can people let me know what scaling is like for gtx 480 in 3d vision. I run a 1680x1050 display and hope an sli solution should result is smoother frame rates. The gain according to websites isn't a great deal in 2d but then it performs perfectly anyway. In 3d thats when the frame rates drop.
can people let me know what scaling is like for gtx 480 in 3d vision. I run a 1680x1050 display and hope an sli solution should result is smoother frame rates. The gain according to websites isn't a great deal in 2d but then it performs perfectly anyway. In 3d thats when the frame rates drop.
The gain with the 2nd 480 in SLI is excellent as mentioned above, except for a few select games where there's much lower scaling and poor GPU utilization. Unfortunately, many of these games are where additional performance is needed the most. It seems DX10/11 games are more prone to scale poorly as dropping the API path down to DX9 in many of these games results in higher GPU utilization and higher performance, although the gain is less than you would expect due to DX9 being less efficient overall.
Some examples of poor/disappointing scaling:
[list]
[*]BFBC2 (decent GPU utilization but still far from 100% with FPS in the 35-50 range)
[*]JC2 (poor GPU utilization and scaling in 3D Vision and SLI, not much more than a single GTX 480 actually and choppier gameplay too)
[*]Metro 2033 DX10/11 (DX9 in High, no MSAA runs great)
[*]Avatar DX10 (DX9 is almost capped at 60FPS but less efficient than DX10)
[*]Splinter Cell Conviction (SLI in 3D is just broken due to a memory leak)
[/list]
Some examples of incredible scaling making Turning 35-45FPS into 60FPS capped per eye and a perfect 3D experience:
[list]
[*]AC2 (just a different gaming experience with GF100 SLI)
[*]PoP 2008 and 2010 (similar to AC2 just not as pronounced)
[*]Batman AA (no need for dedicated PhysX bc of free GPU overhead from 60 FPS cap)
[*]Dark Void (maxed out, PhysX High)
[*]Dragon Age Origins (crank up the AA with the leftover GPU overhead)
[*]Any UE3 game (just need to be careful with the forced MSAA + TSAA as the VRAM/bandwidth hit is still there)
[*]Dirt 2 (everything maxed out, 4xMSAA)
[*]Fallout 3 (all maxed, 8xMSAA)
[*]Dawn of War 2 (all maxed out, in-game AA)
[*]COD 4,5,6 (all maxed out, you might even be able to get away with SGSSAA in these)
[/list]
You can see the 2nd list are games that are semi-demanding, the ones up top are some of the most demanding without S3D and really need the extra performance the most. Again, you can push additional AA in a lot of the games in the 2nd list with all the extra GPU overhead but I generally find its not needed as much with the natural AA effect of the stereo images. Most of this goes out the window though with 3D Vision Surround as the additional resolution and rendering requirements are just too much for GTX 480 SLI in even moderately demanding games.
The gain with the 2nd 480 in SLI is excellent as mentioned above, except for a few select games where there's much lower scaling and poor GPU utilization. Unfortunately, many of these games are where additional performance is needed the most. It seems DX10/11 games are more prone to scale poorly as dropping the API path down to DX9 in many of these games results in higher GPU utilization and higher performance, although the gain is less than you would expect due to DX9 being less efficient overall.
Some examples of poor/disappointing scaling:
BFBC2 (decent GPU utilization but still far from 100% with FPS in the 35-50 range)
JC2 (poor GPU utilization and scaling in 3D Vision and SLI, not much more than a single GTX 480 actually and choppier gameplay too)
Metro 2033 DX10/11 (DX9 in High, no MSAA runs great)
Avatar DX10 (DX9 is almost capped at 60FPS but less efficient than DX10)
Splinter Cell Conviction (SLI in 3D is just broken due to a memory leak)
Some examples of incredible scaling making Turning 35-45FPS into 60FPS capped per eye and a perfect 3D experience:
AC2 (just a different gaming experience with GF100 SLI)
PoP 2008 and 2010 (similar to AC2 just not as pronounced)
Batman AA (no need for dedicated PhysX bc of free GPU overhead from 60 FPS cap)
Dark Void (maxed out, PhysX High)
Dragon Age Origins (crank up the AA with the leftover GPU overhead)
Any UE3 game (just need to be careful with the forced MSAA + TSAA as the VRAM/bandwidth hit is still there)
Dirt 2 (everything maxed out, 4xMSAA)
Fallout 3 (all maxed, 8xMSAA)
Dawn of War 2 (all maxed out, in-game AA)
COD 4,5,6 (all maxed out, you might even be able to get away with SGSSAA in these)
You can see the 2nd list are games that are semi-demanding, the ones up top are some of the most demanding without S3D and really need the extra performance the most. Again, you can push additional AA in a lot of the games in the 2nd list with all the extra GPU overhead but I generally find its not needed as much with the natural AA effect of the stereo images. Most of this goes out the window though with 3D Vision Surround as the additional resolution and rendering requirements are just too much for GTX 480 SLI in even moderately demanding games.
[quote name='chiz' post='1082783' date='Jul 5 2010, 12:56 AM'][*]JC2 (poor GPU utilization and scaling in 3D Vision and SLI, not much more than a single GTX 480 actually and choppier gameplay too)
[*]Metro 2033 DX10/11 (DX9 in High, no MSAA runs great)[/quote]
I have different results.
In both games GPU's utilisation is high throughout all GPUs (3-sli), and Metro DX10 runs well.
JC2 (poor GPU utilization and scaling in 3D Vision and SLI, not much more than a single GTX 480 actually and choppier gameplay too)
Metro 2033 DX10/11 (DX9 in High, no MSAA runs great)
I have different results.
In both games GPU's utilisation is high throughout all GPUs (3-sli), and Metro DX10 runs well.
i7 980X @4.2 1.31v // Asus Rampage III Black Edition // Corsair Dom GT 3x4GB 2000 CL9 // 2x Palit GTX 580 3GB // Crucial RealSSD C300 256GB // 2x WD 2TB EARS // Samsung 2.5" 500GB // LG Blu-Ray DVD
Lian Li PC-A77B // Enermax Revolution 85+ 1250W // MS X-6 // SS Ikari // Logitech G27 + X230 // Win 7 x64 Pro // 3x Dell AW2310 120Hz 3D + Nvidia 3D Vision Surround
3x DDC 3.25 + 3x HTS-PMP400 // EK DDC Dual V2 + Single V2 Tops - Single loop // EK Multi-Option // Bitspower fittings //EK Supreme HF // 2x EK GTX 5X0 Acetal + Nickel
Primochill LRT Black 1/2 ID 3/4 OD // 2x XSPC RX360 + RX240 // Aquaero 5 Pro + flow & temp sensors // 21x Akasa Apache Black
Even though GPU utilization is high for many DX10 or DX11 games I have noticed that the performance hit going from 2D to 3D is more pronounced than for most DX9 games.
Even though GPU utilization is high for many DX10 or DX11 games I have noticed that the performance hit going from 2D to 3D is more pronounced than for most DX9 games.
[quote name='997luke' post='1082953' date='Jul 5 2010, 01:45 AM']I have different results.
In both games GPU's utilisation is high throughout all GPUs (3-sli), and Metro DX10 runs well.[/quote]
I think what he meant isnt that they get a full load or ifthe load is balanced, but how much of a performance boost a second card adds. Another thing is your SLi performance scaling can be misguiding if your CPU is bottlenecking. For SLi you want to have atleast 3.8ghz.
[quote name='997luke' post='1082953' date='Jul 5 2010, 01:45 AM']I have different results.
In both games GPU's utilisation is high throughout all GPUs (3-sli), and Metro DX10 runs well.
I think what he meant isnt that they get a full load or ifthe load is balanced, but how much of a performance boost a second card adds. Another thing is your SLi performance scaling can be misguiding if your CPU is bottlenecking. For SLi you want to have atleast 3.8ghz.
[quote name='997luke' post='1082953' date='Jul 5 2010, 02:45 AM']I have different results.
