Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

CrossFire-on-a-Stick

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
April 6, 2007 5:31:19 PM

Sapphire unveils two processors on one PCB

More about : crossfire stick

April 6, 2007 5:51:38 PM

Looks interesting.

It looks more of a "collectors" item though.
April 6, 2007 6:16:16 PM

Lol , thanks for the laugh, The card looks cool only reason id consider getting it is because it a big nasty looken thing.
April 6, 2007 6:16:52 PM

Ok, they built it, but their drivers don't work very well. It may perform better than a plain 1950 Pro, but it still gets beaten by the 8800s. And it won't do DX10. So what's the point of it? Spend a lot of money to get an ATI card that doesn't beat a 8800? I already have that in my old 1900 XTX Toxic that I bought last summer. So, no thanks to this card.
April 6, 2007 6:25:24 PM

fck you. its idiots like you that ruin these forums.
April 6, 2007 6:37:42 PM

Uhh... why did they use an Intel board for their tests instead of the DFI Crossfire one? Since they couldn't get it running on an Nvidia board its obviously dependent on Crossfire, and wouldn't it be better to run it on an ATI Crossfire chipset? Also, if Crossfire was disabled for the Oblivion tests, why did the Sapphire perform so well in the outdoor tests? Last complaint: the article feels like it was hastily put together since it had quite a few typos. Interesting looking product though. Maybe AMD/ATI will release their own version of this with the R600s. :D 

-mcg
April 6, 2007 6:51:05 PM

Sapphire can't get even their normal catalyst drivers to work properly and now they are making this, I wish them well
April 6, 2007 6:53:37 PM

A card like that is very hard to swallow when you've got 320MB 8800GTSs running around for less if the price scheme is correct.
April 6, 2007 6:55:44 PM

Quote:
Ok, they built it, but their drivers don't work very well. It may perform better than a plain 1950 Pro, but it still gets beaten by the 8800s. And it won't do DX10. So what's the point of it? Spend a lot of money to get an ATI card that doesn't beat a 8800? I already have that in my old 1900 XTX Toxic that I bought last summer. So, no thanks to this card.


well, it is a pre-release sample. It is not final and yet it DOES beat an 8800gts in some tests... (well, it runs right with it anyway) that makes a possibly viable alternative if all the drivers issues are worked out by retail time. Seems like a cool product, more for the speculation in the article of 32 devices and the inherent benefits of xfire vs. sli... but we will have to see.
April 6, 2007 6:57:31 PM

Quote:
why can't you update the uk site at the same time. i cannot see the link, why does this have to be so.


fckin useless yanks :roll:


meh. Useful, useless... we have the article before you.


:twisted: ;) 
April 6, 2007 7:04:20 PM

because you are on the wrong continent.



:lol: 
April 6, 2007 7:15:55 PM

Quote:
'Just Say No' To Four GPUs

Quote:
The possibility of being able to hook up two cards in a "QuadFire" configuration would be cool.


So which is it, yes or no to four GPU's??
a c 108 U Graphics card
April 6, 2007 7:24:34 PM

Well if people though the 8800GTX was too big...think of this sucker....WOW
April 6, 2007 7:34:43 PM

Quote:
it's working now. why the delay though?

They had to translate it from "American English" to "British English". :roll:

-mcg
April 6, 2007 7:42:26 PM

ya stranger, they had to convert in the words lorry, torch, boot etc... and add in a few "oy!" and "bloody-eh!" cries to make it legible. lol.


they should really write a script to automate that... ;) 
April 6, 2007 8:04:03 PM

Quote:
Ok, they built it, but their drivers don't work very well. It may perform better than a plain 1950 Pro, but it still gets beaten by the 8800s. And it won't do DX10. So what's the point of it? Spend a lot of money to get an ATI card that doesn't beat a 8800? I already have that in my old 1900 XTX Toxic that I bought last summer. So, no thanks to this card.


well, it is a pre-release sample. It is not final and yet it DOES beat an 8800gts in some tests... (well, it runs right with it anyway) that makes a possibly viable alternative if all the drivers issues are worked out by retail time. Seems like a cool product, more for the speculation in the article of 32 devices and the inherent benefits of xfire vs. sli... but we will have to see.

