Maximum PC crossfirex RSS Feed

Alienware Announces CrossFireX Dual-3870 Gaming Notebook

Paul Lilly — Mon, 03 Nov 2008 13:20:44 -0600

In a first for Alienware, the company has introduced a CrossFireX-capable gaming notebook for mobile gamers looking to pack some added heat (figuratively, though likely literally as well) in time for the holiday gaming season. Wealthy fraggers can outfit the new M17 with a pair of ATI's Mobility Radeon HD 3870 videocards for plenty of pixel-pushing power on the notebook's 17-inch WXGA+ or optional WUXGA widescreen display.

"By incorporating the all-out performance of CrossFireX graphics and quad-core processing into Alienware's award-winning notebook lineup," says Frank Azor, executive vice-president for Alienware's Product and Marketing Group, "the M17 delivers an impressive feature set at a price point that doesn't break the bank."

Gamers can also double up on storage with up to 640GB of hard drive space in a RAID 0 array (2x320GB), or up to 1TB in RAID 0 for those willing to drop down to a 5400RPM spindle speed (2x500GB), enough to hold 250,000 songs according to Alienware. Other specs and options include Intel Core 2 Duo, Quad, and Extreme processor support, PM45 chipset, up to 4GB of DDR3 memory, RAID 1 support, ATSC HDTV tuner, Blu-ray optical drive, three USB 2.0 ports, eSATA port, WiFi, and other goodies.

The hardware comes wrapped in a "Stealh Black" soft matte finish bearing Alienware's logo and trademark aesthetic flair. But the real surprise is in the price. A base configuration starts at a comparatively modest $1,400, with less than a $2,000 investment required for a configuration consisting of a Core 2 Duo processor, dual-videocards, and 3GB of DDR3 memory on a 1920x1200 HD display.

Surprised? Hit the jump and sound off.

Image Credit: Alienware

Intel Core-Logic Cagematch: Motherboard Roundup!

Gordon Mah Ung — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 15:24:56 -0500

It pays to be an Intel fan these days. You have not only the supremely powerful Penryn CPU in your corner, but also a host of performance-oriented, feature-packed motherboards to choose from. Contributing to the bounty are two recently released enthusiast core-logic chipsets—Intel’s own X48 and Nvidia’s nForce 790i Ultra SLI—which represent the pinnacle of LGA775 computing.

Long delayed, but much anticipated, the X48 is a sequel to Intel’s impressive but short-lived X38 chipset. While the latter worked with Intel’s premiere Core 2 Extreme QX9770 CPU, the X48 offers official 1,600MHz front-side-bus support. It also offers support for DDR3, PCI Express 2.0, and CrossFire X.

The 790i chipset also offers 1,600MHz FSB support, DDR3, and native PCI-E 2.0, but it diverges from X48 in its support for SLI multi-videocard configs.

Sounds fairly straightforward, but choosing a motherboard is far from simple. Even two chipsets that offer similar features can differ markedly in performance. And the variations even persist within different mobos using the same chipset. There’s likely to be significant deviation between vendor A’s nForce motherboard and vendor B’s product.

While they share the same basic core logic, the boards reflect each vendor’s unique approach to leveraging the chipset’s features. From the number of PCI Express slots, to the location of USB ports, to how the BIOS is written and optimized, a motherboard’s design is no small matter.

That’s why we’ve called in four of the hottest Intel-based motherboards currently available, two representing X48 and two representing 790i. We’ll put these boards through their paces to determine a winner in each camp—and ultimately, the superior chipset.

X48 and 790i Reviews:

Naturally, AMD fans will wonder, where's the love? After all, AMD's performance 790FX chipset offers comparable features for its processors. Not to worry. We have reviews of two top-of-the-line 790FX motherboards too.

790FX Reviews:

Next: The Facts on Multiple GPUs, PCI-E 2.0, DDR3, and More!

The Facts about Chipsets and Multiple Videocards

If you have a 30-inch high-resolution display, your games may get a serious performance boost if you run more than one videocard. But know this: You’ll have to choose your GPUs before you buy your motherboard because multiple Nvidia cards must run on boards that support SLI. This means you’re pretty much restricted to Nvidia’s nForce chipset. And that chipset will not support AMD GPUs in a CrossFire config, but Intel chipsets will. In other words, if you want to eventually run multiple videocards, don’t buy an nForce motherboard and an AMD graphics card.

