larrabee vs nvidia

[Zantal]

First of all i would like to say this.

i am a big fan of Nvidia and no matter what happens my computers will always have an nvidia card.

ok so, according to what i read on the internet the new intel platform

called LARRABEE will outperformance the current nvidia and ati cards


What do you think about it?

leave your comments here and try to explai as much as you can =)

[gangaskan]

we'll see come next year ;)

[Evilsizer]

so if its faster then current cards now. does that mean its going to be half as fast compared to next year current cards?

[jason4207]

so if its faster then current cards now. does that mean its going to be half as fast compared to next year current cards?

Exactly. Claiming you can beat current hardware w/ an imaginary product doesn't mean a whole lot.

[Zap]

we'll see come next year ;)

This.

With future products that don't exist and don't have a reference point (such as an earlier/current product with similar architecture) everything right now is speculation from armchair benchmarkers.

[rainless]

First of all i would like to say this.

i am a big fan of Nvidia and no matter what happens my computers will always have an nvidia card.

ok so, according to what i read on the internet the new intel platform

called LARRABEE will outperformance the current nvidia and ati cards


What do you think about it?

leave your comments here and try to explai as much as you can =)

Larrabee is a... well it isn't ANYTHING yet... but by the time it's released it will be a joke.

You've got NVIDIA and what's left of ATI clawing tooth and nail for the top spot, and you've got Intel standing still while they "perfect" Larabee.

By the time it's finally released, their competitors will be two generations ahead of whatever Intel comes up with.

[Neuromancer]

Isnt the LArabee GPU supposed to be based on ray tracing? Which means not currently compatible with, well anything?

[Evilsizer]

Isnt the LArabee GPU supposed to be based on ray tracing? Which means not currently compatible with, well anything?

well it is programable but not based on ray tracing. however it does appear that for RT it would be stronger in that reguards vs other gpus. though since we dont know about future ATI/NV cards it would be hard to say...

[ChanceCoats123]

Isnt the LArabee GPU supposed to be based on ray tracing? Which means not currently compatible with, well anything?

According to my bro ( computer science major at UoI champaign/urbana), there is a company coming out with a specialized ray tracing gpu that is supposed to OBLITERATE any card on the market now. I'm sure it will be the same deal as the larrabee, by the time it is out, it will be out dated. But as for the larrabee, intel needs to program one hell of a driver to power sucha "powerful" card.

[Shiggity]

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/intel/showdoc.aspx?i=3367 - very awesome information on Larrabee.

Chancecoats - You're talking about this - http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3549. It's a ray tracing add-on card that's not meant for home use / gaming. (There's no game with high end raytracing anyways)

Intel is going to push Larrabee's 100% scaling as hard as they can. One ATI / Nvidia card may beat Larrabee, but if SLI and X-fire are not improved, Larrabee will scale better with more than 1 card. (Intel also controls Lucid Technology - supposedly they have an add-on chip that makes any combination of GPU's scale to 100%).

[turbohans]

WOW intel and nvidia are really going at it arent they?!? Kinda goes along with Nvidia attempting to make CPU's

[ViperJohn]

we'll see come next year ;)

Try 3 to 5 years.

Viper

[ChanceCoats123]

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/intel/showdoc.aspx?i=3367 - very awesome information on Larrabee.

Chancecoats - You're talking about this - http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3549. It's a ray tracing add-on card that's not meant for home use / gaming. (There's no game with high end raytracing anyways)

Intel is going to push Larrabee's 100% scaling as hard as they can. One ATI / Nvidia card may beat Larrabee, but if SLI and X-fire are not improved, Larrabee will scale better with more than 1 card. (Intel also controls Lucid Technology - supposedly they have an add-on chip that makes any combination of GPU's scale to 100%).

Intel is almost there to the 100% scaling. Here you go. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Slide_scaling.jpg)

[SuperMiguel]

Isnt the LArabee GPU supposed to be based on ray tracing? Which means not currently compatible with, well anything?

not true

[gangaskan]

Try 3 to 5 years.

