Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Hardware News › [[H]ard|OCP] NVIDIA GeForce 3-Way SLI and Radeon Tri-Fire Review
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

[[H]ard|OCP] NVIDIA GeForce 3-Way SLI and Radeon Tri-Fire Review - Page 21  

post #201 of 321
Quote:
Originally Posted by PoopaScoopa View Post
One reason why a 6990 is used is because you can't use 3 6970s for triple+ monitors. 6950/70s only have 2 DP. Using mixed DP-DVI ports causes screen tearing.
You don't need 3 580s for 1080P either. Even 2 is enough for 1600P when OCd most of the time.
Switching to 5760x1080(more common) would help the Fermis tremendously as well as seen in other reviews due to VRAM.
lol what? i mix dp and dvi and its fine, and i have a third 6970 on the way
Server/Gaming Rig
(22 items)
 
  
CPUCPUMotherboardGraphics
Intel E5-2670 intel E5-2670 Asus Z9PE-D8 WS Visiontek R9 390 
RAMHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
8x4GB DDR3 1333 ECC Registered Toshiba 5TB X300 Seagate 4TB HGST 4TB 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
Sandisk 240GB Sandisk 480GB Samsung 830 128GB Toshiba 6TB X300 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveOS
Toshiba 5TB X300 Toshiba 5TB X300 WH16NS40 Windows 10 Pro 
MonitorMonitorKeyboardPower
Dell S1715H Dell u2311h blackwidow ultimate Kingwin Lazer platinum 1000w 
CaseMouse
Corsair 800D Deathadder Chroma 
  hide details  
Server/Gaming Rig
(22 items)
 
  
CPUCPUMotherboardGraphics
Intel E5-2670 intel E5-2670 Asus Z9PE-D8 WS Visiontek R9 390 
RAMHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
8x4GB DDR3 1333 ECC Registered Toshiba 5TB X300 Seagate 4TB HGST 4TB 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
Sandisk 240GB Sandisk 480GB Samsung 830 128GB Toshiba 6TB X300 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveOS
Toshiba 5TB X300 Toshiba 5TB X300 WH16NS40 Windows 10 Pro 
MonitorMonitorKeyboardPower
Dell S1715H Dell u2311h blackwidow ultimate Kingwin Lazer platinum 1000w 
CaseMouse
Corsair 800D Deathadder Chroma 
  hide details  
post #202 of 321
I put my two cents into the thread over at [H]:

I just got around to reading this review. I must say I highly question some of these nVidia results. How did you measure VRAM usage to make sure you were not hitting a VRAM wall? CPU limiting might have also played a significant role in the results.

I have never seen SLI scaling that bad under any circumstances. A 9.8% FPS increase going from dual 580s to triple 580s out of a theoretical maximum of 50% in F1 2010? Something is seriously bottlenecking there. I saw no less than a 43% performance increase in my testing going from two to three 580s. (Youtube videos comparing 2x, 3x and 4x 580s to prove it.) Granted, I am using 3GB 580s but there is something definitely bottlenecking nVidia in this review. Either VRAM, serious CPU limiting or driver issues. Just to put some of this into perspective, running F1 2010 with all settings maxed and 4x AA 16x AF just like your settings using the built in-game benchmark I get virtually the same FPS as you received @ TRI-SLI using a 78% higher resolution. Granted my 580s are slightly over clocked.

Then showing only a 30% increase in Metro2033 which is known to fully utilize GPU power. I reached a almost perfect 49% scaling in my Metro2033 tests. Then on to only an 11% increase in BF:BC2. Something definitely awry.

Now, I once again state that AMD definitely has the price to performance crown as I have always stated. I just found some of these results unusual, especially claiming that VRAM limits were not reached as I have never seen the 69xx series be able to keep up with my 3GB 580s in benchmarks. I am also not sure why you keep mentioning stuff like " This is bad news for the GTX 580 3-Way SLI folks, considering the Radeon HD 6990 wasn't even running in its OC performance mode" when compared against stock clocked 580s. You do realize that the GTX580s can over clock too?

