MultiGPU Update: Does 3-way Make Sense?
by Derek Wilson on February 25, 2009 2:45 PM EST- Posted in
- GPUs
Power Consumption
No surprises here really. 3-way hardware requires more power at idle and load. Remember that these numbers are total system power consumption, but that these numbers are run with the 3dmark Vantage POM shader test. This means the rest of the system isn't pushed very hard at all. Depending on the game, you could expect real load power draw to be 50 to 100W higher.
While NVIDIA hardware seems to handle idle power a bit better, at load 3-way SLI tends to require much more than 3-way CrossFire. But this is in line with what we saw with 2-way solutions as well.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
46 Comments
View All Comments
MagicPants - Wednesday, February 25, 2009 - link
I've been playing a bit of GTA4 recently, it runs well on my dual 285 system but I've heard there is no SLI support. It might be nice to include a few of these types of games in the mix.Honestly the only game I've played where SLI matters (on 1920x1200) is Crysis.
MagicPants - Wednesday, February 25, 2009 - link
Having the cutoff of 25fps really effected the value of cards. It was interesting to see the values at different resolutions as well.Now I just want to see an interactive graph where I can enter a game and a resolution and it will tell me what video card is the best value. That's not asking too much is it? :)
... or enter a game and resolution and the thing tells me what to put in my system (cpu, memory, motherboard, video card)
plonk420 - Wednesday, February 25, 2009 - link
i'm not even a proponent of SLI/dualGPU until 100% of games work with the technology (and see a worthwhile increase of performance).mastrdrver - Wednesday, February 25, 2009 - link
I think it would have been interesting to see a 2 and 3 way of the 4830 added to all this. Sure it maybe on the lowend of things, but it could have a great value at maybe 1920 and 1680 compared to the more expensive counterparts.stym - Thursday, February 26, 2009 - link
I would like to see that too. I am going to buy a new system next month and I am torn between a single 4870 and two 4830. Same price tag, but what about performance? The problem is, it should have been considered in the previous article. Although I am convinced a two-way 4830 crossfire configuration may provide great performance at a budget price, I doubt a 3-way 4830 makes a lot of sense in a system. You would have to buy a MoBo with three x16 PCI Express slots, and I would not pair that with lower end cards.mastrdrver - Friday, February 27, 2009 - link
It could be a cheap way to go to an i7 platform with power. Spend all the money on the board/memory/cpu and spend ~$300 USD on 3 cards that have a lot of power. If the 4380s scales as well as either the 4850 or 4870, you could have a very powerful but cheap card setup. Not even 300 will buy you a 4870x2. Sure 3 4830s won't beat it, but it will be between a 4870 and the x2. For $300, it sounds like a great deal.Razorbladehaze - Wednesday, February 25, 2009 - link
"Pairing a single card dual GPU AMD card with a single card single GPU option to get 3-way CrossFireX also seems to have a positive impact on microstutter. "I am a little unclear by this statement, I read it as, pairing this combo eliminates the microstutter. But i am concerned that a positive impact could also mean that the FPS in spite of microstutter increases.
This really was the article of most interest to me, as opposed to the 2-way, or 4-way configurations. I find the graphs to be clear and concise with the information they convey.
I find it surprising that there is less discussion on image quality or distortions during benches (yes i know it is difficult to qualitative judge this). I find it hard to believe that these configurations run these game without much flaws, glitches, tearing, flickering in image quality, as my experience has been. I suppose though that if all these issues are resulting from driver optimizations as i suspect, then these commonly benchmarked, newer games get those driver tweaks.
Anyways the only real comments that may be helpful to the actual presentation of material is i agree with the other fellow that the zero point is not contiguous within the graphs. The more accurate the information the better, as opposed to creating a null value, most people understand what is "playable" for their tastes in different genres (at least most people that i believe read these sites). Further I know that my next suggestion is not as mathematically clean as what you have done, but would produce more useful (based upon card prices/selling points) results. Instead of the FPS per $100 spent, change to FPS per $20 or $50 ($50 would be my choice).
Antman56 - Wednesday, February 25, 2009 - link
I wrote an article about it weeks ago. Its a 4850X2 2GB crossfired with a 4850 1GB. Its good.http://forums.anandtech.com/messageview.aspx?catid...">http://forums.anandtech.com/messageview.aspx?catid...
Denithor - Wednesday, February 25, 2009 - link
to the third card option - when the addition of that extra card results in decreased performance? Shouldn't those ones get "0" value ratings?DerekWilson - Wednesday, February 25, 2009 - link
good point ... we'll try and refine it a little more.