Viper

just doing a little googling said a release is planed in 2010 :)



however, i do understand that things do not go as planed

[Evilsizer]

Intel is almost there to the 100% scaling. Here you go. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Slide_scaling.jpg)

very vague reference.. the only time i have seen 100% or near 100% scaling is when they were showing the RT FPS numbers. as they were saying when you doubled the number of cores the FPS doubled.

[PhoenixOfChaos]

I think it's important to remember that every year ATi and nVidia man cards that,generally speaking, trounce their own cards they made just the previous year. So Intel throwing out statisical garbage that they can beat cards of this year won't mean much next year, seeing as this already happens. Granted I bet intel has taken this into consideration.

But intel still has a few difficult hurdles to hop regarding their new toy;
-Drivers
-Competative Pricing
-Whatever nVidia and ATi are cooking up. Because although people have mentioned that all they're doing is shrinking their current die, I'd be willing to bet their R&D team is busy cooking up something that'll beat eachother and Larrabee. These companies survive as well as they do because they're smart. They'll take into account anything Intel has to offer and plan around it.

[Deanzo]

i am a big fan of Nvidia and no matter what happens my computers will always have an nvidia card.



And if Intel was two times faster at a lower price point, you'd stay with nVidia....Sure.

This is all just words on a page for me right now, but the GT300 sounds kind of cool.
http://www.brightsideofnews.com/news/2009/4/22/nvidias-gt300-specifications-revealed---its-a-cgpu!.aspx

[Shiggity]

And if Intel was two times faster at a lower price point, you'd stay with nVidia....Sure.

This is all just words on a page for me right now, but the GT300 sounds kind of cool.
http://www.brightsideofnews.com/news/2009/4/22/nvidias-gt300-specifications-revealed---its-a-cgpu!.aspx (http://www.brightsideofnews.com/news/2009/4/22/nvidias-gt300-specifications-revealed---its-a-cgpu%21.aspx)

Sounds nearly identical to Larrabee (architecturally), without the X86.

[Badbonji]

The GT300 series sound sexy, I already want one! No two! Seven!

[Zantal]

get in queue Badbonji, i am most probably bigger than you so i say i get them first

XD

i just hope to find a job before they come out so i can build the serious pc i always wanted =)

[jobrien2001]

I want the multiple core GPUs from ATI to be out. Their roadmap said last Q of 2009, will probably be delayed... but one can only dream.

100% scale CF in 1 chip... :drool:

[Badbonji]

get in queue Badbonji, i am most probably bigger than you so i say i get them first

XD

i just hope to find a job before they come out so i can build the serious pc i always wanted =)

Bigger as in taller? I am around 6' 3" :)
lol

I will probably get them by xmas at least, hopefully the price might have dropped a bit.
Also been waiting on the intel smackover X58 ver 2 which has lucid hydra on it!

[Zantal]

Bigger as in taller? I am around 6' 3" :)

6' 3" ?

na i am 185 cm x 90kg

AND I AM A NINJA!!!

[Badbonji]

6' 3" ?

na i am 185 cm x 90kg

AND I AM A NINJA!!!

Lol! You got me there on the ninja.
I am 190cm and 80kg :P

[jason4207]

get in queue Badbonji, i am most probably bigger than you so i say i get them first

XD

i just hope to find a job before they come out so i can build the serious pc i always wanted =)

Most people would look at your sig and say that they wish they could have the serious PC they see there. What can't your PC do that you need it to?

I want the multiple core GPUs from ATI to be out. Their roadmap said last Q of 2009, will probably be delayed... but one can only dream.

100% scale CF in 1 chip... :drool:

ATI already has 800-core GPUs. CF is a method of using 2 dies together. If it's all on the same die then you don't need CF. CF is horribly in-efficient compared to intra-die connections.

It makes a lot more sense in the near-future to just increase the number of cores to 1200 or 1600 and/or increase the amount of work each core can do per cycle.

[Zantal]

Most people would look at your sig and say that they wish they could have the serious PC they see there. What can't your PC do that you need it to?