Now I know nVidia bashing is in vogue now, and sometimes rightfully so. They put too little VRAM on their flagship cards and they are definitely overpriced. I just call out unusual test results when I see them.
Zybane
(20 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 6950X - 4.5 GHz Edition 10 Rampage V Extreme Titan Xp  G.Skill 32GB 3200 MHz CL14 
Hard DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
1TB - Samsung SM961 Windows 10 Pro OLED 4K 55" LG C7P Razer BlackWidow TE Stealth Chroma 
PowerMouseAudioAudio
Corsair AX1500i 1500W Titanium Razer Mamba TE Denon AVR-X7200WA Elac BS 312 
AudioAudioAudioOther
Sennheiser HD-700 Headphones Velodyne MiniVee Subwoofer Buttkicker LFE Razer Orbweaver Stealth Chroma 
  hide details  
Zybane
(20 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 6950X - 4.5 GHz Edition 10 Rampage V Extreme Titan Xp  G.Skill 32GB 3200 MHz CL14 
Hard DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
1TB - Samsung SM961 Windows 10 Pro OLED 4K 55" LG C7P Razer BlackWidow TE Stealth Chroma 
PowerMouseAudioAudio
Corsair AX1500i 1500W Titanium Razer Mamba TE Denon AVR-X7200WA Elac BS 312 
AudioAudioAudioOther
Sennheiser HD-700 Headphones Velodyne MiniVee Subwoofer Buttkicker LFE Razer Orbweaver Stealth Chroma 
  hide details  
post #203 of 321
Quote:
Originally Posted by CallsignVega View Post
I put my two cents into the thread over at [H]:

I just got around to reading this review. I must say I highly question some of these nVidia results. How did you measure VRAM usage to make sure you were not hitting a VRAM wall? CPU limiting might have also played a significant role in the results.

I have never seen SLI scaling that bad under any circumstances. A 9.8% FPS increase going from dual 580s to triple 580s out of a theoretical maximum of 50% in F1 2010? Something is seriously bottlenecking there. I saw no less than a 43% performance increase in my testing going from two to three 580s. (Youtube videos comparing 2x, 3x and 4x 580s to prove it.) Granted, I am using 3GB 580s but there is something definitely bottlenecking nVidia in this review. Either VRAM, serious CPU limiting or driver issues. Just to put some of this into perspective, running F1 2010 with all settings maxed and 4x AA 16x AF just like your settings using the built in-game benchmark I get virtually the same FPS as you received @ TRI-SLI using a 78% higher resolution. Granted my 580s are slightly over clocked.

Then showing only a 30% increase in Metro2033 which is known to fully utilize GPU power. I reached a almost perfect 49% scaling in my Metro2033 tests. Then on to only an 11% increase in BF:BC2. Something definitely awry.

Now, I once again state that AMD definitely has the price to performance crown as I have always stated. I just found some of these results unusual, especially claiming that VRAM limits were not reached as I have never seen the 69xx series be able to keep up with my 3GB 580s in benchmarks. I am also not sure why you keep mentioning stuff like " This is bad news for the GTX 580 3-Way SLI folks, considering the Radeon HD 6990 wasn't even running in its OC performance mode" when compared against stock clocked 580s. You do realize that the GTX580s can over clock too?

Now I know nVidia bashing is in vogue now, and sometimes rightfully so. They put too little VRAM on their flagship cards and they are definitely overpriced. I just call out unusual test results when I see them.
They are re-doing the test with a sandy @ 4.7 so hold your horses on the CPU bottleneck thing. I also feel there may be a bit of a bottleneck.

As for Vram-- that is Nvidia's fault. 100 FPS+ is only really useful on a 120Hz screen and with those you are limited to 1080p. Thus, why would you buy 3 580s unless you are using 3 screens? But, if you do use 3 screens you run into Vram issues. The 580 should have had at least 2Gb, period. Nvidia overlooked that one
post #204 of 321
Quote:
Originally Posted by CallsignVega View Post
I put my two cents into the thread over at [H]:

I just got around to reading this review. I must say I highly question some of these nVidia results. How did you measure VRAM usage to make sure you were not hitting a VRAM wall? CPU limiting might have also played a significant role in the results.

