ATI CrossFire limited to 60Hz @ 1600x1200, my my poor lil crossfire!

Discussion in 'Video Cards & Monitors' started by lowdog, Sep 16, 2005.

  1. lowdog

    lowdog Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2003
    Messages:
    4,301
    Location:
    Dreamland.
    Here's the low down: http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=26198, if true then this doesn't sound too good.

    Is it just me or is crossfire seeming to be more unappealing as more revelations about it come to light. :lol:
     
    Last edited: Sep 17, 2005
  2. OP
    OP
    lowdog

    lowdog Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2003
    Messages:
    4,301
    Location:
    Dreamland.
    And a quote from the article reads:

    "ATI suggests that 99.9 per cent of gamers are not using 1600x1200 and believes it plays on lower resolutions"

    ATI have got to be kidding, is this company realy this uninformed.....more likely just a lame excuse to try to justify crossfire's limitations. :lol:
     
  3. eva2000

    eva2000 DDR1/DDR2/DDR3 Addict

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2001
    Messages:
    21,902
    Location:
    Brisbane, Australia
    doesn't phase me much as i only use 1600x1200 LCD mon and stick to 4:3 aspect ratios don't like widescreen heh
     
  4. OP
    OP
    lowdog

    lowdog Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2003
    Messages:
    4,301
    Location:
    Dreamland.
    But your not a real gamer Eva. :D

    Most gamers with high end systems will want to game at 1600x1200 @ 85Htz, 60Htz is a no no for that res.
     
    Last edited: Sep 16, 2005
  5. theicemagic

    theicemagic Member

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2001
    Messages:
    3,964
    Location:
    Melbourne, Australia
    It's probably people who play on ATI systems don't play at 1600x1200... I don't.

    As far as a single card solution goes, they're right there with the 7800gtx, above it an below it depending on the situation...

    However, SLI brings that max res.
     
  6. Smudger

    Smudger Member

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2004
    Messages:
    79
    Location:
    Sydney
    If you're not playing at those resolutions, you won't exactly need Crossfire. If all you have is a 17" LCD that outputs 1280x1024, just a X800XL would be adequate. Anything 1280x1024 below would be bottlenecked by the CPU and the real power of Crossfire or SLI won't even be seen. ATI suggesting that "99.9 per cent of gamers are not using 1600x1200 and believes it plays on lower resolutions" is just ludicrous as a defence as the significant performance benefits Crossfire delivers is mostly at those high resolutions on current games.
     
  7. nugzta

    nugzta Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2005
    Messages:
    540
    Location:
    Sydney
    OMG I was planning to buy DFI Crossfire :(
     
  8. Zoiks

    Zoiks Member

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2003
    Messages:
    3,058
    Location:
    Ashgrove, QLD
    yet this is the enquirer. ATI is just about as big as NVIDIA is. Do you really think that they would be that stupid to create a SLI beating product and castrate it by putting a limitation like that on it?

    Didnt think so.

    Otherwise... I bid $10 on the crossfire testicals
     
  9. AMD64

    AMD64 Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2004
    Messages:
    2,982
    Location:
    NSW
    you have to conisder that if it is true it would lower manufactroing costs , and things of the such so it doesnt seem to far fetched to me
     
  10. SyK

    SyK Member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2001
    Messages:
    687
    Location:
    Beijing
    What possible game requires 2 cards to run at 1280?

    ... and how many gamers running 1600 are using LCDs? :confused:

    None, and none.

    I really hope this isn't true, sounds like a great way to shrink an awesome niche market product into a shit no market product to me. :sick:
     
  11. Oblong Cheese

    Oblong Cheese Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2001
    Messages:
    10,595
    Location:
    Brisbane
    The cards communicate via a DVI cable. So if someone with an intimate knowledge of DVI technology could comment, this issue would be resolved. Any takers?
     
  12. SyK

    SyK Member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2001
    Messages:
    687
    Location:
    Beijing
    Why cut costs on something that's designed to be high-cost high-desire high-end gear?
    Let alone when it cripples the product for the only use it had to begin with.
     
  13. SyK

    SyK Member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2001
    Messages:
    687
    Location:
    Beijing
    I'll go get proper bandwidth numbers, but if DVI can run 1920x1200 for display, how can it not run it from one card to another? And you'd really hope whatever they're doing isn't using the full equiv. bandwidth of normal output to transfer between cards, there's no way that could be efficient...

    So really common sense tells us, even with the 'slave' card just rendering every second frame, and sending a blank full frame for the others, and sending it all completely raw (Most inefficient method I could think of), it should be able to manage 1920 without a problem... :confused:

    But if you want numbers:
    Meaning it has 3 lines, with the much quoted "165MHz", so RGB for a pixel, (165,000,000 / 1920 / 1200) = ~70fps, not allowing for blanking or signalling or anything. Allowing for those presumably drags it down.