I realize that it was a pre-release model, which at least in my mind makes the benches of questionable value. As for its being a replacement for the standard 1900-1950 series, I'm not sure that it meets its goals. Then again, it is a pre-release and not a retail card. For myself, if I was to step up in a video card, I'd either go for a 8800 GTX or wait for the R600 instead of getting another DX9 only card. But that's my choice and other people will make their choices.
April 6, 2007 8:11:35 PM

oh sure, and I agree with you.

from a pure technology, geeking-out view though I find this more interesting than the 8800. More so for the fact of that 32 device idea that has bee floating around crossfire for many moons. This is the first time anything has really materialized that shows that potential.

but stepping from theoretical/possible I would definitely get an 8800 at the moment if I was buying a new card right now. I just did not think that was the point of the article. :) 
April 6, 2007 10:00:43 PM

Quote:
it's working now. why the delay though?

They had to translate it from "American English" to "English". :roll:

-mcg

fixed :lol: 

lololol :lol:  :lol:  :lol: 


well you can see the idea has potential, but i guess its gonna take a few more releases before it really starts to kick in.
April 6, 2007 10:12:48 PM

seriously though stranger, can't you just surf to the US site? I realize that the principal is there for sticking w/ the UK site... but if you really wanted to read it couldn't you just jump over to the US site?



...of course, hoping the pond is a big jump but still... ;) 
April 6, 2007 10:27:43 PM

I don't have a second card as of yet but when I have two final production models I will attempt a four-way crossfire setup. I was traveling all week but I wanted to get this up before the weekend so people could start thinking about the possibilities of a multi-way CrossFire setup.

I tried hooking up an X1950 Pro to the Sapphire X1950 Pro Dual. When the Sapphire was in the first X16 slot and the second card was in the second, I could enable CrossFire. When I reversed the order I could not. I ran a few tests and got the same (similar) figures for 3DMark05 and Doom3.

I am going to see what can be done with the card I have here to see if overclocking is possible. Perhaps we can get more out of the card. I will also try some older drivers to see if there is one that makes CrossFire "happier" than the Catalyst 7.3 I used in the review.

I also plan to keep bugging AMD and Sapphire for a real driver that can enable quad operation.

If you have any ideas on what we should try to do with it (other than suggesting we turn it into a paper weight) I would be up for those.
April 6, 2007 10:28:25 PM

That's a huge b*tch!
April 6, 2007 11:41:35 PM

i have no idea who would buy this card with the r600 coming out and better 8-series cards already out, but it is quite interesting. it was a nice article, too. i'm glad to be partially proven wrong after that "letter to Omid" thread.
April 6, 2007 11:41:44 PM

Interesting engineering project for their engineers, but I don't really see this being a viable product. Mainly due to the timing of the thing.

If r600 is all its cracked up to be, and it is due out in a month or so, assuming this thing launches around the same time, why would anybody want one? I could possibly see such solutions being useful on non-crossfire boards as an upgrade path, but I simply don't see potential buyers for this product.

Lack of DX10 support, and AMD/ATI support also hurt it.

Maybe they are already working on a dual r600 solution as well which depending on price & config could be cool.

