One card outperforms two? It's noted in the article as strange - and I want to see if I can reproduce that. I don't have a 30" monitor, but I'll do the same tests they did at 1920x1200 (and 1680x1050 if I find I need to). I'm wondering if it's just the board they used or has something to do with drivers - I'm also using 9.12, as they did in the article.
The PC I'm using is in my config.
At 1920x1200, CF Enabled:
no AA: 271 fps
4x AA: 221 fps
At 1920x1200, CF Disabled:
no AA: 127 fps
4x AA: 108 fps
Well, for my system, CF gives a significant performance increase, though one can hardly call the disabled form underperforming. I also note that my scores are much higher than what tom's found - sure, my CPU is clocked far higher than what they have...but in some cases I more than doubled their score! I made sure my settings were the same as theirs...anyone have any thoughts on this? Did I miss something, here? It would be cool if someone with another 5000 or even a 4000 CF system to run the numbers on this one. I can't seem to find other reviews with MW2.
Either I screwed up, or the hydra platform really hurts performance - but in the crossfire tests tom's did, the chip was disabled; is it really hampering performance still then?
I might run the tests again with my CPU downclocked - perhaps at 2.9GHz.