And another thing: While the boards reviewed here support two or more graphics cards at high speeds, not all motherboards do. Some boards have just one x16 PCI-E slot; others have an unbalanced PCI-E configuration, in which one slot runs at x16 data rates and another runs at just x4. This can impact performance, so know what you want to do before you purchase your motherboard.

PCI Express 2.0: One Better than Its Predecessor

PCI-E 2.0 is exactly what it sounds like: a sequel to the phenomenally successful PCI-E 1.0. In a nutshell, it doubles the bandwidth of PCI-E 1.0, so an x16 slot goes from 8GB/s to 16GB/s. To take advantage of the extra bandwidth, you need a newer PCI-E 2.0-compliant videocard, such as the GeForce 8800 GT or the Radeon HD 3870. And with double the bandwidth you can expect faster graphics, right? Of course not.

Given today’s games and 2.0 graphics cards, the added capability doesn’t pay huge dividends. It’s best to think of PCI Express 2.0 the way you thought of SATA 3GB or any other newfangled infrastructure upgrade. You lay the road before it gets choked with cars. Newer applications and newer cards will eventually consume that bandwidth.

We’re not yet at the point where PCI-E 2.0 support is a make-or-break deal, but regardless, you’d be hard-pressed to find a new high-performance board that lacks it.

DDR3 Is Here—Get Used to It

If there’s one thing we know, it’s that changes in memory technology rarely go over well. The move from PC100 SDRAM to Direct RDRAM was a disaster, and the move from DDR to DDR2 wasn’t pretty either. People bitch and moan when it’s time to toss their RAM.

Well, we’ve got news for you, Bubba, it’s time to switch yet again. If you care about performance, if you want to see your RAM clocking in at 1,800MHz data rates, then DDR3 is the only game in town. It’s even getting affordable. While many people still think 2GB of DDR3 costs $500, you can actually get it for $120. You won’t get the highest frequency or the lowest latency DDR3 RAM for that price, but it sure as hell makes DDR3 performance more accessible than it was six months ago.

That said, DDR2 is still a viable option, which should console folks who have a ton of it around or just aren’t after that extra bit of performance. Just know that most motherboard vendors are offering only their very best models in DDR3 trim.

Onboard Audio Isn't That Sucky

Hardware aficionados and audio snobs will naturally look down their noses at “free” onboard audio, but it’s really not that bad—at least, not when compared with the onboard audio of five years ago.

Today, onboard audio is very sophisticated and capable of offering real-time Dolby Digital encoding, SPDIF and optical I/O, and surround-sound capabilities. In other words, it’s good enough for most people. Of course, not all onboard audio is the same. The particular audio chip on the motherboard, where it’s mounted, and the software that runs it are all critical to a mobo’s sound quality. Some board vendors also use risers to get sensitive audio parts away from the electrically noisy surface of the motherboard. The most popular chip is Realtek, which until very recently had questionable EAX support. Chips by Sigmatel Audio and Analog Devices are also popular. We generally prefer Analog Devices, followed by Sigmatel and Realtek.

Next: Picking the Right Board

The Big Decision

When all is said and done, which is the right board for you, and why?

It’s pretty clear from the verdicts that the nForce 790i Ultra SLI chipset is the winner. Yes, our verdicts take into account a motherboard’s amenities and layout, but performance is a critical factor. And performance is the result of the chipset—its design, but more importantly, its memory controller. And sure enough, the nForce boards excelled in our memory tests, as well as a majority of the other benchmarks.

Mind you, this was a win by decision, not a clear knockout. Several benchmarks resulted in a virtual tie, with all the boards turning in similar scores when the margin of error was factored in. But still, a win is a win all the same.

It’s just icing on the cake for the nForce crowd that the two boards featuring the 790i chipset also include other important features, although to differing degrees. The Asus Striker II Extreme is jam-packed with bells and whistles and overclocks like nobody’s business, but it costs $100 more than the already pricey EVGA 790i SLI Ultra board and had inferior scores in our gaming benchmarks (however, we suspect that gap will close when Asus releases a BIOS update).

