Problem w/ 4890s in Crossfire

[BlueSkys]

Ok so I replaced my old gpu with a 4890, then a week later added another in crossfire. I didn't see any difference in fps in games so I started to wonder...

I'm playing at my monitors native resolution of 1920X1200 (except for 3DMark, which stays at 1280X1025)

Here's where I'm at right now, and Sooooo confused. I tried each 4890 separately and then together in crossfire, with the bridge in place and Crossfire enabled under catalyst, and here's what I've got...

3Mark06: Each individually scored 16012 exactly and together scored 18250, even though I'm watching the frame rates during the benchmarking and they are EXACTLY the same as they were individually.

World in conflict benchmark (Very High): Again, individually and separate they are getting an average of 36 frames per second. One of the singles actually got a 38 average. High and low fps are the same as well (variation of 1 or 2 fps.)

Crysis Warhead: Again the same... together or separate I'll play through the same part and watch the fps be virtually identical.

And why is it that when they test the 4890 for instance here... http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/ATI/HD_4890_CrossFire/19.html it shows at LEAST 20fps increase among all resolutions in World in Conflict?

And why is it that on their test rig, which isn't so far off of mine, it gets 41fps increased to 78 in World in Conflict and I get 36 increased to well... 36.

It shows in GPUZ at the bottom under ATI Crossfire: Enabled (2GPUs)(Unsure on Vista64) Now I'm watching rivatuners low level hardware monitoring and when in crossfire, both graphs showing GPU usage fluctuate in the same manner although very slight differences which would indicate that in crossfire they are both working and working somewhat independantly. This in conjunction with the consistent though small bump in the 3DMark06 score would indicate that the crossfire is working, but NO INCREASE IN FRAMERATES ANYWHERE would indicate otherwise... and make me want to shoot myself in the face.

Please help!!! thx

My rig:
Cpu:Intel Q6600 oc'd to 3.3 ghz
GPU: 2 X XFX Radeon HD 4890 in Crossfire
OS: Vista 64
Mobo: MSI P45 Platinum
RAM: 4gb OCZ 800mhz
Power: Antec Truepower Quattro 850w

[Xazax]

Q6600 is holding you back abit there i would say hence the minor difference in 3dmark 06 which is heavily CPU bound, also the two games you mention, tend to hate ATI cards(Crossfire doesnt scale well either) and favor Nvidia more, in games like H.A.W.K.S Those HDF4890's would be producing some sweet FPS

[DaMulta]

Q6600 VS Intel Core i7 920 = 920 stomps the shit out of it.

You in what they say bottle neck. Your better using your 2ed card as a Eye-candy card most of the time.

Open up CCC and turn AA all the way up, if you have already done this then that's why you are not seeing a increase at all. Turning it all the way up uses one card for more Eye-Candy! Which is what ATi calls Super AA

[DaMulta]

Also install this little hot fix from Microsoft
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/936710

[BlueSkys]

It says the update does not apply in my system... my 3.3ghz Q6600 is really bottlenecking these cards?? And at 3.8 in the review they get a 30fps increase while I maybe get a negligible few??

[BlueSkys]

And I swear to god, I just ran the benchmark for hawks and with 1 card, high: 184, avg: 59

With 2 cards, crossfire enabled, high:134, avg: 59

???

[FelipeV]

Not only your clock is holding you back, but you will need more bandwidth, just overclocking your CPU to a higher clock wont do much of a help, you will need fsb at least higher then 470 to increase your bandwidth.

As you can see here
http://img90.imageshack.us/img90/2678/overclock.jpg
Increasing CPU Clock didnt help that much.

Crysis and WH, both love bandwidth and clock for MGPU setups, I and a friend was looking at this last week comparing his GTX 295 with my 4870X2, any clock and bandwidth is always wlecome.

You need bandwidth, after that you can use clock to get more fps.

A i7 setup offers good bandwidht compared to a Core 2 setup, probably a sotck i7 can do the same as a overclocked Core 2 in terms of bandwidth.