In both games GPU's utilisation is high throughout all GPUs (3-sli), and Metro DX10 runs well.[/quote]
Yep that's correct, the latest 258 betas do improve GPU utilization but scaling from 1xGPU to 2xGPU and from 2D to 3D is still lower than expected. For example, if you run Metro 2033 in DX9 compared to DX10/11 with the DX11-specific options turned off (Adv. DOF, Tesselation, no MSAA) you'll see DX9 runs much much better than DX10/11 even though GPU utilization is similar. Also, in DX10/11 gameplay is much choppier despite the frame rate counter reading 45-50FPS with all of the symptoms of micro-stutter.
This is for 1080p 3D Vision btw, I found 3D Vision Surround performance and scaling to be very good overall and more like 1/2 the FPS of 1080p rather than 1/3rd as you would expect. Again, this hints 1080p performance is less than optimal and has some scaling issues. For 3-way you may want to compare 2-way vs. 3-way as I've seen some user reports that there is no additional performance gain from the 3rd 480 in 3DVS.
[quote name='997luke' post='1082953' date='Jul 5 2010, 02:45 AM']I have different results.
In both games GPU's utilisation is high throughout all GPUs (3-sli), and Metro DX10 runs well.
Yep that's correct, the latest 258 betas do improve GPU utilization but scaling from 1xGPU to 2xGPU and from 2D to 3D is still lower than expected. For example, if you run Metro 2033 in DX9 compared to DX10/11 with the DX11-specific options turned off (Adv. DOF, Tesselation, no MSAA) you'll see DX9 runs much much better than DX10/11 even though GPU utilization is similar. Also, in DX10/11 gameplay is much choppier despite the frame rate counter reading 45-50FPS with all of the symptoms of micro-stutter.
This is for 1080p 3D Vision btw, I found 3D Vision Surround performance and scaling to be very good overall and more like 1/2 the FPS of 1080p rather than 1/3rd as you would expect. Again, this hints 1080p performance is less than optimal and has some scaling issues. For 3-way you may want to compare 2-way vs. 3-way as I've seen some user reports that there is no additional performance gain from the 3rd 480 in 3DVS.
its the more difficult games in 3d that I'm looking for the performance increase in, want to go surround eventually but i suppose it makes the difference between buying another card now, or just doing it all when i finally get extra monitors. Just cause 2 and BFBC2 where the games I was thinking of as these are particually demanding. Batman seems ok frame rates in 3d, and the others mentioned as good for SLI seem fine at this resolution for 3d.
its the more difficult games in 3d that I'm looking for the performance increase in, want to go surround eventually but i suppose it makes the difference between buying another card now, or just doing it all when i finally get extra monitors. Just cause 2 and BFBC2 where the games I was thinking of as these are particually demanding. Batman seems ok frame rates in 3d, and the others mentioned as good for SLI seem fine at this resolution for 3d.
[quote name='chiz' post='1083217' date='Jul 5 2010, 07:53 PM']Yep that's correct, the latest 258 betas do improve GPU utilization but scaling from 1xGPU to 2xGPU and from 2D to 3D is still lower than expected. For example, if you run Metro 2033 in DX9 compared to DX10/11 with the DX11-specific options turned off (Adv. DOF, Tesselation, no MSAA) you'll see DX9 runs much much better than DX10/11 even though GPU utilization is similar. Also, in DX10/11 gameplay is much choppier despite the frame rate counter reading 45-50FPS with all of the symptoms of micro-stutter.[/quote]
You could argue about it but my I would say if there's GPU utilisation then they're doing some work.
So if 3-sli gets >90% on each core and FPS is good that tells me scaling is good, I would worry if like you said there was poor load (40-60%) on 1 or more cards and low FPS.
I'm not surprised with same utilisation yet lower FPS on DX10/11 - more bling so same work goes into less frames.
The micro-stutter however which you've described in DX10/11 is something different and definitely some issue with that FPS - I'm not getting it though so can't tell.
Hope you'll get it resolved.
[quote name='chiz' post='1083217' date='Jul 5 2010, 07:53 PM']This is for 1080p 3D Vision btw, I found 3D Vision Surround performance and scaling to be very good overall and more like 1/2 the FPS of 1080p rather than 1/3rd as you would expect. Again, this hints 1080p performance is less than optimal and has some scaling issues. For 3-way you may want to compare 2-way vs. 3-way as I've seen some user reports that there is no additional performance gain from the 3rd 480 in 3DVS.[/quote]
I was nicely surprised too, then read tomshardware (or some other review) and less details on peripheral makes perfect sense so not bad.
Unfortunately I can't (well I can but not easily) compare 2-way to 3-way on my system now as I have it under water so too much time for testing to me.
Again, hope you get all your issues sorted out soon!
[quote name='chiz' post='1083217' date='Jul 5 2010, 07:53 PM']Yep that's correct, the latest 258 betas do improve GPU utilization but scaling from 1xGPU to 2xGPU and from 2D to 3D is still lower than expected. For example, if you run Metro 2033 in DX9 compared to DX10/11 with the DX11-specific options turned off (Adv. DOF, Tesselation, no MSAA) you'll see DX9 runs much much better than DX10/11 even though GPU utilization is similar. Also, in DX10/11 gameplay is much choppier despite the frame rate counter reading 45-50FPS with all of the symptoms of micro-stutter.
You could argue about it but my I would say if there's GPU utilisation then they're doing some work.
So if 3-sli gets >90% on each core and FPS is good that tells me scaling is good, I would worry if like you said there was poor load (40-60%) on 1 or more cards and low FPS.
I'm not surprised with same utilisation yet lower FPS on DX10/11 - more bling so same work goes into less frames.
The micro-stutter however which you've described in DX10/11 is something different and definitely some issue with that FPS - I'm not getting it though so can't tell.
Hope you'll get it resolved.
[quote name='chiz' post='1083217' date='Jul 5 2010, 07:53 PM']This is for 1080p 3D Vision btw, I found 3D Vision Surround performance and scaling to be very good overall and more like 1/2 the FPS of 1080p rather than 1/3rd as you would expect. Again, this hints 1080p performance is less than optimal and has some scaling issues. For 3-way you may want to compare 2-way vs. 3-way as I've seen some user reports that there is no additional performance gain from the 3rd 480 in 3DVS.
I was nicely surprised too, then read tomshardware (or some other review) and less details on peripheral makes perfect sense so not bad.
Unfortunately I can't (well I can but not easily) compare 2-way to 3-way on my system now as I have it under water so too much time for testing to me.
Again, hope you get all your issues sorted out soon!
i7 980X @4.2 1.31v // Asus Rampage III Black Edition // Corsair Dom GT 3x4GB 2000 CL9 // 2x Palit GTX 580 3GB // Crucial RealSSD C300 256GB // 2x WD 2TB EARS // Samsung 2.5" 500GB // LG Blu-Ray DVD
Lian Li PC-A77B // Enermax Revolution 85+ 1250W // MS X-6 // SS Ikari // Logitech G27 + X230 // Win 7 x64 Pro // 3x Dell AW2310 120Hz 3D + Nvidia 3D Vision Surround
3x DDC 3.25 + 3x HTS-PMP400 // EK DDC Dual V2 + Single V2 Tops - Single loop // EK Multi-Option // Bitspower fittings //EK Supreme HF // 2x EK GTX 5X0 Acetal + Nickel
Primochill LRT Black 1/2 ID 3/4 OD // 2x XSPC RX360 + RX240 // Aquaero 5 Pro + flow & temp sensors // 21x Akasa Apache Black
[quote name='997luke' post='1083266' date='Jul 5 2010, 04:17 PM']You could argue about it but my I would say if there's GPU utilisation then they're doing some work.
So if 3-sli gets >90% on each core and FPS is good that tells me scaling is good, I would worry if like you said there was poor load (40-60%) on 1 or more cards and low FPS.
I'm not surprised with same utilisation yet lower FPS on DX10/11 - more bling so same work goes into less frames.
