Single card solution...just a simple ?

Majeztik12

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jun 8, 2004
Messages
344
Will we ever get back to the days of a single card solution. QuakeIII... had a single card pushing 100+ fps (GF3-Ti500). QuakeIII was one of the most graphics intense games out at the moment. Why do we "need" two card to do this today. Yes I remember running 2 3dfx VooDoo2s...but c'mon. Is there a GPU/API cycle I am unaware of? A vicious circle...that needs be broken. At least by those of us that have a incompetent/greed meter on our wallets. THIS IS NOT MEANT TO START A FLAME WAR. And yes I know I'm "yelling". This is for the "Thread Gawds" who are too quick to show lack of wit, and like to "DEAD THREAD" things! Thanks for any light on this ? THANKS-
 

TGA

Gawd
Joined
Jun 26, 2004
Messages
825
I really haven’t got a clue what you trying to say but it sounds like you can’t afford a uber leet rig and monitor, so you’re upset that others who can get to have detail in the game that you can’t. Well I am sorry but to me that is rather lame, sorry if I misunderstood and offend you.

In no way is an SLI/Xfire rig required to play new games at acceptable frame rates. I know since I am still using a 9700. Every game can be tweaked to run great on any system from the SLI 7900GTX with 30” LCD to my dated system and personally I think that’s great.

I mean it sounds like you want developers to hold back so you don’t have to turn settings down. Keep in mind if they do hold back your games will look the same as they do now while everyone else who has a killer gaming rig will have to settle for what you get.

Oh and I don’t at all understand you reference to Quake III. Unless I am mistaken I played the hell out of that game well before the GF3 even came out.
 

Chernobyl1

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jun 19, 2004
Messages
1,674
there is a cycle
3 of the major rules which help dictate progression are:

Competition between card manufacturers
New games requiring faster/more featured hardware
customer demand for faster kit

There will always be a demand for faster hardware and if the horsepower cant fit in the space needed, more space will be used if possible. Its not a form of conspiracy, just part of progression.
Where I live there are many dual GPU cards, single GPU cards and SLI or Crossfire cards for sale online or locally.
If you want a single card graphics solution theres loads to choose from which surely will meet your expectation?
I have a single X1800xt and can play every game with ease.
Is your 7800GT not fast enough?

There isnt much performance difference in having a single card with 2 GPU's or 2 cards each with 1 GPU.
Is a single card with 2 GPU's more acceptable for you?

The days of the single card havent gone so I'm not sure what you are asking.
 

GotNoRice

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jul 11, 2001
Messages
10,842
Majeztik12 said:
Will we ever get back to the days of a single card solution. QuakeIII... had a single card pushing 100+ fps (GF3-Ti500). QuakeIII was one of the most graphics intense games out at the moment. Why do we "need" two card to do this today. Yes I remember running 2 3dfx VooDoo2s...but c'mon. Is there a GPU/API cycle I am unaware of? A vicious circle...that needs be broken. At least by those of us that have a incompetent/greed meter on our wallets. THIS IS NOT MEANT TO START A FLAME WAR. And yes I know I'm "yelling". This is for the "Thread Gawds" who are too quick to show lack of wit, and like to "DEAD THREAD" things! Thanks for any light on this ? THANKS-

Dude, I totally hear you on the Quake 3 example, but that’s just because the game was so awesome and lasted so many years. But your comparison isn’t really that fair either… The GF3 is ~2001 level tech whereas Quake 3 came out in 99 or so. When it came out, the leet card to have was a TNT2. The only time I ever saw a TNT2 hit 100+fps in quake 3 was when we had it hooked up to a TV via S-Video using some really low res like 640x480 or maybe 800x600. So for a fair comparison, you would need to take one of the best cards of today and run it with a ~2 year old game, something like battlefield 2. I can’t imagine it would be hard to break 100fps in bf2 with a single card today, as I nearly do that with my aging X800XTPE.

Counter-Strike: Source game out in 2004 and I think people were hitting 100+fps the day it came out.
 