ATI already has 800-core GPUs. CF is a method of using 2 dies together. If it's all on the same die then you don't need CF. CF is horribly in-efficient compared to intra-die connections.

It makes a lot more sense in the near-future to just increase the number of cores to 1200 or 1600 and/or increase the amount of work each core can do per cycle.

My PC can't run crysis @ 1920X1050 over 40FPS and i can't play under 40FPS i had to tune down AA from 4X to 0 to play over 50fps
(a serious pc has an i7-965 @ 4.3ghz and quad sli setup with a different mobo and a monitor with like 2560x1600 resolution
so no i don't consider mine a serious one XD )

those are the stram processors, which are completely different from the cores and you can't simply increase them as you wish

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stream_processing

here you can see exactly what they are


from what i can see Larrabee is like a CPU optimized for graphic

[don'tknow]

My PC can't run crysis @ 1920X1050 over 40FPS and i can't play under 40FPS i had to tune down AA from 4X to 0 to play over 50fps
(a serious pc has an i7-965 @ 4.3ghz and quad sli setup with a different mobo and a monitor with like 2560x1600 resolution
so no i don't consider mine a serious one XD )


Try this config:

http://shadowdane.shackspace.com/Crysis/GamerMax/index.html

I'm assuming you're running Enthusiast thinking it's the 'best quality'; it's actually more of a marketing ploy, unoptimized setting to make people think they need better hardware. The above gamer-max config runs at gamer speed with visuals like enthusiast. Not only fps tweaks but also lighting tweaks which makes it look even better than enthusiast in many areas of the game.

It should give you much higher fps without gimping visuals (on my rig I get 35 avg. fps with enthusiast, 50 avg. with the gamer-max config).

[Mr.Guvernment]

i am a big fan of Nvidia and no matter what happens my computers will always have an nvidia card.


Sorry, have to say it but you should not be a fan of any company so much that you would only buy their cards, you loose in the end. Be smart and buy the best card for your money.

[PhoenixOfChaos]

Sorry, have to say it but you should not be a fan of any company so much that you would only buy their cards, you loose in the end. Be smart and buy the best card for your money.


True that. I went ATi and AMD for my first build back in the day, before the two joined forces. And for my next one I'm going Intel and nVidia. My allegiance lies with my wallet. Whatever gets me the best bang for my buck, within reason. I'd pick card from company A over company B if it was the same clock speeds, 30$ more but had a quieter cooler. That's more personal preference though.

[Shiggity]

My PC can't run crysis @ 1920X1050 over 40FPS and i can't play under 40FPS i had to tune down AA from 4X to 0 to play over 50fps
(a serious pc has an i7-965 @ 4.3ghz and quad sli setup with a different mobo and a monitor with like 2560x1600 resolution
so no i don't consider mine a serious one XD )

those are the stram processors, which are completely different from the cores and you can't simply increase them as you wish

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stream_processing

here you can see exactly what they are


from what i can see Larrabee is like a CPU optimized for graphic

http://www.brightsideofnews.com/news/2009/4/22/nvidias-gt300-specifications-revealed---its-a-cgpu!.aspx

GT300 architecture groups processing cores in sets of 32 - up from 24 in GT200 architecture. But the difference between the two is that GT300 parts ways with the SIMD architecture that dominate the GPU architecture of today. GT300 Cores rely on MIMD-similar functions [Multiple-Instruction Multiple Data (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MIMD)] - all the units work in MPMD mode, executing simple and complex shader and computing operations on-the-go. We're not exactly sure should we continue to use the word "shader processor" or "shader core" as these units are now almost on equal terms as FPUs inside latest AMD and Intel CPUs.

[Zantal]

so?

[Zantal]

Try this config:

http://shadowdane.shackspace.com/Crysis/GamerMax/index.html

I'm assuming you're running Enthusiast thinking it's the 'best quality'; it's actually more of a marketing ploy, unoptimized setting to make people think they need better hardware. The above gamer-max config runs at gamer speed with visuals like enthusiast. Not only fps tweaks but also lighting tweaks which makes it look even better than enthusiast in many areas of the game.