The micro-stutter however which you've described in DX10/11 is something different and definitely some issue with that FPS - I'm not getting it though so can't tell.
Hope you'll get it resolved.[/quote]
Well there's no doubt the GPUs are doing additional work with higher GPU utilization, the question is whether or not that translates into actual FPS.
For example, in JC2 with the initial 257 drivers GPU utlization was very low, only 60-70% and FPS dropped off some compared to the 197 drivers as well. With the 258 drivers, GPU utilization has increased to 80-90% on both GPUs but the performance gain while tangible is very little, maybe 10-20% max. I would've expected closer to 50% performance gain based on GPU utilization while also factoring in 2D performance and single-GPU in 3D Vision performance.
Also, there's ways to force higher GPU utilization without any performance gain at all, try forcing SFR in any of the games in the first list I was talking about, especially Avatar in DX10.
[quote]I was nicely surprised too, then read tomshardware (or some other review) and less details on peripheral makes perfect sense so not bad.
Unfortunately I can't (well I can but not easily) compare 2-way to 3-way on my system now as I have it under water so too much time for testing to me.
Again, hope you get all your issues sorted out soon![/quote]
You should be able to designate 2-way and 3-way SLI in the NVCP or trick the driver by dedicating the 3rd GPU to PhysX. But ya while 3DVS performance scaling is impressive, its still not enough imo to play comfortably in many games. I didn't bother dropping down settings because 3DVS isn't a long-term solution for me but it also seems a bit counterproductive for such a high-end set-up. I think the best compromise would be to somehow drop image quality settings on the flanking panels while keeping image quality high on the main display, but I don't think there's any cheap or easy way to do this as the image is rendered as a single large frame.
[quote name='997luke' post='1083266' date='Jul 5 2010, 04:17 PM']You could argue about it but my I would say if there's GPU utilisation then they're doing some work.
So if 3-sli gets >90% on each core and FPS is good that tells me scaling is good, I would worry if like you said there was poor load (40-60%) on 1 or more cards and low FPS.
I'm not surprised with same utilisation yet lower FPS on DX10/11 - more bling so same work goes into less frames.
The micro-stutter however which you've described in DX10/11 is something different and definitely some issue with that FPS - I'm not getting it though so can't tell.
Hope you'll get it resolved.
Well there's no doubt the GPUs are doing additional work with higher GPU utilization, the question is whether or not that translates into actual FPS.
For example, in JC2 with the initial 257 drivers GPU utlization was very low, only 60-70% and FPS dropped off some compared to the 197 drivers as well. With the 258 drivers, GPU utilization has increased to 80-90% on both GPUs but the performance gain while tangible is very little, maybe 10-20% max. I would've expected closer to 50% performance gain based on GPU utilization while also factoring in 2D performance and single-GPU in 3D Vision performance.
Also, there's ways to force higher GPU utilization without any performance gain at all, try forcing SFR in any of the games in the first list I was talking about, especially Avatar in DX10.
I was nicely surprised too, then read tomshardware (or some other review) and less details on peripheral makes perfect sense so not bad.
Unfortunately I can't (well I can but not easily) compare 2-way to 3-way on my system now as I have it under water so too much time for testing to me.
Again, hope you get all your issues sorted out soon!
You should be able to designate 2-way and 3-way SLI in the NVCP or trick the driver by dedicating the 3rd GPU to PhysX. But ya while 3DVS performance scaling is impressive, its still not enough imo to play comfortably in many games. I didn't bother dropping down settings because 3DVS isn't a long-term solution for me but it also seems a bit counterproductive for such a high-end set-up. I think the best compromise would be to somehow drop image quality settings on the flanking panels while keeping image quality high on the main display, but I don't think there's any cheap or easy way to do this as the image is rendered as a single large frame.
Sorry for double post guys - just had a thought about the SLI and I think and makes perfect sense why 3-sli is way to go for Surround (3D or not) with good gains but not as good for 1 screen.
When we read how it works, with the alternate rendering for 3-sli - each GPU's does the same work - frame-rendering wise - GPU1 - 1,4,7, GPU2 - 2,5,8, GPU3 - 3,6,9.
So all fine? Well the thing is the frame need to be send to the card with output to the screen - so for 1 screen first card will always do more work as on top of the "day job" it has to get frames from GPU2 & 3 every time and send it (no idea how much work is involved with it but something for sure).
With Surround though, it is perfectly even (if we ignore facts that some frames may take longer but that's just odds) - as for each frame each GPU does the render job and sends 2/3 of the frame to other 2 cards so more or less the'll get same load.
Obviously 200 series must be doing things differently since only 400 3-way SLI is supported for surround.
Only question remains whether any micro-stutters are caused by just too much load/data for GPU which is connected to the screen or driver with DX10/11 problem or something else i.e. like realtek sound or interefence with other pci card.
Your case though seems quite clear like driver issue if you've tested 2-way and all was fine with that setup.
A bit guessing in all of this on my part but logically it makes sense to me - correct if you think I'm wrong though (and sorry to those for whom all of this is obvious and clear for a long time - I'm still learning :)
[quote name='chiz' post='1083277' date='Jul 5 2010, 09:41 PM']You should be able to designate 2-way and 3-way SLI in the NVCP or trick the driver by dedicating the 3rd GPU to PhysX. But ya while 3DVS performance scaling is impressive, its still not enough imo to play comfortably in many games. I didn't bother dropping down settings because 3DVS isn't a long-term solution for me but it also seems a bit counterproductive for such a high-end set-up. I think the best compromise would be to somehow drop image quality settings on the flanking panels while keeping image quality high on the main display, but I don't think there's any cheap or easy way to do this as the image is rendered as a single large frame.[/quote]
That's what I thought too - but no way - you can't do it with 3-sli - 1 monitor to 1 card and no way to dedicate 1 card to PhysX only - this is kind of in line with good 3-sli on 3DVS and way it works.
Sorry for double post guys - just had a thought about the SLI and I think and makes perfect sense why 3-sli is way to go for Surround (3D or not) with good gains but not as good for 1 screen.
When we read how it works, with the alternate rendering for 3-sli - each GPU's does the same work - frame-rendering wise - GPU1 - 1,4,7, GPU2 - 2,5,8, GPU3 - 3,6,9.
So all fine? Well the thing is the frame need to be send to the card with output to the screen - so for 1 screen first card will always do more work as on top of the "day job" it has to get frames from GPU2 & 3 every time and send it (no idea how much work is involved with it but something for sure).
With Surround though, it is perfectly even (if we ignore facts that some frames may take longer but that's just odds) - as for each frame each GPU does the render job and sends 2/3 of the frame to other 2 cards so more or less the'll get same load.
Obviously 200 series must be doing things differently since only 400 3-way SLI is supported for surround.
Only question remains whether any micro-stutters are caused by just too much load/data for GPU which is connected to the screen or driver with DX10/11 problem or something else i.e. like realtek sound or interefence with other pci card.
Your case though seems quite clear like driver issue if you've tested 2-way and all was fine with that setup.
A bit guessing in all of this on my part but logically it makes sense to me - correct if you think I'm wrong though (and sorry to those for whom all of this is obvious and clear for a long time - I'm still learning :)
[quote name='chiz' post='1083277' date='Jul 5 2010, 09:41 PM']You should be able to designate 2-way and 3-way SLI in the NVCP or trick the driver by dedicating the 3rd GPU to PhysX. But ya while 3DVS performance scaling is impressive, its still not enough imo to play comfortably in many games. I didn't bother dropping down settings because 3DVS isn't a long-term solution for me but it also seems a bit counterproductive for such a high-end set-up. I think the best compromise would be to somehow drop image quality settings on the flanking panels while keeping image quality high on the main display, but I don't think there's any cheap or easy way to do this as the image is rendered as a single large frame.
