So, does the 7950GX2 count as a single card solution?

[beggerking]

Originally posted by: josh6079
Sorry, I know I said that I wouldn't post in this thread anymore, but beggerking is almost right. He just needs to change one thing in his previous post.

Originally posted by: beggerking
If software has something to do with hardware, then it'd be 1 on 1 relationship.. meaning either software or hardware support would be enough for data to be rendered correctly.

That is not correct. If software has something to do with hardware it would mean that software and hardware are enough for data to be rendered correctly. (Which, it is)

The argument you are continuing is like saying hydrogen has nothing to do with water.

1 on 1 meaning software and hardware share the same property, so as long as one supports it, the other will be able to run it. (which is not true, DX requires [both] hardware to process and software to create instructions).

what a driver is , is a software that translates instructions to specific hardware, any OS would need one for each of its devices

So it (software) has something to do with hardware then, right?

wrong as usual, but I want to see how you explain "(software) has something to do with hardware"?

driver(software) translates instructions(software) to protocoled instructions(software).

 

[beggerking]

Originally posted by: beggerking

Originally posted by: Rangoric

Originally posted by: beggerking

and driver cannot do much with vidoecard directly if videocard itself without OS providing data. Uninstall your Os and try it out....

Xbox.

xbox doesn't have an OS? I'm pretty sure I've heard something about a stripped down win2000 OS that is been used in xbox...

so Rangoric, this is your original quote. you argued that xbox doesn't need an OS to provide data, so where does data come from? do you disagree with your own argument now? that Xbox actually needs an OS?

 

[nts]

Originally posted by: beggerking
driver(software) translates instructions(software) to protocoled instructions(software).

I know I said I wasn't going to reply but lol...

beggerking can you explain the above in your own words? What does it translate (input A and output B), where do the instructions come from and what are protocol'ed instructions? Where do the translated protocol'ed instructions go (software...)?

 

[josh6079]

Originally posted by: beggerking
I want to see how you explain "(software) has something to do with hardware"?

Do you have drivers installed on your computer...at all?

Why can't the 7950GX2 be used in Quad-SLI as of right now, even though the hardware is present to utilize that?

Why do you need an OS?

Why do you need drivers?

How are you able to see what I'm saying, then respond by touching nothing but hardware, and have me see what you say over great distances?

The answer to all of these? Because software has some things to do with hardware. Because at some point the two become dependent of eachother. The "data" that is being sent to the hardware to process and output is software. It is sometihng that can't exist on anything else but hardware itself, and something that only hardware can utilize correctly. To have water, you have to have both hydrogen and oxygen. To have a working computer that would be beneficial to an enthusiast (and comparible to an X1900) you have to have both software and hardware.

If you want this to be compared to an X1900 (which it has been several times already even before you began arguing so extensively) it is only comparible once you are utilizing everything the card has to offer, and that includes its drivers. Otherwise, the 7950GX2 would only compete as far as my old Geforce 3. Just think about what you're trying to argue.

 

[redbox]

Originally posted by: josh6079

Originally posted by: beggerking
I want to see how you explain "(software) has something to do with hardware"?

Do you have drivers installed on your computer...at all?

Why can't the 7950GX2 be used in Quad-SLI as of right now, even though the hardware is present to utilize that?

Why do you need an OS?

Why do you need drivers?

How are you able to see what I'm saying, then respond by touching nothing but hardware, and have me see what you say over great distances?

The answer to all of these? Because software has some things to do with hardware. Because at some point the two become dependent of eachother. The "data" that is being sent to the hardware to process and output is software. It is sometihng that can't exist on anything else but hardware itself, and something that only hardware can utilize correctly. To have water, you have to have both hydrogen and oxygen. To have a working computer that would be beneficial to an enthusiast (and comparible to an X1900) you have to have both software and hardware.

If you want this to be compared to an X1900 (which it has been several times already even before you began arguing so extensively) it is only comparible once you are utilizing everything the card has to offer, and that includes its drivers. Otherwise, the 7950GX2 would only compete as far as my old Geforce 3. Just think about what you're trying to argue.

FTW! :beer:

 

[Ulfhednar]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
I don't think we have anything further to discuss. All who disagree with your opinions are lying fanboys, correct? /Ulfhednar

No, just people like you who ignore evidence as self-explanatory as a photograph are lying fanboys. What are you, the next Iraqi Information Minister?

