ATI Radeon X1950 Pro: CrossFire Done Right
by Derek Wilson on October 17, 2006 6:22 AM EST- Posted in
- GPUs
Final Words
We will have to wait until later today to confirm availability, but ATI has made it clear that this is supposed to be a hard launch. And we certainly hope they deliver on their promise and get those X1950 Pro cards on shelves before people start buying handicapped X1900 GT cards.
All in all, the X1950 Pro is the performance leader at the $200 mark. We heartily recommend it for any gamer with a couple c-notes to drop on graphics hardware. This card is an excellent replacement to the original X1900 GT in both performance, price, and CrossFire capability. While 80nm doesn't deliver huge power savings, RV570 does offer ATI quite an advantage in terms of die size and cost in the long run. We haven't yet tested overclocking with this new core, but we will certainly address the issue once we get our hands on shipping product.
The changes to CrossFire offer quite a bit of value to the end user. The bridge solution is much easier to work with than the external dongle, and while the 2 bridge solution is a little more cumbersome than a single bridge as with SLI, we can't argue with ATI's bridge distribution method or the fact that a 2 channel over the top connection offers greater flexibility in a more than 2 card multi-GPU solution. We also like the fact that ATI is distributing only flexible bridges as opposed to the more common PCB style bridges we often see on SLI systems.
From a technical standpoint, SLI still has the upper hand over CrossFire in terms of scalability and performance in most cases. Over time, we hope to see ATI increasing their scalability in games across the board, but, until we see ATI take a new approach to inter-GPU communication, SLI looks like it will maintain the lead for the foreseeable future. Hopefully ATI has some new approaches lined up for its upcoming R600 that will put CrossFire truly on par with NVIDIA's SLI.
As much as we would like to end this review of a solid product on a high note, we've got to drive home the point that significantly decreasing the specs of a product after it ships is simply not acceptable. The fact that ATI would drop the core clock speed of the X1900 GT by 11% and raise the memory clock by 10% to try to hide the difference is not something we want to see happen. There will be a performance difference between the new and old parts, and not changing the name on the box is simply dishonest. At least ATI has delivered a solid product in the X1950 Pro. Hopefully it'll stay that way throughout its life cycle.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
45 Comments
View All Comments
DerekWilson - Tuesday, October 17, 2006 - link
First of all, every site uses their own benchmarking techniques and sequences in the games. Numbers between review sites won't be comparable.For Quake 4 we used ultraquality mode, and this seems to give ATI the advantage over NVIDIA. We don't have a problem with this because we would prefer to tip the scales in favor of the product that can deliver the best performance at the highest image quality.
munky - Tuesday, October 17, 2006 - link
Would you rather Ati continued to ship the x1900gt with the original specs, and then a bunch of the cards would have to be RMA'd?DerekWilson - Tuesday, October 17, 2006 - link
We would rather they just run out of x1900 GT cards. They're discontinuing the line anyways, so it seems a little strange to try to increase supply by underhanded means.sri2000 - Tuesday, October 17, 2006 - link
They should ship it under a different model number. Call is the X1900 GTA or something like that (or some other alphabet soup combo that's not already taken) so that people can tell that the different model# = different performance.Goty - Tuesday, October 17, 2006 - link
You guys are ragging on this CF implementation like it's some sub-par solution. The transfer speed may be lower than that used by NVIDIA's SLI bridge, but SLI is simplex while this implementation is full duplex. Being able to send data in both directions at the same time should provide a huge speed boost while using ATi's SuperAA modes.JarredWalton - Tuesday, October 17, 2006 - link
Scalability is the key factory. In most benchmarks, SLI gets more of an improvement than CrossFire, indicating that the compositing engine is not an optimal multi-GPU solution. There's almost certainly a decent amount of overhead involved. We do like the new CF connector, but the proof is in the pudding. If 7900 GS is clearly slower in single card configs but often faster in dual-GPU configs, clearly SLI is scaling better than CF.mesyn191 - Friday, October 20, 2006 - link
I don't think its possible to comment on the new CF at all, they've clearly got screwed up drivers for it ATM, but then its ATi so what else is new...I hope AMD cleans up thier driver team because still even after all these years ATi does a half assed job on its drivers.
Goty - Tuesday, October 17, 2006 - link
Are you guys thinking of doing any testing with any of either vendor's multi-card AA modes any time soon? I really think the full duplex connection would really help there (i.e. the cards may not scale as well with the number of cards, but what about as the image quality increases?)Rza79 - Tuesday, October 17, 2006 - link
The Tech Report had problems with this motherboard and Crossfire which made them switch to the Asus P5W DH.You aren't expiriencing any problems with this board?
Second thing, why no AA with games like B&W2 and FEAR?
DerekWilson - Tuesday, October 17, 2006 - link
No problems with the motherboard.AA performance under Black and White 2 and FEAR were excluded because we decided framerate was already at a minimum for the resolution we were testing.