That's what I thought too - but no way - you can't do it with 3-sli - 1 monitor to 1 card and no way to dedicate 1 card to PhysX only - this is kind of in line with good 3-sli on 3DVS and way it works.
i7 980X @4.2 1.31v // Asus Rampage III Black Edition // Corsair Dom GT 3x4GB 2000 CL9 // 2x Palit GTX 580 3GB // Crucial RealSSD C300 256GB // 2x WD 2TB EARS // Samsung 2.5" 500GB // LG Blu-Ray DVD
Lian Li PC-A77B // Enermax Revolution 85+ 1250W // MS X-6 // SS Ikari // Logitech G27 + X230 // Win 7 x64 Pro // 3x Dell AW2310 120Hz 3D + Nvidia 3D Vision Surround
3x DDC 3.25 + 3x HTS-PMP400 // EK DDC Dual V2 + Single V2 Tops - Single loop // EK Multi-Option // Bitspower fittings //EK Supreme HF // 2x EK GTX 5X0 Acetal + Nickel
Primochill LRT Black 1/2 ID 3/4 OD // 2x XSPC RX360 + RX240 // Aquaero 5 Pro + flow & temp sensors // 21x Akasa Apache Black
[quote name='997luke' post='1083284' date='Jul 5 2010, 05:04 PM']With Surround though, it is perfectly even (if we ignore facts that some frames may take longer but that's just odds) - as for each frame each GPU does the render job and sends 2/3 of the frame to other 2 cards so more or less the'll get same load.
Obviously 200 series must be doing things differently since only 400 3-way SLI is supported for surround.
Only question remains whether any micro-stutters are caused by just too much load/data for GPU which is connected to the screen or driver with DX10/11 problem or something else i.e. like realtek sound or interefence with other pci card.
Your case though seems quite clear like driver issue if you've tested 2-way and all was fine with that setup.
A bit guessing in all of this on my part but logically it makes sense to me - correct if you think I'm wrong though (and sorry to those for whom all of this is obvious and clear for a long time - I'm still learning :)[/quote]
This is incorrect from the reviews and Nvidia-supplied graphics. A single frame isn't split among multiple GPUs in 3DVS or even Nvidia Surround, each GPU is responsible for rendering the entire frame and in the case of 3DVS, its also responsible for rendering the stereo image of that frame as well.
Image taken from [b]AnandTech[/b]:
[img]http://images.anandtech.com/doci/3793/3DAFR.jpg[/img]
You can see above GPU #1 will render both the Left Eye and Right Eye view of Frame #1, so it is essentially rendering 2 frames sequentially before GPU #2 and GPU #3 start working on their frames. Once each frame is rendered, that complete frame would then be synchronized (based on prior AFR methods) to the other two GPUs VRAM over the SLI link and the driver would then tell which portion of the frame for that card to output over its display output. I suppose the driver could also split the frame at the card that rendered it to save on bandwidth over the SLI connector but that doesn't seem likely.
I imagine this is also why 3D Vision scales poorly with additional cards beyond 2-way as there's always going to be significant idle time for the 3rd and 4th GPUs as they wait for the 1st and 2nd GPU to finish rendering, especially in 3DVS when you're talking about such massive frames, rendered 2x in stereo. This would also explain why microstutter seems to be worst in SLI and in 3DVS due to all the delay between GPUs getting pre-rendered frames and how long they take to render such high resolution frames and synchronize frames over the SLI connectors.
I think the better solution would be for the S3D driver to send the Left Eye and Right Eye of each frame to different GPUs simultaneously but it doesn't seem like they're able to do that, or do it easily. For 3xSLI you'd have Frame#1L to GPU#1, Frame#1R to GPU#2, Frame#2L to GPU#3, Frame#2R to GPU#1, Frame#3L to GPU#2, Frame#3R to GPU#3 etc. and so on.
Also no need to apologize, I think we're all learning here and trying to get a grip on this awesome new technology, myself included. :)
[quote]That's what I thought too - but no way - you can't do it with 3-sli - 1 monitor to 1 card and no way to dedicate 1 card to PhysX only - this is kind of in line with good 3-sli on 3DVS and way it works.[/quote]
Ya you may need to connect 2-dvi to a single card, which shouldn't result in any performance hit as I think each card has its own identical copy of the frame buffer and the display driver just tells it which portion to output. I'd be curious to see if there were any performance gain from using 1xDVI per card vs. shared output on 1 card, but based on the logistical diagrams published by Nvidia in reviews I doubt it would.
[quote name='997luke' post='1083284' date='Jul 5 2010, 05:04 PM']With Surround though, it is perfectly even (if we ignore facts that some frames may take longer but that's just odds) - as for each frame each GPU does the render job and sends 2/3 of the frame to other 2 cards so more or less the'll get same load.
Obviously 200 series must be doing things differently since only 400 3-way SLI is supported for surround.
Only question remains whether any micro-stutters are caused by just too much load/data for GPU which is connected to the screen or driver with DX10/11 problem or something else i.e. like realtek sound or interefence with other pci card.
Your case though seems quite clear like driver issue if you've tested 2-way and all was fine with that setup.
A bit guessing in all of this on my part but logically it makes sense to me - correct if you think I'm wrong though (and sorry to those for whom all of this is obvious and clear for a long time - I'm still learning :)
This is incorrect from the reviews and Nvidia-supplied graphics. A single frame isn't split among multiple GPUs in 3DVS or even Nvidia Surround, each GPU is responsible for rendering the entire frame and in the case of 3DVS, its also responsible for rendering the stereo image of that frame as well.
Image taken from AnandTech:
You can see above GPU #1 will render both the Left Eye and Right Eye view of Frame #1, so it is essentially rendering 2 frames sequentially before GPU #2 and GPU #3 start working on their frames. Once each frame is rendered, that complete frame would then be synchronized (based on prior AFR methods) to the other two GPUs VRAM over the SLI link and the driver would then tell which portion of the frame for that card to output over its display output. I suppose the driver could also split the frame at the card that rendered it to save on bandwidth over the SLI connector but that doesn't seem likely.
I imagine this is also why 3D Vision scales poorly with additional cards beyond 2-way as there's always going to be significant idle time for the 3rd and 4th GPUs as they wait for the 1st and 2nd GPU to finish rendering, especially in 3DVS when you're talking about such massive frames, rendered 2x in stereo. This would also explain why microstutter seems to be worst in SLI and in 3DVS due to all the delay between GPUs getting pre-rendered frames and how long they take to render such high resolution frames and synchronize frames over the SLI connectors.
I think the better solution would be for the S3D driver to send the Left Eye and Right Eye of each frame to different GPUs simultaneously but it doesn't seem like they're able to do that, or do it easily. For 3xSLI you'd have Frame#1L to GPU#1, Frame#1R to GPU#2, Frame#2L to GPU#3, Frame#2R to GPU#1, Frame#3L to GPU#2, Frame#3R to GPU#3 etc. and so on.
Also no need to apologize, I think we're all learning here and trying to get a grip on this awesome new technology, myself included. :)
That's what I thought too - but no way - you can't do it with 3-sli - 1 monitor to 1 card and no way to dedicate 1 card to PhysX only - this is kind of in line with good 3-sli on 3DVS and way it works.
Ya you may need to connect 2-dvi to a single card, which shouldn't result in any performance hit as I think each card has its own identical copy of the frame buffer and the display driver just tells it which portion to output. I'd be curious to see if there were any performance gain from using 1xDVI per card vs. shared output on 1 card, but based on the logistical diagrams published by Nvidia in reviews I doubt it would.
