That doesn't affect anything when the CPU test consists of a software renderer which does not utilize the graphics cards.Quote:
isn't xfire suppost to be more cpu intense ?
That doesn't affect anything when the CPU test consists of a software renderer which does not utilize the graphics cards.Quote:
isn't xfire suppost to be more cpu intense ?
Quote:
Originally Posted by mursaat
Hmmm I think CPU scores are in line... well my memory is running at puny 2-2-2-5 200mhz I think so it could see some improvement, etc. But this is my 24x7 setup anyway :P
http://service.futuremark.com/orb/pr...rojectId=75821
it does if the xfire driver needs cpu resources to run... the cards are still in xfire mode even if the cpu is doing the rendering...Quote:
Originally Posted by IvanAndreevich
any scores on intel systems?ill be getting my x1900xt næst week,and will post a couple off scores. nice scores by the way
Still waiting for motherboard. I heard it hasn't been sent yet.
Quote:
Originally Posted by vanovich
Only a cold cpu score ( 6.2GHZ 955XE ) so far on Intel with stock CF 1900s - 3Dmark05 was 16kwith stock cardsi. Have a feeling INtel will rule the marks - if a coldbug isse can be resolved
06:
http://img33.imageshack.us/img33/418...compare6tk.jpg
Wow the 955 looks dominating, time to freeze those cards :toast:
Looks like 955 XE is strong in 3DMark06 but FX-60 rules in 05.Quote:
Originally Posted by G H Z
wonder how they fair in pcmark05 :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Sampsa
really fu**ing nice sampsa, i hope u can reach 20k GL man
You don't understand what you are talking about :nono: Drivers won't affect performance if no hardware 3d is involved.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gnome
fx-60 is slower than fx-57 for single threaded apps.
go for 20k !
What power supply are you guys using running 1900 crossfire. I wonder if my OCZ 600W would hold up if I were to do that as well.
It seems like Futuremark sort of "calibrated" the FX60 and the 955XE. At stock speeds, they should be equal, but the 955XE generally gets significantly higher net overclocks. Sort of geared towards overclockers, but not necessarily a fully accurate gauge of performance, hence the advantage in 05 to the FX60.Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeguava
No worries though, you're still my hero. :D
Two cores, two cards, looks hella fun.
as a guess ;) 2k higher in PCMark04 than the current #1 DC AMD - 05 not sure yetQuote:
Originally Posted by eva2000
Sampsa - any news on the Sapp board yet?
Actually I think Gnome is right. CF consumes more CPU power than single card, there is no doubt about that. It does appear in the 06 CPU tests (still 3D running display drivers) that is still true.Quote:
Originally Posted by IvanAndreevich
Hi Macci, do you have tested the cards separately ?Quote:
Originally Posted by macci
So, why your Vga ram frequency was so slow ? limited by the mastercard ?
I imagine with 732/955 as my XTX the score will be impressive.
G H Z
Who is rendering the scene in the CPU tests? The CPU. 3d accelerators are not involved. So, with a FX5200 the CPU score should be the same as with X1900XTX.Quote:
It does appear in the 06 CPU tests (still 3D running display drivers) that is still true.
Theoretically yes. But its hard to completely take the GPU out of the picture. A better GPU will give you a better CPU score, even though its a small difference. Thats why when you overclock the GPU, CPU score goes up slightly.Quote:
Originally Posted by IvanAndreevich
ahmad
Point being in crossfire mode, more CPU resources are needed because the CPU needs to feed the info to two GPUs intead of one. Similarly, with SLI. Here no info is fed to any graphics cards at all.
Maybe someone with Crossfire can test with and without Crossfire enabled to end this discussion.
BTW I have a 2nd 1900 CF system up and running. (On a new different mobo.) It also has an FX-60. I ran 06 and got a much better CPU score. These benches are at all stock. What I am wondering is the 2nd system has 2GB of ram Vs 1GB. Could ram effect the CPU score? I noticed that the people that had a better CPU score than me had more ram....
Also has anyone got a better 06 score with CF on a 100% stock system?
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...1&d=1138806986
That looks like the highest stock I have seen. I saw 10k with stock video card, but at 10x260 on the CPU.
I completely agree with you. Just clearing up something you said :)Quote:
Originally Posted by IvanAndreevich
nice scores, but that X1900CF master card sux..
XTX wo coldbug would be much better and decent ATi RD580 mobo
Indeed...as hipro5 has shown...a maxed out x1900xtx without a coldbug with second revision drivers can easy beat or equal a maxed out 78GTX512 in 3d01.
Ofcourse in 3d05 there's no comparison ;) With 14k on air and 16k single card already broken...all thats left is 20k...but the CF is in the way.
Perkam
I cannot figure out why any one would go CF with these cards right now. Considering you need a really expensive PSU to support them, an expensive master card 1900, a CF MB. A HUGE amount of $ more for a 2nd card; and what do you get?
a lousy 12% gain in performance in 3d05 if your lucky enough to have a duel core cpu such as the fx-60; and in some single core cases almost no gain? I think CF is a joke, any one who buys into it with these 1900 series cards is a fool:slapass: or a filthily rich.:confused:
I will give ATI the benefit of the doubt and blame CF sucking on immature drivers but this is why consumers need to put their foot down along with their wallets and say no to CF!