Carefull there Keys you are starting to attack the man and not the idea which is a major no-no considering debates. He has said this: "I'm afraid I don't agree with you, but I do respect your desire for peaceful discussion" So no matter how well he is trying to do that I guess he still would like a peaceful discussion. It would be better to provide him that then to call him names or insult him. Just my $.02
Carefull there Keys you are starting to attack the man and not the idea which is a major no-no considering debates. He has said this: "I'm afraid I don't agree with you, but I do respect your desire for peaceful discussion" So no matter how well he is trying to do that I guess he still would like a peaceful discussion. It would be better to provide him that then to call him names or insult him. Just my $.02
Originally posted by: Cookie Monster
Ok, people. All you people can have a cookie.
Is it that hard to understand?
The 7950GX2 is a 2 PCB design. Hence it does NOT count as a single card solution. (A single card solution means the card is based on ONE PCB)
HOWEVER it requires just one PCI-e slot like single cards, making it a single PCI-e slot solution.
This issue is just like how light behaves like waves yet it doesnt make light a wave because it could also be a particle.
The card itself behaves like a single card solution, having to use just one PCI-e slot, take some just 2 slots like modern high end single cards and the ability to be used on non SLi boards.
But it uses SLi to render the games (meaning it needs profiles and etc) and ALSO the 7950GX2 is of 2 PCB design making it NOT a single card solution.
We can safely say that the 7950GX2 is a dual GPU solution that behaves like a single card solution yet it isnt a single card solution.
That won't work, to me the the way it plugs into the motherboards itself, the physical gold PCI-E gold part of the card is 1, so hence it's a Single card solution.
However it does require SLI technology, to function we are not denying that, but we have had situations where this has already been done.
the 6600 GT Dual, ATI X1600 Dual, ASUS's 6800 GT Dual etc.
It depends you consider 2 PCB the requirements for the video card to be a Dual video card solution. My requirement is that it plugs into 2 PCI-E slots, the 7950GX2 doesn't do that, it can function on the Nforce 550 or Nforce 4 Ultra motherboards.
And as evidenced by the poll, it is a very close rase, roughly half believe 1 way and half believe the other.
It's a Dual GPU and PCB solution but to me it is a single card entity.
Cookie Monster
Diamond Member
- May 7, 2005
- 5,161
- 32
- 86
Originally posted by: coldpower27
Originally posted by: Cookie Monster
Ok, people. All you people can have a cookie.
Is it that hard to understand?
The 7950GX2 is a 2 PCB design. Hence it does NOT count as a single card solution. (A single card solution means the card is based on ONE PCB)
HOWEVER it requires just one PCI-e slot like single cards, making it a single PCI-e slot solution.
This issue is just like how light behaves like waves yet it doesnt make light a wave because it could also be a particle.
The card itself behaves like a single card solution, having to use just one PCI-e slot, take some just 2 slots like modern high end single cards and the ability to be used on non SLi boards.
But it uses SLi to render the games (meaning it needs profiles and etc) and ALSO the 7950GX2 is of 2 PCB design making it NOT a single card solution.
We can safely say that the 7950GX2 is a dual GPU solution that behaves like a single card solution yet it isnt a single card solution.
That won't work, to me the the way it plugs into the motherboards itself, the physical gold PCI-E gold part of the card is 1, so hence it's a Single card solution.
However it does require SLI technology, to function we are not denying that, but we have had situations where this has already been done.
the 6600 GT Dual, ATI X1600 Dual, ASUS's 6800 GT Dual etc.
It depends you consider 2 PCB the requirements for the video card to be a Dual video card solution. My requirement is that it plugs into 2 PCI-E slots, the 7950GX2 doesn't do that, it can function on the Nforce 550 or Nforce 4 Ultra motherboards.
And as evidenced by the poll, it is a very close rase, roughly half believe 1 way and half believe the other.
It's a Dual GPU and PCB solution but to me it is a single card entity.