Yashu

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Apr 18, 2005
Messages
1,294
nvidia realised "why buy one when you can buy two at twice the price"

and of course ATI had to follow, otherwise they would look like they were lagging in the market.

when you are talking about big buisness you must consider that most corporations that begin to grow large carry with them a right wing political policy that dictates many of their decisions. it's all about the $$$$ cash money.

now you could also look at it another way that is probably more likely: consider the developement in the CPU world... clock speeds have hit a wall and the only path is to add more cores. it is a similar situation in the GPU industry... technical problems and low yealds are a wall that is preventing 64 pipe GPUs and 4gb of vram... the next best thing is to increase the number of cores. and rather then double the silicon die size with multi cores, they developed a way to split the work among two cards.
 

nooh

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jun 16, 2006
Messages
1,488
If you can wait about 4 weeks i think ati are going to release the R570 and the card looks quite promising and i think you might even see four of them in systems because it uses one slot.
 

Yashu

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Apr 18, 2005
Messages
1,294
you mean 4 gpus on the same card? that would be very interesting.
 

USMC2Hard4U

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Apr 4, 2003
Messages
6,154
I feel you. I think its supid that you need 2 - 650$ Video Cards to run a game flawlessly...

I remember when you could get a awesome video card for 250$ and it was uber fast... just one. Now Top of the line is like 600$ for just one card... and its not even enough.. WTF.

Someone needs to lower the cost of top of the line cards and say NO

Top of the line card should be no more than 300$ period. Hell, even fucking awesome CPUs arent as much as a video card. ATi and NVidia have gotten out of control.
 

banned_user

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jun 4, 2004
Messages
414
i think many are missing the point that today not only are the game engines more demanding, they are being run at ever increasing resolutions. 25XXx1600 Is a pretty new thing as far as gaming is concerned. Its simply smart buisness to offer dual cards if a decent amount of people are willing to buy them. I know it would be disapointing if monitor manufacturers didn't sell 24" widescreens cause' "thats overkill man."
 

USMC2Hard4U

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Apr 4, 2003
Messages
6,154
So why dont they make a faster chip? Why dont they sell it for less? Why has the high end gone from 1 card @ 300$ to 2 Cards at 650 each?
 

defaultluser

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jan 14, 2006
Messages
14,399
USMC2Hard4U said:
I feel you. I think its supid that you need 2 - 650$ Video Cards to run a game flawlessly...

Which you don't need. You do know most games released today will play fine on low settings on an FX 5200, right?

I remember when you could get a awesome video card for 250$ and it was uber fast... just one. Now Top of the line is like 600$ for just one card... and its not even enough.. WTF.

I remember when my buddy paid $250 for his G400 MAX, the fastest gaming card on the planet at the time. He could just BARELY squeeze 1024x768 out of that sucker in Quake 3, the most demanding game of the day.

Today ONBOARD VIDEO can hit 60fps in Quake 3 at 1024, and can even play newer games at their lowest settings.

Someone needs to lower the cost of top of the line cards and say NO

Top of the line card should be no more than 300$ period. Hell, even fucking awesome CPUs arent as much as a video card. ATi and NVidia have gotten out of control.

So, I suppose you didn't notice that FX-series and EE-series processors from AMD and Intel cost over $1000, almost double the price for the highest-end single-card solution available?

Face the facts kid: you're just jaded because you got a great deal on an Opteron that overclocks like hell, and you expect to get that kind of value everywhere you turn. Unfortunately for you, in the video card world AMD and Nvidia control the entire supply chain, and they have an abnormally strong grip on card configurations because the memory is bundled with the chip on one card.

This yields cards like the x1600 Pro and 7600 GS: cards which could easily overclock to XT or GT levels, were they not hindered by less expensive DDR2. But stop, and think about that for a minute: the industry doesn't work like it used to. It used to be, if you wanted a CURRENT-generation card, you had to cough up $150 minimum, for the "midrange" version (examples: TNT2, TNT2 Ultra...Voodoo 3 3000, Voodoo 3 3500).

TODAY, you can get a card (7600 GS, for example) that outperforms the previous generation's midrange masterpiece (6600 GT), AND includes the 7-series' new features (TRAA, Gamma-corrected AA), all for only A HUNDRED BUCKS! You used to have to settle for a previous generation card for that price!

