The benchmark results from four-GPU CrossFireX
CF4
To demonstrate just where ATI is in terms of CrossFireX four-GPU
performance and how well it scales, HEXUS was invited to a pre-release
showing under AMD-controlled conditions at its base
in Toronto, Canada.
A four-GPU system, comprising of two Radeon HD 3870 X2s in CrossFireX,
was already on display, as shown below.
An AMD quad-core Phenom 9900 (2.6GHz) CPU provided the grunt and an MSI
790FX
motherboard the conduit to connect everything together.
We were told that the driver was two minor revisions from
being passed fit for the CATALYST 8.3 release.
The premise here, ATI's representatives were eager to point out, was to
show how CrossFireX performance scaled from a
single Radeon HD 3870, through to a Radeon HD 3870 X2, then to an X2
with the single-GPU 3870, and, finally, with two 3870 X2s in tandem.
Effectively, that meant one-, two-, three-, and four-GPU performance,
with the obvious caveat that frame-buffer and memory speeds were
slightly
different in each case.
Five games were benchmarked at 1,920x1,200 and 2,560x1,600 with high
degrees of image quality, to put the onus on the graphics sub-system
rather than the CPU.
The five games comprised of Call of Duty 4, Half-Life: Episode 2,
Unreal Tournament 3, Crysis, and Bioshock.
HEXUS can confirm that the numbers on the spreadsheet below, provided by ATI (the graphics arm of AMD), do
represent actual frame rates during testing, as we picked various
benchmarks
at random and they returned results within a minor standard deviation
of what's shown below. Of course, we'll be doing our own testing once
the driver is made available.
Click on the image to enlarge the spreadsheet screen-grab.
We already know that scaling from a single Radeon HD 3870 to an HD 3870
X2 can be near-2x for a number of games, and that observation is
validated by the numbers in the 2-vs.-1 column, where 1.7x scaling is
common.
Looking at the 3-vs.-1 column, represented by performance of a Radeon
HD 3870 X2 and 3870 against a single 3870, scaling isn't quite as
impressive but does hit >2x in all but Crysis.
Crysis suffers from two major problems with respect to multi-GPU
scaling, as far as ATI is concerned. The engine doesn't lend itself
well to queuing up the necessary frames and DX10 scaling is inherently
poorer than DX9. These two factors combine to diminish the returns.
Looking at four-GPU scaling, as represented by two Radeon HD 3870 X2s
in tandem, pushing 3x a single 3870's performance is highly dependent
upon the title and resolution. Only Half-Life 2: Episode 2 manages it,
just, with the other games scaling to around 2.5x. Crysis scaling,
though, is horrendous, and that's a problem in itself, considering just
how popular the game is.
Is there a need for such performance increases, you might ask? On a
personal note, I run a Dell 3007WFP-HC monitor which ships with a
2,560x1,600 native resolution. I want to play the very latest games at
the highest image-quality settings and at the WQXGA resolution. I
therefore need scaling to work and work really well.
Summary
We've seen first-hand that CrossFireX, in its three- and four-GPU
incarnation, works well enough in DX9 titles run at ultra-high
resolutions and image-quality settings.
A single-GPU Radeon HD 3870 is
no slouch but performance can be up to 3x better with dual Radeon HD
3870 X2s. That will only really matter if you're playing fast-paced
games and want all the eye candy turned on to maximum, however.
Scaling, though, is comparatively limited with the DX10 API, and Crysis
- which is the most talked-about game of 2007 - gains are virtually
non-existent at high resolutions.
Given what we've seen thus far, the optimum combination, assuming the
underlying hardware is in place, appears to be a three-GPU graphics
sub-system run at 1,920x1,200 and above. NVIDIA, we note, already has
three-way SLI for its GeForce 8800 GTX and Ultra SKUs.
It's difficult to give firm buying advice with such a nascent
technology. What we can say for now is that CrossFireX opens up new,
flexible avenues for potential upgrades in the HD 3800-series family.
However, we reckon that the majority of popular gaming titles will need
to scale to 3x before four-GPU operation becomes compelling enough to
invest in.
Further analysis will be presented as we review the CrossFireX driver
before its launch with the CATALYST 8.3 drivers.
Yup, Greg, four GPUs and two teraFLOPS in one box.
printer friendly layout 
discuss in the forums 
email to a friend
IE7 Search
Firefox 2 Search
HEXUS.community :: your right2reply
I gotta get me one of these systems to help lift Team Hexus in to the top 200 - if you haven't already joined to help, what's your excuse?
Could you post f@h performance figures for a quad GPU set-up? I guess not, but it would be interesting to see :)Quote
I bet this thing can fold like a black belt origami master!...
...Could you post f@h performance figures for a quad GPU set-up? ...it would be interesting to see :)
mmm :)Quote
As with gaming, I still can't fully agree that card number above 2 is necessary. Unless scaling is done extremely well and the drivers fully optimized and a large majority of games, the above 2 card configuration will be for those who want high benchmark scores, super-smooth frames with super deep pockets, or need ultra-high quality renders and CGI. I can't see this doing a full on penetration of the mainstream market yet (IE, a large majority of people would have these in their machines.
Yes, there is the 3870X2, and for its price, I'd want to buy it. However, I didn't see huge benefits as I was expecting from the card over a single card solution of the HD3870 or an 8800GTS (G92).Quote
Reply