Note - it BEHAVES like a single card. BUT IT ISNT A SINGLE CARD SOLUTION!!.
Originally posted by: Cookie Monster
Originally posted by: coldpower27
Originally posted by: Cookie Monster
Ok, people. All you people can have a cookie.
Is it that hard to understand?
The 7950GX2 is a 2 PCB design. Hence it does NOT count as a single card solution. (A single card solution means the card is based on ONE PCB)
HOWEVER it requires just one PCI-e slot like single cards, making it a single PCI-e slot solution.
nnec
This issue is just like how light behaves like waves yet it doesnt make light a wave because it could also be a particle.
The card itself behaves like a single card solution, having to use just one PCI-e slot, take some just 2 slots like modern high end single cards and the ability to be used on non SLi boards.
But it uses SLi to render the games (meaning it needs profiles and etc) and ALSO the 7950GX2 is of 2 PCB design making it NOT a single card solution.
We can safely say that the 7950GX2 is a dual GPU solution that behaves like a single card solution yet it isnt a single card solution.
That won't work, to me the the way it plugs into the motherboards itself, the physical gold PCI-E gold part of the card is 1, so hence it's a Single card solution.
However it does require SLI technology, to function we are not denying that, but we have had situations where this has already been done.
the 6600 GT Dual, ATI X1600 Dual, ASUS's 6800 GT Dual etc.
It depends you consider 2 PCB the requirements for the video card to be a Dual video card solution. My requirement is that it plugs into 2 PCI-E slots, the 7950GX2 doesn't do that, it can function on the Nforce 550 or Nforce 4 Ultra motherboards.
And as evidenced by the poll, it is a very close rase, roughly half believe 1 way and half believe the other.
It's a Dual GPU and PCB solution but to me it is a single card entity.
Note - it BEHAVES like a single card. BUT IT ISNT A SINGLE CARD SOLUTION!!.
Like I said your opinion, you haven't provided any evidence to the contrary, 2 PCB and 2 GPU are still not enough to make it 2 video cards. Putting your words in bold doesn't change anything mind you.
The differece between this and 2 video cards is as follows:
2 7900 GTX SLI.
2 G71 Cores, 2 Gold PCI-E Connectors which each have a slot on the motherboard itself to plug into, SLI technology require to work in parrallel.
7950GX2,
2 G71 Cores, 1 Gold PCI-E Connector which has a slot on the motherboard itself to plug into, SLI Technology require to work in parrallel.
Originally posted by: Cookie Monster
Ok, people. All you people can have a cookie.
Is it that hard to understand?
The 7950GX2 is a 2 PCB design. Hence it does NOT count as a single card solution. (A single card solution means the card is based on ONE PCB)
HOWEVER it requires just one PCI-e slot like single cards, making it a single PCI-e slot solution.
This issue is just like how light behaves like waves yet it doesnt make light a wave because it could also be a particle.
The card itself behaves like a single card solution, having to use just one PCI-e slot, take some just 2 slots like modern high end single cards and the ability to be used on non SLi boards.
But it uses SLi to render the games (meaning it needs profiles and etc) and ALSO the 7950GX2 is of 2 PCB design making it NOT a single card solution.
We can safely say that the 7950GX2 is a dual GPU solution that behaves like a single card solution yet it isnt a single card solution.
Haha, some people can't even understand that software and hardware are interdependent...you think they'll understand the dual nature of light??? They may understand if you use a cookie analogy instead though. Hehehe.
Edit: Blast, I wasn't supposed to post again...ah well, whatever.
Originally posted by: coldpower27
Originally posted by: Cookie Monster
Originally posted by: coldpower27
Originally posted by: Cookie Monster
Ok, people. All you people can have a cookie.
Is it that hard to understand?
The 7950GX2 is a 2 PCB design. Hence it does NOT count as a single card solution. (A single card solution means the card is based on ONE PCB)
HOWEVER it requires just one PCI-e slot like single cards, making it a single PCI-e slot solution.
