NVIDIA Single Card, Multi-GPU: GeForce 7950 GX2
by Derek Wilson on June 5, 2006 12:00 PM EST- Posted in
- GPUs
F.E.A.R. Performance
These benchmarks stand to show that F.E.A.R. is in no way a CPU limited game. Even at 1280x1024, the 7950 GX2 shows about a 28% performance lead over the 7900 GTX. Enabling AA pushes that performance lead up over 46%. The point proved here is that there will come a time when more games will demand 7950 GX2 level power at even common desktop resolutions. F.E.A.R. is currently one of the exceptions to the rule, so we still don't recommend that gamers who commonly play at resolutions below 1600x1200 invest in this level of hardware.
The multi-GPU solutions continue to excel under F.E.A.R. as resolution in creases. While the 7900 GT and X1900 GT start to become borderline playable at 1600x1200 with 4xAA, there 7900 GT SLI and 7950 GX2 are still butter smooth.
Even at 2048x1536 with 4xAA, NVIDIA's new high end flagship sails on at an enjoyable 45 fps. The gap between the X1900 XT starts to close at this resolution, dropping back down to only about a 30% lead, but this is understandable considering the volume of data that needs to be sent from one GPU to another. Added stress on memory bandwidth could also be the reason we see the 7900 GT SLI closing the performance gap between itself and the 7950 GX2 (which has a 120Mhz lower effective data rate off of each GPU).
These benchmarks stand to show that F.E.A.R. is in no way a CPU limited game. Even at 1280x1024, the 7950 GX2 shows about a 28% performance lead over the 7900 GTX. Enabling AA pushes that performance lead up over 46%. The point proved here is that there will come a time when more games will demand 7950 GX2 level power at even common desktop resolutions. F.E.A.R. is currently one of the exceptions to the rule, so we still don't recommend that gamers who commonly play at resolutions below 1600x1200 invest in this level of hardware.
The multi-GPU solutions continue to excel under F.E.A.R. as resolution in creases. While the 7900 GT and X1900 GT start to become borderline playable at 1600x1200 with 4xAA, there 7900 GT SLI and 7950 GX2 are still butter smooth.
Even at 2048x1536 with 4xAA, NVIDIA's new high end flagship sails on at an enjoyable 45 fps. The gap between the X1900 XT starts to close at this resolution, dropping back down to only about a 30% lead, but this is understandable considering the volume of data that needs to be sent from one GPU to another. Added stress on memory bandwidth could also be the reason we see the 7900 GT SLI closing the performance gap between itself and the 7950 GX2 (which has a 120Mhz lower effective data rate off of each GPU).
60 Comments
View All Comments
Exsomnis - Monday, June 5, 2006 - link
Since when did slapping two PCBs together = single card? *Confused.*z3R0C00L - Monday, June 5, 2006 - link
Marketing Gimmick...It's two GPU's. It's SLI. The Fastest Single VPU/GPU solution is the x1900XTX (not tested here).
The most advanced GPU/VPU is the x1900XTX as well.
I wonder if these crds will also suffer from the 50% failure rate other 7900 series cards suffer from.
Jojo7 - Monday, June 5, 2006 - link
Haha. 50% failure rate. That's comedy.Where'd you pull that number from?
Hardocp said BFG reported 3-5%, Evga reported .04-1.9%, XFX said in the last 2 weeks they reported a .5% (half of one percent) increase in RMA's.
Yea. That seems like 50% to me.
Xenoid - Monday, June 5, 2006 - link
50% failure rate might be bullshit but the fact that you completely ignored the other half of his message is also bullshit fanboy-ism.The X1900 XTX isn't on here. The X1900 XT Crossfire isn't on here either, but the 7900 GT SLI is. This review is missing 2 of the top video cards, and for what reason? It makes this review incomplete and this should be addressed.
Jojo7 - Monday, June 5, 2006 - link
Actually, I agree with both of your points. The x1900 XTX should have been included in this review in both crossfire and single card. To the same end, the 7900 GTX in sli should have been included imo.
Noise comparisons and power draws would have been nice as well.
DerekWilson - Monday, June 5, 2006 - link
this does touch on our motivation --the 7950 GX2 is a single board solution (for those uncomortable with the inclusion of 2 PCBs, think of one as a daughterboard or something). We wanted to really focus on the comparison to other single board solutions.
Right now x1900 crossfire and 7900 gtx sli are over $1000 investments, and don't really compete with the 7950 GX2 -- unless we look at the 7950 GX2 in SLI. As we couldn't get quad SLI on the 7950 GX2 working for this article, we decided we save the comparison to that copetition later. It does seem pretty clear fromt these tests that the 7950 GX2 in SLI will be able to trump any other solution in its market segment.
Also, the 7950 GX2 doesn't require an SLI board -- which is a great advantage of current multi-GPU solutions. In many cases, putting two other solutions in SLI won't be an option for users who upgrade to a 7950 GX2.
But
Please understand that I certainly appreciate the requests for the inclusion of the 1900xt crossfire and the 7900 gtx crossfire as a reference point to what is currently possible on the highest end of the spectrum. In future articles involving the 7950 GX2 we will address this issue. Thanks very much for your feedback.
poohbear - Thursday, June 8, 2006 - link
50% failure rate? dude, do u know how this percentage thing works?! that would mean 1 in 2 79XX cards fail. please, bs is a great thing and we have plenty of it on the net, but try to atleast make your bs somewhat believable.nullpointerus - Monday, June 5, 2006 - link
No, it isn't. They only wanted to reply to a particular point within his post.
Inkjammer - Monday, June 5, 2006 - link
50% failure rate? Where are you getting those numbers from?z3R0C00L - Monday, June 5, 2006 - link
I got the number from polling various website forums.. including HardOCP.eVGA, XFX and BFG claim low to non-existant issues. My polls show an avg of 48% failure rate. It's on HardOCP... go and check out the forums.