Thu 15 May 2008

RSS Feed

Edited by Paul Hales

Published by Incisive Media Investments Ltd.

Terms and Conditions of use.

To advertise in Europe e-mail here

To advertise in Asia email here.

To advertise in North America email here.

Join the INQbot Mail List for a weekly guide to our news stories:

Subscribe

Dual Asus GeForce 9800GX2 on Intel Skulltrail

First INQpressions What happens when you put four GPUs on eight cores

NVIDIA'S LATEST and greatest - surely great size-wise - card is finally out: the GeForce 9800GX2 is, as we all know, a dual GPU monster basically similar to two 8800GTS512 cards squashed together onto a single dual-PCB behemoth. And, as of this week, the Quad SLI drivers finally work.

The cards are nothing special feature-wise: dual GPUs, each running at 600 MHz with full 128 processing units, and each with 512 MB GDDR3-2000 memory. The black box design surely looks cool though, especially in pairs - maybe that was Nvidian goal, after all... tempt with the "couple buys".

Here I got two Asus EN9800GX2 units - unlike their customised and sped-up 3870X2 cards, the Nvidia dual-GPU entry here is just the reference board, nothing else. Asus packs the board with Company of Heroes: Opposing Fronts game, otherwise you're looking at a reference card.

As the Striker II Extreme test is still going on, I decided to try two of these cards on the now old workhorse: Dual-CPU 4 GHz - 8 cores total - Intel D5400XS Skulltrail mobo. 4 GB of Kingston CL4 FBD-800 RAM were there to help, that much memory is needed at least when running Vista64 to ensure no bad effects of disk paging.

Talking about Vista, I installed the SLI patch as well, just in case. Nvidia's latest WHQL driver, Forceware 174.53 was used.

Since I ran Asus' 3870X2 there before, here are the comparative 3DMark06 default results between the two cards, as well as twin Nvidias in Quad SLI mode.


Asus 3870X2


Asus 9800GX2


2x Asus 9800GX2 QuadSLI

As you can see, at low 1280x1024 SXGA resolution, ATI beats Nvidia, card for card, as long as the CPU is not a problem. The SLI add-on doesn't, well add on. But that situation would change at higher resolutions. Here is 1920x1200 WUXGA, or what I call HD 1080p ++.

Asus 9800GX2


2x Asus 9800GX2 QuadSLI

Finally, on the 30-incher, 2560x1600 4 Mpixel resolution:

Asus 9800GX2


2x Asus 9800GX2 QuadSLI

As you can see, the higher the resolution, the more benefit there is. In fact, with QuadSLI setup here, there is very little performance drop as we increase the resolution. The 2560x1600 SLI score is particularly sweet: for this resolution, these are top scores on an air-cooled setup across all three categories.

Also, keep in mind that this system has no CPU, memory or I/O bottlenecks to speak of: 8 CPU cores are fed out of quad-channel memory, with each card having its own PCI-E x16 connector - v1 only, though.

Also, Nvidia's refusal to support more than two-card SLI on Skulltrail doesn't matter here - in my mind, four GPUs on two dual-GPU cards is about as extreme as it gets on a PC. A far more serious problem is feeding all this with electric juice. A 1200W power supply is an absolute minimum here, and I'm using a Thermaltake 1500W unit just in case.

On the other hand, GPU for GPU, this card barely touches over the year-old dual 8800Ultra SLI, and that's where the problem lies: Nvidia hasn't improved its GPUs much, if at all, for 18 months now - yes DAAMIT wasn't exactly a stellar performer, but, if Intel behaved the Nvidia way, we'd be all still stuck with Q6600 Core 2 as the fastest CPU around...

In summary, this initial benchmark run does churn out some nasty results, at least in an off the shelf "classic" air cooled setup - part of the reason for this "record setting" is that ATI still hasn't perfected the Quad GPU CrossFire X scaling yet. Keep in mind that DAAMIT engineers are working on it, and that the new 3870 chip stepping, coupled with GDDR4 memory and faster PCIe v2 bridge, might spoil Nvidia's domination plans, before green goblin is ready with the 55 nm shrinks of their own.