It should give you much higher fps without gimping visuals (on my rig I get 35 avg. fps with enthusiast, 50 avg. with the gamer-max config).

thanks gonna try it out now

(wasn't even running everything on enthusiast, some settings didn't change so much quality like shadows from gamer to enthusiast difference = 0)

[MadMan007]

You're basing how fast your PC is on Crysis? :-/

[MadMan007]

I just hope NV does a full range launch, or replaces a full generation of cards within a reasonable time. The sub-$150 (MSRP) segment is STILL made up of g92 derivatives. They really need to get a 3/4 or 1/2 die out for the new architecture rather to make it cost feasible than just disabling units in one chip.

One big thing Intel has going for them is a better inhouse fab process with more control over production. TSMC had problems with 40nm last I knew that's why there was no 40nm refresh this spring.

[Zurvan]

Intel is banking on the easy programmability of the x86 cores. The end product is looking like a huge die. Although its too early to comment, yet I am doubtful on Intel managing to match the GT300/RV870 with Larrabee.
It might get stronger as the dev support increases but I am not expecting any marvel at launch.

[Zantal]

You're basing how fast your PC is on Crysis? :-/

who doesn't?

[freeagent]

lol @ crysis.

dam that game.

[Mr.Guvernment]

6' 3" ?

na i am 185 cm x 90kg

AND I AM A NINJA!!!

Lol! You got me there on the ninja.
I am 190cm and 80kg :P

you guys are thin for your height! 192cm (6'4) 216lbs....97.9kg

who doesn't?

Anyone who realizes there are far better games out there :) i couldnt care less if Crysis plays good on my rig, i played it twice, finished it and moved on to much more fun games.

[Badbonji]

you guys are thin for your height! 192cm (6'4) 216lbs....97.9kg



Anyone who realizes there are far better games out there :) i couldnt care less if Crysis plays good on my rig, i played it twice, finished it and moved on to much more fun games.

Crysis is more of a "benchmark" for what future games are expecting to be like IMO.

I am too thin :( But I cycle to work now over the weeked and hope to get fitter over summer which will keep me off my pc and stop it overheating ; )

I just hope the GT300 will exceed my expectations!

[Zantal]

you guys are thin for your height! 192cm (6'4) 216lbs....97.9kg

Anyone who realizes there are far better games out there :) i couldnt care less if Crysis plays good on my rig, i played it twice, finished it and moved on to much more fun games.

Well you have never seen me, and i am not thin :p


And that's a matter of personal taste, i finished crysis and warhead of 6 times per game (atm i am at the 7th XD)
and i am a graphic maniac, the better the game looks the more i like it
some exceptions though, see WoW, NFS(yes once it was cool but now the graphics are old) and some RTS games.


Returning to post,

In my first words i said i would never buy a non Nvidia card.
of course if there would be a better performing one (by a huge margin) i would change my mind, but that won't happen =)
GT300 will pwn once again (maybe not so much this time) ATI and definitely larrabee.

why will it beat larrabee? it's kinda new technology and its in early stages of development. Even when the chip will be ready the architecture will need fine tuning for approx 1-2 years (drivers also) to really use all of its potentials.

Nvidia and ATI have been making adjustments on their chips for far more time
(i know little about this but i think that the general architecture of gpus hasn't changed much from series 7 to gt200)

I can't wait to buy 2 GT300 babies and i really hope that Nvidia will show intel where they should spend their money instead

cheers :beer:

[MadMan007]

I think you should apply your ability to see in to the future to something a little more useful :)

[xtkxhom3r]

wow i didnt even know there was a gt300 in the works... now that i have a x58 board i can try one out with out having to buy a new mobo for sli !!!

[Zantal]

i think people who have i7 platforms will be advantaged this time vs dual core systems.

i think performance will be the same if you have only 1 card, but with an sli of gt300 cards

i7 will have quite some work to do (i hope)

[Evilsizer]

i think people who have i7 platforms will be advantaged this time vs dual core systems.

i think performance will be the same if you have only 1 card, but with an sli of gt300 cards

i7 will have quite some work to do (i hope)

well even now i7 is ahead in sli setups but you need to running Quad or Tri SLI/CF setups to see it. i would think GT300 in two card (single GPU per card) sli would show to be stronger on i7. though i5 from the sounds of it will edge out i7 in certian reguards. since i5 had direct access to PCIE buss though each slot would be x8/x8 in sli/cf vs i7's x16/x16.

