A Look At Triple-GPU Performance And Multi-GPU Scaling, Part 1
by Ryan Smith on April 3, 2011 7:00 AM ESTMass Effect 2, Wolfenstein, and Civ V Compute
Mass Effect 2 is a game we figured would be GPU limited by three GPUs, so it’s quite surprising that it’s not. It does look like there’s a limit at around 200fps, but we can’t hit that at 2560 even with three GPUs. You can be quite confident with two or more GPUs however that your framerates will be nothing short of amazing.
For that reason, and because ME2 is a DX9-only game, we also gave it a shot with SSAA on both the AMD and NVIDIA setups at 1920. Surprisingly it’s almost fluid in this test even with one GPU. Move to two GPUs and we’re looking at 86fps – again this is with 4x super sampling going on. I don’t think we’re too far off from being able to super sample a number of games (at least the console ports) with this kind of performance.
Wolfenstein is quite CPU limited even with two GPUs, so we didn’t expect much with three GPUs. In fact the surprising bit wasn’t the performance, it was the fact that AMD’s drivers completely blew a gasket with this game. It runs fine with two GPUs, but with three GPUs it will crash almost immediately after launching it. Short of a BSOD, this is the worst possible failure mode for an AMD setup, as AMD does not provide individual game settings for CF, unlike NVIDIA who allows for the enabling/disabling of SLI on a game-specific basis. As a result the only way to play Wolfenstein if you had a triple-GPU setup is to change CrossFire modes globally, which requires a hardware reconfiguration that takes several seconds and a couple of blank screens.
We only have one OpenGL game in our suite so we can’t isolate this as an AMD OpenGL issue or solely an issue with Wolfenstein. It’s disappointing to see AMD have this problem though.
We don’t normally look at multi-GPU numbers with our Civilization V compute test, but in this case we had the data so we wanted to throw it out there as an example of where SLI/CF and the concept of alternate frame rendering just doesn’t contribute much to a game. Texture decompression needs to happen on each card, so it can’t be divided up as rendering can. As a result additional GPUs reduce NVIDIA’s score, while two GPUs does end up helping AMD some only for a 3rd GPU to bring scores crashing down. None of this scores are worth worrying about – it’s still more than fast enough for the leader scenes the textures are for, but it’s a nice theoretical example.
| Radeon HD 6970 | GeForce GTX 580 | |||||
| GPUs | 1->2 | 2->3 | 1->3 | 1->2 | 2->3 | 1->3 |
| Mass Effect 2 | 180% | 142% | 158% | 195% | 139% | 272% |
| Mass Effect 2 SSAA | 187% | 148% | 280% | 198% | 138% | 284% |
| Wolfenstein | 133% | 0% | 0% | 151% | 96% | 145% |
Since Wolfenstein is so CPU limited, the scaling story out of these games is really about Mass Effect 2. Again dual-GPU scaling is really good, both with MSAA and SSAA; NVIDIA in particular achieves almost perfect scaling. What makes this all the more interesting is that with three GPUs the roles are reversed, scaling is still strong but now it’s AMD achieving almost perfect scaling on Mass Effect 2 with SSAA, which is quite a feat given the uneven scaling of triple-GPU configurations overall. It’s just a shame that AMD doesn’t have a SSAA mode for DX10/DX11 games; if it was anything like their DX9 SSAA mode, it could certainly sell the idea of a triple GPU setup to users looking to completely eliminate all forms of aliasing at any price.
As for Wolfenstein, with two GPUs NVIDIA has the edge, but they also had the lower framerate in the first place. Undoubtedly being CPU limited even with two GPUs, there’s not much to draw from here.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
97 Comments
View All Comments
Ryan Smith - Monday, April 4, 2011 - link
There are 2 reasons for that:1) We can't immediately get another 6990. I know it seems odd that we'd have trouble getting anything, but vendors are generally uninterested in sampling cards that are reference, which is why we're so grateful to Zotac and PowerColor for the reference 580/6970.
2) We actually can't run a second 6990 with our existing testbed. The Rampage II Extreme only has x16 slots at positions 2 and 4; position 6 is x8. The spacing needs for a 6990CF setup require 2 empty slots, meaning we'd have to install it in position 6. Worse yet is that position 6 is abutted by our Antec 1200W PSU - this isn't a problem with single-GPU cards as the blowers are well clear of the PSU, but a center-mounted fan like the 6990 would get choked just as if there was another card immediately next to it.
We will be rebuilding our testbed for SNB and using a mobo with better spacing, but that's not going to happen right away. The point being that we're not ignoring the 590/6990 multiple card configurations, it's just not something we're in a position to test right now.
piroroadkill - Monday, April 4, 2011 - link
As long as it's in the works, that's alright. Seems like you have your reasons for it being the way it is.Rukur - Monday, April 4, 2011 - link
This whole technology is stupid with monitors.Why don't you stitch together 3 projectors for a seamless canvas to play a game ?
SlyNine - Monday, April 4, 2011 - link
"This whole technology is stupid with monitors." Do you suppose neural interfaces will be her soon. kick ass.Rukur - Monday, April 4, 2011 - link
Can you read more than one sentence ?monkeyshambler - Monday, April 4, 2011 - link
Interesting stuff, but for a 3 card SLI / crossfire what I'd really want to see is what the framerates are when every setting on the card is maxed.e.g. 24x AA 16x AF, high quality settings selected in the driver control panels etc.
supplement this with whats the performance on triple SLI with 3 1920*1080 monitors @ 4x AA
As lets face it if your going to spend this sort of money (and likely a watercooling rig too as theirs no way three cards are tolerable otherwise) you want to have a genuine show of why you should invest.
The current resolutions just will never stretch the cards or enable them to differentiate significantly from a standard SLI setup.
Hope we can see some of the above in a future article....
Rukur - Monday, April 4, 2011 - link
I tend to agree. How is maxing everything any worse then half inch monitor bezels all over your play area.The whole idea of eye infinity is stupid unless we all look through widows with 1 inch gaps while racing extreme cars.
How about some projectors stitched together for real people to actually try.
erple2 - Tuesday, April 5, 2011 - link
Wasn't there an analysis a while back comparing 1x, 2x, 4x, 8x and 16x AA? I thought that the conclusion to that was that there's no discernible difference between 8x and 16x AA, and the differences between 4x and 8x were only visible in careful examination of static images. Under normal play, you couldn't actually tell any difference between them.Maybe I'm just remembering wrong.
Also, I think that Ryan mentioned why they haven't yet done the triple monitor tests yet (lack of hardware).
DanNeely - Tuesday, April 5, 2011 - link
That's generally correct. Toms Hardware has run PCI restriction tests roughly once per GPU generation. The only game that ever really suffered at x4 bandwidth was MS flight simulator.PCIe bandwidth can impact some compute tasks. Einstien@home runs about 30% faster on a 460 in an 16x slot vs an 8x.
fepple - Monday, April 4, 2011 - link
With my two 5870s I have a wierd problem in crossfire. I have two screens a 24''' LCD and a 37'' LED TV. When in crossfire if I play video on the second screen it gets some odd artifacts of black(ish) horizontal lines across the bottom of the screen. Only solution i've found is to not have the cards in crossfire and plug the TV/Screen into different cards for watching stuff.Annoying, any thoughts?