Brothers PC (Win7 64bit) NOT using SLi
PCIe #1 (Closest to CPU, Blue Slot)
Zotac GTS 250 #1
Driving Philips 246EL #1 & #2
PCIe #2 (Furthest from CPU, Black Slot)
Zotac GTS 250 #2
Driving I-inc iH252
FurMark shows card #1 loaded to 99% and card #2 loaded to 0% when displayed on a screen connected to card #1
FurMark shows card #1 loaded to 93% and card #2 loaded to 13% when displayed on a screen connected to card #2
Why is card #1 doing all the work and Card #2 being nothing but a port expander?
We are not using Crossfire/SLi so each video card should only be processing for the monitors connected to it.
My old AGP/PCI setup used the proper card.
PLEASE STOP TRYING TO HELP ME GET CROSSFIRE/SLI WORKING, IT IS NOT THE ISSUE.
We do not use crossfire/sli because we never game in fullscreen mode.
I want the cards to correctly work like two independent graphics cards, and not to shift all the load to one card. Just like the my old AGP/PCI setups did.
These might seem like dumb questions, but we need to get the easy things out of the way, so i'll ask anyway: do you have the the crossfire bridge attached? Do you have crossfire enabled in the Catalyst Control Center?
I also found the following links that suggest furmark does not support crossfire without renaming the .exe for some reason.
I figure when I get this solved on one system the same solution will work on the other, so I'll use my computer as the guinea pig.
With and without the crossfire bridge is the same, card one has all the load.
Crossfire is off, but I made sure by turning it on and then back off. (while its on my other two monitor go blank so I know it was toggling)
you could probably test this by putting one of your brothers cards in your machine and one of your cards in his machines and running dual drivers. I believe you need windows 7 to do this, but i can't seem to locate the page that i remember reading. http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/270289-33-video-drive... here is a link to something that suggests that though, even though the cards being used were outdated. Sorry, i'm really trying to help here.
Yep both are similar
"Sorry! The page you requested couldn't be found"
"Page not found"
I'll have to get back to this later.
Two computers here went down, the year old SSD's killed over. They just vanished from bios and can't be detected by any of my hardware.
What pisses me off about that is I know it wasn't usage, no indexing, no defraging, no pagefile, etc.
Drive monitors showed them lasting another 8.75years (with only 6 months of work time used)
I have four here all are the same make and model, all bought at the same time, all used the same amount.
two are dead now, the other two will go soon.