Overclock.net banner

1 - 14 of 14 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
21 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
This is a semi-hypothetical question.

I have a Sapphire 6950 Dirt3 (unlocked to 6970, healthily overclocked). Is it possible to do 3-monitor eyefinity at greater than 1080p resolution? Like with Yamakasi Catleap Q270s?

The card has
  • 1xDisplayPort 1.2
  • 1xDual-Link DVI-I
  • 1xSingle-Link DVI-D
  • 1xHDMI 1.4a

So I would use the dual link DVI, an active DP to DVI. My question is will the HDMI work for the third monitor? i.e. is there a way to convert HDMI 1.4a to DVI dual link?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
675 Posts
It is possible, what are you planning to do with them?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,436 Posts
HDMI 1.4 has at least the same bandwidth as dual-link DVI, so it can support the higher resolutions.

If you're planning on gaming though, you won't get good frame rates.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
21 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
Yeah I know, framerates would be crap, I would definitely need to add another 6950/6970 or else something even crazier. In which case this is a null point, most other cards (all 6970s and 7970s) come with 2 displayport and a DVI dual link.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
276 Posts
When I got my catleap I realized my toxic 6950 unlocked wasnt enough. It took me using two in crossfire to be able to max all my games and even then I still had dips. This was on a single catleap. I doubt my 7970 would even do 3 decently.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
21 Posts
Discussion Starter #8
What about adding a 6990 and going tri-fire? They seem to be going for ~500. That seems a lot more cost effective than any other option.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
21 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
Of course this is all semi-hypothetical as this would balloon out and become insanely expensive...

3x Monitors ($1000), requiring a 6990 ($500), requiring a kilowatt PSU ($200), and even then I would almost certainly be cpu limited by any quad core, requiring Sandy bridge-E ($600 + $250 motherboard)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
385 Posts
You won't be as bottlenecked with a highly overclocked 2500k as you may think.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
21 Posts
Discussion Starter #11
I'm at about 70% CPU usage in BF3 at 1920x1200, this is at 5 GHz. Does CPU usage scale linearly with resolution (pixels)?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
385 Posts
When going higher resolution it's mostly the GPU which has to increase its work load. The CPU's workload increases a bit considering you are rendering a bigger area and have to load more textures and all of that. I think you'll run into a GPU bottleneck before a CPU bottleneck...
 

·
Iconoclast
Joined
·
30,640 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobmilkman View Post

I'm at about 70% CPU usage in BF3 at 1920x1200, this is at 5 GHz. Does CPU usage scale linearly with resolution (pixels)?
Crank the resolution and CPU utilization will likely go down as you become more GPU limited.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,436 Posts
Nope. Most of that CPU utilization is actually calculating projectile path, and things like that for BF3. That's why you see dual cores hanging with the quad cores in single player and up to ~20 player servers, but as soon as you start getting above 32 players on a single server, CPU usage goes way up in order to keep track of everything.

You're generally more CPU bound at lower resolutions than you are at higher resolutions. That's why benchmarks taken at 1080P don't show much of a difference in performance between a 2500K and FX-8150, but it does show major differences at 1024x768.
 
1 - 14 of 14 Posts
Top