You SHOULDN'T CARE that other people have $1000 SLI setups...purchase what works for you. If you can't afford better, then get a job or stop whining. It is the people who purchase $500 video cards who pave the way for you to have your $100 7600 GSes.

I remember back in early 1998, I was pricing my FIRST 3D video card purchase. I WANTED a Voodoo 2...hell, I WANTED a Voodoo 2 SLI setup...but I could only afford a hundred bucks worth of video card, so I settled for a Rendition v2200. Still, I was able to PLAY ALL THE GAMES those folks with Voodoo 2s did at playable framerates, I simply had to turn down the settings. Now that I have cash, I buy more expensive cards. This is the way the world works.
 

Factorxfiles

Limp Gawd
Joined
May 20, 2006
Messages
214
Computer hardware is just like everything else in life. If you want the best, you're going to have to pay for it. You don't see rednecks walking around drinking 100 year old french wine do you? No, because they can't friggin afford it. They drink beer, it still gets them drunk, and it's in their price range. I bought a $700 computer, and I can get PLENTY of fun out of any video game. I play Oblivion at 1280 x 1024. You DO NOT need to be pushing the limits of a 30" monitor to enjoy a game. Yes, it adds to the immersion, it adds to the fun, etc. etc. I know all that. I'm just saying you don't need it to have fun with the games you play. two-card solutions are meant for people who have the money to go overkill and get the maximum everything. There are a lot of really nice single-card solutions that will let you have alot of fun with the game, and make it look pretty damn nice too. Stop whining that you can't afford 2 GX2's, when you don't need them.
 
Joined
Jun 27, 2006
Messages
702
You will only be able to afford girl man cards at a house wife's wage. I don't see what's so confusing about that concept. Stop whining and get a manly man's job so you will be able to afford a beefy, rugged gx2.
 

nooh

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jun 16, 2006
Messages
1,488
Actually , i do agree that if you cant afford it , it really is not worth it for you.

I did a side job for 5 weeks so i could get my XFX7950XXX and i have been saving up for the last four weeks for my new CPU , but if i couldnt afford it then it does not help me by me whining but trying to acheive that goal.

I said to myself when i saw the panther from Scan advertised i said i want that and i worked in the next three months to acheive it.

I went leaflet distributing for PC repairs and i did children tuition on sundays to earn that extra dough.

I have spent £1500 in the last month on two PCs which i worked on the side tfor the last three months. I wanted it that bad and i believe you can if you want it that bad but you will have to go that extra mile to get it. I even got a side business out of it. :)
 

Budwise

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Dec 7, 2004
Messages
1,833
multi card solutions are simply ATI and Nvidia's method of doubling profits without doubling your performance :)
 
Joined
Jun 27, 2006
Messages
702
nooh said:
Actually , i do agree that if you cant afford it , it really is not worth it for you.

I did a side job for 5 weeks so i could get my XFX7950XXX and i have been saving up for the last four weeks for my new CPU , but if i couldnt afford it then it does not help me by me whining but trying to acheive that goal.

I said to myself when i saw the panther from Scan advertised i said i want that and i worked in the next three months to acheive it.

I went leaflet distributing for PC repairs and i did children tuition on sundays to earn that extra dough.

I have spent £1500 in the last month on two PCs which i worked on the side tfor the last three months. I wanted it that bad and i believe you can if you want it that bad but you will have to go that extra mile to get it. I even got a side business out of it. :)
I admire you're worth ethic. I on the other hand, am lazy. I could get a part time job but I make excuses like I don't have a car, mc donalds isn't my line of work, only reason a 16 y/o should work is if she is if you're crack whore who has a baby, etc. That's probably why all I can afford is a wimpy 7600gt. Even though I have weak hardware, I still consider myself an enthusiast because I still try to suck out the best performance I possibly can out of it. On a side note, what's a panther.
 

Yashu

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Apr 18, 2005
Messages
1,294
I have a good career and good wage, but I still think SLI can be an outragious price for what you get.

I am extreme practical... in the sense that I don't even want a new gen card because there are less modding ability.

what I wish is that game companies work on their code efficiancy instead of expecting faster video card solutions.

