SLI is now Official for AMD's Motherboard Chipsets.

[Spikesoldier]

I have owned two ATi cards and two nV cards in the last 4 years. I have had absolutely no driver problems with any of the cards. Ever.

The last time I had a serious video card driver problem was when I got a TNT 2 Ultra. That is so long ago that I don't generally consider it anymore.

I am "anyone" who has been on both platforms and I have been happy with both.

i wish to echo this comment.

 

[Spikesoldier]

Yep. Same is true for Intel platform. NV does not license SLI to Intel, they license SLI to the mobo makers who are making Intel compatible mobo's.

All this press release tells us is that the guys in Taiwan (Gigabyte, Asrock, EVGA, etc) see there being money in selling SLI-compatible mobos that support AMD CPU's.

AMD the company need not even be involved in such business arrangements.

another good comment i want to echo.

 

[Grooveriding]

Do Intel have to qualify or certify SLI as compatible for usage with their chipsets ? If so, would the same be true for AMD certifying SLI as compatible with their chipsets ? Or is it just up to the board makers to tack it on via the BIOS ?

 

[busydude]

Do Intel have to qualify or certify SLI as compatible for usage with their chipsets ? If so, would the same be true for AMD certifying SLI as compatible with their chipsets ? Or is it just up to the board makers to tack it on via the BIOS ?

Nvidia provides the code to board makers for a specified fee.. which unlocks SLI functionality.

 

[Silverforce11]

Where I come from this post is a slam dunk. :thumbsup:
Do I get the assist?

So a user has bad experiences and somehow its representative? Logic please. n = 1 does not equal = fact.

I've used CF and SLI for a long time, both have problems, if you know how to troubleshoot, most problems are fixable. These days, from 58xx and Fermi onwards, sli/cf is fantastic. If you want to talk about bad drivers, i could mention NV releasing drivers that kills their cards.. for many users. But we still know that n = a few thousand, does not equal = majority of users.

Perspective.

 

[aigomorla]

Yep. Same is true for Intel platform. NV does not license SLI to Intel, they license SLI to the mobo makers who are making Intel compatible mobo's.

All this press release tells us is that the guys in Taiwan (Gigabyte, Asrock, EVGA, etc) see there being money in selling SLI-compatible mobos that support AMD CPU's.

AMD the company need not even be involved in such business arrangements.

lol...

board makers sneaked it in by putting in a NF200 chip on it first b4 they got the OK code to do it...

I've used CF and SLI for a long time, both have problems, if you know how to troubleshoot, most problems are fixable. These days, from 58xx and Fermi onwards, sli/cf is fantastic. If you want to talk about bad drivers, i could mention NV releasing drivers that kills their cards.. for many users. But we still know that n = a few thousand, does not equal = majority of users.

Perspective.

you know what i could second this comment.
And your right with the new gen cards, a lot of things were fixed or cleared up.

However, you'd think 2 generations of flagships failing on you would give you some sort of grief?

Anyhow, in short, im not pushing someone to get X over Y.
Infact i only push them in how to cool it properly.

If you like ATi, and im sure a lot of us here do, then by means go xfire and get ati.
If you like Nvidia, then this is a rejoice moment, because now you dont need to spend the extra 400 on an intel platform so you can be nit picky when scaling your cards.

 

[bunnyfubbles]

Lastly ask any F@Her... they only get Nvidia, because they FOLD better also.

But less then 5% of us posting here are probably folders...

True, but the original train of thought here is SLI

and multi GPU Folding doesn't require SLI

There are some popular motherboards for a F@H GPU rig that happen to be AMD because there are several that offer tons of PCI-e x16 slots for a much lower price than an intel counterpart, allowing 4 or more nVidia cards to be plugged in specifically to fold, again no SLI necessary

 

[bryanW1995]

yet they have better driver support for games?

Irony for you no?

yeah, like that gtx 590 launch driver?

but the question is DO THEY WORK BETTER IN GAMES?

75% of the time.. its YES.

Which is why i gave up on ATI and Xfire..

I honestly got tired of waiting for good working solid drivers.