[Shiggity]

Bleh, we should have 100% scaling by now.

What's really going to **** me off is if Intel comes out with Larrabee and that scales near 100%, then in 6 months ATI and Nvidia cards do too.

[Zantal]

well even now i7 is ahead in sli setups but you need to running Quad or Tri SLI/CF setups to see it. i would think GT300 in two card (single GPU per card) sli would show to be stronger on i7. though i5 from the sounds of it will edge out i7 in certian reguards. since i5 had direct access to PCIE buss though each slot would be x8/x8 in sli/cf vs i7's x16/x16.

i7 will be better than i5 no matter what,

i5 doesn't have triple channel memory support, and doesn't have qpi
and ppl with i7 pcs won't trade those for a direct accesso to pcie
because
1) as you said it's 8x instead of 16x (and it makes a lot of difference)
2) if i am correct the socket is different from i7 versions this means gotta change mobo too
3) the mobos required won't be for gamers, they will be more accessible

so to summarize i5 is for low end pcs and i7 will still be for high end ones

(i hope i didn't say any bull****)

[Evilsizer]

i7 will be better than i5 no matter what,

i5 doesn't have triple channel memory support, and doesn't have qpi
and ppl with i7 pcs won't trade those for a direct accesso to pcie
because
1) as you said it's 8x instead of 16x (and it makes a lot of difference)
2) if i am correct the socket is different from i7 versions this means gotta change mobo too
3) the mobos required won't be for gamers, they will be more accessible

so to summarize i5 is for low end pcs and i7 will still be for high end ones

(i hope i didn't say any bull****)
your right but if i could have held out longer, i would have gone i5 for being cheaper. QPI is a connection for more then one cpu really, DMI that is going to be used on i5. isnt that bad compared to QPI, even though the connection speeds are different. as noted by reviewers that did QPI speed testing 4.8 was all the cpu needed even oced. you know what i need to start a thread with links to things i have read. cause 75% of the time i cant find the same reviews/articles agian, LOL.

[Zantal]

i tend to believe ppl even with no proof sometimes.

you may find also some reviews where the i5 beats the i7 in Pi calculations.

i5 does not have HT so he takes advantage of that, just wait for the real benchmarks and you will see =)

HT does great job with multithreaded apps, and this is the path that programmers are choosing

[Evilsizer]

i tend to believe ppl even with no proof sometimes.

you may find also some reviews where the i5 beats the i7 in Pi calculations.

i5 does not have HT so he takes advantage of that, just wait for the real benchmarks and you will see =)

HT does great job with multithreaded apps, and this is the path that programmers are choosing

well i normally remember what i read pretty well but things to slip sometimes. im not up on some of the stuff like i use to be. while HT is good it depends on the app. since i started thinking about it after reading a post either at the FAH forums or the rosetta forums. since it is for simulations, you have to wonder how much it is effecting the performance of it when you have two projects/WU's sharing the same space. by that i mean the L1/L2 cache and there isnt much of it like with core 2. as clearly by Adak's LV LGA771 server with two 2.5ghz cpus. he is pulling a RAC of 3789 vs my current at 3176, with my cpu at clocks in sig using HT. then that started to make me think that apps like this really love L2, which i7 lacks. i can only hope that L2 can grow at least to 512kb. while im not a EE, i think for those two apps im refering to above it would help out when using HT.

My i7 920@3.4ghz w/HT RAC
http://boinc.bakerlab.org/rosetta/show_host_detail.php?hostid=1036882
Adak's LGA771 LV-2.5ghz xeons RAC
http://boinc.bakerlab.org/rosetta/show_host_detail.php?hostid=1045442

[Shiggity]

Do they sell a 2 socket 1366 board with 48 PCI-E lanes yet? ;)

[Evilsizer]

Do they sell a 2 socket 1366 board with 48 PCI-E lanes yet? ;)

not with 48 pcie lanes but you can find dual socket ATX server boards at newegg atm.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813131378 (wondering if it might have ocing options in the bios) :burn:

list of dual lga1366
http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&N=2010200302%201071346469&name=Dual%20LGA%201366

[MadMan007]

Hah I like how the cheapest dual sockets are priced similarly to 'enthusiast' LGA1336 boards. Of course they go up quickly from there...

[Shiggity]

Turbo boost is going to make overclocking obsolete soon (any clocking that isn't super hard core anyways). I mean the 920 D0's could turbo mode to 4.0ghz and be fine, Intel just went really conservative with it because it was brand new.

Dynamic overclocking ftw

I want to be able to adjust the turbo mode settings though, someone figure that out ;)

Edit - Sorry I'm getting too offtopic here.

[Badbonji]

Turbo boost is going to make overclocking obsolete soon (any clocking that isn't super hard core anyways). I mean the 920 D0's could turbo mode to 4.0ghz and be fine, Intel just went really conservative with it because it was brand new.

Dynamic overclocking ftw

I want to be able to adjust the turbo mode settings though, someone figure that out ;)

Edit - Sorry I'm getting too offtopic here.

Also they want to make it look like their new series is much better, and would need to turbo more than 4Ghz, and would need to spend more on R&D as technology would probably move a bit faster.

[jason4207]

My PC can't run crysis @ 1920X1050 over 40FPS and i can't play under 40FPS i had to tune down AA from 4X to 0 to play over 50fps
(a serious pc has an i7-965 @ 4.3ghz and quad sli setup with a different mobo and a monitor with like 2560x1600 resolution
so no i don't consider mine a serious one XD )

those are the stram processors, which are completely different from the cores and you can't simply increase them as you wish

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stream_processing

here you can see exactly what they are


from what i can see Larrabee is like a CPU optimized for graphic

I would consider that to be an overkill PC, not a 'serious' PC. What you have is better than what 95%+ of the population owns and I would definitely call it serious.

Don't use AA in Crysis! It makes it look worse.

http://www.ocforums.com/showthread.php?t=539393

SP's are basically very simple cores. They are made for video processing, and so they don't need to be as multi-purpose as CPU cores. Most CPU tasks are difficult to code in a parallel manner while GPU tasks are parallel by nature. This is why adding more SP's increases GPU power, but adding cores to a CPU doesn't do anything unless the specific task can take advantage.

nVidia can increase the SP's (or 'cores') as they wish given temperature/power limitations and practical die yields.

G92 had 128 SP's, and GT200 has 240SP's. If you were to look at all 128 SP's as a single core then the GT200 would basically be a dual-core G92. But it isn't. It's a 240 simple-core chip.

http://images.anandtech.com/reviews/video/NVIDIA/GeForceGTX200/GT200fullblock.png

Look at the pic. Lots of tiny processors grouped together that can crunch through parallel tasks like a hot knife through butter. If you were to put 2 GT200's together on the same die, you'd just have more of the TPC sub-units...not 2 distinct cores. Besides, w/ 2 distinct cores you'd need 2 distinct memory banks. It's far more efficient to keep everything working together as 1 unit.


Edit: Rumors point to GT300 having 16 clusters of 32 shaders instead of the 10 clusters of 24 shaders that we currently have in GT200.

