Originally Posted by memeroot want hydra on a graphics card
Quote:
Originally Posted by steve30x I think a hydra addin card would be good. If thats any way possible.
The problem with this is, that all the information from the graphic cards have to pass through the Hydra chip, and an add-on card would severely limit bandwidth. The same goes for the onboard chip.
Those white SATA cables are pretty pimp, but who wants a big blue rectangle on the front of their case? And a single USB3.0 port!? Would a second one have broke the budget?
I was thinking the other day that if i had a motherboard that supported SLI i might have been tempted to try 2 x GTX460's... But i think that 1 high end card is the way forward from now on for me.
Originally Posted by Hustler AMD SLI.................'bout bloody time.
Not everyone who goes AMD wants to go Xfire......
SLI is a far more robust dual card solution than ATI's ,at times, shambolic Xfire drivers........
SLI isn't significantly better solution and still carries all the same problems inherent to a multi-GPU system. Considering the awesome card performance of the current gen cards SLI/xfire are pretty redundant. You'd need to be running a massive resolution or multi-monitor setup to justify it. ATi does better multi-monitor as well even if you do want to go that route.
I'm not saying that xfire is better, far from it, I just don't see why anyone would want to build a new system with multi-GPU.
Note: This doesn't account for benchmarking and folding because Intel is better in both cases.
Back in the day MSI were known as a relatively dodgy brand, more prone to failure than other, more reputable brands. Like naming a mobo 870 when it really has an older, redundant chipset... I'm sure they've come a long way, but I still wouldn't go MSI over Asus, not for my mobo, no way.
Originally Posted by m0ngy Back in the day MSI were known as a relatively dodgy brand, more prone to failure than other, more reputable brands. Like naming a mobo 870 when it really has an older, redundant chipset... I'm sure they've come a long way, but I still wouldn't go MSI over Asus, not for my mobo, no way.
The more expensive boards are a lot better, but unlike Gbt UD2/3s and Asus LEs, we've had a hit and miss relationship with the budget stuff. Their 770-C45 was excellent and we continue to recommend it, but 785Gs were terrible.
Comments 1 to 15 of 15
ReplyAye, Suthbridge.
The problem with this is, that all the information from the graphic cards have to pass through the Hydra chip, and an add-on card would severely limit bandwidth. The same goes for the onboard chip.
Not everyone who goes AMD wants to go Xfire......
SLI is a far more robust dual card solution than ATI's ,at times, shambolic Xfire drivers........
SLI isn't significantly better solution and still carries all the same problems inherent to a multi-GPU system. Considering the awesome card performance of the current gen cards SLI/xfire are pretty redundant. You'd need to be running a massive resolution or multi-monitor setup to justify it. ATi does better multi-monitor as well even if you do want to go that route.
I'm not saying that xfire is better, far from it, I just don't see why anyone would want to build a new system with multi-GPU.
Note: This doesn't account for benchmarking and folding because Intel is better in both cases.
Marketing BS, that's what the name is.
You're right off course, naming should be clear
The more expensive boards are a lot better, but unlike Gbt UD2/3s and Asus LEs, we've had a hit and miss relationship with the budget stuff. Their 770-C45 was excellent and we continue to recommend it, but 785Gs were terrible.
How is the budget LGA 1366 stuff, like Asus P6T SE or Asrock x58 Extreme?
-
« Previous
-
1
-
Next »
Discuss in the forums