Crossfire without Mastercards for x1600/x1300s

C

ClearM4

2[H]4U
Joined
Oct 5, 2005
Messages
2,320
Posted on [H]ard front page is an interesting note about the x1300s and x1600s not needing a master card to run crossfire. Now all ATI needs to do is get some cheaper crossfire motherboards out, continue this onto the next R580 core, and rename crossfire to something shorter because its too long to type out and SLI is a lot more catchy. http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=2594
 
If ATi can do it with these cards. Why can't they do it will the X1800s? Makes things so much easier and could be on par with SLi. As for being shorter... you can call it CF.. :p
 
To those in the know, nomenclature such as SLI or Crossfire really don't matter. To the general public, they're given an acronym which they have no idea what it stands for - and if they found out it was scalable link interface, they'd be just as confused. If anything, Crossfire is more attractive to the general public.

As for the master card deal... I believe the dongle is the biggest issue (or was in the [H] review). As for the x1800's... I think the only reason ATI did this for the lower end cards was so the consumer didn't have to buy a $500 mastercard to crossfire their $200 x1300/x1600. So you can't really see an analogy to the x1800 cards.
 
V99 said:
If ATi can do it with these cards. Why can't they do it will the X1800s? Makes things so much easier and could be on par with SLi. As for being shorter... you can call it CF.. :p
Click to expand...

bandwidth

you need fast communication between the cards, since ATI does not have a fast internal connector like NVIDIA they had to go the dongle rout on the outside, with the idea of no X1300 or X1600 master cards all the communication is handled through the PCI-Express bus, there is no dongle

we already knew X1300 wouldn't need mastercards, their performance is such that all that is needed is the PCIe bus

what's new here is that apparently ATI thinks the PCIe bus is sufficient for the X1600 series as well

but for the X1800 series there is no way they could only use the PCIe bus, they need the dongle because there is just too much of a bandwidth demand

this is all very interesting, could raise the benefit of a 2 x16 PCIe solution on X1600 cards
 
I really don't see a problem with the dongle. Its not even another cord. Its the same video card cord with 1 more connection to link both cards. Everything else behind your computer has a cord you won't even notice. Right now I have a loop cord from my sound card to my tv tuner card and it really makes no difference. You don't even see the core unlike others running all over the place this one stays behind you computer.
 
ClearM4 said:
I really don't see a problem with the dongle. Its not even another cord. Its the same video card cord with 1 more connection to link both cards. Everything else behind your computer has a cord you won't even notice. Right now I have a loop cord from my sound card to my tv tuner card and it really makes no difference. You don't even see the core unlike others running all over the place this one stays behind you computer.
Click to expand...
The dongle is limiting the resolution to 1600x1200 and 60 Hz. I see a problem with spending that much money and having those limits.
 
Intel_Hydralisk said:
The dongle is limiting the resolution to 1600x1200 and 60 Hz. I see a problem with spending that much money and having those limits.
Click to expand...

actually, no

the dongle is not the reason for the limitation in the R420 series, the limitation is single link DVI and the compositing chip

in the X1000 series they now use dual link DVI and the compositing chip is new, there is no limit with them
 
Intel_Hydralisk said:
The dongle is limiting the resolution to 1600x1200 and 60 Hz. I see a problem with spending that much money and having those limits.
Click to expand...
on the x800s. Supposedly the x1x00's dont have that issue.
 
ClearM4 said:
I really don't see a problem with the dongle. Its not even another cord. Its the same video card cord with 1 more connection to link both cards. Everything else behind your computer has a cord you won't even notice. Right now I have a loop cord from my sound card to my tv tuner card and it really makes no difference. You don't even see the core unlike others running all over the place this one stays behind you computer.
Click to expand...

the main problem people have with the dongle is the fact that a special mastercard is required

what people really want is an internal connection like NVIDIA so you can just buy two of the same card and hook them up, that way you don't have to buy a more expensive mastercard to use with a certain series
 
Exactly, the X1000 series has 2 x dual-link DVI ports so can do 2560 x 1600.

I reckon they should throw in the Master Card "extras" at no extra charge on the XT, it would help justify the price.
 
Brent_Justice said:
the main problem people have with the dongle is the fact that a special mastercard is required

what people really want is an internal connection like NVIDIA so you can just buy two of the same card and hook them up, that way you don't have to buy a more expensive mastercard to use with a certain series
Click to expand...
I agree master cards were not ATI best idea. I guess I didnt relate the dougle to master cards. I already have a hard time justifying SLI or crossfire and mastercards really hurt. Thats why I found this post interesting, no extra costs of bridge or dougle. Sounds like they need Dual 16x pci-e already :)
 
Facts:

There is NO techinical reason we cant XFire on SLI mboard or SLI on XFire mboard, only NV and ATI's decision NOT to let us.

All that is required is 2 x16 PCIe slots (physically) and as tests showed, leaving one x16 and one x2 still SLI'd ok, though configuring for x8 x8 was best.

On current boards which in SLI/XFire are x8 x8, there isnt enough bandwidth in PCIe to do it "neked" over the PCIe bus.

Think about the physical connection, two x8 slots, the boards need to run say x4 x4 to the PCU, with a x4 interconnect between the two cards. So all inter-card transfers would only have x4 path to go over. X1300 X1600 the throughput is slow enough overall that an x4 path between cards can handle the conversation.

Now, the newer FULL two x16 boards that are TWO complete x16... like Asus's A8N32 board... would allow say x6 gpu-to-cpu per card and an x10 interconnect between the cards, which would get the job done for X850 or X1800... "NEKED".

ATI with thier "dongle" is using in XFire the DVI path as a means to do the highspeed interconnect. Personally they should have done it differently.

Engineeringwise, you can make an external blackbox (pretty cheap one actually) that has two DVI-D inputs, and a DVI-D output..."D" as in only the digital DVI signals, Then that box, along with proper driver SW, would take the outputs of two video cards and stitch them together into ONE image.

Well, ATI sort of did just that, only they put the "blackbox" ON the MASTER card instead of being totally external. If they did a seperate box, then any two cards with DVI-D output and correct driver could part take in SLI..er XFire- ness. Even two 9800pro's!!! But they didnt, oh well.
 
xX_Jack_Carver_Xx said:
Engineeringwise, you can make an external blackbox (pretty cheap one actually) that has two DVI-D inputs, and a DVI-D output..."D" as in only the digital DVI signals, Then that box, along with proper driver SW, would take the outputs of two video cards and stitch them together into ONE image.

Well, ATI sort of did just that, only they put the "blackbox" ON the MASTER card instead of being totally external. If they did a seperate box, then any two cards with DVI-D output and correct driver could part take in SLI..er XFire- ness. Even two 9800pro's!!! But they didnt, oh well.
Click to expand...

Wish they had. An external "black box" would have been pretty cool. Maybe even plug it into a USB port, so a driver could control how it mixes the signal from the two cards.

Could you imagine that? Running literally ANY two cards with DVI output, load-balanced between them?
 
I might have missed something but I thought I read that Ati way with the x1300 and the x1600 was the way they render the games. Nvidia does hardware rendering and other then the master card with the x1800 Ati does it with software, which this artical pointed out would make the cards run 25% slower. The nice thing tho was that you can run the ATI cards SLI on a Nforce4 motherboard. I read a few other articals and if I'm wrong then you can shit on me. ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top