This issue is just like how light behaves like waves yet it doesnt make light a wave because it could also be a particle.
The card itself behaves like a single card solution, having to use just one PCI-e slot, take some just 2 slots like modern high end single cards and the ability to be used on non SLi boards.
But it uses SLi to render the games (meaning it needs profiles and etc) and ALSO the 7950GX2 is of 2 PCB design making it NOT a single card solution.
We can safely say that the 7950GX2 is a dual GPU solution that behaves like a single card solution yet it isnt a single card solution.
That won't work, to me the the way it plugs into the motherboards itself, the physical gold PCI-E gold part of the card is 1, so hence it's a Single card solution.
However it does require SLI technology, to function we are not denying that, but we have had situations where this has already been done.
the 6600 GT Dual, ATI X1600 Dual, ASUS's 6800 GT Dual etc.
It depends you consider 2 PCB the requirements for the video card to be a Dual video card solution. My requirement is that it plugs into 2 PCI-E slots, the 7950GX2 doesn't do that, it can function on the Nforce 550 or Nforce 4 Ultra motherboards.
And as evidenced by the poll, it is a very close rase, roughly half believe 1 way and half believe the other.
It's a Dual GPU and PCB solution but to me it is a single card entity.
Note - it BEHAVES like a single card. BUT IT ISNT A SINGLE CARD SOLUTION!!.
Like I said your opinion, you haven't provided any evidence to the contrary, 2 PCB and 2 GPU are still not enough to make it 2 video cards. Putting your words in bold doesn't change anything mind you.
The differece between this and 2 video cards is as follows:
2 7900 GTX SLI.
2 G71 Cores, 2 Gold PCI-E Connectors, SLI technology require to work in parrallel.
7950GX2,
2 G71 Cores, 1 Gold PCI-E Connector, SLI Technology require to work in parrallel.
actually There are is an error in your list:
2 7900GTX SLI ....2 Gold pci-e connectors
7950GX2 ..... 1 Gold pci-e connectors
It should read:
2 7900 GTX SLI.
2 G71 Cores, 2 Gold PCI-E Connectors, SLI technology require to work in parrallel.
7950GX2,
2 G71 Cores, 2 Gold PCI-E Connectors, SLI Technology require to work in parrallel.
Which would make them .....that's right equal. The evidence is quoted from the Anandtech article on the 7950GX2:
and linked here by ulfhednar Further proof
Keysplayr
Elite Member
- Jan 16, 2003
- 21,211
- 50
- 91
I don't know what you mean. I called him zero names throughout this entire thread. Go back and check. If he really wanted peaceful discussion, don't you think he would actually try to have one instead of calling everyone lying fanboy red-herring fallacy spreaders over and over and over again? He probably would. I don't see that happening do you? He's a funny guy, what can I say.
Yet more appeal to motive fallacies. Learn to construct a point and make it, otherwise don't bother.
Another appeal to motive fallacy, do you ever learn?Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
There is not a decent bone in your body is there? Your good for laughs, but thats about it. And you did make me laugh. Thanks
If I had a penny for every time you said something without any real substance, I would be able to go buy myself a 7950GX2 right now. :roll:It's pretty hard to have a sensible debate with someone who ignores any and all evidence against him. When you show signs of being even remotely interested in using common-sense and logic instead of rabid fanboyism, I will take you seriously enough to be nice to you.
There may not be any known viruses that "break hardware" (since the CIH virus doesn't count), but I can think of a few ways software can damage hardware. Here's one example: a software developer colleague of mine claims that he once accidentally set an embedded device on fire (I think it was some kind of VOIP box) when his device driver went into an infinite loop.
If you drove an old CRT monitor at a unsupported resolution or a too-high refresh rate, the image would be a solid flickering gray or white and the monitor would emit a high-pitched whine. Now, I don't know if the following is strictly true, or if manufacturers were trying to cover their asses, but they always cautioned end-users to avoid unsupported resolutions/refresh rates, because this could damage their monitor.
