Lucid Hydra on Smackover 2

[Sr7]

all that for no reason, first of all, i end my post with this...




second i never said anything about evil corporations, ever, I said market and money controls, which is hardly evil, its logical, and its what has to be done in the eagles eyes of the stock holders.

While things upgrade rather quickly, companies still try to hold onto things that are big money makers, its obvious, look how long Nvidia dangled around the G80, and SLI and Xfire now has been around for quite some time.


YOu wanna make this massive post about how you dont think this works, yet it has been demoed many times and without fail. You saying the demos are fakes? Now who's talking evil corporation.

Not trying to be offensive. Just it seems you are arguing something with no "direct points" I understand some of your points, but where do they lead?

Its like your almost using your points to say Hydra is bull. It doesnt exist and wont work.

When they are saying release is Q1, chip is done, and explain what it does and have showed what it does.

So they are lying about it all?

I too want to know some of the answers you are seeking, but you and I are different hear, you are asking the questions like the Hydra chip is a theory. When i want to ask the questions to know the answers that I know exist.

your coming off almost as a conspiracy theorist. Like its some big bull crap all made up to get people going.

I must say, you are one depressing cat.

There's a difference between lying and inflating the truth while trying to get investors. I'm sure they have something they've shown as I alluded to already, but it's not as easy as you guys think to make this type of thing work, let alone work fluidly.

Come on, you honestly think you can have their 3rd party tech know how much work to send to each GPU? How can you get 100% scaling unless you perfectly divide the work? If the workload is different (one does geometry, one does textures) as you say, how could you possibly know the amount of time it would take to render each portion, to ensure you're getting maximum overlapped rendering (i.e. scaling)?

Not to mention the entire point of a graphics pipeline is you're bottlenecked somewhere in it... if you're bottlenecked by texturing, it won't do you any good to split off the geometry rendering phase to another GPU, because you'll STILL have that same texture bottleneck in the chip doing the texturing. Do you guys understand how bottlenecks work at all? You're only as fast as your slowest point in the chain.

Different generations of chips do operations at different precisions.. you'll end up with different colors running the same thing through each chip. You really want to combine those into 1 final image?

Clearly you guys are sold on this but I really think there is a lot of naivete here. I'm not accusing any corporation of lying, but I think you guys are just lapping this up. Clearly there are a lot of people posting here who don't understand how this stuff works, and that's okay.. but please don't try to flame someone who clearly has more knowledge on the topic.

[Manicdan]

Come on, you honestly think you can have their 3rd party tech know how much work to send to each GPU? How can you get 100% scaling unless you perfectly divide the work? If the workload is different (one does geometry, one does textures) as you say, how could you possibly know the amount of time it would take to render each portion, to ensure you're getting maximum overlapped rendering (i.e. scaling)?

by measuring latency of the workload sent and adjust accordingly. its really not too hard to have a monitor built into the chip that checks how long it takes to have the frame information of each gpu replied back. and who knows if the hydra chip will come with a benchmarking type program that measures the gpu(s) for performance, and uses that info to know which is better for which features.

[Sr7]

by measuring latency of the workload sent and adjust accordingly. its really not too hard to have a monitor built into the chip that checks how long it takes to have the frame information of each gpu replied back. and who knows if the hydra chip will come with a benchmarking type program that measures the gpu(s) for performance, and uses that info to know which is better for which features.

That wouldn't work, otherwise microstutter would be solved by now. You can't just "measure and adjust" because you don't know what the next frames frametime will be. Each frame can be wildly different, run fraps sometime to see your frametimes on a per-frame level, then look at it and ask yourself "what could a LUCID driver extrapolate on to ensure it knows how fast 1 gpu is relative to another?" Each chip will be faster or at different points, depending on clocks and arch bottlenecks. They can't just predict that kind of stuff.

If you did what you say, you'd end up slowing down potentially faster frames.

u should use your own advice, u talk as if you made the chip yourself, but dont believe its even possible.

try to think outside of what SLI and CF do, then u can talk to us about how the hydra works

Uh, I'm not talking about how Hydra works, I'm talking about general rendering... clearly many people have been swooned by the idea and have bought in full bore Call me a skeptic.

[Manicdan]

Clearly you guys are sold on this but I really think there is a lot of naivete here. I'm not accusing any corporation of lying, but I think you guys are just lapping this up. Clearly there are a lot of people posting here who don't understand how this stuff works, and that's okay.. but please don't try to flame someone who clearly has more knowledge on the topic.

u should use your own advice, u talk as if you made the chip yourself, but dont believe its even possible.

try to think outside of what SLI and CF do, then u can talk to us about how the hydra works