ID software and VALVE seems to be the only producers that really tries to write effeicient code.
and conversely, EA is the producer that writes the worst code.

bascally game production houses are falling into the same rut as software makers did in the late 90's.... just assuming that processing power will always grow to accommodate their product.

Blaming nvidia and ATI is silly... they are just filling a market. you think SLI would have been a hit if there were no bloated games that needed it to look good at native resolutions?
 
Joined
Jun 27, 2006
Messages
702
You're right that game optimizations are getting sloppier. I mean, just look at oblivion, quad sli
can't even compete with the 360 due to the 360 optimizations. However, you can't blame the game programmers for your hardware. They can't optimize games the way 360 games are optimized because the platform is extremely varied, while all 360s feature the same hardware.
Another reason why I disagree that games should be coded better is because graphics already take up a huge budget. Optimizing a game to work wonderfully for every weak set up and to utilize all the power of enthusiast gamer's rigs will eat up the budget. Finally, focusing on using hardware makes technology push ahead. If you want games that run well on weaker setups, I suggest you try a console.
 

ImNoGod

Limp Gawd
Joined
Apr 10, 2006
Messages
149
Monkey_feces said:
You're right that game optimizations are getting sloppier. I mean, just look at oblivion, quad sli
can't even compete with the 360 due to the 360 optimizations. However, you can't blame the game programmers for your hardware. They can't optimize games the way 360 games are optimized because the platform is extremely varied, while all 360s feature the same hardware.
Another reason why I disagree that games should be coded better is because graphics already take up a huge budget. Optimizing a game to work wonderfully for every weak set up and to utilize all the power of enthusiast gamer's rigs will eat up the budget. Finally, focusing on using hardware makes technology push ahead. If you want games that run well on weaker setups, I suggest you try a console.

Oblivion and morrowind both have shit coding and quite frankly, theres no need for it. :rolleyes:
 

Yashu

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Apr 18, 2005
Messages
1,294
yeah not sure why anyone would be FOR sloppy coding...

you talk about budgets... honestly I would not mind waiting an extra 6 months for a game if it is going to run awsome on my existing setup.
 
Joined
Jun 27, 2006
Messages
702
I'm no programmer, but I am sure it would take more than 6 months to configure a game to utilize 100% of component computing power for every system configuration out there. In oblivion's case, getting the massive, interactive world to run like half life 2 would take 1 year minimum. I would rather have games that require 100% more graphics processing power in a year than having oblivion run on a 6600gt. Like I said, if you don't like the pace the computer industry is evolving at, stick to consoles.
 

nooh

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jun 16, 2006
Messages
1,488
Monkey_feces said:
I admire you're worth ethic. I on the other hand, am lazy. I could get a part time job but I make excuses like I don't have a car, mc donalds isn't my line of work, only reason a 16 y/o should work is if she is if you're crack whore who has a baby, etc. That's probably why all I can afford is a wimpy 7600gt. Even though I have weak hardware, I still consider myself an enthusiast because I still try to suck out the best performance I possibly can out of it. On a side note, what's a panther.

LOL . Man i started to work when i was 14 years old. The PANTHER is a QUAD SLI System from SCAN PC and it costed £4250 when i saw it then.

I am short of another 7950 to match it , so i have nearly matched my goal but now i dont really want that 7950 cos there is no need , i can wait until it goes to £200.
 
Joined
Jun 27, 2006
Messages
702
nooh said:
LOL . Man i started to work when i was 14 years old
I thought the industrial revolution ended 300 years ago and child labor was abolished, wtf? I still don't know what a panther is :mad:
 

Killa_2327

2[H]4U
Joined
Jan 3, 2006
Messages
3,238
Monkey_feces said:
I thought the industrial revolution ended 300 years ago and child labor was abolished, wtf? I still don't know what a panther is :mad:

You can easily get a job at 14. Mow some lawns, babysit kids. Your 16 though, quit making excuses and go flip some burgers. After you flip all them burgers you'll learn lots of things about money, and you'll probably save up for a car instead of that video card.
 

nooh

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jun 16, 2006
Messages
1,488
http://www.scan.co.uk/
They have changed the spec of it now cos it got very bad reviews and the price for that matter, when i was dreaming of it cost £4250 and i calculated that if i made it myself i t would cost me £1800.