Here's an example that I just googled:
http://www.cs.utexas.edu/users/deke/laptopsupport/manuals/d600/display.htm
" NOTICE: You can damage an external monitor by using an unsupported refresh rate. Before adjusting the refresh rate on an external monitor, see the monitor user's guide."
Here's another one for you:
http://trixter.wordpress.com/2006/02/02...yth-1-software-cannot-damage-hardware/
From the article and its comments:
1) "My old ATI 8500 had a bug in it with certain invalid resolutions (caused by games crashing etc) that would literally fry my expensive Panasonic 19? CRT. Thankfully it came with a 3 year warranty, and they would cover it. But it was annoying lugging that thing to the service repairing multiple times. Especially how it was really ATI?s fault."
2) "He was screwing around with POKE in BASIC and POKE?d a value somewhere into CGA-land, saw some pretty squiggles for about 3 seconds, then poof and we smell the familiar smell of ozone. We went back to Computerland, but they told him that there was no way that software could have damaged hardware and they weren?t going to repair it (thinking that he had dropped it or something). So my friend, with salesman watching with one eye from across the room, walks over to another one on display, takes the diskette out, boots into BASIC, writes a 1-line program, and poof, ozone, and no more monitor. "
So, are these examples of "poorly designed hardware damaging itself in response to software instructions", or are they examples of "software damaging software"? If you pick the first choice, you're just splitting hairs.
And what exactly is the line between hardware and software any way? Are programmable parts such as CPLDs or FPGAs "hardware" or "software"?
http://www.netrino.com/Articles/ProgrammableLogic/index.html
Quote: "In recent years, the line between hardware and software has blurred."
Quote: "As this trend continues, it becomes more difficult to separate hardware from software. After all, both hardware and software designers are now describing logic in high-level terms, albeit in different languages, and downloading the compiled result to a piece of silicon. Surely no one would claim that language choice alone marks a real distinction between the two fields. Turing's notion of machine-level equivalence and the existence of language-to-language translators have long ago taught us all that that kind of reasoning is foolish. There are even now products that allow designers to create their hardware designs in traditional programming languages like C. So language differences alone are not enough of a distinction."
Originally posted by: redbox
Originally posted by: coldpower27
Originally posted by: Cookie Monster
Originally posted by: coldpower27
Originally posted by: Cookie Monster
Ok, people. All you people can have a cookie.
Is it that hard to understand?
The 7950GX2 is a 2 PCB design. Hence it does NOT count as a single card solution. (A single card solution means the card is based on ONE PCB)
HOWEVER it requires just one PCI-e slot like single cards, making it a single PCI-e slot solution.
This issue is just like how light behaves like waves yet it doesnt make light a wave because it could also be a particle.
The card itself behaves like a single card solution, having to use just one PCI-e slot, take some just 2 slots like modern high end single cards and the ability to be used on non SLi boards.
But it uses SLi to render the games (meaning it needs profiles and etc) and ALSO the 7950GX2 is of 2 PCB design making it NOT a single card solution.
We can safely say that the 7950GX2 is a dual GPU solution that behaves like a single card solution yet it isnt a single card solution.
That won't work, to me the the way it plugs into the motherboards itself, the physical gold PCI-E gold part of the card is 1, so hence it's a Single card solution.
However it does require SLI technology, to function we are not denying that, but we have had situations where this has already been done.
the 6600 GT Dual, ATI X1600 Dual, ASUS's 6800 GT Dual etc.
It depends you consider 2 PCB the requirements for the video card to be a Dual video card solution. My requirement is that it plugs into 2 PCI-E slots, the 7950GX2 doesn't do that, it can function on the Nforce 550 or Nforce 4 Ultra motherboards.
And as evidenced by the poll, it is a very close rase, roughly half believe 1 way and half believe the other.
It's a Dual GPU and PCB solution but to me it is a single card entity.
Note - it BEHAVES like a single card. BUT IT ISNT A SINGLE CARD SOLUTION!!.