There is no second PCI-E slot, ATi are committing suicide in their fabs! :roll:

 

[Rangoric]

Originally posted by: beggerking

Originally posted by: beggerking

Originally posted by: Rangoric

Originally posted by: beggerking

and driver cannot do much with vidoecard directly if videocard itself without OS providing data. Uninstall your Os and try it out....

Xbox.

xbox doesn't have an OS? I'm pretty sure I've heard something about a stripped down win2000 OS that is been used in xbox...

so Rangoric, this is your original quote. you argued that xbox doesn't need an OS to provide data, so where does data come from? do you disagree with your own argument now? that Xbox actually needs an OS?

Did I? Thats an aweful lot of words to put into my mouth, when in fact, I just wanted to bring up the XBox.

Why? Because software ports from PC to XBox rather easily, and I've seen Linux load an XBox game on the XBox and suffer no performance hit.

 

[redbox]

Hey Ulfhednar I wouldn't rush to put people on the all-too-famous fanboy list. I don't disagree with your reasoning or proof I just think that your hostility at keys is a little bit misdirected. He responded to Creig:

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Originally posted by: Creig

So, does the 7950GX2 count as a single solution?

If two PCBs physically connected together via an SLI bridge or a CrossFire dongle are each considered a single individual card, how can two PCBs physically connected together via a PCI-E connector be considered only one card?

The PCB, HSF, GPU and memory is "the card", not the interface.

Well, basically some of us are looking at it from how many PCB's there are and counting two cards. Others are looking at how many PCI-e slots it uses and counting one. Mix in a whole smattering of other garbage, and you have the makings of a thread that makes no sense whatsoever. Nor does it even matter.

Basically saying that there are differing view points on what constitutes a single card PCB or interface. To which you replied:

Originally posted by: Ulfhednar

Yes, and those people are called lying fanboys with selective vision. It's been proven over and over again with photographic evidence and quotes from AnandTech and Extreme Systems that the 9750GX2 setup uses one board as an expansion board, connecting the two boards with a second PCI-E slot.

Keysplayer2003 wasn't taking either side just providing the fact that there are different views in this forum and a whole lota crap in the middle. Latter after Keysplayer2003 has said :

Translation: You don't respect other peoples opinions. Result: Not many people will respect yours

You claim that you are not stating opinion, but fact, right? And I am supposed to believe that your comment about those lying fanboys with selective vision, right? By that fact we have 108 lying fanboys with selective vision who answered this poll. I'd say that is pretty much opinion. I can't put your evidence into opinion because...well it isn't, the evidence you provide is very real. I just think that keys was trying to explain both sides of the issue.

 

[redbox]

Ok beggerking, this is why I can believe BFG10K when he says it's two cards from a software standpoint: Anandtech article on the 7950GX2

quote from the above link:

Because of the way PCIe works, the operating system is able to see the two graphics cards as if they were independent parts.

nuff said.

 

[thilanliyan]

Beggerking, I think you have to understand something. Please read through what I say carefully.

All this time you have been arguing semantics. No one doubts that the card can turn on and off and go to the BIOS and safemode too without a specific SLI driver. However, what people are trying to get across is that to experience the full features and power of the card, you NEED the SLI drivers. That is what people mean by "software is related to hardware".

It's like if you have a car and the engine starts fine but the transmission doesn't work. You can say the car "works" but that's not the point of the car...it needs to move also and can't without the transmission working properly. In the same way the 7950 (engine) needs the the SLI drivers (transmission) to function with the full features and power. And the SLI drivers sees 2 GPUs and hence why some people don't consider it a single card.

See what I'm saying?

 

[Keysplayr]

Thanks redbox.

 

[Ulfhednar]

Originally posted by: redbox
Hey Ulfhednar I wouldn't rush to put people on the all-too-famous fanboy list. I don't disagree with your reasoning or proof I just think that your hostility at keys is a little bit misdirected.

I'm afraid I don't agree with you, but I do respect your desire for peaceful discussion. Unfortunately, I've been doing this spiel with keys for pages and pages, and he has shown nothing but a complete incapability to look at evidence and not throw it aside if it shows anything contrary to his point, and a complete incapability of discussing something with a shred of rationality and logic.

When somebody ignores evidence (photographic and literary), spits out fallacies (red-herrings, begging the question, appeals to motive, and the worst yet appeals to force ie. threats) and generally acts like a bit of a tool then I, in all fairness, think it's time to bring out the "f-word" and think I've been nice in not bringing it out earlier.

