I think ernie and julio gallo said it best when they said no wine before its time. We will release when everything is done, we aren't going to rush to market.
- Status
I think ernie and julio gallo said it best when they said no wine before its time. We will release when everything is done, we aren't going to rush to market.
didnt read whole thread, maybe later so forgive me if this has come up.
Will AM3+ motherboards support SLI? I mean native no driver hacks required im not interested in hacked drivers at all.
The main reason i switched to Intel is because i did not want to be locked into one specific vender for GPU's, i consider it a bad business decision that AMD forces you to use there own GPU's if you go multiple cards on their chipsets.
I will consider BD if the price/performance is right but only if they can offer at least 3 full speed PCIe(edited to clarify, i consider full speed 8x PCIe 2) slots with SLI support. If not then LGA2011 it is, Intel is definatly not the best in long term socket support but at least they let you play with whichever GPU's you want even if they are from the competetion, AMD could learn something from them on this issue.
Will AM3+ motherboards support SLI? I mean native no driver hacks required im not interested in hacked drivers at all.
The main reason i switched to Intel is because i did not want to be locked into one specific vender for GPU's, i consider it a bad business decision that AMD forces you to use there own GPU's if you go multiple cards on their chipsets.
I will consider BD if the price/performance is right but only if they can offer at least 3 full speed PCIe(edited to clarify, i consider full speed 8x PCIe 2) slots with SLI support. If not then LGA2011 it is, Intel is definatly not the best in long term socket support but at least they let you play with whichever GPU's you want even if they are from the competetion, AMD could learn something from them on this issue.
Last edited by a moderator:
busydude
Diamond Member
- Feb 5, 2010
- 8,793
- 5
- 76
Until and unless Nvidia offers its license for no extra cost, I see no possibility of them supporting SLI.
I imagine AMD (or AMD mobo manufacturers) would need to license SLI from Nvidia. Even if team green was willing (I don't think they are), I doubt it would be cheap. Perhaps Hydra will be a decent compromise. Regardless, while many here like running two or more GPUs, it doesn't make up enough of the market to worry over, especially with Xfire and single slot/dual GPUs as altenatives.
Might as well ask why Nvidia won't allow their cards to be used for PhysX (under Win7) with an ATI GPU. Each likes to protect their domain.
Someone will probably correct me if I'm wrong, but Xfire on Intel mobos probably comes "free" though cross-licensing or AMD is simply licensing it to Intel for free or really cheap.
Last edited:
This already announced board should have SLI support through its Lucid Hydra chip.
I think that most won't due to some licensing costs involved with including SLI support. There's at least one out there and there will probably be more, but I suppose it depends on how much you're willing to spend on a board.
I think that most won't due to some licensing costs involved with including SLI support. There's at least one out there and there will probably be more, but I suppose it depends on how much you're willing to spend on a board.
Ill pay extra for it but not alot extra. If intel can offer boards with SLI support that dont cost a premium i dont see why AMD cant do that same.
podspi
Golden Member
- Jan 11, 2011
- 1,982
- 102
- 106
Because nVidia won't license it to them... AMD can't just fire up TPB and torrent it or something... Trust me, the motherboards are physically able to, so if AMD could do it legally, they would.
Why would Nvidia not license to them? That doesnt make any sense, they would sell more cards with all platforms fully supporting there products. I know AMDs market share is very small compared to intel but there is still alot of AMD boards out there.
Besides AMD licence to intel for CF and that is there direct competetion, why would it be any differnt for nvidia and AMD.
I dont see why nvidia would charge for the license unless there stupid.
boards will still cost more because of the added feature but by allowing amd boards to run sli for no extra cost nvidia would get more gpu sales. So the license charge is really not needed unless they want to be greedy and get nothing.
btw why do we need nvidia support? arnt amd radeons good enough?
boards will still cost more because of the added feature but by allowing amd boards to run sli for no extra cost nvidia would get more gpu sales. So the license charge is really not needed unless they want to be greedy and get nothing.
btw why do we need nvidia support? arnt amd radeons good enough?
Last edited:
LiuKangBakinPie
Diamond Member
- Jan 31, 2011
- 3,903
- 0
- 0
This what happens when a turkish guy cant read english properly. That guy from AMD said their new ones will have a 50 percent performance increase over their last ones. So he translated it with his broken English and wolla
You do pay an SLI premium on Intel boards. AFAIK, AMD does not charge a licensing fee for crossfire to chip/mobo manufacturers. nVidia does. Why would AMD pay nVidia for something that they license for free?
podspi
Golden Member
- Jan 11, 2011
- 1,982
- 102
- 106
Don't know what to tell you.
http://xdevs.com/e107_plugins/content/content.php?content.30
They make it pretty clear that SLI is activated via hacked nVidia drivers fooling it into thinking it is on an Intel chipset. AMD is not preventing you from doing anything. Now, it may be true that because the companies are competitors, they aren't terribly willing to negotiate about it, but that sort of thing is pretty common.
Lonbjerg
Diamond Member
- Dec 6, 2009
- 4,419
- 0
- 0
A) The first point (the link is down atm. I I am guing to guess here) was debunked. AGEIA's PhysX wasn't either multithreaded (Unless the devs specificly coded it to be multithreaded)
or used SSE2. It was single threaded and used x87. NVIDIA added (auto) multithreading and SSE2 to the API, thus make that point: meh.
B) Comparing 3000 rigid bodies ot 100.000's of rigid bodies or comparing games where destroyed 100's of items magically dissapear after 10 seconds or become "dead" to 1.000's of rigid bodies that reamain and stay interactive is a bad comparions.