Their xfire drivers and scaling have improved a lot in the past 6 months or so. I very much agree that barring a few extreme cases like the one I mentiond above, nvidia has generally done a better job of putting out better drivers sooner in the past. However, in the past 6-9 mos they've been pretty even, and amd has even had a slight advantage imho.

It's funny that people are actually believing their BS claims.

Actually, "in recent years" AMD has never been as weak for gaming compared to Intel as today so that's a total BS. They didn't allow SLI on AMD chipsets in the Lynnfield days so why now when it's even worse for AMD? They're afraid of the Lucid Hydra, that's why.

Is hydra really that much of a threat? I figured that they were more concerned about BD actually being competitive-enough that gamers would buy it. IMHO the only reason we haven't seen sli available on amd platforms recently has been that true high end gamers had no interest in any of their cpus.

 

[bryanW1995]

So does nvidia plan on making AM3+ chipsets, or is it out of the game completely now? Back in the day, nvidia chipsets were basically the reason I bought AMD CPUs. Of course, AMD makes awesome chipsets now too.

Nvidia has said officially they're out of the chipset business. I don't see them changeing their mind anytime soon.

I wonder if part of the current thaw with AMD isn't due to NV's problems with intel? It's definitely in NV's best interest to have all of their options open, and AMD certainly won't mind stealing some sales away from intel.

 

[bryanW1995]

LOL you can run NV beta drivers for months before wanting to switch (more than needing to switch). On the other hand AMD users download a new driver, something doesn't work properly, then 3 days later the first hotfix comes out, it still doesn't fix anything, and 3 days later another hotfix comes out, and the cycle continues.

of course, when amd has a driver problem it doesn't usually involve flames/smoke/etc ala gtx 590.

Both companies have driver issues, but honestly arguing over either is pointless. For almost all users, they are both excellent.

 

[bryanW1995]

actually its more based on what games run better on what brand.

There are a lot of games which are clear cut in the middle that will run better on one platform vs the other..

ie. Flight Simulator X

Some people cant stand the water glitches, some can.

Its all boils down on what settings u play on your card, and how hard you are able to push them while keeping them in check.

Lastly ask any F@Her... they only get Nvidia, because they FOLD better also.

But less then 5% of us posting here are probably folders...

Some DC projects run better with AMD, some with NV. Currently F&H is better with NV, though that is subject to change soon since AMD has a higher share of the dx11 mid/high market than they did for dx10.

 

[notty22]

http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/foru...ore-16-taking-amd-gpu-folding-next-level.html
Here is a recent article testing a new AMD client, it seems much better, but a gtx 560 scores 14-16000 ppd according to the article.

 

[Skurge]

http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/foru...ore-16-taking-amd-gpu-folding-next-level.html
Here is a recent article testing a new AMD client, it seems much better, but a gtx 560 scores 14-16000 ppd according to the article.

Not sure how this is relevant to the thread.

 

[notty22]

Not sure how this is relevant to the thread.

I guess you were oblivious to the F@h content in above posts.
How shocking.

edit: By the way, Folding does not need SLI support, but for even a casual gamer, folder, its a obvious PLUS that you can also game/SLI with your folding cards.

 

[Gikaseixas]

Good news. More options for the user

 

[NoQuarter]

IMHO the only reason we haven't seen sli available on amd platforms recently has been that true high end gamers had no interest in any of their cpus.

That doesn't make any sense, historically SLI had only been available on nForce chipsets regardless of platform, so the reason AMD 'lost' SLI wasn't a lack of demand but rather nVidia leaving the chipset business.

Even if interest were low, the cost for nVidia to offer SLI is neglibile so they risk no capital by opening up that market. Since X58 the current implementation of SLI is simply a check in the driver to see if you have an approved chipset. There is no technical limitation preventing any AMD chipset to enable SLI except for that flag in nVidia's drivers. Thus nVidia could turn it on at no cost and start charging their SLI licensing fee to get a chipset approved.

The reason that SLI hasn't been available is simply nVidia's strange hardball business tactics.

 

[Idontcare]

Do Intel have to qualify or certify SLI as compatible for usage with their chipsets ? If so, would the same be true for AMD certifying SLI as compatible with their chipsets ? Or is it just up to the board makers to tack it on via the BIOS ?

No, it's all covered in the adherence of the mobo maker and chipset to the PCIe spec as it is. If the board conforms then it can do SLI as well, just needs to pay the piper and get the magic DRM key.

 

[nitromullet]

The reason that SLI hasn't been available is simply nVidia's strange hardball business tactics.

This is ultimately true, but the reason NVIDIA didn't bother to pursue SLI licensing for AMD chipsets post-nForce is because most gamers weren't interested in buying AMD cpus anyway. Intel forced NVIDA out of the chipset business too with Nahalem, but there was no way NVIDIA wasn't going to have SLI on the platform of choice. For their part, motherboard makers were willing to play the extra SLI fee because they knew it would help sell motherboards.

IMO, it's a still BS for motherboard makers (and ultimately consumers) to have to pay for what amounts to basic PCIe functionality on a PCIe motherboard. Personally, I wish both AMD and Intel would lock NV's stupid encryption out of their systems, and force them to open SLI up to all capable motherboards.

 

[Borealis7]

this made me LOL:

"We’ve been recently hearing chants of “SLI for AMD CPUs”, and figured that now is a great time to do it," said NVIDIA's Tom Peterson in a blog post. "After all, we want to make sure gamers can benefit from the new CPU competitive landscape and ensure they have NVIDIA SLI – the highest performance, most stable multi-GPU solution - to game on!"

NV taking a jab at the competition while working alongside it mwahahaha

source: Dailytech (http://www.dailytech.com/NVIDIA+Licenses+SLI+for+Upcoming+AMD+Chipsets/article21496.htm)

 

[cantholdanymore]

All this press release tells us is that the guys in Taiwan (Gigabyte, Asrock, EVGA, etc) see there being money in selling SLI-compatible mobos that support AMD CPU's.

Could it be that nvidia on future APUs doesn't really makes sense since hybrid crossfire has been confirmed?:hmm:

 

[Janooo]

Yep. Same is true for Intel platform. NV does not license SLI to Intel, they license SLI to the mobo makers who are making Intel compatible mobo's.

All this press release tells us is that the guys in Taiwan (Gigabyte, Asrock, EVGA, etc) see there being money in selling SLI-compatible mobos that support AMD CPU's.

AMD the company need not even be involved in such business arrangements.

Does this mean that if you want to buy 990 chipset mobo and you do not intend to/will not use SLI you still pay $5 tax to NV?

That's sick.

 

[blastingcap]

I hope it's not a repost but as the title says, AMD CPU users can now enjoy SLI officially - albeit for only AMD's 990FX, 990X and 970 chipsets.

Source: http://blogs.nvidia.com/2011/04/you-asked-for-it-you-got-it-sli-for-amd/?sf1380447=1

dual GPU configs are more headache than they're worth imho, unless you truly need it (like for 3x30").

wake me up when NVDA allows me to use an ATI card as my main graphics card and a NVDA card for PhysX. Not that I'd ever pay for such a thing directly, but my gf has an older NVDA card that could use an upgrade, and I could use it as a PhysX card rather than sell it for $10.

 

[Idontcare]

Does this mean that if you want to buy 990 chipset mobo and you do not intend to/will not use SLI you still pay $5 tax to NV?

That's sick.

We (I) don't know if the structure of the licensing fees for AMD platforms are the same as those Nvidia implemented for the Intel platforms, but if they are similar then yeah that is the basic gist of it.

Buying an AMD mobo, even if you don't plan to stick a single Nvidia video card in it, will result in a net transfer of wealth from you to Nvidia by way of the licensing rights Nvidia has negotiated with the mobo maker.

It is sheer marketing brilliance on behalf of Nvidia's lawyers, you got to give them that. They managed to create a revenue enhancement opportunity from something that already existed.

You can bet that had there been a way to get Physx licensed on a per-mobo level rather than the customer expecting it for free via the drivers then we'd all have Physx enabled (of your mobo is licensed for it) regardless whether your system contains an AMD vid card or not.

Could you imagine if Microsoft got hold of this revenue model? Not only would you need to pay for the software if you wanted to run Windows 7 or Office 2010, but you'd need to buy a mobo or cpu that was Microsoft licensed as well.

And if you elected to run Linux or open-office instead, well too bad, you already paid Microsoft a licensing fee when you bought your hardware so they could care less.