Two HD 7990s in quadfire is a very bad move, have a read of this review
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/radeon-hd-7990-crossfire-overheat,3539.html
By comparison 4 air cooled Titans are quite easy to keep cool in a decent PC case.
-
Competitor rules
Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.
AMD Talks Graphic Industry’s Trends – Radeon HD 7970 Still The King of $299 Price Segment
- Thread starter Boomstick777
- Start date
Two HD 7990s in quadfire is a very bad move, have a read of this review
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/radeon-hd-7990-crossfire-overheat,3539.html
By comparison 4 air cooled Titans are quite easy to keep cool in a decent PC case.
Read that a few days ago, regardless 4 gpu's generally speaking is a pointless move anyway. The scaling from 3-4 is normally insignificant (with the odd exception) and not worth the outlay. Still unsure why amd seems to have problems designing an effective and quiet fansink (as they call it) when NVidia seems to have nailed it a good while ago.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 30 Nov 2011
- Posts
- 11,523
scaling is poor in the reviews that websites do because they have standardised tests they run on a standardised test rig
kaap gets very good scaling on his 4 card vs my 3 card setup because he has tuned his system and setup to take advantage of 4 cards
kaap gets very good scaling on his 4 card vs my 3 card setup because he has tuned his system and setup to take advantage of 4 cards
In benchmarks maybe, there's been plenty of articles on 3 way vs 4 way setups over the years and invariably they come to the same conclusion, that 4 cards isn't worth the outlay over 3 as the 4th generally adds a very small performance percentage.
I'm just waiting for 7950s to hit <£160, pretty sure crossfired would last me ages
I have said it a few times, but if AMD were to drop a HD7950X2 right now it would really put a hurting on Nvidia (though obviously it could hurt 7990 sales too).
The smart thing for AMD to do would be to sell the 7990 at the price a HD7950X2 would sell for.
From a manufacturing point of view it probably would cost AMD about the same to produce either option.
Associate
- Joined
- 2 Apr 2011
- Posts
- 1,205
Presumably because you were curious and interested in trying it out and not because its miles better and less expensive and an old card rehashed. Oh wait..........
Haha you got me!
- Joined
- 2 Jan 2012
- Posts
- 12,415
- Location
- UK.
I'm not really sure what your point is.. You just can't compare a single GPU to a dual GPU, totally different experience one being way more driver dependent and prone to issues than the other.
AMD need a new card to compete with the 780 / Titan. It's good for everyone keeps prices competitive, strapping two 7970's together and charging way more than the prices of those cards individually isn't enough..
As I said, tell that to every review site that does it, they clearly DO feel that you can compare them, one vendor does a "monolithic" gpu for its high end, the other doesn't. You might want to read up on the 2900xt and what happened behind the scenes with the 4000 series, that basically prompted amd's high end boards to be dual gpu variations. I can't recall if it was anandtech or not but there was a behind the scenes article done on what happened at ati after the 2900xt flopped.
I owned two of those 2900xt's, they were terrible, but hey they had a 512bit bus.
In some games they did pretty well, others not so well. I ran crossfire with 2 1 gig versions and it was a weird experience to say the least. I remember playing dod source and if you looked in certain areas the frame rates would drop to single card numbers and other times it was dual gpu numbers, also accompanied by the sound of the fan spinning up and down to corroborate that one gpu was clocking itself down.
Didn't keep them for too long though.
Associate
- Joined
- 5 Nov 2005
- Posts
- 2,242
I owned two of those 2900xt's, they were terrible, but hey they had a 512bit bus.
I was also part of that epic fail....
No, it's not. If they both provided identical experiences they would be, but they don't. That simple really.
Toddle off and tell that to all the review sites that compare them then if that's the case. And you'd also be as well telling that to people on forums who compare them as well. Its the 2 fastest cards from either camp and at the minute AMD has the faster card, and as far as I'm concerned that's really all there is to it.
Last edited:
It doesn't stop people comparing AMD's CPUs to Intel's regardless of cores.
How about you stop making excuses and quit being an apologist?
They are comparable and it's a fact, the fact that you don't like that they are comparable is another matter completely.
How am I being an apologist? I am merely stating just because you CAN compare something does not mean you should.
Multi-GPU has inherent issues for the pure fact it IS a Multi-GPU solution. If there were no issues then single GPU cards would not exist any more, they would just many chuck smaller, cheaper GPUs onto one board rather than one single expensive powerful GPU.
I quite frankly could not care less what review sites think/review/compare. This is not a question of what is the absolute fastest card irrespective of anything else. It's about making valid comparisons across the entire inventory of a brands products. I cannot remember the last time a review site reviewed a new SINGLE GPU card and at the end concluded it would be better to invest in two slower cards in a Multi-GPu configuration. They may point to the fact for the price of the single GPU beast you _COULD_ have 2 lesser cards but that is all it is, it is not a direct comparison and it is most certainly not "This single GPU solution is pointless, get this Multi-GPU solution instead".
There quite clearly is a very big distinction between Single GPU and Multi-GPU products. How you chose to interpret that yourself is irrelevant, anyone who wants to treat Multi-GPU as Single GPU products is just simply being obstructive for the sake of argument.
As for the CPU argument...don't be ridiculous. You can compare AMD to Intel because if you sat down at the desktop and used both you would never ever be able to tell. Load an app on intel...same as AMD. Multi-GPU solutions have issues, they are being ironed out, slowly, but anyone who denies Multi-GPU has game/driver specific problems is kidding themselves.
Multi-GPU has inherent issues for the pure fact it IS a Multi-GPU solution. If there were no issues then single GPU cards would not exist any more, they would just many chuck smaller, cheaper GPUs onto one board rather than one single expensive powerful GPU.
I quite frankly could not care less what review sites think/review/compare. This is not a question of what is the absolute fastest card irrespective of anything else. It's about making valid comparisons across the entire inventory of a brands products. I cannot remember the last time a review site reviewed a new SINGLE GPU card and at the end concluded it would be better to invest in two slower cards in a Multi-GPu configuration. They may point to the fact for the price of the single GPU beast you _COULD_ have 2 lesser cards but that is all it is, it is not a direct comparison and it is most certainly not "This single GPU solution is pointless, get this Multi-GPU solution instead".
There quite clearly is a very big distinction between Single GPU and Multi-GPU products. How you chose to interpret that yourself is irrelevant, anyone who wants to treat Multi-GPU as Single GPU products is just simply being obstructive for the sake of argument.
As for the CPU argument...don't be ridiculous. You can compare AMD to Intel because if you sat down at the desktop and used both you would never ever be able to tell. Load an app on intel...same as AMD. Multi-GPU solutions have issues, they are being ironed out, slowly, but anyone who denies Multi-GPU has game/driver specific problems is kidding themselves.
Last edited:
And single gpu cards can also have problems with driver related performance, crashes, glitches etc same as multi gpu. The only real inherent multi gpu specific bug that comes to mind is micro stutter and that seems to be going the way of the dodo for amd come the end of July. I've ran 3 gpu's for well over a year and can count on one hand the amount of issues I've had, an issue with rage that affected most amd cards and 1 with battlefield 3 performance. Ever since the introduction of caps any real issues usually get sorted in a decent time frame. From what i've seen people really do a good job of going totally over the top blabbing on about multi gpu being ropey, oddly enough in practice for me at least its been fine.
Last edited:
That would effect Single and Multi configs equally, so it's somewhat of a moot point.
Multi-GPU issues would never affect Single GPU solutions.
And yes, I agree that Multi-GPU issues are slowly being ironed out. But as it stands Single/Multi GPU configurations cannot be treated 100% equally.
Trust me, I hope one day they can be because I really like the idea of Multi-GPU in my next build.