Originally Posted by nismogt1
Just as an FYI guys,
SLI splits the screen in two.One card " painting or rendering " each upper & lower half. Crossfire's approach is different because each card takes individual small sections " think of it as small squares like on a checkerboard " and reders them.
I dunno, I have had both Nvidia & ATI. Each seems to do better " per game " than the other. Meaning on 1 game The ATI will look a bit better or sharper/more color.The other game the same thing for Nvidia.
yes but ATI also has 2 different Crossfire modes as well:
from my previous link.
ATI CrossFire: Two ATI RadeonÂ® video cards, one with a "compositing engine" chip, plug into a compatible motherboard. ATI's technology focuses on image quality and does not require identical video cards, although high-performance systems must have identical cards. Crossfire divides up the work of rendering in one of three ways:
* splitting the screen in half and assigning one half to each card (called "scissoring")
* dividing up the screen into tiles (like a checkerboard) and having one card render the "white" tiles and the other render the "black" tiles
* having each card render alternate frames
Now which one is better? I can clearly see Crossfire being the superior multi-gpu solution with 3 different modes, one identical to SLI, and 2 other ones to mix it up for better results since some games will work better with one mode than the other. You can also mix and match different cards unlike SLI (4850+ 4870), and overclock each card individually.
But which one works better? lol then it would SLI. So much "Nvidia, its meant to be played" that are optimized for SLI, that is until Blizzard/Activion starts releasing some games, and we'll probably see some more ATI optimized titles.Edited by darksideleader - 2/21/09 at 9:17am