I have never seen SLI scaling that bad under any circumstances. A 9.8% FPS increase going from dual 580s to triple 580s out of a theoretical maximum of 50% in F1 2010? Something is seriously bottlenecking there. I saw no less than a 43% performance increase in my testing going from two to three 580s. (Youtube videos comparing 2x, 3x and 4x 580s to prove it.) Granted, I am using 3GB 580s but there is something definitely bottlenecking nVidia in this review. Either VRAM, serious CPU limiting or driver issues. Just to put some of this into perspective, running F1 2010 with all settings maxed and 4x AA 16x AF just like your settings using the built in-game benchmark I get virtually the same FPS as you received @ TRI-SLI using a 78% higher resolution. Granted my 580s are slightly over clocked.

Then showing only a 30% increase in Metro2033 which is known to fully utilize GPU power. I reached a almost perfect 49% scaling in my Metro2033 tests. Then on to only an 11% increase in BF:BC2. Something definitely awry.

Now, I once again state that AMD definitely has the price to performance crown as I have always stated. I just found some of these results unusual, especially claiming that VRAM limits were not reached as I have never seen the 69xx series be able to keep up with my 3GB 580s in benchmarks. I am also not sure why you keep mentioning stuff like " This is bad news for the GTX 580 3-Way SLI folks, considering the Radeon HD 6990 wasn't even running in its OC performance mode" when compared against stock clocked 580s. You do realize that the GTX580s can over clock too?

Now I know nVidia bashing is in vogue now, and sometimes rightfully so. They put too little VRAM on their flagship cards and they are definitely overpriced. I just call out unusual test results when I see them.
I don't know what it is, but maybe because we own the cards 24/7, these numbers keep looking off to me as well.

I have brought it up twice now about this VRAM (I am glad you mentioned it too.) I feel more people would listen to someone who actually has a comparable setup and are notorious for possibly having the fastest computer around.

I know I have hit the VRAM wall in games at lower resolutions, sometimes again with out AA, Civilization V, Metro2033, and Crysis all are capable of 5760x1080 VRAM wall crushing.

Now, this is a valid review. They are comparing two cards, you, me or Jim Bob can get. But there is a bottleneck, and I don't necessarily feel its the CPU's speed as much as it is the resolution.

If I am not mistaken, there are other multi-monitor resolutions to choose from, they could show the 4800x900, 4860x900, 4860x1050, 5040,1050 etc. I personally feel, they are aiming for a resolution/game settings physically out of reach of the hardware at hand. Although I only play at 5760x1080 and 1920x1080, its still a valid point to bring up. I don't have a problem with you testing the highest physical resolution, testing all the settings on max, or 16xAA, but don't tell me you aren't hitting a VRAM wall, without explaining how, and proof.
Snowdevil
(16 items)
 
ASUS G750JM
(9 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
[i7 4790K @ 4.4 GHz (1.186v)] [Asus Sabertooth Z97 Mark S] [nVidia Geforce GTX 1080] [nVidia Geforce GTX 1080] 
RAMHard DriveCoolingOS
[G.Skill 32GB DDR3 2133 MHz] [Crucial MX100 256GB] [Phanteks PH-TC12DX] [Win 10.1 Pro] 
MonitorMonitorKeyboardPower
[LG 29UM65 (2560x1080)] [QNIX Evo II LED (2560x1440)] [WASD v2 Tenkeyless] [NZXT Hale90 v2 ] 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
[ThermalTake GT10 Snow Edition] [Razer Mamba - Chroma] [Razer Kabuto] [Razer Man O' War] 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 4770HQ Intel HM87 Express Chipset Geforce GTX 860M 8GB DDR3L 1600 MHz 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Samsung SSD EVO DVD-RW Stock Windows 8.1 
Monitor
1920x1080 TN 
  hide details  
Snowdevil
(16 items)
 
