nVidia and why SLI Technology is behind.

[MrK6]

This was better than an SNL episode. Thanks MrK6.

Difficult to be snide when one's shown to have the intellectual capacity of a middle schooler. Thanks for the laugh, keysplayr.

So both GPU's are utilized 100% then?

No. You need to do more reading as you still have yet to grasp these simple concepts.

If we wanted your commentary on other members, we'd hire you as the official forum shrink. In lieu of that, please enjoy this vacation for practicing medicine without a license.
-ViRGE

 

[Final8ty]

But it still has to wait for the slowest card to complete a frame and render it before it can release it's own much more quickly rendered frame.

So, the faster card, while it won't slow it's clock speed to the slowest card, is going to sit around and wait while the slowest card completes it's work anyway.
This is with AFR, Tile based rendering. The only way this would be beneficial is if using Split screen rendering. Faster GPU takes care of a larger percentage of the workload (70% say) while the slower GPU handles (30% say). And this is load balanced in the driver due to changing loads in scenes.

In your example though, the 950MHz Card (if indeed a more powerful card so lets say all other charectaristics of the 4 cards are the same save clock speed.), would wait for the 900MHz card, the 900MHz card would wait for the 850MHz card, and the 850MHz card would wait for the 800MHz card. So, theoretically, all four of these cards are STILL only as fast as the slowest card.

Nope and i should not have to repeat myself as I already said that when i put one GPU at 500MHz that i lost some fps but nowhere near as much as when i ran them all at 500Mhz because my fps dropped a significant amount when i did that.

Maybe you should read that PDF link i posted.

 

[SlowSpyder]

TY

GPU1 at 800MHz: "I'm rendering frame 1 of this scene. Almost done, then the floor is yours GPU2!"
GPU2 at 1000MHz: "Gee thanks GPU1. As soon as you're done, I'll release frame 2 that I already have done."
GPU3 at 700MHz: "I'm working on frame 3. Going as fast as I can which is 700MHz."

This, to me, is physics. Can't get around it. AFR = alternate frame rendering means that each GPU is tasked with the subsequent frame. Right?
I mean, I'm always open to be corrected, but MrK6 you are really nasty about it. Over and above. A little civility goes a long way. If it's not in your ability
to do so, than I must ignore.

I don't think that is how it works in this case... I believe (as Final8ty somewhat confirmed with his 500MHz GPU example) is that stutter gets worse, but FPS probably technically does increase. I'm hardly an expert on AFR, though. But I would think you'll get more frames in a given space of time with two of the same GPU's at 1000MHz and 800MHz then those same two GPU's at 800MHz. BUT, because the time it takes to render those frames, I think stutter becomes worse. At least that is how I visualize it in my mind... the 1000MHz GPU will still get its work done faster, and over a bit of time you may ultimately have a bit higher FPS. But seeing as some people are already sensitive to microstutter with identical GPU's, I could see this making it that much worse.

 

[Keysplayr]

I don't think that is how it works in this case... I believe (as Final8ty somewhat confirmed with his 500MHz GPU example) is that stutter gets worse, but FPS probably technically does increase. I'm hardly an expert on AFR, though. But I would think you'll get more frames in a given space of time with two of the same GPU's at 1000MHz and 800MHz then those same two GPU's at 800MHz. BUT, because the time it takes to render those frames, I think stutter becomes worse. At least that is how I visualize it in my mind... the 1000MHz GPU will still get its work done faster, and over a bit of time you may ultimately have a bit higher FPS. But seeing as some people are already sensitive to microstutter with identical GPU's, I could see this making it that much worse.

I was thinking exactly the same thing. But then I was sure I'd get attacked for daring to compare this to microstutter in any way shape or form. Glad you said it first. And I do remember saying that Crossfiring unlike cards does have it's value. Apparently it has drawbacks as well for the extra flexibility it provides.

 

[Final8ty]

I was thinking exactly the same thing. But then I was sure I'd get attacked for daring to compare this to microstutter in any way shape or form. Glad you said it first. And I do remember saying that Crossfiring unlike cards does have it's value. Apparently it has drawbacks as well for the extra flexibility it provides.

No you would not have been attacked as i had already said something to that effect already.
The biggest problem, is the perpetual blanket assumptions made by people who don't have first hand long term experience and they seem to be the ones who perpetuate the most.

 

[Smoblikat]

HyperSLI lets you SLI different cards. ATI lets you do this nativley, but with more limitations. An interesting thing is you can run an 5770 + 6770 + 5750 + 6750 all in quadfire at the same time unmodded.

 

[Final8ty]

HyperSLI lets you SLI different cards. ATI lets you do this nativley, but with more limitations. An interesting thing is you can run an 5770 + 6770 + 5750 + 6750 all in quadfire at the same time unmodded.

Most likely because the 6xxx are rebrands of the 5xxx equivalents.

 

[Nemesis 1]

Didn't intel with the IGPU3 on haswell basicly just add 2 GT2s together to make the GT3. is this not the same in a manner off speaking

 

[Keysplayr]

No you would not have been attacked as i had already said something to that effect already.
The biggest problem, is the perpetual blanket assumptions made by people who don't have first hand long term experience and they seem to be the ones who perpetuate the most.

Well, we won't know now because I did not say it first. Gladly.
And I did miss when you mentioned this earlier. Cards with uneven clock speeds and uneven workloads and potential for increased microstutter. Sounds reasonable.