 

[redbox]

Originally posted by: Ulfhednar

Originally posted by: redbox
Hey Ulfhednar I wouldn't rush to put people on the all-too-famous fanboy list. I don't disagree with your reasoning or proof I just think that your hostility at keys is a little bit misdirected.

I'm afraid I don't agree with you, but I do respect your desire for peaceful discussion. Unfortunately, I've been doing this spiel with keys for pages and pages, and he has shown nothing but a complete incapability to look at evidence and not throw it aside if it shows anything contrary to his point, and a complete incapability of discussing something with a shred of rationality and logic.
When somebody ignores evidence (photographic and literary), spits out fallacies (red-herrings, begging the question, appeals to motive, and the worst yet appeals to force ie. threats) and generally acts like a bit of a tool then I, in all fairness, think it's time to bring out the "f-word" and think I've been nice in not bringing it out earlier.

I think I can relate to that. Hummm I wonder who that reminds me of.... Seriously though I am not going to go back through this monster of a thread and try and find out where you two got off on the wrong foot I just think it's not far fetched to call this a single video card. It's does only plug into one 16x pci-e slot on the motherboard, and works fairly well with a number of motherboards without the sli chipset. However, I can see the other view that it is simply a video card with an expansion slot and another video card added to it. It really is just a persons perspective. And to get yourself all worked up over someone else's perspective I think is a little hazardous to one's health.

If Keysplayer2003 wants to disregard your evidence(and I for one think that he hasn't even looked at it very much) that's his thing. And as this thread can attest to you are very unlikely to change his mind.

 

[coldpower27]

Originally posted by: redbox

Originally posted by: Ulfhednar

Originally posted by: redbox
Hey Ulfhednar I wouldn't rush to put people on the all-too-famous fanboy list. I don't disagree with your reasoning or proof I just think that your hostility at keys is a little bit misdirected.

I'm afraid I don't agree with you, but I do respect your desire for peaceful discussion. Unfortunately, I've been doing this spiel with keys for pages and pages, and he has shown nothing but a complete incapability to look at evidence and not throw it aside if it shows anything contrary to his point, and a complete incapability of discussing something with a shred of rationality and logic.
When somebody ignores evidence (photographic and literary), spits out fallacies (red-herrings, begging the question, appeals to motive, and the worst yet appeals to force ie. threats) and generally acts like a bit of a tool then I, in all fairness, think it's time to bring out the "f-word" and think I've been nice in not bringing it out earlier.

I think I can relate to that. Hummm I wonder who that reminds me of.... Seriously though I am not going to go back through this monster of a thread and try and find out where you two got off on the wrong foot I just think it's not far fetched to call this a single video card. It's does only plug into one 16x pci-e slot on the motherboard, and works fairly well with a number of motherboards without the sli chipset. However, I can see the other view that it is simply a video card with an expansion slot and another video card added to it. It really is just a persons perspective. And to get yourself all worked up over someone else's perspective I think is a little hazardous to one's health.

If Keysplayer2003 wants to disregard your evidence(and I for one think that he hasn't even looked at it very much) that's his thing. And as this thread can attest to you are very unlikely to change his mind.

This is a nice post, I like it, it shows your ability to see both sides of an issue and respect other peoples beliefs on issues.

 

[Ulfhednar]

I know I won't change his mind, and at this point I am beyond caring as it would be like pushing a boulder up-hill with a toothpick. I basically just want to know why, exactly, he keeps dismissing solid evidence simply because it's contrary to his opinion. His opinion doesn't bother me, it's the way he just tosses logic out of the window at the first sign of trouble.

 

[redbox]

Originally posted by: Ulfhednar
I know I won't change his mind, and at this point I am beyond caring as it would be like pushing a boulder up-hill with a toothpick. I basically just want to know why, exactly, he keeps dismissing solid evidence simply because it's contrary to his opinion. His opinion doesn't bother me, it's the way he just tosses logic out of the window at the first sign of trouble.

I can understand that I just really think he hasn't taken the time to look at your evidence very much(even though it is just a photo). You want to know why he keeps dismissing your evidence if it is contrary to his opinion? Well, my friend the answer to that is in your own question. It is human nature to want to defend your beliefs. Many people wether they are aware of it or not throw logic out of the window just to hold on to their beliefs. I hope I am not painting a picture of keysplayer2003 that is inaccurate, and I don't mean for this to sound like the 7950gx2 is his religious dogma or anything, just trying to show that many people don't listen to logic because of personal beliefs. I think you would at least find Keys a little more receptive if you where to revist your evidence in a more peaceful maner. Look a couple of pages back and you will find just such an occasion between Keys and Ackmed. Through calming down and carefull debate they where able to come to an understanding.

 

[Ulfhednar]

Oh, I agree, but therein lies the problem. I would like a calm and careful debate, but when someone insists on performing handwavium on every piece of evidence you provide and most of their points are logical fallacies, it becomes quite clear that you're not talking to someone who is well-informed on how to present their point and to back it up whilst refuting the opposition.

I am not trying to insult Keys' intelligence here, I don't see much serious debate on this forum from many people at all, but he obviously knows the subject manner so I am sure he could come up with some good points if he would just look over the evidence impartially. If he tried, he might even find a legitimate fault with my evidence without resorting to a logical fallacy (ie. "your evidence doesn't matter because you are a meanie" and "I will invent a new definition for PCI-E slot" are terrible counter-points.)

 

[BFG10K]

Incorrect driver yields 0 performance.

In otherwords the hardware doesn't work.

the NIC can indeed load an incorrect driver, just that it will give out garbage results.

In otherwords the hardware doesn't work.

Please don't use other people's concept without first make sense of it first.

It's not a "concept", it's fact.

really? didn't know a non-harddrive driver can directly access a harddrive....wow.. I think you just invented a whole new concept!

(1) You made this argument up because I never said that.
(2) A non-HD driver accessing an HD is actually something you imply based on your "software has nothing to do with hardware". Or are you now flip-flopping and telling us you need a specific driver for a specific piece of hardware?

Please keep your arguments consistent and stop making up arguments that people never said. Thanks.

yet you cannot refute it as it is the fact.

Not fact, fiction.

Also BIOS is software so are you now going to claim it isn't specific to the hardware device? How do a flash a GPU with a NIC BIOS?

that is actually true.

If your definition is work is "not working at all".

BIOS = basic input/output software. I don't see how driver can not go thru it.

I didn't claim otherwise.

its basically a decoder to decode data send from your driver.

To a certain extent at a basic level but it's the driver that does the programming which is why we don't update BIOSes, we update drivers.

that is because the game was programmed using directx which supports it. try running a dx8 game with it, it will not work.

I asked you about OpenGL games whose rendering has absolutely nothing to do with DirectX. Or are you now suggesting OpenGL is actually DirectX? Do you even know what DirectX is?

Also you have dodged my AA/AF point and this is your usual tactic; you dodge anything that doesn't suit your incorrect arguments.

Answer the question: how can we force AA and AF in OpenGL games given DirectX has nothing to do with it and given the games were made before the features even existed?

 

[Gamer X]

Wow this thraed is still going on !!

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: Ulfhednar
Oh, I agree, but therein lies the problem. I would like a calm and careful debate, but when someone insists on performing handwavium on every piece of evidence you provide and most of their points are logical fallacies, it becomes quite clear that you're not talking to someone who is well-informed on how to present their point and to back it up whilst refuting the opposition.

I am not trying to insult Keys' intelligence here, I don't see much serious debate on this forum from many people at all, but he obviously knows the subject manner so I am sure he could come up with some good points if he would just look over the evidence impartially. If he tried, he might even find a legitimate fault with my evidence without resorting to a logical fallacy (ie. "your evidence doesn't matter because you are a meanie" and "I will invent a new definition for PCI-E slot" are terrible counter-points.)

Redbox is correct. It is not the data you presented that I dismissed, (handwavium) but the manner in which you chose to address me. Ulfhednar, I have looked carefully at your photo. What it tells me, is that even if you were 100% correct in your analysis of the 7950GX2 and there is in fact 2 PCI-e connectors present on it, what does this mean to the end user? You are approaching this from a purely technical standpoint. I understand that. But in the end, all that really matters is what it means to an end user like you or me in the real world or practical use of the card. It all comes down to final usage of the product. A user does not need two PCI-e slots to utilize this card, so what does it matter to him/her if the card has a second internal PCI-e connector or not? It doesn't. So if you want me to agree with you from a purely technical standpoint, you may be right on the money, or not. I don't know and it really doesn't seem to have any effect on the functionality of the card.

You will see for yourself if you do end up getting one, that any technical reference to a card that has two PCI-e connectors is sort of moot, when you and your single PCI-e motherboard are happily gaming away with a GX2. (Assuming you purchase or have a motherboard with a single PCI-e slot.