ASUS G750JM
(9 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
[i7 4790K @ 4.4 GHz (1.186v)] [Asus Sabertooth Z97 Mark S] [nVidia Geforce GTX 1080] [nVidia Geforce GTX 1080] 
RAMHard DriveCoolingOS
[G.Skill 32GB DDR3 2133 MHz] [Crucial MX100 256GB] [Phanteks PH-TC12DX] [Win 10.1 Pro] 
MonitorMonitorKeyboardPower
[LG 29UM65 (2560x1080)] [QNIX Evo II LED (2560x1440)] [WASD v2 Tenkeyless] [NZXT Hale90 v2 ] 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
[ThermalTake GT10 Snow Edition] [Razer Mamba - Chroma] [Razer Kabuto] [Razer Man O' War] 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 4770HQ Intel HM87 Express Chipset Geforce GTX 860M 8GB DDR3L 1600 MHz 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Samsung SSD EVO DVD-RW Stock Windows 8.1 
Monitor
1920x1080 TN 
  hide details  
post #205 of 321
ok say it is a VRAM limitation, arent the 3GB 580s a good bit more money than the 1.5GB ones? how much more money do you need to sink into an nvidia setup for it to be faster? as it is its what $1000 vs $1500 and the 3GB are like $630 each so $1890 for 3? for that price i could get 2 6990s and have cash to spare.

Especially considering that 3 6970s would have been faster given the lower clocks of the default 6990
Server/Gaming Rig
(22 items)
 
  
CPUCPUMotherboardGraphics
Intel E5-2670 intel E5-2670 Asus Z9PE-D8 WS Visiontek R9 390 
RAMHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
8x4GB DDR3 1333 ECC Registered Toshiba 5TB X300 Seagate 4TB HGST 4TB 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
Sandisk 240GB Sandisk 480GB Samsung 830 128GB Toshiba 6TB X300 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveOS
Toshiba 5TB X300 Toshiba 5TB X300 WH16NS40 Windows 10 Pro 
MonitorMonitorKeyboardPower
Dell S1715H Dell u2311h blackwidow ultimate Kingwin Lazer platinum 1000w 
CaseMouse
Corsair 800D Deathadder Chroma 
  hide details  
Server/Gaming Rig
(22 items)
 
  
CPUCPUMotherboardGraphics
Intel E5-2670 intel E5-2670 Asus Z9PE-D8 WS Visiontek R9 390 
RAMHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
8x4GB DDR3 1333 ECC Registered Toshiba 5TB X300 Seagate 4TB HGST 4TB 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
Sandisk 240GB Sandisk 480GB Samsung 830 128GB Toshiba 6TB X300 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveOS
Toshiba 5TB X300 Toshiba 5TB X300 WH16NS40 Windows 10 Pro 
MonitorMonitorKeyboardPower
Dell S1715H Dell u2311h blackwidow ultimate Kingwin Lazer platinum 1000w 
CaseMouse
Corsair 800D Deathadder Chroma 
  hide details  
post #206 of 321
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blindsay View Post
ok say it is a VRAM limitation, arent the 3GB 580s a good bit more money than the 1.5GB ones? how much more money do you need to sink into an nvidia setup for it to be faster? as it is its what $1000 vs $1500 and the 3GB are like $630 each so $1890 for 3? for that price i could get 2 6990s and have cash to spare.

Especially considering that 3 6970s would have been faster given the lower clocks of the default 6990
The 3GB ones available are the same price as 1.5GB (Palit comes to mind.) If people were only worried about price, I think nVidia wouldn't have ever succeeded =D

I have already spent my money... twice in fact. To me this is more about identifying cards weaknesses and strengths, and understanding what really is going on. I have already seen CallSign's incredibly detailed benchmarking threads, and his numbers (at even higher resolutions) are beating these numbers. So if the only difference is that CallSign has 3GB of VRAM, then obviously HardOCP have to refigure some tests, because they are claiming the opposite. Furthermore, CSV's has other variables, such as his Gulftown being nicely overclocked + GPUs overclocked. Its a lot to consider when you come down to it, but frankly, I am convinced that there is test tweaking to consider.