You could ask JFAMD what runs faster (or give an educated guess)...AMD CPU Bullet Physics...or AMD GPU OpenCL Bullet Physics?
Physics API's have (in theory) the same features...it's just that the FLOPS from a GPU is so much more powerfull for physics calcualtion than a CPU.
Ask yourself this:
Why does AMD want to add a "GPU" to their CPU core?
LiuKangBakinPie
Diamond Member
- Jan 31, 2011
- 3,903
- 0
- 0
The only time you will be worried about FLOPS is when you are building a Super Computer. Otherwise Flops in the everyday Pc are as useless as wet toiletpaperA) The first point (the link is down atm. I I am guing to guess here) was debunked. AGEIA's PhysX wasn't either multithreaded (Unless the devs specificly coded it to be multithreaded)
or used SSE2. It was single threaded and used x87. NVIDIA added (auto) multithreading and SSE2 to the API, thus make that point: meh.
B) Comparing 3000 rigid bodies ot 100.000's of rigid bodies or comparing games where destroyed 100's of items magically dissapear after 10 seconds or become "dead" to 1.000's of rigid bodies that reamain and stay interactive is a bad comparions.
You could ask JFAMD what runs faster (or give an educated guess)...AMD CPU Bullet Physics...or AMD GPU OpenCL Bullet Physics?
Physics API's have (in theory) the same features...it's just that the FLOPS from a GPU is so much more powerfull for physics calcualtion than a CPU.
Ask yourself this:
Why does AMD want to add a "GPU" to their CPU core?
taltamir
Lifer
- Mar 21, 2004
- 13,576
- 6
- 76
Those hacked drivers are actually cracked drivers. nVidia drivers contain DRM that prevents SLI from working unless the BIOS contains encrypted keys which you must buy from them. All boards with two slots are capable of SLI, but all SLI "capable" boards are ones who paid nvidia their extortion money for those keys. The cracked drivers merely remove the DRM which would otherwise disable SLI.
Another thing the DRM does is disable GPU physX if an AMD GPU is detected, that includes an AMD IGP.
The only reason they have not been sued for anti competitive practices is because this is self sabotaging behavior, plus damages get to accrue so it will hurt more when AMD finally does complain to the US government.
AMD cannot prevent a board maker from paying nvidia for those keys and including them in the board, so you could potentially see SLI capable AMD boards.
Because there direct competetion(intel) is doing it and they are losing sales because they are not doing it. Simple concept, if your boards are fully compatable with ALL gpu's you will sell more boards, it works for intel no reason it wouldnt work the same way for AMD.
And it cant be much of a fee, the intel boards that are SLI are maybe $10 more than the non SLI boards, $10 i'll pay no problem, $50-100 is to much which seems to be the price the hydra chip boards run at.
SLI, XFIRE...all BS tech anyways that isnt mature enough to work worth a damn. Single GPU forever!
You have obviously not used dual cards in the last few years. I have no issue with my SLI 460's. And now that the ATI scaling issues are resolved with thr 6xxx series CF is now a viable option. And if you need more performance than a single card can provide(3d, eyefinity, 120hz display) you have no choice but to go multiple GPU.
well i cant say since ive never done either but 2 or 3 cards looks much nicer then 1, especially the 460 EE's look nice. i would love to see 2 or 3 in my case, But looks arnt worth $800 and im only on a 19 inch.
Lonbjerg
Diamond Member
- Dec 6, 2009
- 4,419
- 0
- 0
Not for physics in games and a lot of other stuff:
http://golubev.com/about_cpu_and_gpu_2_en.htm
http://fhtr.blogspot.com/2010/03/gazing-at-cpu-gpu-crystal-ball.html
A) The first point (the link is down atm. I I am guing to guess here) was debunked. AGEIA's PhysX wasn't either multithreaded (Unless the devs specificly coded it to be multithreaded)
or used SSE2. It was single threaded and used x87. NVIDIA added (auto) multithreading and SSE2 to the API, thus make that point: meh.
B) Comparing 3000 rigid bodies ot 100.000's of rigid bodies or comparing games where destroyed 100's of items magically dissapear after 10 seconds or become "dead" to 1.000's of rigid bodies that reamain and stay interactive is a bad comparions.
You could ask JFAMD what runs faster (or give an educated guess)...AMD CPU Bullet Physics...or AMD GPU OpenCL Bullet Physics?
Physics API's have (in theory) the same features...it's just that the FLOPS from a GPU is so much more powerfull for physics calcualtion than a CPU.
Ask yourself this:
Why does AMD want to add a "GPU" to their CPU core?
I would have no idea what is faster, I am a server guy.
As to all the discussion of SLI, that is an issue between nvidia and the board manufacturers. We don't build boards.
LiuKangBakinPie
Diamond Member
- Jan 31, 2011
- 3,903
- 0
- 0
LiuKangBakinPie
Diamond Member
- Jan 31, 2011
- 3,903
- 0
- 0
Nope hardware is useless without software. Baloney
http://blogs.fau.de/hager/2010/12/07/the-400x-gpu-speedup-baloney/
Lonbjerg
Diamond Member
- Dec 6, 2009
- 4,419
- 0
- 0
So PhysX is not out?
Badaboom?
Mathlab?
VReveal?
Folding@Home?
Try dnowloading Vreveal and tells us if you "home PC" experinced any performance difference.
Intel is going this route, AMd is going this route, NVIDIA is going this route...are you saying they all full of it?
- Status
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