After all is said, I would appreciate an apology for being called a fanboy liar spreading red-herring fallacies. Not just to me, but to everyone you blanketed with the terms.

Keys

 

[Sable]

Bwhahahahaahhahahahaaa


You bunch of giffords.

 

[coldpower27]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Originally posted by: Ulfhednar
Oh, I agree, but therein lies the problem. I would like a calm and careful debate, but when someone insists on performing handwavium on every piece of evidence you provide and most of their points are logical fallacies, it becomes quite clear that you're not talking to someone who is well-informed on how to present their point and to back it up whilst refuting the opposition.

I am not trying to insult Keys' intelligence here, I don't see much serious debate on this forum from many people at all, but he obviously knows the subject manner so I am sure he could come up with some good points if he would just look over the evidence impartially. If he tried, he might even find a legitimate fault with my evidence without resorting to a logical fallacy (ie. "your evidence doesn't matter because you are a meanie" and "I will invent a new definition for PCI-E slot" are terrible counter-points.)

Redbox is correct. It is not the data you presented that I dismissed, (handwavium) but the manner in which you chose to address me. Ulfhednar, I have looked carefully at your photo. What it tells me, is that even if you were 100% correct in your analysis of the 7950GX2 and there is in fact 2 PCI-e connectors present on it, what does this mean to the end user? You are approaching this from a purely technical standpoint. I understand that. But in the end, all that really matters is what it means to an end user like you or me in the real world or practical use of the card. It all comes down to final usage of the product. A user does not need two PCI-e slots to utilize this card, so what does it matter to him/her if the card has a second internal PCI-e connector or not? It doesn't. So if you want me to agree with you from a purely technical standpoint, you may be right on the money, or not. I don't know and it really doesn't seem to have any effect on the functionality of the card.

You will see for yourself if you do end up getting one, that any technical reference to a card that has two PCI-e connectors is sort of moot, when you and your single PCI-e motherboard are happily gaming away with a GX2. (Assuming you purchase or have a motherboard with a single PCI-e slot.

After all is said, I would appreciate an apology for being called a fanboy liar spreading red-herring fallacies. Not just to me, but to everyone you blanketed with the terms.

Keys

Agreed, if someone suggested their point of view in such a manner I would not even consider the evidence they propose, regardless of how good such evidence was.

 

[beggerking]

Originally posted by: BFG10K

Incorrect driver yields 0 performance.

In otherwords the hardware doesn't work.

incorrect. it outputs garbage results, yields 0 performance, but the hardware itself still work as it still inputs and outputs data.

really? didn't know a non-harddrive driver can directly access a harddrive....wow.. I think you just invented a whole new concept!

(1) You made this argument up because I never said that.
(2) A non-HD driver accessing an HD is actually something you imply based on your "software has nothing to do with hardware". Or are you now flip-flopping and telling us you need a specific driver for a specific piece of hardware?

I'm referring to this quote:

BFG:
...driver which then directly programs and operates the HD to get the data.

care to explain your theory?

 

[beggerking]

Originally posted by: BFG10K

BIOS = basic input/output software. I don't see how driver can not go thru it.

I didn't claim otherwise.

actually you did .. on previous page.. here

BFG:
"OMG, this is beyond comical now. Now you're claiming it's the BIOS doing all the work on the video card? Why do we even need drivers then if the OS is simply sending data to the BIOS? "

please stop flipflopping.

 

[josh6079]

Originally posted by: beggerking
I want to see how you explain "(software) has something to do with hardware"?

Do you have drivers installed on your computer...at all?

Why can't the 7950GX2 be used in Quad-SLI as of right now, even though the hardware is present to utilize that?

Why do you need an OS?

Why do you need drivers?

How are you able to see what I'm saying, then respond by touching nothing but hardware, and have me see what you say over great distances?

The answer to all of these? Because software has some things to do with hardware. Because at some point the two become dependent of eachother. The "data" that is being sent to the hardware to process and output is software. It is sometihng that can't exist on anything else but hardware itself, and something that only hardware can utilize correctly. To have water, you have to have both hydrogen and oxygen. To have a working computer that would be beneficial to an enthusiast (and comparible to an X1900) you have to have both software and hardware.

If you want this to be compared to an X1900 (which it has been several times already even before you began arguing so extensively) it is only comparible once you are utilizing everything the card has to offer, and that includes its drivers. Otherwise, the 7950GX2 would only compete as far as my old Geforce 3. Just think about what you're trying to argue.