Knowing is half the battle!
Snowdevil
(16 items)
 
ASUS G750JM
(9 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
[i7 4790K @ 4.4 GHz (1.186v)] [Asus Sabertooth Z97 Mark S] [nVidia Geforce GTX 1080] [nVidia Geforce GTX 1080] 
RAMHard DriveCoolingOS
[G.Skill 32GB DDR3 2133 MHz] [Crucial MX100 256GB] [Phanteks PH-TC12DX] [Win 10.1 Pro] 
MonitorMonitorKeyboardPower
[LG 29UM65 (2560x1080)] [QNIX Evo II LED (2560x1440)] [WASD v2 Tenkeyless] [NZXT Hale90 v2 ] 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
[ThermalTake GT10 Snow Edition] [Razer Mamba - Chroma] [Razer Kabuto] [Razer Man O' War] 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 4770HQ Intel HM87 Express Chipset Geforce GTX 860M 8GB DDR3L 1600 MHz 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Samsung SSD EVO DVD-RW Stock Windows 8.1 
Monitor
1920x1080 TN 
  hide details  
Snowdevil
(16 items)
 
ASUS G750JM
(9 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
[i7 4790K @ 4.4 GHz (1.186v)] [Asus Sabertooth Z97 Mark S] [nVidia Geforce GTX 1080] [nVidia Geforce GTX 1080] 
RAMHard DriveCoolingOS
[G.Skill 32GB DDR3 2133 MHz] [Crucial MX100 256GB] [Phanteks PH-TC12DX] [Win 10.1 Pro] 
MonitorMonitorKeyboardPower
[LG 29UM65 (2560x1080)] [QNIX Evo II LED (2560x1440)] [WASD v2 Tenkeyless] [NZXT Hale90 v2 ] 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
[ThermalTake GT10 Snow Edition] [Razer Mamba - Chroma] [Razer Kabuto] [Razer Man O' War] 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 4770HQ Intel HM87 Express Chipset Geforce GTX 860M 8GB DDR3L 1600 MHz 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Samsung SSD EVO DVD-RW Stock Windows 8.1 
Monitor
1920x1080 TN 
  hide details  
post #207 of 321
Quote:
Originally Posted by RagingCain View Post
The 3GB ones available are the same price as 1.5GB (Palit comes to mind.) If people were only worried about price, I think nVidia wouldn't have ever succeeded =D

I have already spent my money... twice in fact. To me this is more about identifying cards weaknesses and strengths, and understanding what really is going on. I have already seen CallSign's incredibly detailed benchmarking threads, and his numbers (at even higher resolutions) are beating these numbers. So if the only difference is that CallSign has 3GB of VRAM, then obviously HardOCP have to refigure some tests, because they are claiming the opposite. Furthermore, CSV's has other variables, such as his Gulftown being nicely overclocked + GPUs overclocked. Its a lot to consider when you come down to it, but frankly, I am convinced that there is test tweaking to consider.

Knowing is half the battle!
I'm with you 100% Something is definitely awry. Eagerly anticipating newly updated results.
 
KillTheBananas
(14 items)
 
Minecraft Server
(15 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i5-2500k @ 4.9Ghz 1.42v Asus Maximus IV Extreme Rev B3 EVGA 3GB GTX 780 FTW 8GB G.Skill Trident DDR3 1866Mhz 9-9-9-24 1.65v 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
40GB OCZ Vertex 2 SSD, 2x WD 320GB Raid-0, 1TB WD 2x Lite On LH-20A1S Windows 7 Ultimate x64 Hanns-G 28" | 1920x1200 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Logitech G15 Gaming Antec HCP-1200 CoolerMaster HAF-X w/ window mod Logitech G9 Gaming Laser 
Mouse Pad
SteelSeries 63003SS QCK+ XXL 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Phenom II x4 955 @ 3.6Ghz MSI K9N2 SLI Platinum 2x 9600gt 1GB in SLI 2x 2GB Corsair Dominator 1066Mhz 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
WD Caviar Blue 250GB 2x LiteOn DVD-RW Windows 7 Ultimate x64 HannsG Hi221D 22" 1680 x 1050 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
PS/2 Antec Earthwatts 650w Antec 900 Optical 
Audio
Realtek 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD Athlon 64 X2 4200+ @ 2.2Ghz Tyan Tomcat S2866 PNY 8600GT 2x 1Gb, 2x 512MB Mix'n'match 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
160GB WD don't remember XP x86 19" HannStar 1440x900 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
MiMO 7" USB Monitor PS/2 450W something Antec mid 
MouseMouse PadAudio
Dell hmmm no need 
  hide details  
 
