ATI Multi-VPU up and running. . .

[Jawed]

Well if it will work with any northbridge, that means it'll prolly work with NForce4 Ultra SLI mobos.

That'll make a lot of people happy. It'll also sell a lot less ATI motherboards. Damn, doesn't ATI understand about customer lock-in?

Unless NVidia decides that the NForce4 Ultra SLI chipset won't activate the 8+8 PCI Express mode (i.e. it won't accept two different PEG slots) if an NVidia GPU driver isn't present.

Jawed

 

[trinibwoy]

Unless NVidia decides that the NForce4 Ultra SLI chipset won't activate the 8+8 PCI Express mode (i.e. it won't accept two different PEG slots) if an NVidia GPU driver isn't present.

Jawed

Nope that will just sell more ATI boards and will be a bad move on their part. Especially since ATI's own offerings at first glance are very appealing to the enthusiast and may cut a deep swath in Nvidia's market share in that segment on their own merit.

 

[digitalwanderer]

Thanks for the link tEd, I'm gonna go try and understand it. :?

some more info about how it works

-No physical connector requires between devices;

This is gonna bite Nvidia in the ass.

It shouldn't as much as it will, the bit I think will hurt nVidia is the two different cards can work together.

Finding a card identical to one you picked up a year or two ago can be hard to impossible at times, but you can usually find one that is very similar.

I don't know exactly how exact nVidia's SLI is, but I was under the impression that you needed exact matched cards to make it work and that always seemed like it's achilles heel to me. Allowing for different cards to work together offers more chances/options of actually using two down the road.

Not a flame, just an opinion....please take it as such. I'm still an AGP guy here, so what do I know.

 

[CJ]

-Currently assumes two identical graphics devices installed in both connectors;

I guess that (currently) means a X300 can't be coupled to a X850XT PE?

 

[digitalwanderer]

Nevermind, looks like that particular requirement is already changing. :?

ATI does not reveal the Multi-VPU concepts to the general public, but for its add-in card partners it has posted a brief overview of its technology in its roadmap update. At least for now there is one important update from what was previously reported – ATI wants two identical graphics cards to be installed, not two different boards as said before based on information from unofficial sources. Here is what ATI says to its partners:

* Multiple ATI RADEON X800 XT boards cooperatively rendering a single frame;
* Requires two physical x16 connectors on the mainboard;
* Load balancing and synchronization implemented entirely in software;
* No physical connector requires between devices;
* Currently assumes two identical graphics devices installed in both connectors;
* Offers several user selectable modes of multi-processing;
* Works with any PCIe north bridge.

Methinks me will wait until it's been out for a bit and we actually know what the what is before I go ga-ga or pitchforking the idea.

 

[Joe DeFuria]

-Currently assumes two identical graphics devices installed in both connectors;

I guess that (currently) means a X300 can't be coupled to a X850XT PE?

Thats what it would mean.

I'm still hoping that it wouldn't require two absolutely identical cards...(same card, same manufacturer)...but who knows. Having to buy the exact same card would be a significant turn off to me. It makes AMR/SLI a much more risky upgrade path unless you buy both cards at the same time.

 

[egore]

The fact that it says "Currently assumes" identical graphics cards mean that in the future it might be able to work with different cards. It is software based so initially it could just be a software limitation.

 

[trinibwoy]

Not a flame, just an opinion....please take it as such. I'm still an AGP guy here, so what do I know.

Getting a little defensive there digi - nothing in your post said 'flame' at all I don't think anyone has verified the exact match thing with Nvidia though - I'm guessing GT's from different AIB's will work fine.

 

[Jawed]

Not a flame, just an opinion....please take it as such. I'm still an AGP guy here, so what do I know.

Getting a little defensive there digi - nothing in your post said 'flame' at all I don't think anyone has verified the exact match thing with Nvidia though - I'm guessing GT's from different AIB's will work fine.

http://www.nzone.com/object/nzone_sli_faq.html

Can I mix and match?
No. NVIDIA doesn’t support SLI on two different models or from different vendors. SLI supports configurations with the same model (i.e. 6800 Ultra) from the same vendor (Vendor XYZ).

Jawed

 

[DemoCoder]

I bet that's just a software limitation, and if someone forced PCI Ids between two identical GPUs, but different manufacturers, it would probably work. The biggest issue is if the connector between the cards is in different places.

 

[Joe DeFuria]

I bet that's just a software limitation, and if someone forced PCI Ids between two identical GPUs, but different manufacturers, it would probably work.

Agree and disagree.

I bet it is enforced in software, but it's probably for a good reason. I'd bet any slight differences in board / chip frequencies could be very problematic with the SLI interface...since presumably the SLI interface clock itself is tied to the board.

ATI's solution (assuming latest rumors are true, and it's a pure software solution over the PCIe bus) wouldn't have such limitations. The downside to ATI's solution is likely more overhead, and less efficiency.

 

[Geeforcer]

Didn't 3dfx SLI have the same requirement for V2? I seem to recall some people successfully running two cards from different vendors, but AFAIR it was a crapshoot.

 

[Joe DeFuria]

Didn't 3dfx SLI have the same requirement for V2? I seem to recall some people successfully running two cards from different vendors, but AFAIR it was a crapshoot.