Another example of how MGPU setups are affected by overclock and increase in bandwidth and clock speeds. Its not a CF, but the effect its the same.

http://img134.imageshack.us/img134/2248/crysisislandhighcputest.jpg
http://img134.imageshack.us/img134/7056/crysisislandveryhighcpu.jpg

[3870x2]

Q6600 is holding you back abit there i would say hence the minor difference in 3dmark 06 which is heavily CPU bound, also the two games you mention, tend to hate ATI cards(Crossfire doesnt scale well either) and favor Nvidia more, in games like H.A.W.K.S Those HDF4890's would be producing some sweet FPS

It is well known that quads do great with xfire, and Q6600 OCed to 3.3 is a very good processor, the 6600 holds its own just fine when OCed 1.1ghz:rockout:
It has to be something else. The only thing I can think of is immature drivers. Check your setup against other reviews, google 4890 xfire.

Just to clarify, a better CPU is always a great option, but this isnt a "bottleneck", it is CPU scaling.

[TRIPTEX_CAN]

@ 1920 his CPU bottleneck with that q6600 should be negligible. Crossfire Warhead scales really well in my experiences.

@ OP. Completely remove all your drivers and related software and reinstall the latest ATI catalyst driver for your system. Make sure CAtalyst AI is not set to "Disabled" in CCC and you should actually set it to "Advanced" when playing Crysis Warhead.

You should get more of a boost than you are. ESPECIALLY @ 1900x1200 your CPU is not the issue.

Read this also. --> http://forums.techpowerup.com/showthread.php?t=51219

[BlueSkys]

It is well known that quads do great with xfire, and Q6600 OCed to 3.3 is a very good processor, the 6600 holds its own just fine when OCed 1.1ghz:rockout:
It has to be something else. The only thing I can think of is immature drivers. Check your setup against other reviews, google 4890 xfire.

Just to clarify, a better CPU is always a great option, but this isnt a "bottleneck", it is CPU scaling.

I'm totally comparing my gains to the techpowerup review I linked above... where they gain like 30 fps in world in conflict.

@ 1920 his CPU bottleneck with that q6600 should be negligible. Crossfire Warhead scales really well in my experiences.

@ OP. Completely remove all your drivers and related software and reinstall the latest ATI catalyst driver for your system. Make sure CAtalyst AI is not set to "Disabled" in CCC and you should actually set it to "Advanced" when playing Crysis Warhead.

You should get more of a boost than you are. ESPECIALLY @ 1900x1200 your CPU is not the issue.

Read this also. --> http://forums.techpowerup.com/showthread.php?t=51219

And I saw this earlier and followed the steps exactly to see if it helped... and no gains :(

[TRIPTEX_CAN]

What was the "old GPU" you replaced with the 4890?

You might want to try a registry sweet to remove residuals form the old drivers.

If that doesnt work... Reinstall Windows.

[BlueSkys]

An 8800GTS 512 (G92)

[mastrdrver]

So what cat drivers are you running?

Are you running 2 bridges or 1?

I've seen reports where people have said that they see limitations at higher resolutions with just 1 bridge compared to 2. I can't comment though as I've never had a physical 2 card setup.

[BlueSkys]

Running Catalyst 9.4 and driver version 8.60

Tried w/ 1 or 2 bridges...

Just ran a crysis benchmark program that actually showed me a near 100% increase in framerates... in the benchmark it went from an avg of 16 with Xfire disabled to an average of 30.

Tried the exact same thing with the Hawx and World in conflict benchmark programs, and again the Xfire showed NO increase in fps. Maybe I screwed something up when looking at crysis before.

I can't imagine this is right... but I'm really starting to think that it's completely hit or miss with crossfire whether or not it helps. I don't understand why in the reviews they get increases across the board, but I'm not seeing any possible problems on my end.

At this point, I would certainly advise against paying for 2 cards...

[TRIPTEX_CAN]

When you have your system setup right Crossfire works really well. I dont think I would say hit or miss as I see high % gains more often then not but there are issues that arise when you install Crossfire over old Nvidia drivers.

[iandh]

This isn't just bottleneck, there is definitely a software or hardware issue in your system... I ran 4870 CF on a Q6600 and saw a HUGE difference.

[BlueSkys]

I reinstalled windows completely when I switched my mobo and added the first 4890... then reinstalled the drivers when I added the second as instructed by the optimization thread posted above.

So confused...