You are right chiz with 2 full complex frames taking long in that setup (I wrote though that each frame is rendered by 1 GPU and send to other for display only but doesn't matter in that point)
As for the 3-sli there is the following connector reccomendation on nvidia system requirements:
You are right chiz with 2 full complex frames taking long in that setup (I wrote though that each frame is rendered by 1 GPU and send to other for display only but doesn't matter in that point)
As for the 3-sli there is the following connector reccomendation on nvidia system requirements:
i7 980X @4.2 1.31v // Asus Rampage III Black Edition // Corsair Dom GT 3x4GB 2000 CL9 // 2x Palit GTX 580 3GB // Crucial RealSSD C300 256GB // 2x WD 2TB EARS // Samsung 2.5" 500GB // LG Blu-Ray DVD
Lian Li PC-A77B // Enermax Revolution 85+ 1250W // MS X-6 // SS Ikari // Logitech G27 + X230 // Win 7 x64 Pro // 3x Dell AW2310 120Hz 3D + Nvidia 3D Vision Surround
3x DDC 3.25 + 3x HTS-PMP400 // EK DDC Dual V2 + Single V2 Tops - Single loop // EK Multi-Option // Bitspower fittings //EK Supreme HF // 2x EK GTX 5X0 Acetal + Nickel
Primochill LRT Black 1/2 ID 3/4 OD // 2x XSPC RX360 + RX240 // Aquaero 5 Pro + flow & temp sensors // 21x Akasa Apache Black
Wow. Excellent thread. With 3-way SLI I was hoping to remove any performance hits in 3D Vision with top end games like Metro and JC2 etc. For a single monitor 2x Sli seems to be the sweet spot. However, judging by what chiz mentions above it appears that 2x Sli will not deliver the prefered performance I am looking for if I go the 3D surround route. Like Luke, I hope that 3-way SLI and 3D vision is improved with upcoming drivers. I'm not holding my breath though.
Wow. Excellent thread. With 3-way SLI I was hoping to remove any performance hits in 3D Vision with top end games like Metro and JC2 etc. For a single monitor 2x Sli seems to be the sweet spot. However, judging by what chiz mentions above it appears that 2x Sli will not deliver the prefered performance I am looking for if I go the 3D surround route. Like Luke, I hope that 3-way SLI and 3D vision is improved with upcoming drivers. I'm not holding my breath though.
4770k @ 4.2 Water cooled
32 Gigs DDR 3 2400
GTX Titan X SLI
Obsidian 800D
EVGA 1300 watt
1 Terabyte SSD raid 0
ASUS 27 inch 3D monitor 3D vision 2.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Acer HN274H
30" IPS Pro Monitor WQXGA 2560x1600
Mitsubishi 60737 60" DLP HDTV
Core i7 3820 @4.8ghz
16GB DDR3 1600
ASRock Fatal1ty X79 Professional LGA 2011
SeaSonic X-SERIES X-1050 1050W
Windows 7 Ultimate x64
ASUS GTX titan SLI
Sennheiser pc 360 with Asus Xonar Essence STX
Bose Companion 3 Series II
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Some examples of poor/disappointing scaling:
[list]
[*]BFBC2 (decent GPU utilization but still far from 100% with FPS in the 35-50 range)
[*]JC2 (poor GPU utilization and scaling in 3D Vision and SLI, not much more than a single GTX 480 actually and choppier gameplay too)
[*]Metro 2033 DX10/11 (DX9 in High, no MSAA runs great)
[*]Avatar DX10 (DX9 is almost capped at 60FPS but less efficient than DX10)
[*]Splinter Cell Conviction (SLI in 3D is just broken due to a memory leak)
[/list]
Some examples of incredible scaling making Turning 35-45FPS into 60FPS capped per eye and a perfect 3D experience:
[list]
[*]AC2 (just a different gaming experience with GF100 SLI)
[*]PoP 2008 and 2010 (similar to AC2 just not as pronounced)
[*]Batman AA (no need for dedicated PhysX bc of free GPU overhead from 60 FPS cap)
[*]Dark Void (maxed out, PhysX High)
[*]Dragon Age Origins (crank up the AA with the leftover GPU overhead)
[*]Any UE3 game (just need to be careful with the forced MSAA + TSAA as the VRAM/bandwidth hit is still there)
[*]Dirt 2 (everything maxed out, 4xMSAA)
[*]Fallout 3 (all maxed, 8xMSAA)
[*]Dawn of War 2 (all maxed out, in-game AA)
[*]COD 4,5,6 (all maxed out, you might even be able to get away with SGSSAA in these)
[/list]
You can see the 2nd list are games that are semi-demanding, the ones up top are some of the most demanding without S3D and really need the extra performance the most. Again, you can push additional AA in a lot of the games in the 2nd list with all the extra GPU overhead but I generally find its not needed as much with the natural AA effect of the stereo images. Most of this goes out the window though with 3D Vision Surround as the additional resolution and rendering requirements are just too much for GTX 480 SLI in even moderately demanding games.
Some examples of poor/disappointing scaling:
Some examples of incredible scaling making Turning 35-45FPS into 60FPS capped per eye and a perfect 3D experience:
You can see the 2nd list are games that are semi-demanding, the ones up top are some of the most demanding without S3D and really need the extra performance the most. Again, you can push additional AA in a lot of the games in the 2nd list with all the extra GPU overhead but I generally find its not needed as much with the natural AA effect of the stereo images. Most of this goes out the window though with 3D Vision Surround as the additional resolution and rendering requirements are just too much for GTX 480 SLI in even moderately demanding games.
-=HeliX=- Mod 3DV Game Fixes
My 3D Vision Games List Ratings
Intel Core i7 5930K @4.5GHz | Gigabyte X99 Gaming 5 | Win10 x64 Pro | Corsair H105
Nvidia GeForce Titan X SLI Hybrid | ROG Swift PG278Q 144Hz + 3D Vision/G-Sync | 32GB Adata DDR4 2666
Intel Samsung 950Pro SSD | Samsung EVO 4x1 RAID 0 |
Yamaha VX-677 A/V Receiver | Polk Audio RM6880 7.1 | LG Blu-Ray
Auzen X-Fi HT HD | Logitech G710/G502/G27 | Corsair Air 540 | EVGA P2-1200W
[*]Metro 2033 DX10/11 (DX9 in High, no MSAA runs great)[/quote]
I have different results.
In both games GPU's utilisation is high throughout all GPUs (3-sli), and Metro DX10 runs well.
I have different results.
In both games GPU's utilisation is high throughout all GPUs (3-sli), and Metro DX10 runs well.
i7 980X @4.2 1.31v // Asus Rampage III Black Edition // Corsair Dom GT 3x4GB 2000 CL9 // 2x Palit GTX 580 3GB // Crucial RealSSD C300 256GB // 2x WD 2TB EARS // Samsung 2.5" 500GB // LG Blu-Ray DVD
Lian Li PC-A77B // Enermax Revolution 85+ 1250W // MS X-6 // SS Ikari // Logitech G27 + X230 // Win 7 x64 Pro // 3x Dell AW2310 120Hz 3D + Nvidia 3D Vision Surround
3x DDC 3.25 + 3x HTS-PMP400 // EK DDC Dual V2 + Single V2 Tops - Single loop // EK Multi-Option // Bitspower fittings //EK Supreme HF // 2x EK GTX 5X0 Acetal + Nickel
Primochill LRT Black 1/2 ID 3/4 OD // 2x XSPC RX360 + RX240 // Aquaero 5 Pro + flow & temp sensors // 21x Akasa Apache Black
Rig worklog
System:
Intel I7 920 overclocked to 4ghz
Asus Rampage Extreme II
2 Ge-force 480 in SLI
GTX 295 PhysX Card
12gb ddr3 2000mhz ram
Intel SSD in RAID 0
BR RW
1000w Sony surround sound
NVIDIA 3D Vision
3d displays tested:
Mitsubishi 65" DLP 3d HDTV (good old 1080p checkerboard since 2007!!!)
Panasonic VT25 (nice 2d but I returned it due to cross talk)
Acer H5360 720p on 130" screen (the best 3d)
23" Acer LCD monitor (horrible cross talk- sold it)
Samsung 65D8000
In both games GPU's utilisation is high throughout all GPUs (3-sli), and Metro DX10 runs well.[/quote]
I think what he meant isnt that they get a full load or ifthe load is balanced, but how much of a performance boost a second card adds. Another thing is your SLi performance scaling can be misguiding if your CPU is bottlenecking. For SLi you want to have atleast 3.8ghz.