EVGA’s board, on the other hand, is simply a solid go-to Nvidia reference design that delivers on all the 790i’s key features. Both are more than respectable, so choosing between them will come down to personal preference—and your budget.

Admittedly, an nForce chipset isn’t a practical solution for everyone, specifically folks who either have dual ATI videocards or are planning to run a CrossFire X setup in the future. We have good news for them. Gigabyte’s X48T-DQ6 is a solid runner up, with the advantages of a reliable Intel chipset. It’s also fairly tweakable. There’s certainly no shame in owning this motherboard. In fact, Intel should model its own boards on the X48T-DQ6’s design.

In the end, however, even the best boards here aren’t perfect. There’s always room for innovation and improvement. Turn the page to see some of the radical new features we’d like to see in future mobo designs.

Next: Our Dream Motherboard!

One Mother of a Board

If you could make the ultimate motherboard, what would it be? We sat back, rubbed our eyes until we saw stars, and imagined what the ideal motherboard would look like.

In the Lab: Gordon Mah Ung Cross-Examines CrossFire

Gordon Mah Ung — Tue, 29 Apr 2008 15:35:28 -0500

AMD's Radeon HD 3870 X in quad mode scales well for having four GPUs.

I’ve been skeptical of multi multi-GPU support since the days of Nvidia’s original Quad SLI. Back then, bad drivers, a lack of game support, and 30-inch panels that cost a month’s pay made the prospect unpalatable.

So when AMD sent us an Alienware ALX system decked out with four GPUs, I didn’t expect much. But the dual Radeon HD 3870 X2s in this rig performed pretty damn well. In a system sporting a 3GHz Core 2 Extreme QX6850 overclocked to 4GHz, an Asus X38 board, DDR3/1800 RAM, and Windows Vista, the double double-barreled 3870 X2s’ performance at ultra-high resolutions shocked the hell out of me. In 3DMark06, Call of Duty 4, and Unreal 3, I saw a roughly 40 percent increase in frame rates going from one Radeon HD 3870 X2 to two.

At lower resolutions, closer to reality, the four Radeon GPUs didn’t up the ante quite as much at 1900x1200, but there was still a healthy 20 percent boost in COD4 and UT3. That’s probably not worth filling that second slot, but at least the setup offers decent scaling. The Radeon HD 3870 X2 ain’t perfect, though. Driver problems initially plagued our preview of the cards, so our assessment is that this quad-GPU solution isn’t quite ready for prime time.

It’s not much of a secret that Nvidia has its own second-gen Quad SLI coming out. It will use two new dual-GPU cards dubbed GeForce 9800 X2. It’s obviously too early to say which will be faster, but the quad Radeon HD 3870 X2 at least presents a respectable dual-card solution for folks who want to build a high-res gaming box using an Intel X38 or even X48 chipset.

CrossfireX Performance
	CrossFireX	Single Card	% Difference
3DMarkOverall 2560x1600, DX9	21,050.0	12,889.0	38.8%
3DMark06 HDR1 Canyon Flight 2560x1600, DX9 (fps)	52.7	30.0	43.1%
3DMark06 HDR2 Deep Freeze 2560x1600, DX9 (fps)	51.3	26.0	49.3%
Call of Duty 4 2560x1600, DX9 (fps)	93.0	73.0	21.5%
Unreal 3 CTF-OmicronDawn_Bot 2560x1600, DX10 (fps)	118.0	65.6	44.4%
Unreal 3 CTF-OmicronDawn_Bot 2560x1600, DX9 (fps)	120.3	68.5	43.1%

Hands-On Preview with CrossFireX

Gordon Mah Ung — Thu, 28 Feb 2008 16:22:35 -0600

If you take a double-barreled shotgun and duct tape another double-barreled shot to it, do you get double the performance or do you find your ass planted firmly on the ground with the buckshot scattered? That’s what we wondered when AMD sent us its new Radeon HD 3870X2 running in CrossFireX mode. That’s a total of four GPUs in the system.

