New Crossfire Review

[nitromullet]

X-fire review to possibly follow in a few weeks

apoppin, just wondering if you've had a chance to check out AT's look into Crossfire performance with P35...

http://anandtech.com/cpuchipse...howdoc.aspx?i=2995&p=4

http://anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=2990&p=6

Looks like 975X is the better choice at the moment over P35. P35 Crossfire still provides a boost over a single card, but you should keep the fact that P35 runs dual cards in x16/x4 in mind when benching and drawing conclusions.

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: nitromullet

X-fire review to possibly follow in a few weeks

apoppin, just wondering if you've had a chance to check out AT's look into Crossfire performance with P35...

http://anandtech.com/cpuchipse...howdoc.aspx?i=2995&p=4

http://anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=2990&p=6

Looks like 975X is the better choice at the moment over P35. P35 Crossfire still provides a boost over a single card, but you should keep the fact that P35 runs dual cards in x16/x4 in mind when benching and drawing conclusions.

That is interesting. And my board, the 650i SLI, I can only run x8/x8 when in SLI mode. Not bad, but I don't know how, or even if x4 would stifle performance on the P35.

 

[nitromullet]

The 16x/4x may not be the limitation, but IIRC, P965 (16x/4x) also didn't have quite as good Crossfire performance as 975x.

Looks like generally the Crossfire performance between P965 and 975X is pretty close, but there are cases where P965 falls behind:

http://www.firingsquad.com/har...erformance/default.asp

...of course that review is a few months old, so it's possible that drivers have improved performance.

The main reason for bringing this up is really just as a footnote for apop's future testing to note that he might not be able to wring the full potential from a Crossfire setup due to his chipset. So, any conclusions drawn based on his benchmarks should bear that in mind. Basically, what it boils down to is that it is difficult for a home user to conduct conclusive benchmarks (as you already know, I'm sure) simply due to the fact that they don't have access to as wide an array of hardware as review sites do to weed out other variables. I'm sure that apoppins' benchmarks will be great in assessing Crossfire performance on a popular P35 motherboard, but that is the extent of it.

Another reason I bring this up is because I'm kicking around a number of different options at the moment, and if I was in apoppin's shoes I would seriously consider a different motherboard for a Crossfire setup. When spending $700-800 on video cards, I wouldn't be shy about spending an additional $100 on a motherboard to make sure I got the most out of it. This is one of the reasons that I've generally stuck with NVIDIA for multi-card setups, SLI is really backed 100% by NVIDIA (take the good and bad with that) whereas Crossfire has to rely on their competitor's support for Crossfire for Intel.

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: nitromullet

X-fire review to possibly follow in a few weeks

apoppin, just wondering if you've had a chance to check out AT's look into Crossfire performance with P35...

http://anandtech.com/cpuchipse...howdoc.aspx?i=2995&p=4

http://anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=2990&p=6

Looks like 975X is the better choice at the moment over P35. P35 Crossfire still provides a boost over a single card, but you should keep the fact that P35 runs dual cards in x16/x4 in mind when benching and drawing conclusions.

well, i am thinking Bearlake was 100% beta drivers when i got it ... lots of random BSODs and little issues to hard lockups - drove me nuts at first ... simply updating the MB drivers and flashing the BIOS stabilized everything.

i am also thinking that this review is a little out-of-date [May 23rd] and i would like to see it updated before spending another $200 and getting another copy of WinVIsta for minimal performance gains at only 16x10 ... ATF tested at much higher resolutions then i ever care to run.
[actually i haven't activated Vista - even yet - it allows you all the updates and complete freedom for the first 30 days - unlike XP]

but no ... the best thing i can do is test xfire on P35 ... and if it IS limiting, THEN think about another MB ... depending on "how" limiting ... there is ALWAYS "something better"

i do believe the 4x is not so limiting for the 2nd x-fired card ... and it could be interesting to get a HD2950xtx as the main card and use my current lesser card in the slower slot [as users sometimes do with x1900xt and x1950xt]
... maybe a silly idea ... could even hold back the next gen ... but i doubt it will be as powerful as people hope