In both games GPU's utilisation is high throughout all GPUs (3-sli), and Metro DX10 runs well.
I think what he meant isnt that they get a full load or ifthe load is balanced, but how much of a performance boost a second card adds. Another thing is your SLi performance scaling can be misguiding if your CPU is bottlenecking. For SLi you want to have atleast 3.8ghz.
In both games GPU's utilisation is high throughout all GPUs (3-sli), and Metro DX10 runs well.[/quote]
Yep that's correct, the latest 258 betas do improve GPU utilization but scaling from 1xGPU to 2xGPU and from 2D to 3D is still lower than expected. For example, if you run Metro 2033 in DX9 compared to DX10/11 with the DX11-specific options turned off (Adv. DOF, Tesselation, no MSAA) you'll see DX9 runs much much better than DX10/11 even though GPU utilization is similar. Also, in DX10/11 gameplay is much choppier despite the frame rate counter reading 45-50FPS with all of the symptoms of micro-stutter.
This is for 1080p 3D Vision btw, I found 3D Vision Surround performance and scaling to be very good overall and more like 1/2 the FPS of 1080p rather than 1/3rd as you would expect. Again, this hints 1080p performance is less than optimal and has some scaling issues. For 3-way you may want to compare 2-way vs. 3-way as I've seen some user reports that there is no additional performance gain from the 3rd 480 in 3DVS.
In both games GPU's utilisation is high throughout all GPUs (3-sli), and Metro DX10 runs well.
Yep that's correct, the latest 258 betas do improve GPU utilization but scaling from 1xGPU to 2xGPU and from 2D to 3D is still lower than expected. For example, if you run Metro 2033 in DX9 compared to DX10/11 with the DX11-specific options turned off (Adv. DOF, Tesselation, no MSAA) you'll see DX9 runs much much better than DX10/11 even though GPU utilization is similar. Also, in DX10/11 gameplay is much choppier despite the frame rate counter reading 45-50FPS with all of the symptoms of micro-stutter.
This is for 1080p 3D Vision btw, I found 3D Vision Surround performance and scaling to be very good overall and more like 1/2 the FPS of 1080p rather than 1/3rd as you would expect. Again, this hints 1080p performance is less than optimal and has some scaling issues. For 3-way you may want to compare 2-way vs. 3-way as I've seen some user reports that there is no additional performance gain from the 3rd 480 in 3DVS.
-=HeliX=- Mod 3DV Game Fixes
My 3D Vision Games List Ratings
Intel Core i7 5930K @4.5GHz | Gigabyte X99 Gaming 5 | Win10 x64 Pro | Corsair H105
Nvidia GeForce Titan X SLI Hybrid | ROG Swift PG278Q 144Hz + 3D Vision/G-Sync | 32GB Adata DDR4 2666
Intel Samsung 950Pro SSD | Samsung EVO 4x1 RAID 0 |
Yamaha VX-677 A/V Receiver | Polk Audio RM6880 7.1 | LG Blu-Ray
Auzen X-Fi HT HD | Logitech G710/G502/G27 | Corsair Air 540 | EVGA P2-1200W
You could argue about it but my I would say if there's GPU utilisation then they're doing some work.
So if 3-sli gets >90% on each core and FPS is good that tells me scaling is good, I would worry if like you said there was poor load (40-60%) on 1 or more cards and low FPS.
I'm not surprised with same utilisation yet lower FPS on DX10/11 - more bling so same work goes into less frames.
The micro-stutter however which you've described in DX10/11 is something different and definitely some issue with that FPS - I'm not getting it though so can't tell.
Hope you'll get it resolved.
[quote name='chiz' post='1083217' date='Jul 5 2010, 07:53 PM']This is for 1080p 3D Vision btw, I found 3D Vision Surround performance and scaling to be very good overall and more like 1/2 the FPS of 1080p rather than 1/3rd as you would expect. Again, this hints 1080p performance is less than optimal and has some scaling issues. For 3-way you may want to compare 2-way vs. 3-way as I've seen some user reports that there is no additional performance gain from the 3rd 480 in 3DVS.[/quote]
I was nicely surprised too, then read tomshardware (or some other review) and less details on peripheral makes perfect sense so not bad.
Unfortunately I can't (well I can but not easily) compare 2-way to 3-way on my system now as I have it under water so too much time for testing to me.
Again, hope you get all your issues sorted out soon!
You could argue about it but my I would say if there's GPU utilisation then they're doing some work.
So if 3-sli gets >90% on each core and FPS is good that tells me scaling is good, I would worry if like you said there was poor load (40-60%) on 1 or more cards and low FPS.
I'm not surprised with same utilisation yet lower FPS on DX10/11 - more bling so same work goes into less frames.
The micro-stutter however which you've described in DX10/11 is something different and definitely some issue with that FPS - I'm not getting it though so can't tell.
Hope you'll get it resolved.
[quote name='chiz' post='1083217' date='Jul 5 2010, 07:53 PM']This is for 1080p 3D Vision btw, I found 3D Vision Surround performance and scaling to be very good overall and more like 1/2 the FPS of 1080p rather than 1/3rd as you would expect. Again, this hints 1080p performance is less than optimal and has some scaling issues. For 3-way you may want to compare 2-way vs. 3-way as I've seen some user reports that there is no additional performance gain from the 3rd 480 in 3DVS.
I was nicely surprised too, then read tomshardware (or some other review) and less details on peripheral makes perfect sense so not bad.
Unfortunately I can't (well I can but not easily) compare 2-way to 3-way on my system now as I have it under water so too much time for testing to me.
Again, hope you get all your issues sorted out soon!
i7 980X @4.2 1.31v // Asus Rampage III Black Edition // Corsair Dom GT 3x4GB 2000 CL9 // 2x Palit GTX 580 3GB // Crucial RealSSD C300 256GB // 2x WD 2TB EARS // Samsung 2.5" 500GB // LG Blu-Ray DVD
Lian Li PC-A77B // Enermax Revolution 85+ 1250W // MS X-6 // SS Ikari // Logitech G27 + X230 // Win 7 x64 Pro // 3x Dell AW2310 120Hz 3D + Nvidia 3D Vision Surround
3x DDC 3.25 + 3x HTS-PMP400 // EK DDC Dual V2 + Single V2 Tops - Single loop // EK Multi-Option // Bitspower fittings //EK Supreme HF // 2x EK GTX 5X0 Acetal + Nickel
Primochill LRT Black 1/2 ID 3/4 OD // 2x XSPC RX360 + RX240 // Aquaero 5 Pro + flow & temp sensors // 21x Akasa Apache Black
Rig worklog
So if 3-sli gets >90% on each core and FPS is good that tells me scaling is good, I would worry if like you said there was poor load (40-60%) on 1 or more cards and low FPS.
I'm not surprised with same utilisation yet lower FPS on DX10/11 - more bling so same work goes into less frames.
The micro-stutter however which you've described in DX10/11 is something different and definitely some issue with that FPS - I'm not getting it though so can't tell.
Hope you'll get it resolved.[/quote]
Well there's no doubt the GPUs are doing additional work with higher GPU utilization, the question is whether or not that translates into actual FPS.
For example, in JC2 with the initial 257 drivers GPU utlization was very low, only 60-70% and FPS dropped off some compared to the 197 drivers as well. With the 258 drivers, GPU utilization has increased to 80-90% on both GPUs but the performance gain while tangible is very little, maybe 10-20% max. I would've expected closer to 50% performance gain based on GPU utilization while also factoring in 2D performance and single-GPU in 3D Vision performance.
Also, there's ways to force higher GPU utilization without any performance gain at all, try forcing SFR in any of the games in the first list I was talking about, especially Avatar in DX10.
[quote]I was nicely surprised too, then read tomshardware (or some other review) and less details on peripheral makes perfect sense so not bad.
Unfortunately I can't (well I can but not easily) compare 2-way to 3-way on my system now as I have it under water so too much time for testing to me.