Also i started work because of greed and i wanted to buy whatever i want without asking my mum and dad, they bought me what i wanted but i use to break things alot and then i would get a bollocking.

So now i can break things and give myself the bollocking i deserve. :D
 

GreenMonkey

2[H]4U
Joined
Jun 25, 2006
Messages
2,159
SLI and other double-card solutions are only required if you are a big fan of crazy resolutions & settings like 1600x1200 and greater. Single card solutions do the job otherwise.

And the Quake 3 example: when Q3 beta came out I was running it (barely) on a Voodoo3 2000 and a K6-2 350mhz :eek: Did 40fps barely (most of the time). 100fps. Pfft. That didn't come for a few years.
 

Killa_2327

2[H]4U
Joined
Jan 3, 2006
Messages
3,238
GreenMonkey said:
And the Quake 3 example: when Q3 beta came out I was running it (barely) on a Voodoo3 2000 and a K6-2 350mhz :eek: Did 40fps barely (most of the time). 100fps. Pfft. That didn't come for a few years.

No, but when Quake 3 was released and you played it on your Voodoo3 lag free you probably shit yourself. :D

Quake 3 was amazing, but I remember purchasing Doom 2 then Quake came along and I almost died, what an amazing jump!
 

nooh

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jun 16, 2006
Messages
1,488
GreenMonkey said:
SLI and other double-card solutions are only required if you are a big fan of crazy resolutions & settings like 1600x1200 and greater. Single card solutions do the job otherwise.

And the Quake 3 example: when Q3 beta came out I was running it (barely) on a Voodoo3 2000 and a K6-2 350mhz :eek: Did 40fps barely (most of the time). 100fps. Pfft. That didn't come for a few years.
I think we have got to a peak where the game developers cannot keep up with the programming and that it costs soo much more.

The cards coming G80, R600, they are for greater resolution gaming and most of us will not see resolution like that because it cost too much.

I am thinking of saving up for the 30" dell but then i say to myself is it wortth it ?
 
Joined
Jun 27, 2006
Messages
702
nooh said:
http://www.scan.co.uk/
They have changed the spec of it now cos it got very bad reviews and the price for that matter, when i was dreaming of it cost £4250 and i calculated that if i made it myself i t would cost me £1800.

Also i started work because of greed and i wanted to buy whatever i want without asking my mum and dad, they bought me what i wanted but i use to break things alot and then i would get a bollocking.

So now i can break things and give myself the bollocking i deserve. :D
I'm not an expert in UK vernacula, so I didn't quite understand what a "bollocking" is. If it is what I think it is, I hope your parents didn't give you a bol locking(hope that o is pronounced ah and not ih). If it is what I think it is, how do you position your head in such a manner?

That panther is nice, but how much is 1800 pounds and did the version you were eying have quad sli like this one?
 

nooh

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jun 16, 2006
Messages
1,488
Monkey_feces said:
I'm not an expert in UK vernacula, so I didn't quite understand what a "bollocking" is. If it is what I think it is, I hope your parents didn't give you a bol locking(hope that o is pronounced ah and not ih). If it is what I think it is, how do you position your head in such a manner?

That panther is nice, but how much is 1800 pounds and did the version you were eying have quad sli like this one?

I think its about $7500 which is £4250 that was the real one but then it all went pear shaped and £1800 is about $3250

But when it was released and reviewed by CustomPC it was a flop because of the drivers and you payed $1000 for a special painted case. I have noticed that they have taken it off since the review and changed it in to the one which now starts at $2000 and goes to about $8000 but you do get a 30" dell with this one.
 

Yashu

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Apr 18, 2005
Messages
1,294
I would rather have games that require 100% more graphics processing power in a year than having oblivion run on a 6600gt.

then you are not very buisness savvy... a game company benefits from their software running well on the widest range of hardware. take a look at HL2 as an example... it is one of the best selling games ever... STILL. It will run great on your 6600gt.

infact, you should look at the valve survey info. Most people don't have much faster then a 6600gt... and it would be pretty short sighted for a game company to leave these people out.

And what do consoles have to do with any of this... any game would run well at 400X300 (your TVs resolution...). heh.
 
Top