Overall, our game testing indicates that driver optimizations will be paramount to improving CrossFire performance on the P35 chipset when utilizing Vista. Due to the x16/x4 limitations, the expected performance capability of the R600, and a whole new generation of games coming out over the next few months that promises to pound your current system into submission at the highest settings, we cannot recommend the P35 at this time for a CrossFire capable system. That honor still belongs to the chipset that refuses to die, the 975X which is slated to be replaced this summer with the new X38 chipset. While not always the fastest solution for an R600 CrossFire platform it does offer a level of consistency and stability that is not always present on the P35. We fully expect the P35 to perform significantly better in several areas once AMD has the time to tune their drivers for it. For now we understand and accept this lack of optimization, but that does not mean we like it.

work in progress .. why would i get a 975x when the X38 is replacing it?

The P35 boards do very well in single card configurations at these higher detail settings and follow the same performance pattern we noticed in the 1280x1024 testing. The S.T.A.L.K.E.R. results surprised us as this was the only game where the P35 boards scored better than the 975X in CrossFire. Prey and Company of Heroes still show relatively poor CrossFire 2900 XT performance on the P35 chipset regardless of memory choice. This is an area that both the BIOS programmers and AMD are working to address, and we expect the next official Catalyst driver release to improve results on the P35 platforms. This is just another indication that the drivers and BIOS are still a work in progress, particularly in multi-GPU setups.

 

[nitromullet]

i would like to see it updated before spending another $200 and getting another copy of WinVIsta for minimal performance gains at only 16x10

You didn't buy retail? Retail Vista will let you re-install on different hardware with a phone call, like XP. OEM will not...

work in progress .. why would i get a 975x when the X38 is replacing it?

Yeah, I wasn't really thinking 975X when I wrote that about Crossfire... X38 was more the direction I was leaning. Although, that will probably be atad bit more than just another $100... I imagine that the X38 boards will go for at least $300.

http://www.bit-tech.net/news/2...oards_look_promising/1

...you know that mobo ain't cheap

On a side note... How has your board been? If I was going to pick up a P35 board, it would most likely be that one or the slightly cheaper P35-DS3R version.

 

[SolMiester]

I dont understand, if the settings are higher and more detailed for 1 card and its still faster than the other card when at higher res, HTF is that bias!? Whether or not 1 card likes AA or Shaders, if the other card doesn't have as high a details and still gets beaten at a higher res.............!?

 

[apoppin]

On a side note... How has your board been? If I was going to pick up a P35 board, it would most likely be that one or the slightly cheaper P35-DS3R version.

i really like it ... after updating to the latest BIOS and chipset drivers it is exceptionally stable ... lots of OC'ing features - i have no idea how far i can push my CPU OC

i DO know that it will support the 65nm intel CPUs and will provide a decent upgrade path with an option for Crossfire ... if x38 proves to be 10-15% faster, i might upgrade ... but you know X38 will also have its own bugs to be worked out.

i expect to keep this MB till next Summer or later ... but then i expected to have kept my AGP x1950p/512M
'till [this coming] Winter
maybe i will ... i still can't seem to get rig of the damn thing ... not even for $135

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: apoppin

On a side note... How has your board been? If I was going to pick up a P35 board, it would most likely be that one or the slightly cheaper P35-DS3R version.

i really like it ... after updating to the latest BIOS and chipset drivers it is exceptionally stable ... lots of OC'ing features - i have no idea how far i can push my CPU OC

i DO know that it will support the 65nm intel CPUs and will provide a decent upgrade path with an option for Crossfire ... if x38 proves to be 10-15% faster, i might upgrade ... but you know X38 will also have its own bugs to be worked out.

i expect to keep this MB till next Summer or later ... but then i expected to have kept my AGP x1950p/512M
'till [this coming] Winter
maybe i will ... i still can't seem to get rig of the damn thing ... not even for $135

=====

Originally posted by: SolMiester
I dont understand, if the settings are higher and more detailed for 1 card and its still faster than the other card when at higher res, HTF is that bias!? Whether or not 1 card likes AA or Shaders, if the other card doesn't have as high a details and still gets beaten at a higher res.............!?

i believe it is designed to confuse you
no reputable site confirms their numbers because of their "home grown" testing methods that are subject to abuse by the reviewer.