    Which I believe is what happens, wasn't there much talk of 1920 over single link being possible when it first happened, thanks to "Decreased blanking intervals"?

    I think this is exactly that, some journalist being a smartass because he's worked out that the chip can only do that rate, and not knowing or ignoring that that's the rate of standard single-link DVI, and that there've been ways around it for quite some time now. :rolleyes:

    [ Edit: added numbers, possible source of rumour ]
     
    Last edited: Sep 16, 2005
  14. Zoiks

    Zoiks Member

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2003
    Messages:
    3,058
    Location:
    Ashgrove, QLD
    exactly... it just would not make sense... lets sink millions into a product that will be as useful as tits on a bull
     
  15. SyK

    SyK Member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2001
    Messages:
    687
    Location:
    Beijing
    http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=26228

    Bingo.

    I e-mailed them, but perhaps somebody beat me to it, by the time the main page had reloaded this had appeared. :lol:

    To be honest, I think it's perfectly sensible at this level, given that a huge majority of people using this gear at this point in time are going
    to be 1600x1200 CRT or 1920x1200 LCD.

    Sure, he still has a bitch, and the higher would certainly be nice, and lack of it kills off the chunk that basically have to have it (ie. 30-inch Cinema Display rich-ass gamers. :p ) but it's a hell of a lot better than a 1600 cap, given the number of people with 1920 widescreens now.

    All this to make it all work with current cards as "slave" cards, too. OH, the pains of a hacked-on bandaid solution when the competition sneaks up on you with a big feature. :lol:
     
  16. Vanilla Ice

    Vanilla Ice Member

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2002
    Messages:
    2,327
    Location:
    Sydney
    What a rediculous statement :shock:

    I think you'll find ATi, that 99.9 percent of gamers won't be spending $1000+ on video cards (well maybe 99.5%).
     
    Last edited: Sep 16, 2005
  17. OP
    OP
    lowdog

    lowdog Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2003
    Messages:
    4,301
    Location:
    Dreamland.
    These facts are just that, FACT!

    No refresh rate above 60Htz @ 1600x1200. ATI just shot themselves in the foot. If they wanted to compete in the high end dual GPU department then this isn't the way to go about it. :rolleyes:

    [EDIT by SLATYE: Added your second post here, since it was directly after this one]
    Come on lets face it.

    If someone has the $$$ and want's the top end a dual card system, do you think they will even consider crossfire if it's limited at 60htz refresh rate with 1600x1200 res....NO WAY. ATI have just :confused: themselves out of the picture.

    Man what a marketing stratergy, why the hell did they even bother. Their a whole year behind Nvidia with a dual card setup and now they are intending to release a crippled contender into the foray. To far out there into the twilightzone for me to comprehend. :wired:
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 17, 2005
  18. anthony256

    anthony256 Member

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2001
    Messages:
    10,781
    Location:
    Adelaide
    How pathetic..

    The cards are completely limited at under 1600x1200 (7800GTX reviews show this, the 6800U/X850XT series of cards can keep up), but ABOVE 1600x1200 is where the new card/s shine.

    I myself upgraded from a 1600x1200 LCD to a 1920x1200 (20" > 24") and bought myself the 7800GTX for the higher resolution, even still, I have to turn some game details down (FEAR for example).

    Now, SLI, Crossfire, is mainly aimed at the enthusiasts.. who HAVE the money to blow on stuff like this. It's also aimed (well, in my eyes) at people who have larger displays who don't run wussy 1024x768 on high end cards.. as it is CPU limited. If you're running SLI 7800GTX @ 1024x768 you're a complete idiot. You wouldn't notice the difference between one or two. But.. if you had a 20/21/24 " CRT/LCD, you would be running a much higher resolution which chews through the video cards power.

    So, if they think people are going to solely buy Crossfire and run 1600x1200 without getting shit for it, think again. I won't be bothering with Crossfire as the only REASON I'd be going to it is so I can run higher resolutions (1600x1200 and up) without loss of frames (or cranking up AA, AF, etc).

    I'm quite disappointed with ATI :(
     
  19. anthony256

    anthony256 Member

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2001
    Messages:
    10,781
    Location:
    Adelaide
    60hz isn't that bad.. but it limits the higher end users to smallER monitors (under 20", etc). So, if you've got Crossfire and a 22" CRT/LCD or bigger, what's the point? Just get SLI.
     
  20. nVIDIAxp

    nVIDIAxp Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2003
    Messages:
    1,161
    Location:
    North Shore, Sydney
    true
    im recently revisiting farcry will 78gtx sli @2048*1536 4x Gammacorrect AA+8XAF with all the eyecandy turned to highest....

    it simply turned out to be a different game :shock:
     

Share This Page

Advertisement: