Slashdot Mirror


Four GPU Motherboard

didde writes "The people over at Tom's Hardware are running a story on Gigabytes experiments with quadruple GPU's on one motherboard. Perhaps we'll need something cooler than liquid metal to keep this beast from running hot?" From the article: "About half a year ago, we learned that Gigabyte was working on a graphics card that integrates two GeForce 6600GT graphics chips. While we were impressed with the out-of-the-box approach from Gigabyte, there was of course the question, whether two of those cards could be combined for a total of four graphics chips."

13 of 220 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Quad Cards? by Morticae · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Not necessarily.
    It's the same concept as a Beowulf supercomputer.

    With the possiblity of parallelism, we can use cheaper cards in tandem and get the same power as a high end graphics card (or one that doesn't exist) for far less money.

    It also helps things like failure--if one node fails you can simply replace it without the entire system (your $1000 graphics card) going down.

    Redundant systems and parallel computing are the wave of the future wooooooo!

  2. Why? by nmg196 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Can anyone think of a reason why you need more than one of these cards? Currently my machine runs the most complex game I can think of (HalfLife 2) at 1280x960 at more frames per second than my monitor even scans at.

    Why would you need it to be 4 times faster than that?

    OK, I can see that a handful of people might want to play at 1600x1200 if they have a decent monitor, but usually, running at resolutions higher than that is fairly pointless unless you have a 21" or bigger monitor. The average monitor can't do resolutions that large without blurring the pixels together from what I've seen.

    1. Re:Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      It could be useful for DSP work. With each geforce processor having more FLOPS than a typical processor, it packs a LOT of number crunching power.

    2. Re:Why? by MoralHazard · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Half-Life 2 is the most complex game you can this of, right now. Shit, I remember people saying the exact same thing about the ATI Rage 128 and the original GeForce, right about the time the first Half-Life game came out.

      3D game animation is one of the few areas in which ordinary PC consumers run programs that routinely push the limits of their machines. Your machine might be enough to run HL2 perfectly well, but just give it a year or two. Game designers WILL push the envelope of technology, and your machine will eventually struggle to play the newest games.

      Remember, Gigabyte isn't shipping this Quad-GPU motherboard, yet. This might not hit shelves until next year. At which point it still might be overkill, but it'll be ready for the next-gen games.

    3. Re:Why? by Agave · · Score: 3, Insightful

      There are monitors smaller than 21"?? :)

      I will never understand why someone will spend $500+ on a videocard and then skimp on the monitor.

    4. Re:Why? by UnknowingFool · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I can only think of multiple displays with multiple monitors. Instead of a card handling all the monitors, each monitor (or monitors) is handled by a separate card. i.e. One for right, One for center, one for left, one for top or behind. For gamers, they could use it to create panoramic views. It could also be used for large multi-monitor displays demo displays, but for the average person, I don't see a big need.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
  3. Re:So...how much longer until... by the_raptor · · Score: 3, Insightful

    As graphics get closer to "good enough" reality, games will *have* to focus on gameplay over eye candy.

    --

    ========
    CINC, 4th Penguin Legion
  4. Covered in hot grits, no less! by Thud457 · · Score: 4, Insightful
    I, for one, WELCOME our cliched joke overlords!


    This is /. , we've gotta give people like you something to whine about.obligatory speeling errur.

    --

    the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

  5. I for one... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    ...never want to hear that joke again. Dear GOD people, get some new material. Longhorn-running overlords? do you even read what you type?

  6. Re:So...how much longer until... by DrEldarion · · Score: 4, Insightful

    as the ratio of gamplay to graphics seems to diminish every day

    Yes, because games like Knights of the Old Republic, the Zelda series, Gran Turismo 4, the upcoming Will Wright game Spore, World of Warcraft, and so on and so on and so on have absolutely horrible gameplay!

    It always makes me laugh to hear "old-school" gamers complain about companies putting graphics ahead of gameplay. Do you not remember the LEGIONS of horrible games on the NES/SMS/Genesis/SNES/etc? There were TONS of games where basically the only gameplay that was there was "dodge this stuff and shoot this stuff".

    There have ALWAYS been a huge amount of "games" with horrible gameplay. The only difference now is that the crap looks nice.

  7. Bandwidth and the Potential of this Card by vectorian798 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I know a lot of you are gonna be saying that there is no mobo with two x16 PCI-E slots so let me point out one right now:

    Tyan Thunder K8WE - definitely the top of the line for dual-opteron mobo's right now IMHO.

    Anyways, the reason this is a stupid idea is of course that as soon as someone 'upgrades' to this and squeezes out a refresh rate higher than our monitors can produce or our eyes can detect, we will have our next-gen cards and games.

    Next-gen cards of course will have hardware features (read: steeped in the architecture) that no matter what you do, this generation of cards won't be able to support. For example, think of the GeForce 4MX versus the GeForce 3 Ti 200. As you may know, the 4MX does not have any shaders and the Ti 200 does. Even if I bundled up 4 4MX's, I would not be able to render reflective water in Far Cry or Half Life 2 (assuming the game in question allowed it with out inferior GPU first of all) simply because there is no dedicated hardware for volumetric per-pixel effects.

    So then, instead of getting more GPU's (or spending money on a more expensive mobo just to be able to SLI) people should just wait until we actually need that extra juice - and now certainly is not the time. I recall that in one of the Unreal 3 Engine demos from a long while back, someone commented that the 6800's would run U3 like crap even on low settings (I think they said 25 FPS).

  8. Re:Quad Cards? by gcauthon · · Score: 2, Insightful

    A cluster of X components is never going to be as reliable as a single component. If you buy more of something then your odds of seeing a defect go up, not down. You are correct in that if one card fails then you only need to replace the one card. However, your odds of a card failing are now four times as likely. Supercomputers are not for the thrifty and neither are multi-gpu systems.

  9. Re:So...how much longer until... by PCM2 · · Score: 2, Insightful
    There have ALWAYS been a huge amount of "games" with horrible gameplay. The only difference now is that the crap looks nice.
    I always thought the main gripe was that nowadays the crap looks nice and costs millions and millions of dollars to produce. What you end up with, therefore, is a gaming industry that's become a big-money factory system run by huge media conglomerates who A.) overwork their employees and B.) are highly risk averse, meaning they are far more likely to produce mediocre games based on such-and-such "proven" media franchise than they are to invest in the things that makes games fun. All the money gets poured into stinkers and boring re-hashes and the small, innovative games companies get swept under the rug, or else are acquired and subsequently dismantled by the machine.

    DISCLAIMER: I almost never play videogames, I'm just relaying the gripes as I understand them.

    --
    Breakfast served all day!