Yes, and yes, IIRC.

 

[Geeforcer]

-Works with any PCIe north bridge.

If true, that would be key. The obvious reason: should work on any dual slot motherboard...regarless of manufacturer. Less obvious reason: you could then conceivably make a single slot AMR board...that works in ANY PCI-e mobo.

You would still need two 16x PCIe slots. How many north brirdges support over 32 lanes?

 

[Joe DeFuria]

You would still need two 16x PCIe slots. How many north brirdges support over 32 lanes?

That's unclear at the moment. (They don't seem to know if it's just two physical 16x solts, or 16x electrical as well.)

But yes, if it requires to 16x (electrical) slots, that would be similarly limiting....though again, not for single slot/dual CPU boards. Though with a single slot solution, I guess an additional chip / bridge may be needed.

 

[Geeforcer]

Precisely. If it does require two 16x slots, it will be restricted to ATIs own chipsets, at leas initially (I know there are some NV4 Tyan boards with two 16x slots, but they are out there). Over time, other chipset makers (VIA, Intel) may introduce chipsets that support 34 or more lanes. Actually, I think that it will be both in Nvidia's and ATI's best interest to keep their multi-card approach limited to their own motherboards. SLI/Whatever market is already a small niche, and the prospects of selling motherboard AND two cards to the same consumer might look quite appetizing.

 

[Joe DeFuria]

Well, that's a dual edge sword.

I mean, for myself, having to buy a certain mobo / chipset for my video cards would actually be a turn-off...and might lead me to pick neither one.

 

[Geeforcer]

Well, that's a dual edge sword.

I mean, for myself, having to buy a certain mobo / chipset for my video cards would actually be a turn-off...and might lead me to pick neither one.

I agree, but for people aiming to buy two $300-500 cards AND having to buy a new motherboard anyway to accommodate them, this probably is much less of a problem. From ATI/Nvidia perspective, sales of their multi-card offer them a soft "lock-in" for video card sales, with people buying these board more likely then not purchasing a video card based on their chip as well.

 

[Geo]

Well, the MVP designation (rather than AMR) seems to be confirmed as well. . .check the mobo box here: http://www.bit-tech.net/feature/80

 

[Megadrive1988]

"Scalable" prolly means in terms of DX capabilities (or special features like the AA or AF algorithms), rather than "performance". What, exactly, would you downscale on a 512MB R520 with a 512-bit bus to make it "compatible" with an X800XT? The core clock? The pipe-count? The memory bandwidth? It just doesn't make sense.

If MVP really does allow any two ATI PCI Express cards to work together, then it'll be a boon for any enthusiast who upgrades. You no longer have to find a little sister who's willing to let you fiddle with her computer - your old graphics card still has some use in your rig. Uhm, unless you're one of those enthusiasts who really does have to spend vast wodges on 2x the latest and greatest.

I wonder how long it'll take ATI to get the drivers stable? 6 months?

Spotted over on R3D, this new Sapphire mobo looks like an extreme overclocker's wet dream:

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=55734

The MVP version can't be far behind, can it?

Also, just a thought, do we know that Xbox 360 will only have 1 R500 in it? What if it's architected to have 2?...

Jawed

let me expand on your thought, Jaws 8)

it would be enourmously 'cool' if Xenon | Xbox Next | Xbox 360 had twin R500 or R5xx VPUs. not two graphics cards, of course, since consoles never have graphics *cards*, just 2 graphics *processors* on the motherboard--like Sega's Model 3 circa 1995-96 which had twin Real3D/Pro-1000 GPUs. or NAOMI 2 which had twin PowerVR2DCs / CLX2s (plus ELAN) .

Xenon's most-often reported configuration:
a triple-core CPU, but only one graphics processor still seems a little bit unbalanced. maybe it is very well balenced. I realize that the 3-core CPU and single R500 or R5xx could be *very* well balanced. It is just that, at first glance, it might seem unbalanced when one sees: oh! "3 CPUs" and one graphic chip.

for pure fun - I'd like 1 of 3 different configurations for Xenon:

____
config #1: 3 main chips total

*triple-core (6 threads) or quad-core (8 threads) CPU. (1 chip)
*twin R500 or R5xx graphic processors (2 chips)
____
config #2: 3 main chips total

*triple-core (6 threads) or quad-core (8 threads) CPU. (1 chip)
AGEIA 'PhysX' PPU -or- an 8 vectorprocessor chip (1 chip)
single R500 or R5xx graphics procesor (1 chip)
____
config three: 4 main chips total

*triple-core (6 threads) or quad-core (8 threads) CPU. (1 chip)
*AGEIA 'PhysX' PPU -or- an 8 vectorprocessor chip (1 chip)
*twin R500 or R5xx graphics processors (2 chips)
____


configurations #2 and #3 have *one* of two possible co-processors: either the AGEIA PhysX Physics Processing Unit, or that 8 vectorprocessor chip that version and bbot mentioned.

configuration #3 has the most processing power, because it has both a co-processor (PhysX PPU -or- an 8 vectorprocessor chip) *and* two seperate ATI graphics processors.

8)