KillTheBananas
(14 items)
 
Minecraft Server
(15 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i5-2500k @ 4.9Ghz 1.42v Asus Maximus IV Extreme Rev B3 EVGA 3GB GTX 780 FTW 8GB G.Skill Trident DDR3 1866Mhz 9-9-9-24 1.65v 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
40GB OCZ Vertex 2 SSD, 2x WD 320GB Raid-0, 1TB WD 2x Lite On LH-20A1S Windows 7 Ultimate x64 Hanns-G 28" | 1920x1200 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Logitech G15 Gaming Antec HCP-1200 CoolerMaster HAF-X w/ window mod Logitech G9 Gaming Laser 
Mouse Pad
SteelSeries 63003SS QCK+ XXL 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Phenom II x4 955 @ 3.6Ghz MSI K9N2 SLI Platinum 2x 9600gt 1GB in SLI 2x 2GB Corsair Dominator 1066Mhz 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
WD Caviar Blue 250GB 2x LiteOn DVD-RW Windows 7 Ultimate x64 HannsG Hi221D 22" 1680 x 1050 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
PS/2 Antec Earthwatts 650w Antec 900 Optical 
Audio
Realtek 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD Athlon 64 X2 4200+ @ 2.2Ghz Tyan Tomcat S2866 PNY 8600GT 2x 1Gb, 2x 512MB Mix'n'match 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
160GB WD don't remember XP x86 19" HannStar 1440x900 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
MiMO 7" USB Monitor PS/2 450W something Antec mid 
MouseMouse PadAudio
Dell hmmm no need 
  hide details  
post #208 of 321
I hate it when you're so reasonable CallsignVega
post #209 of 321
Quote:
Originally Posted by JCPUser View Post
They are re-doing the test with a sandy @ 4.7 so hold your horses on the CPU bottleneck thing. I also feel there may be a bit of a bottleneck.
Yes, but if there is a CPU bottleneck problem here for Nvidia, it is there also for AMD. So both set-up will improve proportionnally with higher CPU speed.

I already post some benchmarks showing that my Quad-Fire set-up can go head-to-head with 580 Quad-SLI with same CPU speed over 5.0 (mine is at 5.3). So HardOCP results will stay the same.

The CPU bottleneck is applying to both set-ups, be it Nvidia or AMD. So the results will be the same.

And with all respect to the local Nvidia idol, the guy is using a 11K$ computer. So I don't think the results he gets are down to earth like those on HardOCP. I don't think we should use the results he gets to compare with HardOCP results, or anyone else results, since no one is using a system like he's using .

Why use the 1 in a billion system? HardOCP are using a system that ''normal'' users could use or can relate to. So those results are alot more useful for the masses using pimped Honda Civics, then the 1 guy using a Ferrari.

And since he was not even able to make 3 X 30'' LCD work with Quad-Fire properly, and AMD did confirm to me there is no problems doint that, and that it's working fine in-house at AMD, I'm not sure we can totally trust his findings and his ''expertise''. He's just a random guys using a pseudo, like all of us posting here, but who made the choice to spend alot more money on a computer that even the extreme users hanging-out are spending. But all that money spent doesn't make him an ''expert'' like the professionnal reviewers at HardOCP.

HardOCP are professionnals reviewers. How can I trust the results of someone using a pseudo and not even able to install drivers to make a Quad-Fire set-up works properly with 3 screens?

I should receive my 3 X 30'' LCD this week, and if it works, like AMD ate telling me it will, I hope Vega will be man enough to admit he didn't install things properly, or didn't have the expertise to do it properly, and step-up from the virtual pedastal people in here built for him. And that people will reconsider the virtual icon status he got because he spent alot of money on a computer.