[DaMulta]

Can you give us CCC Screen shots with GPU-Z Screen shots?

You can host pics here
www.techpowerup.org

Just hit print screen, open paint, ctrl-v, save as and go to that link.

[purecain]

i'd reinstall windows....

going from green to red always causes problems....good luck with it...

[BlueSkys]

i'd reinstall windows....

going from green to red always causes problems....good luck with it...

I did.

[thraxed]

You don't really have a problem, just a crappy motherboard. P45 boards, when in crossfire use 8x on each slot, so 2 cards in crossfire the equivalent too 1 card @ 16x, atleast on MSI motherboards. This is why you don't see a gain. For the test setup, it runs two slots at 16x in crossfire. So its actually doubling the pci bandwidth when two cards are in use. Your system robs half of the bandwith from the first slot so ya can use crossfire.

[BlueSkys]

Can you give us CCC Screen shots with GPU-Z Screen shots?

You can host pics here
www.techpowerup.org

Just hit print screen, open paint, ctrl-v, save as and go to that link.

Here ya go

http://img.techpowerup.org/090501/1168.jpg
http://img.techpowerup.org/090501/2824.jpg
http://img.techpowerup.org/090501/3.jpg
http://img.techpowerup.org/090501/4.jpg

[BlueSkys]

You don't really have a problem, just a crappy motherboard. P45 boards, when in crossfire use 8x on each slot, so 2 cards in crossfire the equivalent too 1 card @ 16x, atleast on MSI motherboards. This is why you don't see a gain. For the test setup, it runs two slots at 16x in crossfire. So its actually doubling the pci bandwidth when two cards are in use. Your system robs half of the bandwith from the first slot so ya can use crossfire.

This is the case with the MSI P45 Platinum, but I've read that running with 2 cards in x8 doesn't rob bandwidth and should be fine for running xfire...

Can I get someone else to verify this?

[TRIPTEX_CAN]

This is the case with the MSI P45 Platinum, but I've read that running with 2 cards in x8 doesn't rob bandwidth and should be fine for running xfire...

Can I get someone else to verify this?

From all the tests I've seen the loss of bandwidth between x8 and x16 isnt really noticeable until you hit 2560x1600 and at the the difference can be close to 15% or more depending on the game. Although @ 1900x1200 there is still a loss. With that said even accounting for the x8 "limitation" crossfire gains should be more than noticeable in almost ever D3D application.

http://www.tweaktown.com/articles/1472/intel_p45_vs_x48_crossfire_performance/index.html

[grunt_408]

well you have pcie2 so when they go to 8x they still work well. when i had my 4850's in crossfire they got around 17k in 3d mark 06

[thraxed]

The P45 Platinum comes with two PCI Express x16 Generation 2.0 slots which support ATI’s Crossfire multi-GPU platform. When two cards are installed the chipset splits the x16 into two x8 lanes. Single graphics cards installations should be placed in the dark blue slot, as cards installed in the light blue slot gives x8 mode.


Source: motherboards.org

Would be true on other motherboards, but again there doubling the bandwith when at 8x(usually 16x + 8 x), your board splits it.

[BlueSkys]

From all the tests I've seen the loss of bandwidth between x8 and x16 isnt really noticeable until you hit 2560x1600 and at the the difference can be close to 15% or more depending on the game. Although @ 1900x1200 there is still a loss. With that said even accounting for the x8 "limitation" crossfire gains should be more than noticeable in almost ever D3D application.

http://www.tweaktown.com/articles/1472/intel_p45_vs_x48_crossfire_performance/index.html

Yeah, and here they are using 2 4850s!! and they are getting an average of 61fps while I am getting an average of 59fps with 2 4890s! (and with only 1 4890 btw)

here: http://www.tweaktown.com/articles/1472/intel_p45_vs_x48_crossfire_performance/index6.html

[dccmadams]

This is the solution to your problem. You need to uninstall the ati drivers, make sure both cards are installed, then install drivers. It doesnt work right when you have the drivers installed with 1 card, then add another later.

[mastrdrver]

From all the tests I've seen the loss of bandwidth between x8 and x16 isnt really noticeable until you hit 2560x1600 and at the the difference can be close to 15% or more depending on the game. Although @ 1900x1200 there is still a loss. With that said even accounting for the x8 "limitation" crossfire gains should be more than noticeable in almost ever D3D application.

http://www.tweaktown.com/articles/1472/intel_p45_vs_x48_crossfire_performance/index.html

That article needs to be banished to the nether regions of the internet. They are the only ones to show any difference between 8x and 16x crossfire on pci-e 2.0 slots. Even my own experience going from a pci-e 16x 1.1 to 2.0 board shows no noticeable difference in real world game play. This is with a 4870x2.

So let this myth die: PCI-e 2.0 8x crossfire does not bandwidth limit any current ATI single and/or multi gpu single card solutions to a noticeable effect.

[Polarman]

From what i've read, World in Confict is one of those games that does NOT scale with Crossfire.

[dccmadams]

see my post above for solution.

[mastrdrver]

If you want something that will definately tell you if your scaling at all is the Devil May Cry 4 benchmark. With AI disabled and on one gpu, I can turn 70-100 avg on DX9. With AI enabled and on advance, I get at least 50% scaling. With my Q9400 at 3.2Ghz, I'm way over 200fps average with all in benchmark settings at max at 1920x1200.

[Drizzt5]

What was the "old GPU" you replaced with the 4890?

You might want to try a registry sweet to remove residuals form the old drivers.

If that doesnt work... Reinstall Windows.

An 8800GTS 512 (G92)

Are you sure you reformatted? lol... it sounds like a bad driver installation to me.

[BlueSkys]

I completely reinstalled windows when I got the first 4890, at that point i did a fresh install of catalyst and the drivers. When I purchased the 2nd 4890, I uninstalled all ati programs on my computer and once again installed the drivers with both cards installed.

[BlueSkys]

From what i've read, World in Confict is one of those games that does NOT scale with Crossfire.

In every crossfire review I've read they show significant gains in fps over a single card (including world in conflict)...

For instance here (check the world in conflict section): http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/ATI/HD_4890_CrossFire/19.html

[Drizzt5]

That is really weird... A q6600 at 3.6ghz with a single 4890 scores better in 3dmark06, same with 2x4850's with a q6600 @ 3.6.

[erocker]

Follow this please:
After CrossFiring several cards this has never failed me.

http://forums.techpowerup.com/showthread.php?t=52502

[SonDa5]

My analysis.

1. Your temps are probably on fire and slowing down performance.
2. For extreme bandwidth try a solid 4 ghz OC on the CPU with your crossfire. I'm sure your 3dMark06 scores will sky rocket.
3. Invest some money in decent cooling CPU and GPUs.

[grunt_408]

I have found this is the best way to get crossfire working well good old spankenstiens sticky
http://forums.techpowerup.com/showthread.php?t=51219

[random]

Ehr dude, my cpu was on 3.4ghz and 4850 crossfire and I got 21k in 3dmark06. Your setup getting only 16-18k doesn't seem like a bottleneck at all, it looks more like a crossfire problem and that score seems fairly similar to one 4890 running on its own.

Reinstall, try each card if they work. Don't forget as well that Crossfire for 4x00 series is PlugAndPlay. So just take out the second card leave one in reinstall drivers (9.4) and put the second card back in.

[Drizzt5]

Ehr dude, my cpu was on 3.4ghz and 4850 crossfire and I got 21k in 3dmark06. Your setup getting only 16-18k doesn't seem like a bottleneck at all, it looks more like a crossfire problem and that score seems fairly similar to one 4890 running on its own.

Reinstall, try each card if they work. Don't forget as well that Crossfire for 4x00 series is PlugAndPlay. So just take out the second card leave one in reinstall drivers (9.4) and put the second card back in.

I don't believe that... My 4850's are overclocked pretty decent and I have my cpu at 3.825ghz and I just got 20,305. I hit 21,111 exactly when I had my cpu at 4ghz.


But still, he should be getting higher.

[SonDa5]

I don't believe that... My 4850's are overclocked pretty decent and I have my cpu at 3.825ghz and I just got 20,305. I hit 21,111 exactly when I had my cpu at 4ghz.


Maby he has crazy HD4850 skills. I think his score is possible with the cpu clock he posted.