Just my opinion, and I am just a lonely pessimistic bastard. :) 
April 6, 2007 11:51:23 PM

yeah, concept design like the infamous 4x4? :lol:  couldn't help my self.

i agree, though. not necessarily something that i'd do as a CEO of a company, but... thats probably why i'm NOT a CEO. and it would be cool if there were r600 applications of this technology coming in the near future as phaxmohdem suggested :D 
a b U Graphics card
April 7, 2007 12:29:52 AM

Being that 4x4 is supposed to be a reality, keep bugging them for a quad/xfire driver. If you get one along with another dual 1950 pro Toms could fiiiinally have a great scoop
April 7, 2007 12:34:33 AM

i meant 4x4 as in amd's 4x4 platform btw
a b U Graphics card
April 7, 2007 1:25:01 AM

Right, we just need the other four
April 7, 2007 1:36:41 AM

Way to insult 300,000,000 people :roll:
April 7, 2007 1:40:12 AM

Quote:
Right, we just need the other four



OOOOOH yeah gotcha :lol:  my bad.

anyway, i'm not retarded in thinking that people have done quad-sli before, correct? as in two 7950 gtx thingies, which are like the Dual from the review? just curious, and making sure i'm not tricking myself.
April 7, 2007 2:07:32 AM

actually, on many of amd/atis plan thingys i can't remember the proper name yet, they have a card similar to the 7950gtx2 called the x2900xtxx2, maybe sapphire could be the first people to release such a card since they already have the ground work done?
April 7, 2007 5:33:16 AM

Haha, this thing is a diesel bomb yet the author likes it. It can't even beat the single chip X1950XTX...
April 7, 2007 5:45:53 AM

I certainly hope the retail version (if it comes out) does have functioning drivers. It baffles my mind why a graphics card manufacturer would invest the R&D and bucks into a product that requires driver support and drop the ball on that.

It's size may make it impossible to install in a lot of cases, it doesn't support DX10, and other better chips are already on the horizon. The potential for "quadfire" sounds good, but until we see it working it is just a paper product.

Need graphics horsepower? Stick with two watercooled overclocked 8800GTX cards in SLI.
a b U Graphics card
April 7, 2007 6:14:49 AM

I have a suggestion. How about testing this against a similar single cards in Xfire? That would show the advantage/disadvantage of having it on a single board. Also, I may have read the article wrong but did it say you have to have a Xfire board to use this? So people with a single 16x pci-e board are out of luck? I thought the appeal of these was, in addition to catering to the Uber-enthusist who wants 4 GPUs, to allow Xfire/SLI performance on the cheaper single 16x boards most people have. The dual cards from NVidia didn't need an SLI board did they?
a b U Graphics card
April 7, 2007 6:39:06 AM

I remember there being usibility issues...dont think it was driver related, if I remember it was mobo related. Whether or not it was a sli issue or not I dont remember
a c 171 U Graphics card
April 7, 2007 7:09:26 AM

I can't believe it took 2 pages before someone noticed. Why wasn't a normal x1950pro CF setup tested as well??? Are there any advantages to buying this card performance wise? Toms tested it against plenty of other setups, but not this one? Gee thanks. Good way for us to see how well this works.
April 7, 2007 8:38:49 AM

Quote:
I don't have a second card as of yet but when I have two final production models I will attempt a four-way crossfire setup. I was traveling all week but I wanted to get this up before the weekend so people could start thinking about the possibilities of a multi-way CrossFire setup.

I tried hooking up an X1950 Pro to the Sapphire X1950 Pro Dual. When the Sapphire was in the first X16 slot and the second card was in the second, I could enable CrossFire. When I reversed the order I could not. I ran a few tests and got the same (similar) figures for 3DMark05 and Doom3.

I am going to see what can be done with the card I have here to see if overclocking is possible. Perhaps we can get more out of the card. I will also try some older drivers to see if there is one that makes CrossFire "happier" than the Catalyst 7.3 I used in the review.

I also plan to keep bugging AMD and Sapphire for a real driver that can enable quad operation.

If you have any ideas on what we should try to do with it (other than suggesting we turn it into a paper weight) I would be up for those.


I am looking forward to seeing what those results are.

I also agree w/ others here about testing against a "regular" cf setup...

rock on man.
a c 171 U Graphics card
April 7, 2007 10:20:42 AM

Agreed, but then the article should have been put off for a bit. Show the card against what it is supposed to be competing. Show it against a set of 7900GS in sli. Put it up against some 7950GTs. Include an 8800GTS/X to remind people what they could get if they selected a better higher card. But why not include the cards this thing could replace? Sure, I could go find my own link, but it doesn't seem that hard to go find a pair of X1950pros to CF together.