But if it doesn't work, like he said, I will be the first to tell him, and post it here. And will reconsider what I'm thinking of him.

But spending alot of money on something doesn't make you automatically an ''expert'' on that subject. People should respect the professionnals at HardOCP loosing hours and hours doing reviews in properly controlled environment for us.

My opinion only. And I'm entitled to it.
Edited by Levesque - 4/30/11 at 4:25am
    
CPUCPUMotherboardGraphics
i7-5930k @ 4.9  i7-3930k @ 5.1 (2nd rig) Asus Rampage V (X99) + Asus Rampage IV (2nd rig) 2X Nvidia 1080 Ti SLI watercooled 
GraphicsRAMRAMHard Drive
2X Nvidia 980 Ti SLI watercooled (2nd rig)  4X8GB=32GB G.Skill DDR4-2700 4X4GB=16GB Ripjaws DDR3 2400 CL9 (2nd rig) 3X Samsung 840 Evo 1TB SSD 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
Samsung 850 Pro 250GB 3XSeagate 3TB LG Blu-ray writer 2X Quad-120 MCR420 
CoolingCoolingCoolingCooling
2X Triple-120 MCR320 + 1X Triple-120 Feser 2X Dual-120 XSPC RX240 32 Gentle Typhoon fans (mix of 3000 and 1850rpm) Reservoir 2X Koolance RP-452x2 with 4X MCP655 p... 
CoolingOSMonitorKeyboard
2X EK Supreme HF CPU waterblock Windows 10 Pro x64 Acer XB270HU IPS G-Sync 2440p (main rig) 3X 30'... CoolerMaster Masterkeys Pro S MX blue switch, C... 
PowerCaseMouseAudio
Antec HCP1200 + AX850 dual PSU main rig, AX120... Mountain Mods Extended Ascension + Pedestal 24 ... Logitech G502 x 2 PSB speakers 5.1 
  hide details  
    
CPUCPUMotherboardGraphics
i7-5930k @ 4.9  i7-3930k @ 5.1 (2nd rig) Asus Rampage V (X99) + Asus Rampage IV (2nd rig) 2X Nvidia 1080 Ti SLI watercooled 
GraphicsRAMRAMHard Drive
2X Nvidia 980 Ti SLI watercooled (2nd rig)  4X8GB=32GB G.Skill DDR4-2700 4X4GB=16GB Ripjaws DDR3 2400 CL9 (2nd rig) 3X Samsung 840 Evo 1TB SSD 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
Samsung 850 Pro 250GB 3XSeagate 3TB LG Blu-ray writer 2X Quad-120 MCR420 
CoolingCoolingCoolingCooling
2X Triple-120 MCR320 + 1X Triple-120 Feser 2X Dual-120 XSPC RX240 32 Gentle Typhoon fans (mix of 3000 and 1850rpm) Reservoir 2X Koolance RP-452x2 with 4X MCP655 p... 
CoolingOSMonitorKeyboard
2X EK Supreme HF CPU waterblock Windows 10 Pro x64 Acer XB270HU IPS G-Sync 2440p (main rig) 3X 30'... CoolerMaster Masterkeys Pro S MX blue switch, C... 
PowerCaseMouseAudio
Antec HCP1200 + AX850 dual PSU main rig, AX120... Mountain Mods Extended Ascension + Pedestal 24 ... Logitech G502 x 2 PSB speakers 5.1 
  hide details  
post #210 of 321
Re-testing with a faster CPU in the worse case is a waste of time and won't change anything. No harm in doing it. It is nothing but a scientific exercise of removing a possible source of error. If AMD is faster then the result won't change, right.

Off Topic, I am interested in those quadfire 3x30 results. I also have a hard time believing this CFX bandwidth " bottleneck" really exists.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Hardware News
This thread is locked  
Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Hardware News › [[H]ard|OCP] NVIDIA GeForce 3-Way SLI and Radeon Tri-Fire Review