[random]

I don't believe that... My 4850's are overclocked pretty decent and I have my cpu at 3.825ghz and I just got 20,305. I hit 21,111 exactly when I had my cpu at 4ghz.


But still, he should be getting higher.

Well I don't know I only used it once back then when I was searching for benchmarking programs, vantage came later and became my main benching prog. But I know what I saw, it was definitely around 20-21k (Does the slight difference REALLY need to be mentioned to matter in this conversation?) and either way its still higher than his 4890 crossfire setup which is weird because those results show similar to a single 4890 setup.

[Drizzt5]

Well I don't know I only used it once back then when I was searching for benchmarking programs, vantage came later and became my main benching prog. But I know what I saw, it was definitely around 20-21k (Does the slight difference REALLY need to be mentioned to matter in this conversation?) and either way its still higher than his 4890 crossfire setup which is weird because those results show similar to a single 4890 setup.

With 3.4ghz on your q6600 I don't think that is the score you got. I am just basing it off of the results I've seen myself and from others.
It matters a little bit because it might make his score look worse then it is.
Besides 3dmark06 is a really bad comparison for gpu's when the different gpu's are paired with cpu's with different clock speeds. Forget about it.

[JrRacinFan]

Give us a Vantage run with single card and dual card.

Regarding the bridges; Only single bridge needed with resolutions up to 1900x1200. So test each bridge to make sure one isnt bad.

[BlueSkys]

Give us a Vantage run with single card and dual card.

Regarding the bridges; Only single bridge needed with resolutions up to 1900x1200. So test each bridge to make sure one isnt bad.

Crossfire: Overall-p14098 gpu-15282 cpu-11439

Single 4890: Overall-10374 gpu-9962 cpu-11843

So crossfire is working... I just don't understand why I'm not getting any boost in fps in these games, where in the reviews they are getting a 50-90% increase in framerates in the same games with similar systems.

[random]

Your not getting any boosts because of

a) Your CPU needs to be clocked at least at 3.6ghz to have no bottlenecks

b) Your monitor size? Need at least 1680x1050, 1920x1080 to see GPU boosts over CPU.

[SonDa5]

My run with a single HD4890.

20,332 3dMark06 benchamarks with a single HD4890.

http://minidriven.com/GreenMachine/HD4890203343dmark06.JPG

Also the HD4890 doesn't really seem to rely on CPU speed as much as the HD4850 to increase performance.

I'm going to crossfire a VisionTek HD4850 here in a few minutes if my Corsair TX650W is up for the task.

[BlueSkys]

Your not getting any boosts because of

a) Your CPU needs to be clocked at least at 3.6ghz to have no bottlenecks

b) Your monitor size? Need at least 1680x1050, 1920x1080 to see GPU boosts over CPU.

For your b) I am running in 1920x1200, but can someone tell me why I keep hearing this, because every single multi-gpu review in any magazine I've ever seen shows significant boosts across all resolutions? Granted the increase percentage gets higher with the higher resolutions but I've never seen actual reports of NO increase by adding another gpu even in lower res.

[SonDa5]

HD4890 doesn't seem to bottle neck with a slower CPU.

[Mussels]

you uhh, wouldnt happen to have Vsync enabled would you?

[BlueSkys]

Not that I know of... I don't see it in CCC

[Mussels]

Not that I know of... I don't see it in CCC

its there under 3D options. try forcing it to off.

[mastrdrver]

Under all settings.

[BlueSkys]

Wait for vertical refresh?

[Mussels]

Wait for vertical refresh?

yeah thats the one.

force it off and see what happens.

[BlueSkys]

Well, it was put to off unless application specifies, so I forced it off and went to run hawx. I was getting an average of 59fps with 1 4890, and with 2 in crossfire. That should have been a tip off to me that vsync was enabled. So I disabled it in the hawx options and re ran the benchmarks. This time 99fps average (high of 198) with crossfire! I'm thinking, sweet... maybe that was the problem. So I disable the second card and see what a single card does.... Avg. of 97fps. (High of 218)

WTF!!!!
I'm getting pretty convinced crossfire is a sham...

[erocker]

It's no sham considering it works for everyone else.