It seems like a certain someones rant against this place was well deserved. Instead of waiting until they could do this right, they rushed it out the door comparing it to many cards execpt what seems like the most logical. I want to see this benchie because it will show us if this is a better way of doing CF or not. If there is a ~3% difference between this card and a "real" CF setup, then I know it isn't any better to do it this way. (from a performance standpoint at least, heat/power might be a different story.)
April 7, 2007 10:21:49 AM

well i know they have more than 1 x1950pro, because i've seen them use a few different ones.
a b U Graphics card
April 7, 2007 12:18:53 PM

Quote:
fck you. its idiots like you that ruin these forums.


What are you going to do about it?? neener neener neener puhlease.
April 7, 2007 3:46:32 PM

Am I still right in thinking that Vista doesn't support multiple GPU setups and therefore that this product is an XP-only piece of kit until Vista or ATi drivers are updated?

Taking the assumption that I am right into account, doesn't this mean that this card will have a somewhat limited lifespan? I suppose its DX9 architecture also backs up my thinking.

I don't expect this card to be cheap, I certainly don't expect it to be as cheap as an 8800GTS 320Mb which is my personal bang-for-buck winner at the mo. 1950 Pros were designed for mid range performance, so this card isn't going to be the winner in its price class, why didn't they shimmy 2 more powerful GPU's onto there...such as XTXs?
April 7, 2007 5:46:36 PM

So its not even as good as an 8800 GTS? Dissapointing!
April 8, 2007 4:35:47 AM

Quote:
That's a huge b*tch!


correction: That's a TALL b*tch
April 9, 2007 9:24:34 AM

Quote:
Can fathom trying to cool two xtxs on one card? Those would get way too hot, and the x1950pro still beats out the 7950gt, nvidia's price:p erformance card, but considering the card held it's own compared to the gtx, I don't know what you are talking about it, it's scores were only slightly lower for most things than the gtx, so I think it's performance is good enough, whether quad xfire will work or not is a different story, but as a stand alone card, it performed quite well and gamers aren't going to switch to vista for a while, very few have, most will stick with xp until all their games perform as smoothl on vista and sp1 has been released, so I don't see much of a problem with the vista issue either, anyone that would be buying this gpu would at least have some computer knowledge and would at least know somethings on the vista issue


I do apologise, I thought it was on a par with the 8800GTS not the GTX, forgive me. Seeing as the GTX is the top card right now then getting 2 mid-range GPUs to rival it just by putting the chip which links them on the same PCB is rather impressive.

Admittedly putting 2 XTXs on the same card would be stupid but I was just trying to think of a feasible route they could use to get even more power and seeing as they can't use 2 8800 chips as they belong to nVidia the XTX was my only other choice. I assume that r600-based cards are going to demand a beefy PSU and so jamming 2 of those together would require a stupendous PSU.

I guess progress on this card is dependant upon manufacturer driver support. I just hope that if they release this they'll treat it better than nVidia did the 7950GX2.

It's good to see companies pushing out high-performance but good value single-slot graphics cards for all of us who bought non sli/crossfire mobo's because it's not something we see ourselves indulging in. All things considered I think 2007 has been and will continue to be an exciting year for GPU releases.
April 9, 2007 10:38:17 AM

Quote:
I do apologise, I thought it was on a par with the 8800GTS not the GTX, forgive me. Seeing as the GTX is the top card right now then getting 2 mid-range GPUs to rival it just by putting the chip which links them on the same PCB is rather impressive.

Admittedly putting 2 XTXs on the same card would be stupid but I was just trying to think of a feasible route they could use to get even more power and seeing as they can't use 2 8800 chips as they belong to nVidia the XTX was my only other choice. I assume that r600-based cards are going to demand a beefy PSU and so jamming 2 of those together would require a stupendous PSU.

I guess progress on this card is dependant upon manufacturer driver support. I just hope that if they release this they'll treat it better than nVidia did the 7950GX2.

It's good to see companies pushing out high-performance but good value single-slot graphics cards for all of us who bought non sli/crossfire mobo's because it's not something we see ourselves indulging in. All things considered I think 2007 has been and will continue to be an exciting year for GPU releases.


the R600s will be on par with the 8800 series for power consumption. If it drew much more power there wouldn't be a feasible way to cool it effectively, cheaply and on a large scale.
April 9, 2007 11:03:36 AM

Quote:
Ok, they built it, but their drivers don't work very well. It may perform better than a plain 1950 Pro, but it still gets beaten by the 8800s. And it won't do DX10. So what's the point of it? Spend a lot of money to get an ATI card that doesn't beat a 8800? I already have that in my old 1900 XTX Toxic that I bought last summer. So, no thanks to this card.


well, it is a pre-release sample. It is not final and yet it DOES beat an 8800gts in some tests... (well, it runs right with it anyway) that makes a possibly viable alternative if all the drivers issues are worked out by retail time. Seems like a cool product, more for the speculation in the article of 32 devices and the inherent benefits of xfire vs. sli... but we will have to see.

I realize that it was a pre-release model, which at least in my mind makes the benches of questionable value. As for its being a replacement for the standard 1900-1950 series, I'm not sure that it meets its goals. Then again, it is a pre-release and not a retail card. For myself, if I was to step up in a video card, I'd either go for a 8800 GTX or wait for the R600 instead of getting another DX9 only card. But that's my choice and other people will make their choices.

Sailer, I don't think that the 7950gt beats the 8800 and that is dual GPU too. The 8800 is hard to beat.
-cm
a c 171 U Graphics card
April 10, 2007 6:40:34 AM

Quote:
I don't think that the 7950gt beats the 8800 and that is dual GPU too.


The 7950GT is NOT a dual GPU card. Your thinking of the 7950GX2.
April 10, 2007 3:19:43 PM

Just to put one thing into perspective, there is a hint that a dual R6xx based card could be in the future. Of course we cannot get confirmation about "future products" but we are confident this could be true. So perhaps this is more of a proof of concept as dual X850 was the proof for CrossFire.
a c 171 U Graphics card
April 10, 2007 3:57:02 PM

Quote:
But the x1950xt is looking more and more appealing after seeing the 8600 ultra flop :) 


The x1950pro/XT look to be very good deals. Consider that you can get a pro for ~$150, and an XT for ~$200, both appear to be cheap then the 8600GTS, and both provide better frame rates. If I highly overclocked 8600GTS can't beat an x1950pro, then the only fault with the x1950 series is the lack of DX10. And that really isn't a bad thing until DX10 only games start to show up...
a c 171 U Graphics card
April 10, 2007 5:29:32 PM

Just a thought here folks, maybe we're all wrong about this. Nvidia seems to use a 128bit memory bus for all their midrange cards. Both the 6600GT and 7600GT used it. Neither of these cards could beat the top dogs of their day, but they were very popular at the time. The 7600GT is still a popular card for those that don't need "insane" amounts of power. Perhaps this card is a good deal, it after all does equal one of AMDs current "power" offerings as long as AA/AF is turned off.

Oh wait, I forgot. Its MSRP is higher then even the highest end card that ATI makes, never mind. It will flop...
a c 171 U Graphics card
April 11, 2007 5:50:39 AM

Thats the previous high end. When the 6600GT came out, the x800 series was out from ATI. Same with the 7600GT. They might not have come out at the same time, but they were close.

I'm not saying the 8600GTS is a bad card, just overpriced. Knock the price down to $150ish, and you've got a deal. Its silly to buy a card right now just because it supports DX10. By the time DX10 games come out, there will be much better cards out.
!