For those who don’t know, AMD’s Radeon HD3870X2 is the company’s second generation dual-GPU card. The first, the Rage Fury Maxx, was introduced before the turn of the century. Unlike Nvidia’s GeForce 7950GX2 card which sandwiched two separate PCBs together to form a “single” dual GPU card, the Radeon HD3870X2 features both GPUs on the same PCB. Each GPU features 320 stream processors, a 256-bit memory interface, a unified video decoder and a 512MB of GDDR3 frame buffer for each GPU. The card also supports DirectX 10.1 and Shader 4.1 for future proofing.

For this preview, Alienware supplied its top ALX gaming PC equipped with two Radeon HD 3970X2 cards. Also stuffed into the ALX were: a water-cooled, 3GHz Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9650 overclocked to 4GHz, 4GB of Patriot DDR3/1800, and an X38-based Asus P5E3 Deluxe motherboard. The cards were each clocked at the stock speeds for the HD 3970X2: 825MHz core and 900MHz memory.

We ran three benchmarks: Call of Duty 4, 3DMark06 and Unreal Tournament 3 for our tests. We initially planned to test using Crysis as well, but ended up chucking it as a benchmark due to sporadic stability problems that we couldn’t explain.

What’s the quick verdict? Benchmark results scaled surprisingly well when we moved from two-GPUs (in a single 3870X2 board) to four GPUs (in a pair of 3870X2s).The caveat, of course, is that you’ll need to play your games at ultra high resolutions to really see the difference. But even at 1920x1200 – the standard resolution of most 24-inch flat panels, you can see a frame rate increase of roughly 20 percent by dropping a second 3870X2 board in your rig. When you step up to a 30-inch panel, the four GPUs in the 3870X2 come into play with roughly a 40 percent increase in frame rate.

That’s not too shabby. It also erases reservations we’ve had about quad GPUs since Nvidia tested its dual-GPU GeForce 7950GX2 cards two years ago. Then, buggy drivers and difficulties getting games to support the high resolutions pretty much destroyed Quad SLI. Lack of Vista drivers didn’t help either. Things have changed for ultra-high resolution gaming now though. With the price of 30-inch panels coming down and 3870X2 boards available for an almost affordable $450 each, we’re genuinely excited about the technology.

However, the 3870X2 won’t be the only quad-GPU game in town for long. Nvidia has its own second-generation Quad SLI in the works. Still, the performance of the 3870X2 in CrossFireX makes us feel a bit more comfortable that at least those two extra GPUs aren’t goldbricking—at least at high resolutions.

There’s still work to be done to improve stability with AMD drivers, which is why this is a preview and not a review. The company also freely admits that the scaling is best under DirectX9. DX10 performance currently to top out at three GPUs, the company says. The company says that that problem is a driver issue that it expects to fix. For now, the ball goes back to Nvidia.

A version of the 3870X2 driver enabling CrossFireX will be publicly available March 5th.

BENCHMARKS
	CrossFireX	Single Card	Percent difference
3DMark Overall 12x10, DX9	22,890.0	20,094.0	12.2%
3DMark Overall 25x16, DX9	21,050.0	12,889.0	38.8%
3DMark06 HDR1 Canyon Flight 26x16, DX9	52.7	30.0	43.1%
3DMark06 HDR2 Deep Freeze 26x16, DX9	51.3	26.0	49.3%
3DMark06 HDR1 Canyon Flight 19x12, DX9	85.3	43.7	48.8%
3DMark06 HDR2 Deep Freeze 19x12, DX9	79.9	41.0	48.7%

Call Of Duty 4 25x16, DX9	93.0	73.0	21.5%
Call Of Duty 4 19x12, DX9	140.0	73.4	47.6%

Unreal 3 CTF-OmicronDawn_bot 25x16, DX10	118.0	65.6	44.4%
Unreal 3 CTF-OmicronDawn_bot 19x12, DX10	143.6	105.0	26.9%
Unreal 3 CTF-OmicronDawn_bot 25x16, DX9	120.3	68.5	43.1%
Unreal 3 CTF-OmicronDawn_bot 19x12, DX9	136.0	108.0	20.6%