Follow this please:
After CrossFiring several cards this has never failed me.

http://forums.techpowerup.com/showthread.php?t=52502

^^Did you do everything in that link?

Also, have you tried installing motherboard chipset drivers with both cards in? It's definitely worth a shot.

[BlueSkys]

It's no sham considering it works for everyone else.



^^Did you do everything in that link?

Also, have you tried installing motherboard chipset drivers with both cards in? It's definitely worth a shot.

I did do everything in that link...

On the forums in response to my problems, I'm getting people (including moderators) saying that it just goes to show what they've been saying for a while. That sli/crossfire is just a gimmick. This is my only experience with multi-gpu, and it's not a good one.

My system specs are all posted, and I seem to have everyone stumped as to why I'm getting no real increase in performance even though I have doubled my investment in gpus.

I'll try to reinstall the chipset drivers and will update.

[DaMulta]

I have had good experience with dual cards. In fact I say run two cards or noting. Running the extra things inside CCC, and inside Nvidia control panel really takes two cards to take advantage of them.

Also they are pushing CF more and more because they are working on dual core GPUs which will force them to have near perfect drivers.


I will have two 4890 cards in on Thursday. That I will be running on the new AM3FX platform.
---
I will post the difference in performance I see between the cards.
-----
I'm starting to wonder if you have a bad card, or a bad CF cable.

[DaMulta]

Now I did run two hd2900xt cards on a FX-62 system. It was bottle necked HARD!

I would get 10 grand in 06 with one card and 12 grand with two cards.

So in gaming what I did was use the 2ed card as I candy. I would just turn on every setting in CCC BUT v-sync and enjoy my games clearer. This is something that you may end up doing also.....

[BlueSkys]

---
I will post the difference in performance I see between the cards.
-----
I'm starting to wonder if you have a bad card, or a bad CF cable.

I have tried each card individually and benchmarked them both... they are identical. And I have tried with both bridges installed, as well as only one (on either connection).

And I would really like to see the difference in performance you see...

[BlueSkys]

Now I did run two hd2900xt cards on a FX-62 system. It was bottle necked HARD!

I would get 10 grand in 06 with one card and 12 grand with two cards.

So in gaming what I did was use the 2ed card as I candy. I would just turn on every setting in CCC BUT v-sync and enjoy my games clearer. This is something that you may end up doing also.....

This sounds like what I'm experiencing... I can't imagine I'm getting bottlenecked with my Q6600 @ 3.3Ghz though... :(

[DaMulta]

I can!

That is an older chip! You can not compare chips with Mhz

Lets put it this way two QX9650(the Xeon chips) bench as fast as ONE i7965
Both are one thousand dollar chips both are clocked at 3ghz, but the other one will run circles around it.


Try your games with maxed out CCC I bet you like it a lot. I do and in fact run my games like that when I do play. Benchmarking is the only time I turn it down to performance mode like your wanting.


Other than that look into ways of getting your CPU to run at 4Ghz 24/7.

[mastrdrver]

Are your clocks on both cards jumping to 3d speeds in games?
Do you have the molex connected on the board that is to give power to the PCI-e slots?
What kind of loads did you see with the Riva Tuner hardware monitor?

[SonDa5]

I think something is not configured right or maby the cards or MB are bad.

[random]

This sounds like what I'm experiencing... I can't imagine I'm getting bottlenecked with my Q6600 @ 3.3Ghz though... :(

I think you really are being bottlenecked, 4890 is faster than gtx295 in crossfire and I couldn't get rid of bottlenecks for shit on my gtx295 at 3.6ghz with my CPU.

4850 crossfire on the other hand took me until 3.4ghz on my Q6600 to get rid of their bottlenecks, one 4890 is fine under 3.3ghz since it performs only a tiny bit slower than 4850 crossfire (4850 crossfire equivalent of 1x gtx285 or 1x 4850x2)

I'm not sure how to do the maths on this but you will hardly see a difference in your gaming benchies with 2 cards, I'm assuming with 4890's your overclocks become handicapped in crossfire which is why there are slower frames running 2. But then again I'm not even sure weather you still get the performance boost or not with your CPU only running 3.3ghz.

So I may be completely wrong about my assumption.

Other culprits could be the MOBO PCIE slots or your config as the above poster mentioned.

[Mussels]

i have some pics in regards to bottlenecking.

3.5Ghz Q6600, stock 4870's
http://img.techpowerup.org/090505/all.jpg

3.5Ghz Q6600, 4870's OC'd (800/1000)
http://img.techpowerup.org/090505/OCd GPUs.jpg

Notice the score difference... or lack thereof. I'm confident that its CPU limited.

[TRIPTEX_CAN]

i have some pics in regards to bottlenecking.

3.5Ghz Q6600, stock 4870's
SNIP

3.5Ghz Q6600, 4870's OC'd (800/1000)
SNIP

Notice the score difference... or lack thereof. I'm confident that its CPU limited.

Can you run that exact same test @ a higher resolution.... 1680x1050 or higher please?

[Mussels]

Can you run that exact same test @ a higher resolution.... 1680x1050 or higher please?

i've just moved to win 7 and the xeon, but yeah i can re-test at 1080P if you want.


new CPU, 4Ghz
Stock GPU's
1280x1024 test (compared to Q6600, for bottlenecking purposes)
http://img.techpowerup.org/090505/4GHz.jpg

OC'd GPU's
http://img.techpowerup.org/090505/4GHz OC\'d viddies.jpg


1920x1080 tests

Since it gave an invalid score due to the changed res, i only did the GPU tests for the stock cards. the GPU score was all thats relevant here anyway.

stock GPU
http://img.techpowerup.org/090505/stock GPU.jpg

OC'd GPU
http://img.techpowerup.org/090505/oc GPU.jpg

More of a difference, but still negligible.

[BlueSkys]

Are your clocks on both cards jumping to 3d speeds in games?
Do you have the molex connected on the board that is to give power to the PCI-e slots?
What kind of loads did you see with the Riva Tuner hardware monitor?

A- Yeah, the clocks are jumping to full speed during games
B- Yeah, I remembered to connect the molex lol
C- In RivaTuner it shows that both cards are reaching 100% load during games.

[mastrdrver]

I did a quick look and didn't see anyone ask, but are you sure your cpu is not overheating and triggering the throttling? Even with it disabled in the bios, it will still kick in. It just doesn't do is so quick.

I ran across a post on [H] where someone was having a similar non scaling issue with crossfire and ended up being that the cpu was throttling because of temps.

[BlueSkys]

I did a quick look and didn't see anyone ask, but are you sure your cpu is not overheating and triggering the throttling? Even with it disabled in the bios, it will still kick in. It just doesn't do is so quick.

I ran across a post on [H] where someone was having a similar non scaling issue with crossfire and ended up being that the cpu was throttling because of temps.

Good question bro... but unfortunately thats not it either. I've been monitoring my cpu temps and they never get above 60 on full load. My giant Zalman heatsink has been working awesome lol

[human_error]

Just to check you're not playing in windowed mode are you? Crossfire doesn't like windowed mode.

Also to see if your system thinks crossfire is running right click on you ati icon next to your clock on the bottom right of your screen then select one of your cards>crossfirex settings> show crossfire x icon.

With that enabled you get a massive ATI badge in the top right of your screen when playing games where crossfire is running - if you see it then it's not that your system isn't enabling crossfire for some reason, if you don't see it then crossfire isn't getting enabled and we need to figure out why.

[SonDa5]

4850 crossfire on the other hand took me until 3.4ghz on my Q6600 to get rid of their bottlenecks, one 4890 is fine under 3.3ghz since it performs only a tiny bit slower than 4850 crossfire (4850 crossfire equivalent of 1x gtx285 or 1x 4850x2)





I didn't see any "bottle neck" issues with the HD4890. Just solid performance even at slower CPU speeds. I know what you are refering to about the HD4850. They open up to fast CPUs.

[SonDa5]

Just to check you're not playing in windowed mode are you? Crossfire doesn't like windowed mode.


Some do. Furmark in windows mode runs in Xfire in my machine.

[BlueSkys]

Just to check you're not playing in windowed mode are you? Crossfire doesn't like windowed mode.

Also to see if your system thinks crossfire is running right click on you ati icon next to your clock on the bottom right of your screen then select one of your cards>crossfirex settings> show crossfire x icon.

With that enabled you get a massive ATI badge in the top right of your screen when playing games where crossfire is running - if you see it then it's not that your system isn't enabling crossfire for some reason, if you don't see it then crossfire isn't getting enabled and we need to figure out why.

Yeah, the icon has been there... and I haven't been opening anything in windowed mode.

[TRIPTEX_CAN]

i've just moved to win 7 and the xeon, but yeah i can re-test at 1080P if you want.

More of a difference, but still negligible.

I was expecting more of a difference.. is the xeon a dual core or quad?

[Mussels]

I was expecting more of a difference.. is the xeon a dual core or quad?

xeons a dual.

Point is simple: anything as epically powerful as 4870 crossfire (or above) cant be fed enough CPU power on the 775 platform.

[BlueSkys]

xeons a dual.

Point is simple: anything as epically powerful as 4870 crossfire (or above) cant be fed enough CPU power on the 775 platform.

Not saying you're wrong... but can you explain this to me then?

http://forums.techpowerup.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=19775&d=1225339888

[Mussels]

Not saying you're wrong... but can you explain this to me then?

http://forums.techpowerup.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=19775&d=1225339888

they used the Nvidia card as a Physx card to boost the CPU score.

[BlueSkys]

maybe a solution for me then?

[Mussels]

maybe a solution for me then?

it doesnt make your PC faster at anything. its something that will only boost your vantage score, and nothing else.

[TRIPTEX_CAN]

xeons a dual.

Point is simple: anything as epically powerful as 4870 crossfire (or above) cant be fed enough CPU power on the 775 platform.

A QX9650 is a 775 CPU and could easily feed those cards if put it the right hands. :rolleyes:

[Mussels]

A QX9650 is a 775 CPU and could easily feed those cards if put it the right hands. :rolleyes:

i amend my statement "at stock speeds" lol.

A QX could definately pull it off, i just think GPU's are advancing far quicker than CPU's

[TRIPTEX_CAN]

i amend my statement "at stock speeds" lol.

A QX could definately pull it off, i just think GPU's are advancing far quicker than CPU's


If we're talking stock speeds then I dont believe anything on the market (inc. i7 and PII) can give OC'd 4890s all the juice they need. Sure i7 and PII are fast but they're dont make C2Qs look like Pentium 4s.

[mastrdrver]

Good question bro... but unfortunately thats not it either. I've been monitoring my cpu temps and they never get above 60 on full load. My giant Zalman heatsink has been working awesome lol

Is your C2Q a G0 or B3 stepping?
Have you calibrated your monitoring software?
Which cpu sensor doesn't get above 60 (tcase or tjunction)?

I found out recently that my numbers were off 4*C under load and the only time its really accurate. My idle temps don't change no matter how much Vcore I add. I was still good temp wise, just more trust worthy now. What Zalman are you using?

[SonDa5]

A QX9650 is a 775 CPU and could easily feed those cards if put it the right hands. :rolleyes:



I totally agree. I don't want to upset anybody here but I really think there are way too many people ruining the Xfire experience because they are having problems setting up Xfire.

If you have a Xfire MB IMO it's a shame to not properly use them.

[BlueSkys]

I totally agree. I don't want to upset anybody here but I really think there are way too many people ruining the Xfire experience because they are having problems setting up Xfire.

If you have a Xfire MB IMO it's a shame to not properly use them.

If you've read through this and have any advice on how I can more properly utilize crossfire here... please contribute.

Is your C2Q a G0 or B3 stepping?
Have you calibrated your monitoring software?
Which cpu sensor doesn't get above 60 (tcase or tjunction)?

I found out recently that my numbers were off 4*C under load and the only time its really accurate. My idle temps don't change no matter how much Vcore I add. I was still good temp wise, just more trust worthy now. What Zalman are you using?

It's a G0, not sure exactly how to calibrate the software other than by doing the sensor text in realtemp. And I'm assuming it's tcase... I'm going off the different core temp readings in realtemp. The highest core temp is pretty much always core 1, and it never reaches 60 at full load. Hope that's what you were asking lol.

And it's the Zalman CNPS9700 LED

[mastrdrver]

http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/221745-29-core-core-temperature-guide