[Zantal]

i use AA 2x, just to smooth out the edges on the guns and some objects,

AA 2x has lesser performance impact, 4x looks much better but performance hit is noticeable, everything above 4x results in heave fps drop (this is what i have noticed so far)

btw to all crysis players with a 260 gtx, game runs very smooth on nearly everything set to enthusiast if you crack your memory frequency over 1215 MHz (i think it requires a lot of bandwidth)

I was running it with 2 gtx260 oc to 700 - 1400 - 1150 and the performance gain is huge when going for 1200 and above

btw this is off-topic now, but is fun to exchange thoughts anyway =)

keep it going


btw regarding SP i wasn't clear enough, by increasing the cluster number (not the actual sp number) should not result in similar scaling,
i think the shaders in that way are used less efficiently, but the architecture is not the one of the gt200 so we'll have to see how it turns out and see some real benches.

i think that the gt300 on the actual games won't result in a 100% performance gain as many web sites claim it will be

(edit: also what i think is that they make a gt200 with say 480 sp cores and same speeds won't have a 100% performance increase
but correct me if i am wrong)

(edit2: and regarding the overkill pc, someone who can afford that pc will have much more power than mine, my father uses my pc to do some heavy stuff that wouldn't go on his laptop, and it generally takes 10 hours to finish, with that one we could cut the time by approx 1-2 hours
which results in me having more time to do my stuff XD, it really depends on what you are going to do with it tbh)

[jason4207]

When you use AA in Crysis the built-in Edge_AA in the game doesn't work. Edge_AA makes the vegetation look smoother, and AA doesn't work on the vegetation. So, you are trading vegetation smoothness for gun smoothness...to each their own.


You are correct in that increasing the SP's or clusters has limited potential, but it is still better than trying to SLI 2 distinct dies or simply doubling what you see above onto a single die. Until they can get the SP's to do more work per cycle, the problem arises that you have more than an adequate number of SP's to process the parallel data stream, and adding more SP's just means more SP's get wasted. If you increase the resolution of the game you can use more SP's. So, the GT300 may be awesome for 2560x1600 gaming, but not many folks run that high.

If they can get the SP's (and ROPs) to run faster that will also help tremendously as it will benefit all resolutions.

This is why an 8800GTS-512 can do so well in 3DMark06 compared to GT200 cards. The higher clock speeds of the 8800 more than make up for the lack of SP's at the lower resolution (1280x1024) where all the extra SP's on the GT200 can't even be effectively used.


A GT200 w/ 480SP's probably wouldn't have a 100% increase over a normal GT200 at normal gaming resolutions, but it might at extremely high resolutions as long as the amount of vRAM is sufficient. It would certainly perform better than 2 normal GT200's in SLI, though.

[jason4207]

(edit2: and regarding the overkill pc, someone who can afford that pc will have much more power than mine, my father uses my pc to do some heavy stuff that wouldn't go on his laptop, and it generally takes 10 hours to finish, with that one we could cut the time by approx 1-2 hours
which results in me having more time to do my stuff XD, it really depends on what you are going to do with it tbh)

They wouldn't have proportionally more power based on the amount of money they spent, though. You'd spend 500% more money to get about 10% more performance.

Those extra GPU's will do nothing for his work (assuming it is CPU based), and will do very little for your gaming. They will give you more headaches, though.

IMO multi-GPUs are for folding (and similar) and benchmarking. All my games play fine at 1920x1200 on a single 280GTX. Adding another card just increases my power bill, and makes the PC room hotter and more uncomfortable.

[Zantal]

They wouldn't have proportionally more power based on the amount of money they spent, though. You'd spend 500% more money to get about 10% more performance.

Those extra GPU's will do nothing for his work (assuming it is CPU based), and will do very little for your gaming. They will give you more headaches, though.

IMO multi-GPUs are for folding (and similar) and benchmarking. All my games play fine at 1920x1200 on a single 280GTX. Adding another card just increases my power bill, and makes the PC room hotter and more uncomfortable.

that's the main problem, it depends on the use you will do for it.
be aware that i bought the i7-920 and overclocked it the same as the 965
although i bought it for the real 4 cores and the ht.
whoever goes for the 965 has money to spend on it and wants the top.
(if you can why not?)

you might play good your games with yout 280gtx but i would not with a single, since my fav games are really demanding (Age of Conan in dx10 and crysis)

now one question arises, will i use most of the gt300 playing at 1920*1050?
(bear in mind i want 2 of em :p cos there is friend competition on who's got the best rig and i never failed)

btw now i am off cya guys

and btw i like my room to be hot in winter. my father turns on the heat only when it's really cold so my room is pretty comfy =)