In the meantime, let's see how the cards perform in other stuff, and how does their matching mobo, the Striker II Extreme with Nforce 790i Ultra, stack up against the Skulltrail when running these expensive cards. µ

Comments

Toss up some game FPS

you went to all this work and couldn't toss up a Crysis benchmark? :D just to compare with other published benchmarks
posted by : Alex, 28 March 2008

Monstrosity

I can come close to those numbers with 2 8800gt's and an e8400.
posted by : Jay, 28 March 2008

$$$$$$$$$$$$

Heres another Very Good report for ?Ultie?64, my only gasp is price. How about transfering some of this high buck tech to mainstream?
We know its not cpu holding Ultie64 back nor game cards, its in chipset where bottleneck remains.As J implies. Loving Ultie, its not crasher, more stop/restart instantly, so theres room to move up, edges to unfural.

Also, numbers are high due to redundancy of gpu pushing test, not nessesarily better quality performance on one monitor, however, its hard to argue larger pixel # on monitor isn't well served. Alex is true, frame rates of 40-60 just arn't TOP, about mid par.Eg: cheapest Fire Gl v.has always been 40 fps on Ultie, even at 3d '6 3K.
Back to Lab, I believe x48 Intel chipset is key road to nirvanna here.Its wif of barbequed ribs,from across river.These 3d scores should hit 28,000 ('6) or better awaiting Vantage score & Nahalem plus OC'able chipset maximo.Higher cpu Core & hd mb/sec rate. Then whole conastoga wagon of goodies should explode upward.We st war d Ho
Thomas Drashek
posted by : Ultie_Tom, 30 December 2007

Really?

You can get nearly 20k in 3dmark06 at 2560x1600 with 8800 GT's? Link please?

@ Article, "if Intel behaved the Nvidia way, we'd be all still stuck with Q6600 Core 2 as the fastest CPU around..."

What way? Using a die shrink to boost performance? What do you call Penryn?
posted by : Tam Smith, 28 March 2008

too expensive

The amount of bang for the buck is awful.

I can put a railgun slug through your head just as accurately at 1280x1024, 60+ FPS as 2560x1600, 60+ FPS. With or with high quality 16x full scene AA and accurate water reflections.

This hardware has essentially no relevance - except to the 0.1% of the gaming population that has too much money in their pockets.

HPC number crunching people could put it to use, but they have no use for skulltrail per se, and non-X2 8800GT are cheaper by the GPU.

Thanks for the numbers though.
posted by : hoohoo, 28 March 2008

ZOMG

I can come close to those numbers with 1 ati rage128 and a celeron 300A.
posted by : DUECE, 28 March 2008

E8400 Dual GT's

People really need to use more common sense. Why do I have to explain that is beyond me.

When Jay says he can get nearly similar performance form a E8400 and dual GT's, I instantly knew what was his point, what he really meant. The vast majority of game doesn’t support more than 2 threads CPU and scale poorly with multiple GPU, especially beyond 2 GPU. The LCD size sweet-spot is 22in for 1680 X1050. Some of us use 24In for 1920 X1200 maximum resolutions. Practically no one use 30in LCD for gaming in 2008.

What Jay meant is that in real life, he can get 90% of the performance with his own setup, at a minute fraction of the cost. That’s it…
posted by : Ramon Zarat, 30 December 2007

zomg = too funny!

The chipsets are having to do too much work indeed. They should form a workers rights group and get some more management chips on board, or upgrades of chips and buses, or all those.

Being fairer on the board - it does take the 771s so it's in the high-end server area and HPC cluster area cause of that, and it's defintely not just gamers that want high performance graphics - video, movie, animation folks and other artists benefit from these kinds of rigs.

What I do wonder about though is usable frame rates in realtime gaming....surely anything about 60fps means you need the monitor refreshing at higher than 60Hz.

posted from my 300A
posted by : zupakomputer, 31 December 2007

3870x2

What this actually shows me is that skulltrail is a total rip off.

I can get 19k in 3dm06 at the default settings with my q6600!!! Admitedly its running at 3.8 but there are plently of people running even higher.

I have only founs one game that properly benefits from extra cores and quads, and people jsut don't benchmark it right!
Supremme commander, or its addon Forged Alliance.

If you are going to bench it, you have to do it like 1 Hour+ into the game on large maps, multiple ai's. Then Skulltrail might jsut show some improvement!
posted by : craig, 30 March 2008

3850x3

1 card the 3850x3 can score 24,909 3dmark06.

http://technewstime.com/hardware-news/3850x3-benchmarked
posted by : Monty, 31 March 2008

What an age we live in.

Wouldn't it be funny if the Playstation 2 HAD ran Toy Story in real time.
posted by : MDH, 01 January 2008

Not quite a lightyear, but still.....

Why does the timestamp appear as January 01?

posted by : zupakomputer, 31 March 2008
IThound
Search for solutions, reports & analysis

Newsletter signup