 

[bryanW1995]

Extelleron is probably just an amd fanboy who's trying to justify his crappy video card. Oops, wait, he has an 8800gts 640mb... maybe he has mpd and his ati side is pissed at him for buying nvidia.

and maybe you should keep this to yourself

 

[Extelleron]

Originally posted by: bryanW1995
Extelleron is probably just an amd fanboy who's trying to justify his crappy video card. Oops, wait, he has an 8800gts 640mb... maybe he has mpd and his ati side is pissed at him for buying nvidia.

and maybe you should keep this to yourself

I'm not going to deny that I prefer AMD as a company, over Intel or nVidia, but at least I don't go around posting benchmarks from sites that have been proven to be untrustworthy, and really make no attempt to hide their bias. Read the HardOCP reviews, and you can tell right away you they want to win and which company they like better.

I bought nVidia because, back in January, ATI didn't have what I wanted and I wasn't going to wait. While I'd rather own an ATI card, I'm not going to take a subpar card or wait 6 months just to buy their cards. If nVidia has a better card with GeForce 9, then I'm going to be forced to go nVidia again.

And I don't think you should be talking about "faboys." Take a look in the mirror, kid, because you're one. If you think the HD 2900XT is a "crappy card," then you're a far bigger fanboy than I am.

 

[NicColt]

Originally posted by: Wreckage

Originally posted by: Extelleron

That's BS Wreck and you know it. Name one credible review with the 7.6 drivers where the GTS wins the majority of tests. The X-bit labs review is run with 7.5 drivers, yet still shows the HD 2900XT winning the majority of tests (Some of the games the HD 2900 had trouble with, like STALKER, have now been fixed and the HD 2900 performs fine in them.) http://www.xbitlabs.com/articl...a-extreme_7.html#sect1

And yes, X-bit labs used Anti-aliasing in every game that would allow it. The HD 2900XT doesn't always win by a huge amount, but in pretty much every game (except for those that 7.5 had problems with, like STALKER) the HD 2900XT beats the GTS and in a few it equals/beats the GTX. Don't come here with your BS HardOCP reviews and tell me the GTS is faster than the HD 2900XT. It is in a few limited situations, but that is hardly widespread.

Plenty of reviews back up Hardocp, especially in those games and even more so when using AA. So you can deny the results simply because you don't like them, but it does not make it any less true.

The 7.6's did very little.

How in the world can there be such a difference.... CF benchmark
In this link the 2900XT beats the GTX in SLI very badly...

It seems that the GTS is still favored at this time.

So according the the above link where the CF 2900XT badly beats the 8800GTX SLI, the GTS SLI is still favored at this time ???

*thinks about commenting this thread, but looks at Wreckage + HardOCP and slowly backs off*

Umm... I think I should to...

Edit: I may have made a mistake... the above link refers to the 2900XTX ! (still)

 

[nitromullet]

How in the world can there be such a difference.... CF benchmark
In this link the 2900XT beats the GTX in SLI very badly...

It's all about testing methodology, the benchmarks you posted used Vista and HardOCP's used XP SP2... Although I am very much for Vista benchmarking, I hold the HardOCP review in higher regard than the benchmarks you posted because it is unclear what the settings are (AA/AH denoted as "default" and "high"), plus there are only two game benchmarks. Both sites look like they are pretty selective with regards to apples-to-apples comparisons to make them say what they want them to. Two games and some synthetic benchmarks is hardly enough to declare a victory, and anyone claiming otherwise simply isn't thorough enough in their methodology. What is does do for me though is pique my interest to see more Crossfire/Vista benchmarks from a more thorough source.