Again, hope you get all your issues sorted out soon![/quote]
You should be able to designate 2-way and 3-way SLI in the NVCP or trick the driver by dedicating the 3rd GPU to PhysX. But ya while 3DVS performance scaling is impressive, its still not enough imo to play comfortably in many games. I didn't bother dropping down settings because 3DVS isn't a long-term solution for me but it also seems a bit counterproductive for such a high-end set-up. I think the best compromise would be to somehow drop image quality settings on the flanking panels while keeping image quality high on the main display, but I don't think there's any cheap or easy way to do this as the image is rendered as a single large frame.
So if 3-sli gets >90% on each core and FPS is good that tells me scaling is good, I would worry if like you said there was poor load (40-60%) on 1 or more cards and low FPS.
I'm not surprised with same utilisation yet lower FPS on DX10/11 - more bling so same work goes into less frames.
The micro-stutter however which you've described in DX10/11 is something different and definitely some issue with that FPS - I'm not getting it though so can't tell.
Hope you'll get it resolved.
Well there's no doubt the GPUs are doing additional work with higher GPU utilization, the question is whether or not that translates into actual FPS.
For example, in JC2 with the initial 257 drivers GPU utlization was very low, only 60-70% and FPS dropped off some compared to the 197 drivers as well. With the 258 drivers, GPU utilization has increased to 80-90% on both GPUs but the performance gain while tangible is very little, maybe 10-20% max. I would've expected closer to 50% performance gain based on GPU utilization while also factoring in 2D performance and single-GPU in 3D Vision performance.
Also, there's ways to force higher GPU utilization without any performance gain at all, try forcing SFR in any of the games in the first list I was talking about, especially Avatar in DX10.
You should be able to designate 2-way and 3-way SLI in the NVCP or trick the driver by dedicating the 3rd GPU to PhysX. But ya while 3DVS performance scaling is impressive, its still not enough imo to play comfortably in many games. I didn't bother dropping down settings because 3DVS isn't a long-term solution for me but it also seems a bit counterproductive for such a high-end set-up. I think the best compromise would be to somehow drop image quality settings on the flanking panels while keeping image quality high on the main display, but I don't think there's any cheap or easy way to do this as the image is rendered as a single large frame.
-=HeliX=- Mod 3DV Game Fixes
My 3D Vision Games List Ratings
Intel Core i7 5930K @4.5GHz | Gigabyte X99 Gaming 5 | Win10 x64 Pro | Corsair H105
Nvidia GeForce Titan X SLI Hybrid | ROG Swift PG278Q 144Hz + 3D Vision/G-Sync | 32GB Adata DDR4 2666
Intel Samsung 950Pro SSD | Samsung EVO 4x1 RAID 0 |
Yamaha VX-677 A/V Receiver | Polk Audio RM6880 7.1 | LG Blu-Ray
Auzen X-Fi HT HD | Logitech G710/G502/G27 | Corsair Air 540 | EVGA P2-1200W
When we read how it works, with the alternate rendering for 3-sli - each GPU's does the same work - frame-rendering wise - GPU1 - 1,4,7, GPU2 - 2,5,8, GPU3 - 3,6,9.
So all fine? Well the thing is the frame need to be send to the card with output to the screen - so for 1 screen first card will always do more work as on top of the "day job" it has to get frames from GPU2 & 3 every time and send it (no idea how much work is involved with it but something for sure).
With Surround though, it is perfectly even (if we ignore facts that some frames may take longer but that's just odds) - as for each frame each GPU does the render job and sends 2/3 of the frame to other 2 cards so more or less the'll get same load.
Obviously 200 series must be doing things differently since only 400 3-way SLI is supported for surround.
Only question remains whether any micro-stutters are caused by just too much load/data for GPU which is connected to the screen or driver with DX10/11 problem or something else i.e. like realtek sound or interefence with other pci card.
Your case though seems quite clear like driver issue if you've tested 2-way and all was fine with that setup.
A bit guessing in all of this on my part but logically it makes sense to me - correct if you think I'm wrong though (and sorry to those for whom all of this is obvious and clear for a long time - I'm still learning :)
[quote name='chiz' post='1083277' date='Jul 5 2010, 09:41 PM']You should be able to designate 2-way and 3-way SLI in the NVCP or trick the driver by dedicating the 3rd GPU to PhysX. But ya while 3DVS performance scaling is impressive, its still not enough imo to play comfortably in many games. I didn't bother dropping down settings because 3DVS isn't a long-term solution for me but it also seems a bit counterproductive for such a high-end set-up. I think the best compromise would be to somehow drop image quality settings on the flanking panels while keeping image quality high on the main display, but I don't think there's any cheap or easy way to do this as the image is rendered as a single large frame.[/quote]
That's what I thought too - but no way - you can't do it with 3-sli - 1 monitor to 1 card and no way to dedicate 1 card to PhysX only - this is kind of in line with good 3-sli on 3DVS and way it works.
When we read how it works, with the alternate rendering for 3-sli - each GPU's does the same work - frame-rendering wise - GPU1 - 1,4,7, GPU2 - 2,5,8, GPU3 - 3,6,9.
So all fine? Well the thing is the frame need to be send to the card with output to the screen - so for 1 screen first card will always do more work as on top of the "day job" it has to get frames from GPU2 & 3 every time and send it (no idea how much work is involved with it but something for sure).
With Surround though, it is perfectly even (if we ignore facts that some frames may take longer but that's just odds) - as for each frame each GPU does the render job and sends 2/3 of the frame to other 2 cards so more or less the'll get same load.
Obviously 200 series must be doing things differently since only 400 3-way SLI is supported for surround.
Only question remains whether any micro-stutters are caused by just too much load/data for GPU which is connected to the screen or driver with DX10/11 problem or something else i.e. like realtek sound or interefence with other pci card.
Your case though seems quite clear like driver issue if you've tested 2-way and all was fine with that setup.
A bit guessing in all of this on my part but logically it makes sense to me - correct if you think I'm wrong though (and sorry to those for whom all of this is obvious and clear for a long time - I'm still learning :)
[quote name='chiz' post='1083277' date='Jul 5 2010, 09:41 PM']You should be able to designate 2-way and 3-way SLI in the NVCP or trick the driver by dedicating the 3rd GPU to PhysX. But ya while 3DVS performance scaling is impressive, its still not enough imo to play comfortably in many games. I didn't bother dropping down settings because 3DVS isn't a long-term solution for me but it also seems a bit counterproductive for such a high-end set-up. I think the best compromise would be to somehow drop image quality settings on the flanking panels while keeping image quality high on the main display, but I don't think there's any cheap or easy way to do this as the image is rendered as a single large frame.
That's what I thought too - but no way - you can't do it with 3-sli - 1 monitor to 1 card and no way to dedicate 1 card to PhysX only - this is kind of in line with good 3-sli on 3DVS and way it works.
i7 980X @4.2 1.31v // Asus Rampage III Black Edition // Corsair Dom GT 3x4GB 2000 CL9 // 2x Palit GTX 580 3GB // Crucial RealSSD C300 256GB // 2x WD 2TB EARS // Samsung 2.5" 500GB // LG Blu-Ray DVD
Lian Li PC-A77B // Enermax Revolution 85+ 1250W // MS X-6 // SS Ikari // Logitech G27 + X230 // Win 7 x64 Pro // 3x Dell AW2310 120Hz 3D + Nvidia 3D Vision Surround
3x DDC 3.25 + 3x HTS-PMP400 // EK DDC Dual V2 + Single V2 Tops - Single loop // EK Multi-Option // Bitspower fittings //EK Supreme HF // 2x EK GTX 5X0 Acetal + Nickel
Primochill LRT Black 1/2 ID 3/4 OD // 2x XSPC RX360 + RX240 // Aquaero 5 Pro + flow & temp sensors // 21x Akasa Apache Black
Rig worklog
Obviously 200 series must be doing things differently since only 400 3-way SLI is supported for surround.
Only question remains whether any micro-stutters are caused by just too much load/data for GPU which is connected to the screen or driver with DX10/11 problem or something else i.e. like realtek sound or interefence with other pci card.
Your case though seems quite clear like driver issue if you've tested 2-way and all was fine with that setup.
A bit guessing in all of this on my part but logically it makes sense to me - correct if you think I'm wrong though (and sorry to those for whom all of this is obvious and clear for a long time - I'm still learning :)[/quote]
This is incorrect from the reviews and Nvidia-supplied graphics. A single frame isn't split among multiple GPUs in 3DVS or even Nvidia Surround, each GPU is responsible for rendering the entire frame and in the case of 3DVS, its also responsible for rendering the stereo image of that frame as well.
Image taken from [b]AnandTech[/b]:
[img]http://images.anandtech.com/doci/3793/3DAFR.jpg[/img]
You can see above GPU #1 will render both the Left Eye and Right Eye view of Frame #1, so it is essentially rendering 2 frames sequentially before GPU #2 and GPU #3 start working on their frames. Once each frame is rendered, that complete frame would then be synchronized (based on prior AFR methods) to the other two GPUs VRAM over the SLI link and the driver would then tell which portion of the frame for that card to output over its display output. I suppose the driver could also split the frame at the card that rendered it to save on bandwidth over the SLI connector but that doesn't seem likely.
I imagine this is also why 3D Vision scales poorly with additional cards beyond 2-way as there's always going to be significant idle time for the 3rd and 4th GPUs as they wait for the 1st and 2nd GPU to finish rendering, especially in 3DVS when you're talking about such massive frames, rendered 2x in stereo. This would also explain why microstutter seems to be worst in SLI and in 3DVS due to all the delay between GPUs getting pre-rendered frames and how long they take to render such high resolution frames and synchronize frames over the SLI connectors.
I think the better solution would be for the S3D driver to send the Left Eye and Right Eye of each frame to different GPUs simultaneously but it doesn't seem like they're able to do that, or do it easily. For 3xSLI you'd have Frame#1L to GPU#1, Frame#1R to GPU#2, Frame#2L to GPU#3, Frame#2R to GPU#1, Frame#3L to GPU#2, Frame#3R to GPU#3 etc. and so on.
Also no need to apologize, I think we're all learning here and trying to get a grip on this awesome new technology, myself included. :)
[quote]That's what I thought too - but no way - you can't do it with 3-sli - 1 monitor to 1 card and no way to dedicate 1 card to PhysX only - this is kind of in line with good 3-sli on 3DVS and way it works.[/quote]
Ya you may need to connect 2-dvi to a single card, which shouldn't result in any performance hit as I think each card has its own identical copy of the frame buffer and the display driver just tells it which portion to output. I'd be curious to see if there were any performance gain from using 1xDVI per card vs. shared output on 1 card, but based on the logistical diagrams published by Nvidia in reviews I doubt it would.
Obviously 200 series must be doing things differently since only 400 3-way SLI is supported for surround.
Only question remains whether any micro-stutters are caused by just too much load/data for GPU which is connected to the screen or driver with DX10/11 problem or something else i.e. like realtek sound or interefence with other pci card.
Your case though seems quite clear like driver issue if you've tested 2-way and all was fine with that setup.
A bit guessing in all of this on my part but logically it makes sense to me - correct if you think I'm wrong though (and sorry to those for whom all of this is obvious and clear for a long time - I'm still learning :)
This is incorrect from the reviews and Nvidia-supplied graphics. A single frame isn't split among multiple GPUs in 3DVS or even Nvidia Surround, each GPU is responsible for rendering the entire frame and in the case of 3DVS, its also responsible for rendering the stereo image of that frame as well.
Image taken from AnandTech:
You can see above GPU #1 will render both the Left Eye and Right Eye view of Frame #1, so it is essentially rendering 2 frames sequentially before GPU #2 and GPU #3 start working on their frames. Once each frame is rendered, that complete frame would then be synchronized (based on prior AFR methods) to the other two GPUs VRAM over the SLI link and the driver would then tell which portion of the frame for that card to output over its display output. I suppose the driver could also split the frame at the card that rendered it to save on bandwidth over the SLI connector but that doesn't seem likely.
I imagine this is also why 3D Vision scales poorly with additional cards beyond 2-way as there's always going to be significant idle time for the 3rd and 4th GPUs as they wait for the 1st and 2nd GPU to finish rendering, especially in 3DVS when you're talking about such massive frames, rendered 2x in stereo. This would also explain why microstutter seems to be worst in SLI and in 3DVS due to all the delay between GPUs getting pre-rendered frames and how long they take to render such high resolution frames and synchronize frames over the SLI connectors.
I think the better solution would be for the S3D driver to send the Left Eye and Right Eye of each frame to different GPUs simultaneously but it doesn't seem like they're able to do that, or do it easily. For 3xSLI you'd have Frame#1L to GPU#1, Frame#1R to GPU#2, Frame#2L to GPU#3, Frame#2R to GPU#1, Frame#3L to GPU#2, Frame#3R to GPU#3 etc. and so on.
Also no need to apologize, I think we're all learning here and trying to get a grip on this awesome new technology, myself included. :)
Ya you may need to connect 2-dvi to a single card, which shouldn't result in any performance hit as I think each card has its own identical copy of the frame buffer and the display driver just tells it which portion to output. I'd be curious to see if there were any performance gain from using 1xDVI per card vs. shared output on 1 card, but based on the logistical diagrams published by Nvidia in reviews I doubt it would.
-=HeliX=- Mod 3DV Game Fixes
My 3D Vision Games List Ratings
Intel Core i7 5930K @4.5GHz | Gigabyte X99 Gaming 5 | Win10 x64 Pro | Corsair H105
Nvidia GeForce Titan X SLI Hybrid | ROG Swift PG278Q 144Hz + 3D Vision/G-Sync | 32GB Adata DDR4 2666
Intel Samsung 950Pro SSD | Samsung EVO 4x1 RAID 0 |
Yamaha VX-677 A/V Receiver | Polk Audio RM6880 7.1 | LG Blu-Ray
Auzen X-Fi HT HD | Logitech G710/G502/G27 | Corsair Air 540 | EVGA P2-1200W
As for the 3-sli there is the following connector reccomendation on nvidia system requirements:
[url="http://www.nvidia.com/docs/IO/89575/sub-connector-recommendation.pdf"]Nvidia connector requirements[/url]
so 1 card should go to 1 monitor for 3-sli.
Let's see how the driver develops :)
As for the 3-sli there is the following connector reccomendation on nvidia system requirements:
Nvidia connector requirements
so 1 card should go to 1 monitor for 3-sli.
Let's see how the driver develops :)
i7 980X @4.2 1.31v // Asus Rampage III Black Edition // Corsair Dom GT 3x4GB 2000 CL9 // 2x Palit GTX 580 3GB // Crucial RealSSD C300 256GB // 2x WD 2TB EARS // Samsung 2.5" 500GB // LG Blu-Ray DVD
Lian Li PC-A77B // Enermax Revolution 85+ 1250W // MS X-6 // SS Ikari // Logitech G27 + X230 // Win 7 x64 Pro // 3x Dell AW2310 120Hz 3D + Nvidia 3D Vision Surround
3x DDC 3.25 + 3x HTS-PMP400 // EK DDC Dual V2 + Single V2 Tops - Single loop // EK Multi-Option // Bitspower fittings //EK Supreme HF // 2x EK GTX 5X0 Acetal + Nickel
Primochill LRT Black 1/2 ID 3/4 OD // 2x XSPC RX360 + RX240 // Aquaero 5 Pro + flow & temp sensors // 21x Akasa Apache Black
Rig worklog
4770k @ 4.2 Water cooled
32 Gigs DDR 3 2400
GTX Titan X SLI
Obsidian 800D
EVGA 1300 watt
1 Terabyte SSD raid 0
ASUS 27 inch 3D monitor 3D vision 2.