Like I said your opinion, you haven't provided any evidence to the contrary, 2 PCB and 2 GPU are still not enough to make it 2 video cards. Putting your words in bold doesn't change anything mind you.
The differece between this and 2 video cards is as follows:
2 7900 GTX SLI.
2 G71 Cores, 2 Gold PCI-E Connectors, SLI technology require to work in parrallel.
7950GX2,
2 G71 Cores, 1 Gold PCI-E Connector, SLI Technology require to work in parrallel.
actually There are is an error in your list:
2 7900GTX SLI ....2 Gold pci-e connectors
7950GX2 ..... 1 Gold pci-e connectors
It should read:
2 7900 GTX SLI.
2 G71 Cores, 2 Gold PCI-E Connectors, SLI technology require to work in parrallel.
7950GX2,
2 G71 Cores, 2 Gold PCI-E Connectors, SLI Technology require to work in parrallel.
Which would make them .....that's right equal. The evidence is quoted from the Anandtech article on the 7950GX2:
and linked here by ulfhednar Further proof
I was refering to the Gold PCI-E Connector that connects to the motherboard only, I should have made my post more clear.
1 Gold PCI-E Connector that plugs directly into the motherboard itself and not onto the PCB of the other GPU. I will have changed my post to reflect this.
Originally posted by: Ulfhednar
Yet more appeal to motive fallacies. Learn to construct a point and make it, otherwise don't bother.
Another appeal to motive fallacy, do you ever learn?Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
There is not a decent bone in your body is there? Your good for laughs, but thats about it. And you did make me laugh. Thanks
It's pretty hard to have a sensible debate with someone who ignores any and all evidence against him. When you show signs of being even remotely interested in using common-sense and logic instead of rabid fanboyism, I will take you seriously enough to be nice to you.
I think I have made quite the point already, I don't have to take the avenue, you wish me to take to make a point. My point still stands.
No, the issue in this thread is completely different from wave/particle duality. This issue is about how no one agrees on the definition of "single-card solution", yet somehow everyone continues to debate on whether the 7950GX2 is a "single-card solution" or not. In other words, this is really a debate about definitions and semantics. Just like when BFG used a made-up, yet commonsense, English term like "driver path" to describe the behaviour of a driver; instead of attacking the content of his argument, beggarking attacked the words that he used. Ridiculous.
You're on the wrong track when you say that "light behaves like waves yet it doesn't make light a wave...." Light acts like both waves and particles. Light is both waves and particles. There is nothing about light that is "more particle-like" or "more wave-like" that would justify saying "light is really a particle, but it acts like a wave" or "light is really a wave, but it acts like a particle". It's wrong to say that light is "really" one of those two things, and just "acts" like the other. It "acts" like both waves and particles, and it "really is" both waves and particles. In fact, all matter is both waves and particles. The only reason we don't notice is because everyday objects are so big that their wavelengths too small to observe.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wave-particle_duality
A better analogy is the debate on this question: "Does Free Will exist?" People have been arguing about it forever, but not everyone agrees on what "free will" means.
Anyone can see that you're obviously not gonna settle a debate if you can't even agree on the meaning of the terms. If one guy has one definition in his head of "single-card solution" and the next guy has a different definition, obviously both will think they are right and nothing will ever convince them otherwise.
If you could somehow come up with a definition of "single-card solution" that everyone agreed on (obviously this will never happen), then there would be absolutely no question of whether the 7950GX2 is a single card or not.
This is I think is the gist of the issue, I think we all have a different meaning as to what a "single-card solution" is, so we can't reach a definitive agreemnt on what a single card is.
Hence why I don't like AMD's terminology of saying they have "true" Dual Core with their Athlon 64x2 line.
if a monitor was made to function to acquire and display ALL resolution/refresh rates and breaks when it does that (aka monitor resolution example), then its a hardware flaw.
Then most, if not all, of the CRT monitors produced before the mid-to-late '90s have a serious flaw. I want my money back. It says in pretty much every CRT monitor's manual that driving it at the wrong resolution/refresh can damage it. Maybe the chances of that happening are slim to none, but they put that warning in there for a reason.
What about the example of the device driver that set a piece of hardware on fire? Or the kid who wrote to video memory and destroyed a monitor?
I really do think you are playing with semantics and splitting hairs.
Exactly. This is how marketers hype up their products - by fooling their customers with language that is so vague you can't say they are lying, but you also can't say they are telling you the whole story. The only way to get the real picture is to read the specs and data sheets. For example, if you google for retailers that sell the 7950GX2, usually they list the video memory as 1 GB (without elaborating on any details). Of course, everyone here knows while that may be technically true, it's not telling you the whole story.
Another example is 6-bit LCDs, which can only produce 262144 actual colours and use dithering to push the number to 16.2 million. Most monitor manufacturers don't tell you this. Even on their spec sheets, the list the number of colours as 16.7 million or 16.2 million. The reason nobody has holy wars about "Does my monitor REALLY display 262144 colours or 16.2 million colours?" is because knowledgeable customers already understand and agree on the issues of 6-bit versus 8-bit LCDs and dithering.
true, if you put it that way... its a design flaw caused by rapid advancement in videocard resolution/refresh rate...
That embedded device needs a fan/heatsink design if it is ever allowed to cause fire.
Another flaw in monitor design. video memory don't destroy a monitor, lack of control in video output in a monitor does.
Now you are just playing at semantics. Under your definition of "software destroying hardware", there is no possible scenario where it could ever happen. You would always say it was a hardware flaw that caused the damage.
While that may be true under your definition, that is not the common-sense meaning that people use. For example, in the story of the kid who destroyed a monitor by writing to video memory, the store salesperson refused to believe his story because he said "software can't damage hardware". The kid was able to convince him by doing the same thing to other monitors. Do you think the salesman really cared whether there was an inherent hardware flaw that was being exposed/triggered by software or whether the "software itself" caused the damage?
I mean, if I wanted to get really pedantic, like you, I could say that "software doesn't do anything". It's just a set of machine-readable instructions that does nothing on its own, until you actually run it on hardware. Or getting even more abstract, you start with a program, which is just a mathematical abstraction, which the coder translates into a human-readable source code, which gets translated into machine-readable instructions, which still doesn't do anything until it's running on some hardware platform.
That's how a Computer Science prof might look at it. But, in the real world, someone would say "software does something", and no one would argue.
If you can't understand abstract technical details, you are only ignorant to be arguing against it.
If you actually read the article, it specifically said the hardware(bios, a flash memory) still works. You can always reflash it to make it work.
If you don't have an ATI card installed yet you installed a ATI driver, most likely a message box will pop up notifying that you don't have the correct hardware. That message box, is the prove that the software is correctly "working".
In other words, like keysplayr2003, you're not going to make any attempt to disprove my points. On the contrary, you're just going to sit there and call me a meanie as if it has any relevence whatsoever to the topic at hand.
You're pathetic, really. :roll: Like I said, learn to debate or stop trying.
I'm not playing with semantics, but I do have a CS degree so that is how exactly I look at it. It all depends on if you look at it from an economical view or from an technical view. I take the technical view in this thread because we are discussing what 7590gx2 IS(technical), not what it functions as (economical).
hardware is actually very much like software, that it is never fool proof. If it is allowed to be instructed to break itself, then it should be fixed from its hardware manufacturer.
I won't call ATI card a crap only because its software(CCC) is a crap. Actually, 1900xt is a very good card with or without CCC.
No point when I said your not worth the time. Your doing exactly as expected. As if what you think of me actually means diddly squat to me. And I am entitled to my opinion whether you like it or not, regardless of how you feel about it.
I know how to debate jsut fine.
Keysplayr
Elite Member
- Jan 16, 2003
- 21,211
- 50
- 91
*Snickers.*
In case you missed it, I addressed your evidence with this post:
"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"
Your proper response?
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 Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 21K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter