Wednesday, February 7th 2007

R600 will support quad-GPU CrossFire

AMD (ATI) has been working on the quad-GPU problem ever since NVIDIA released their 7900GX2. AMD has officially solved it, with their wonder-GPU, the R600. The R600, with it's high clocks and GDDR4, will support quad-GPU CrossFire. Of course, the requirements for this will be substantial to say the least. Getting a motherboard with four PCI Express ports, and a power supply that will run four high-performance graphics cards like the R600, will cost a lot of money.Source: The Inquirer
Add your own comment

37 Comments on R600 will support quad-GPU CrossFire

#1
BXtreme
ya, :cry: i'll just get 1 of these...
Posted on Reply
#2
EviLZeD
wowa just imagine the cost it wont be so pretty :
Posted on Reply
#3
Protius
That'll be a heck alot of power and money, I think i'll just stick to 1
Posted on Reply
#4
W1zzard
hehe all ati chips support quad crossfire... its a driver thing .. and right now the quad driver sucks
Posted on Reply
#5
BXtreme
but, even if the driver goes gd (which will take a looong time), ppl ain't buyin 4 of these, atleast who are sane ;)
Posted on Reply
#6
C.Ash
by: W1zzard
hehe all ati chips support quad crossfire... its a driver thing .. and right now the quad driver sucks
Yes, of course. Every piece of hardware has the potential to support anything. The drivers are always the issue.
Posted on Reply
#7
Fleekar
Dayum Think of the Weight and Heat of those 4 monsters. Are they still marked for 12 inches long? :twitch:
Posted on Reply
#8
C.Ash
A few points:

- You would need a motherboard with at least four PCIe x8 slots, wich dosent exsist.
- You can just buy an Addon PSU wich costs 50$ and can run a single R600. The Main PSU only has to have around 24A to run the rest of the PC without the card(s).
- The CPU is what is really the problem with this - hardware wise. Its not that there arent enough cores, but that while the R600 drivers will support Quad-Xfire for ALL games ( because they are specifically designed for every game), only one Core on the CPU will be used for gaming. Alan Wake May be an exception.
- Drivers. Quad-SLi for nVidia performs worse than Standard SLi, wheras anyone who bought two 7950 GX2 and thought they would recieve a performance boost from Quad-SLi was dead wrong because nVidia never remmembered to create drivers to support Quad-SLi. Very eratating. I wonder why no class action law suits havent been filed against nVidia for this one..

So, while it may be possible to link up four R600's in Quad-Xfire, it is likely the drivers will only be good enough for two. That means that there is not much reason to buy a Quad-PCIe x16 motherboard, unless u have faith that support for Quad GPU on 4 slots will be well supported some day.
Posted on Reply
#9
DaMulta
My stars went supernova
ATi has been doing this for ever in Flight Sims/ where crossfire comes from.

I see this as more as a marketing thing AMD says "Look at me I have the highest 3dmark06 score"
Posted on Reply
#10
Lazzer408
by: zekrahminator
AMD (ATI) has been working on the quad-GPU problem ever since NVIDIA released their 7900GX2. AMD has officially solved it, with their wonder-GPU, the R600. The R600, with it's high clocks and GDDR4, will support quad-GPU CrossFire. Of course, the requirements for this will be substantial to say the least. Getting a motherboard with four PCI Express ports, and a power supply that will run four high-performance graphics cards like the R600, will cost a lot of money.

Source: The Inquirer
ATI is still ATI it is -NOT- "AMD Graphics" it is "ATI graphics" and will remain that way even though it is owned by AMD. It is the ATI r600 not the AMD r600. ATI is working on there graphics division and AMD works the CPUs. Someday there might be a joint effort in the development of something but please... Don't give AMD credit for anything from ATI... YET! :) I don't know why I'm just bothered by that. I guess AMD polluting the ATI name bothers me. lol :)
Posted on Reply
#11
WarEagleAU
Bird of Prey
This is kind of cool. Looks like they are justifying the 2KW psus....man, I hate to have that electric bill. Honestly though, if I Could afford it, Id build one of these just to see.
Posted on Reply
#12
DRDNA
by: WarEagleAU
This is kind of cool. Looks like they are justifying the 2KW psus....man, I hate to have that electric bill. Honestly though, if I Could afford it, Id build one of these just to see.
ME Too !!!! And I will even if I cant afford it:toast:
Posted on Reply
#13
tigger
I'm the only one
aye,buy 4 of them and in two months they release a better card:laugh:
Posted on Reply
#14
DRDNA
by: tigger69
aye,buy 4 of them and in two months they release a better card:laugh:
lol, same ole same ole
Posted on Reply
#15
i_am_mustang_man
i would rather have a full tower case with 4 of those 250w front bay psus, one per gpu
that way if one psu blows, it only takes one component with it ;)
lots of wires, but i bet they could be routed on the non space side of the case (generally the right side)
lol, can you imagine having an outlet for your monitor, printer, main psu, psu1, psu2, psu3, psu4, speakers? that's eight, and i would really want separate circuits on the top and bottom plug so i could have one surge for just gpus, and aother surge for the usual

safest option imo
Posted on Reply
#16
newtekie1
Semi-Retired Folder
This is insane and pointless. The benefits of having two graphics cards are still being debated, 4 is just ridiculous.
Posted on Reply
#17
Lazzer408
by: newtekie1
This is insane and pointless. The benefits of having two graphics cards are still being debated, 4 is just ridiculous.
Crossfire works great. Benifits? Hows 9500 (one card) to 17,200 (crossfire) in 3dmark05 ? :rockout: You WILL need an ubberfast qx6800 to benifit from "quadfire" (c)Lazzer408 :)
Posted on Reply
#18
Namslas90
by: newtekie1
This is insane and pointless. The benefits of having two graphics cards are still being debated, 4 is just ridiculous.
No debate on two cards. Waste of money for 4 cards. SLI/Crossfire is the wave of the future for hi-def graphics and gaming.
Posted on Reply
#19
newtekie1
Semi-Retired Folder
by: Lazzer408
Crossfire works great. Benifits? Hows 9500 (one card) to 17,200 (crossfire) in 3dmark05 ? :rockout: You WILL need an ubberfast qx6800 to benifit from "quadfire" (c)Lazzer408 :)
Raising the score in a benchmark is one thing, actually seeing benefits in gameplay is another.
Posted on Reply
#20
Lazzer408
by: newtekie1
Raising the score in a benchmark is one thing, actually seeing benefits in gameplay is another.
:rolleyes: HL2 250fps increased to 400fps... FEAR 40fps increased to 69fps... Quake 3 (as a joke) went from 380fps to 729fps lol Dont dis the crossfire. :rockout:
Posted on Reply
#21
KennyT772
well dont look at it in respect to the r600 itself. it is talking about the r600 series. meaning we very well could see dual graphics cores per pcb and run crossfire between them. quad-crossfire as you mention it is physically impossible as there are only 7 expansion slots in the atx spec and 4 r600 gpus would require at least 8 slots for the cards and coolers. ati seems to be going towards parallel processing just as amd is with cpus. dont expect quad r600's. expect crossfire on dual gpu r610s and r630's
Posted on Reply
#22
Lazzer408
My point was crossfire works quite well and hell... we can dream cant we? :) Multiple GPUs was what 3dfx had figured out with the original voodoo processor. You could literally add a second chip and get 100% improvement. Add 2 more and it doubles again. I wonder why Nvidia didn't work that into there GPUs since they aquired 3dfx. I bet 3dfx would be PWN these days. Some of there older stuff to this day can run Doom3. Anyways what was this thread about? Oh yeh the r600 supporting quad gpu crossfire. Does that mean 2 cards, sporting 2 GPUs each, can be connected in crossfire? Is that what "quad crossfire" is? -cool- :rockout:
Posted on Reply
#23
anticlutch
by: russianboy
I really don't see the point. You can't see more than 60fps so why the hell would you want 400? TV's run on 24/25 fps. Its more than enough.
Probably for bragging rights....


I'd rather have them make dual core GPU's (much like how both AMD and Intel are making their processors). It would save everyone a lot of money and a lot of space... if not, people will have to start making use of external cases like Asus's just for graphics cards and their PSU(s).
Posted on Reply
#24
Wile E
Power User
by: russianboy
I really don't see the point. You can't see more than 60fps so why the hell would you want 400? TV's run on 24/25 fps. Its more than enough.
I partially agree with the 60fps statement, but it all depends on the individual. Some people can see the difference up to 80fps, but they are a rare breed. I disagree with your statement about 24/25fps being enough, however. 24/25fps looks like garbage with pc games. The only reason it looks good with tv or movies is because they use motion blur effects to make it look much smoother than it really is. They essentially trick your brain into believing it's seeing a higher framerate.
Posted on Reply
#25
ex_reven
by: Wile E
I partially agree with the 60fps statement, but it all depends on the individual. Some people can see the difference up to 80fps, but they are a rare breed. I disagree with your statement about 24/25fps being enough, however. 24/25fps looks like garbage with pc games. The only reason it looks good with tv or movies is because they use motion blur effects to make it look much smoother than it really is. They essentially trick your brain into believing it's seeing a higher framerate.
What about the fact that you could use the extra processing power for rendering environments etc? When I used the SDK for Counter Strike Source my X800 was nowhere near up to it....lag to the max man...

And thats true about the motion blurring, you cant compare tv shows to computer games
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment