'll consider it mostly done, shut up, and call it a viable alternative. (the noise, heat, cost aren't as much an issue to me)

 

[Creig]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
It's that same fact again. Not enough time. They had to go external compositor because it was the only thing they could have done, or knew how to do. Its the fact that they used an external cable in the first place that I can't get over. There is really no question in my book. This was thrown together the best way they knew how in a short amount of time.

For somebody complaining about me not backing up MY statements, I see no proof from you that this is indeed true. Why don't you back up YOUR claims with some links, "brudda".

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Originally posted by: Creig

Originally posted by: Rollo
Crossfire X850 was a joke.

I'll mostly agree with you on that one. It seemed to be more for the benefit of their PR dept than anything else. But for people with LCDs, the refresh rate issue is meaningless. So it wasn't totally useless.

Ah, those silver linings.

So what's your point? Am I wrong?

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
Rushed. Rushed. Rushed. I can almost hear the echo's of the whips crackin in the ATI development labs. One guy in a suit slashing the whip around groaning, "Work faster you insignificant nothing of a scientist!!! We have money to steal from our uninformed sheep. I don't care how you do it, JUST DO IT RIGHT THE F NOW!!!" LOL.

:roll: We already have one Rollo in these forums, quit trying to be Rollo #2.