Sign-in / Sign-up
Your question

New ATI 5000 Series Crossfire Question

Tags:
  • Graphics Cards
  • New Build
  • Crossfire
  • ATI
  • Graphics
  • Product
Last response: in Graphics Cards
September 8, 2009 4:38:35 PM

I plan on getting one ait hd 4890 for my new build but its not going to take full advantage of dx11, but the new 5000 series will be taking full advantage of dx11... so my question is can i xfire the 4890 with a new 5000 series and be able to get the full effects of dx11 when its released?

More about : ati 5000 series crossfire question

a c 332 U Graphics card
September 8, 2009 4:42:10 PM

Probably not, but who knows.
m
0
l
a c 249 U Graphics card
September 8, 2009 5:12:41 PM

maybe not. they used different chip right? but who knows, maybe ATi can develop some drivers to make it happen. :D 
anyway just wait when the real things comes out. you will get your answers by then
m
0
l
Related resources
September 8, 2009 5:53:17 PM

haha yea, im thinkin about ordering the parts in pieces anyways, the gpu will be the last part ill buy due to the fact that my mobo will have a decent on board gpu... i really rather not spend money on a card that wont use the new graphic technology
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
September 8, 2009 8:27:10 PM

maybe use the 4890 for physics
m
0
l
a c 332 U Graphics card
September 8, 2009 8:28:48 PM

obsidian86 said:
maybe use the 4890 for physics

Not any more.
m
0
l
a c 332 U Graphics card
September 8, 2009 8:30:04 PM

Not that you could anyway.
m
0
l
a c 249 U Graphics card
September 8, 2009 8:33:16 PM

you can use 4890 as dedicated physic card? i thought that this physics are nvidia's thing.
m
0
l
September 8, 2009 9:59:24 PM

You can just wait 1 more day and then ask questions if you have any. Ati will unveil their 5000 series Thursday morning
m
0
l
September 8, 2009 10:01:09 PM

Mousemonkey said:
Ahh, I stand corrected. Although that has less of a line up than Nvidias.


I would say HAVOK has a better catalogue of games then PhysX for a start it's supported by Valve and PhysX as yet lacks a single killer title to it's name at the moment all it has is load very good to medicore titles in it's line up. Whilst physics are over talked on these forums (I won't say overrated as I've yet to see anyone rave about them) and their importance over stated at times HAVOk does has the advantage of having it's load shared between both the the video card and the CPU.
m
0
l
a c 332 U Graphics card
September 8, 2009 10:03:53 PM

But it has the disadvantage of AMD's marketing department.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
September 8, 2009 10:22:31 PM

yeah " look at my dedicated havok card " doesn exactly roll off the tongue
m
0
l
September 9, 2009 1:20:23 AM

Its probably going to be like the old days when you had a 2D card, a 3D card (voodoo) and a DVD accellerator card. But insead we will have a Nvidia card for physx, an ATI card for Havok and a Intel larrabee for god knows what.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
September 9, 2009 1:26:36 AM

^^ yea that would be a voodoo ;p
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
September 9, 2009 6:01:06 AM



That's the 2006 version of HavokFX that never really got past the demo stage, Intel bought it and totally changed the methodology.

Havok phyics now is nothing like it was in 2006, and by 2008 ATi said it was dead.

The current Havok is OpenCL based an is focused on hardware above the X1K series, and likely won't even be code for the HD2K and GF8&9 series.

As for multi-card situations, there's not much detail on it yet, most early trials are 1 GPU.

As for Xfiring HD5K and HD4K, nearly impossible due to the changes in architecture.

It's pretty safe to say no Xfire for different generations, only possible use would be general style computing.
m
0
l
September 9, 2009 9:36:27 AM

Since DX 10.1 is close to DX 11 you might have full compatibility for the first few months that might even make up a
full year and with the constant CC updates this could turn out not to be a problem until the 6000 Series.

m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
September 9, 2009 10:00:19 AM

Any news on the probable release of new cards from NVIDIA and ATI?
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
September 9, 2009 10:31:49 AM

Almost impossible for the reasons ape said.

Just hold off a few more weeks, not that long to wait. In fact we will be hearing about the cards in the next few days (on the 10th right? I forgot when it was set.)
m
0
l
September 9, 2009 4:04:56 PM

yea i can hold off no problem, just wanted to know if that would work... i wonder how much better dx11 is going to be then 10? 10 is much better then 9 so kind of expecting another large leap
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
September 10, 2009 12:11:40 AM

It is more of a leap in how it deals with things rather then how it looks. You should see (once DX11 games come out) you should see games look the same but possibly demand less power to run.
m
0
l
a c 249 U Graphics card
September 10, 2009 4:39:00 AM

yea. i heard it was something like that. the dx 11 is strictly superset to dx 10.1 then the look should be not to far off from what we can see from dx 10. but the dx 11 ease the shader rendering with the new shader (or something like that) thus reduce the power consumption of the card.....

at least thats how i understand it should work
m
0
l
September 10, 2009 11:43:14 PM

yea well most features of dx11 are going to be moved over to the dx 10/10.1 gpus so waiting isnt really gettin you anywhere for the most part... not many games use dx10 anyways and dx11 games sure as hell wont be developed for a while
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
September 11, 2009 12:12:45 AM

yeah but why drop money now and later? Even count price drops on the new cards if your going to get another card to crossfire now with the 4000 then move to the 5000 series within a few moneys your wasting money.
m
0
l
September 11, 2009 1:18:18 AM

well iv ordered everything but the card, so im waiting to see what all the hipe is about and then after everything steadies down ill decide which card ill get but a 4890 for 150 or so sounds mighty sexy to me :) 
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
September 11, 2009 11:46:35 AM

JeanLuc said:
I would say HAVOK has a better catalogue of games then PhysX for a start it's supported by Valve and PhysX as yet lacks a single killer title to it's name at the moment all it has is load very good to medicore titles in it's line up. Whilst physics are over talked on these forums (I won't say overrated as I've yet to see anyone rave about them) and their importance over stated at times HAVOk does has the advantage of having it's load shared between both the the video card and the CPU.


True, but to use Havok, you have to use their engine, which is not an option for many devs simply because of limitations teh engine imposes. PhysX is an API, so any engine can import and use PhysX, giving devs free choice.

The issue, of course, is since ATI refuses to support it, no one is willing to make a game with PhysX replacing a software based physics engine, instead relegating the standard to an optional add-in layer, limiting the effects that can be used.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
September 11, 2009 6:53:36 PM

gamerk316 said:
True, but to use Havok, you have to use their engine, which is not an option for many devs simply because of limitations teh engine imposes. PhysX is an API, so any engine can import and use PhysX, giving devs free choice.


So might Havok, because it will work off of OpenCL, which I'm sure you know is an Open API, so that may or may not be a defining characteristic, but like Havok, PhysX is ALSO a proprietary Engine, so you can use both, as was the case with GRAW which used Havok for the underlying Physics and PhysX for the add-on debris physics.

Quote:
The issue, of course, is since ATI refuses to support it, no one is willing to make a game with PhysX replacing a software based physics engine, instead relegating the standard to an optional add-in layer, limiting the effects that can be used.


Actually it's not only ATi that refuses to support it, it's Intel and S3, that also refuse to support the restriction that a CUDA layer must be supported by them and give nV access to all their hardware calls, but even nVidia won't support it the way Ageia originally did, now limiting PPU use, and also refusing to allow you to use it on other people's systems if you do not use an nVidia card as the graphics rendering card. So it's not like it's only one company not playing nice, it was nV trying to use the limited PhysX install base to leverage other companies to give up their IP, and that wasn't about to happen, and in so doing they themselves limited the adoption and future of PhysX (Novodex) which was already limited (compared to Havok) before Ageia bought them and then nV bought them.
m
0
l