Talk:AMD CrossFire

message: Please move the comparison of SLI/CrossFire to Comparison of CrossFire and Scalable Link Interface
LaVieEntiere (talk) 21:17, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Notice

message: Added source citing template. Not only does this article read like an ad, but it makes a handful of questionable claims that are meaningless without references. Major cleanup required. --Ultimus 12:58, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've taken action and edited the article as best I can. Unverifiable information has been removed, as has the hyperbole. I'd like for someone else to go over my work. AthlonBoy 18:04, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sources 

message: The explanation of Master Cards on the X1900 platform is incorrect.  Most of these series of cards are bundled as Crossfire Ready.
--alvinc
:Crossfire Ready cards arent Master cards. A 'Ready' sticker simply means that you can add a Master card of the same series and have it certified to work - they're simply regular cards. Master cards are labeled as "Crossfire Edition", with the name varying depending on the manufacturer. 
:That said, I dont know what part of the article you have a problem with, and why you think the 'Disadvantages' section is NPOV. Everything in there is fact, and if a fact is disputed, you ask for citation. I'll remove the NPOV tag, but I encourage you to put a 'citation needed' tag on the sentence or paragraph you have a problem with. --AthlonBoy 11:07, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Master Cards 

message: The name of this page seems particularily poor. Of all the things one could put in brackets, (GPU) seems to be a rather poor choice. It also appears the Camel Casing is incorrect, which, if corrected, would eliminate the need for anything else in the name. Still, I suspect that "ATI CrossFire" might be the best solution. Any comments? Maury 12:12, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It seems ATI agree with you - "Cross over to the ultimate visual experience – ensure your gaming PC runs with ATI CrossFire Certified components.". They even label it as ATI CrossFire in the official logo. Seems good enough for me. -AthlonBoy 14:05, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well it doesn't look like there's any negatives, so here we go... Maury 11:54, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move to "ATI CrossFire"? 

message: Honestly, I don't see the point in mentioning this as a disadvantage anymore as the older-generation technology is obsolete, those cards are extremely hard to find nowadays, and I have a hunch that ATI has discontinued the CrossFire editions. Its good information to know, but maybe we should put it in seperate "History" section and out of the Disadvantage, I feel that these sections (advantages/disadvantages) should be up to date with what is currently used/available as opposed to what is not being used/available, thoughts?--WuZheng 13:23, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: do it as ati is moveing to an sli type link Joe The Dragon 00:42, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Done and done... this new CrossFire bridge looks pretty good, X850 CrossFire in my opinion should be looked upon as a v1 type of thing and should rightfully take its place in the main part of the article as a piece of CrossFire's history.--WuZheng 14:50, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  On Mentioning the X850 CrossFire in the Disadvantage Section 

message: It just struck me, in the advantages section masterless crossfire in the mid-range and below segment is listed. But SLI can do that too. While you lose performance from taking the SLI bridge out on a mid range card, masterless crossfire suffers in the same way, and you can't bridge them together there. There's also no good reason to not use an SLI bridge - the pins are there, SLI motherboards come with a bridge, so it only makes sense to take it off for testing purposes. In that regard, bridged SLI is more efficient than bridgeless SLI and masterless CrossFire of similar cards.
What does everyone else think? -Skorpus McGee 13:27, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the argument is slightly out of context, ATI CrossFire solutions at the low-mid range can ONLY operate on PCI-express communication, whereas nVidia cards have an option, you can dig up some benchmarks, but you'll see that SLI'd 7600s vs. CF'd X1600s represents somewhat of a performance gap, but really this is due to architectural differences more than CF vs. SLI. In its own right, I'm sure that bridged SLI has more bandwidth available for Multi-GPU configurations, but at the same time no one has done an outright comparison (at least I think no one) between low-mid range CF and bridgeless SLI. Dig that up if you will, and if its significant in one way or the other, change this article accordingly. --WuZheng 16:16, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, even the most exhaustive google search turns up nothing but forum posts about bridgeless SLI announcements. I'd be willing to say that it makes no difference if we're talking about 7600s and X1600s, which was really the point of me bringing it up - if SLI can do it, why is it listed as an advantage for CrossFire? -Skorpus McGee 19:29, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I believe it is an advantage in favour of ATI's technology because of the fact that CF'd low-mid range cards operate solely on it, in such a way that there is no alternative for these lines of graphics adapters and that they are advertised to be solely reliant on PCI-express communication. SLI is somewhat different in this sense, nVidia doesn't advertise that it's cards can do this and would probably rather have you use/buy a bridge than run it without. Therein lies some sort of advantage for PCI-express CrossFire. And, again if any of us happens to find significant information regarding performance comparisons between bridgeless SLI and low-midrange CF we will have to change the article accordingly, but we haven't so the advantage, for now, stays.--WuZheng 22:16, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

text: Upon reading the existing Hexus review in the article, I see that at its best, dongleless CrossFire (Splinter Cell: CT test) yields almost negligible differences, and in ATI's traditional rendering weakpoint (OpenGL tests) we see that the CrossFire deficit is larger, which leads me to think that clearly ATI could have something here for them as what they are doing with PCI-e CrossFire is exemplifying what true multi-GPU setups should look like, plug it in and it works, no dongles, bridges, etc. The next step would most likely be multi-GPU with different brands of video cards, like Alienware's now defunct VideoArray project. I stand by my belief that dongleless CrossFire remain an advantage.--WuZheng 22:30, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mid-range cards don't need a Y-dongle - but there exists bridgeless SLI! 

message: Is dongle the correct term? The dongle article suggests that this is some type of security device. Giles Bathgate 18:59, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, dongle is indeed the correct term. ATi themselves have stated this fact, though I can't remember where. -Skorpus McGee 10:25, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Dongle

message: Should a multi-GPU article be made with a history of the idea and links to the individual technologies (perhaps even Alienware's canceled solution?). Discussion call. -RK 216.9.142.185 18:20, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Multi-GPU article 

message: Is the only reason that the name was changed to CrossFireX because Spider was launched (As in was it just a marketing change), or is CrossFireX a new/seperate version?  If the last one, what's different about them?  I'm a little confused about all of this.  -- Imperator3733 (talk) 15:41, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  CrossFireX 

message: It would be useful if the article stated what cards can be paired for CF. Exact match only ?
Same chip ? Same manufacturer ? Same chip family ?
--Xerces8 (talk) 14:27, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mixing and matching cards ? 

message: The listed disadvantage based on the first generation of Crossifre Cards, namely the 1800 and 1900 series cards no longer applies, as this disadvantage has been addressed or eliminated in all new crossfire cards, hence it shouldn't be listed in the disadvantages, as it NO LONGER comprises a major disadvantage to SLI. Perhaps the introduction or a history section is more appropriate. As the disadvantage section already states the 'first generation of' hence no longer a disadvantage of the technology.
"CrossFire doesn't always give a performance benefit – in some extreme cases, it can lower the framerate due to the particulars of an application's coding. This is also true for Nvidia's SLI, as the problem is inherent in multi-GPU systems."
I am removing this because as is stated, it is also a problem with SLI... which means it's not a disadvantage when compated to SLI. Feel free to add it back into another section.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.103.248.6 (talk) 04:20, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Point well met. -Skorpus McGee (talk) 00:59, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It should be readded in my opinion.  Presuming you are correct it is not a relative to sli disadvantage it is still useful information.  I question why the section is limited to the sli comparison anyways, but why not work it into the article or add it and clarify whether or not it is known if it is an issue with one interface more than the other.--24.29.234.89 (talk) 07:47, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

text: I have moved two of the points in the "Disadvantages" section to a general "Caveats" section, similair to the setup of Nvidia SLI. If anyone considers this to be a sub-obtimal solution, feel free to change it, but I agree with above editor that the current article is missleading in this respect.--Lowercasedefaultusername (talk) 11:04, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Disadvantages. 

message: there is no discussion about crossfire pro, acceptable cards, limitations, uses.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.169.112.20 (talk) 11:38, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  crossfire pro 

message: Shouldn't Hybrid CrossFire be mentioned in the article? I think it's very relevant information.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Veikk0.ma (talk • contribs) 16:49, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  ATI Hybrid CrossFire 

message: Quote "Low-end Radeon x1300 and x1600 cards have no 'CrossFire Edition' but are enabled via software, with communication forwarded via the standard PCI Express slots on the motherboard."
I googled a lot and there is no proof of this information on the Internet. In fact I have such dual card right in my computer case (with first generation Crossfire motherboard XPress 1600), and it seems obvious to me they don't do crossfire neither software nor hardware.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 123.108.108.30 (talk) 06:53, 25 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  The statement of first generation software crossfire have no reference 

message: This article is missing one major piece of information, how does Crossfire actually work? The entire article is just a brief explanation of the various generations. There is no explanation of how the cards function together to enable a higher frame rate. If two cards have 1GB of memory does that mean there is 2GB of texture memory (answer is no but this should be explained)?
I think it would be good if we could get a technical explanation of what the ribbon cable does that interconnects each card. From the article it appears to be an internal DVI or video link that enables the video output of each card to be overlaid together creating one complete video signal which is then sent to the display(s). If that is the case, each video card has the same texture data in its memory and is rendering a different part of the frame or different frame. 68.165.249.102 (talk) 16:02, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  A better technical explanation of AMD Crossfire is needed 

message: With the last release of AMD Catalyst drivers (11.12), it is no more true that only SLI rendering allows to set manually a profile for each application.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by roccometeora (talk) 17:50, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  About the "disadvantages" section 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on AMD CrossFireX. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141129091454/http://www.club-3d.com/index.php/amd_crossfirex.html to http://www.club-3d.com/index.php/amd_crossfirex.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:14, 24 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello, I wanted to let you know that I moved the page from AMD CrossFireX back to AMD CrossFire. The article used to be named AMD CrossFire, as you can see here: Talk:AMD CrossFire#CrossFireX.
The reason I moved it back is because AMD CrossFire is the correct name:
* https://www.amd.com/en/technologies/crossfire
* https://www.amd.com/en/support/kb/faq/dh-018
--Soluvo (talk) 01:25, 6 October 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  CrossFire or CrossFireX? 

message: application of parallel processing for computer graphics, yes or no? should be stated in the article.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.201.184.159 (talk) 08:04, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[parallel processing]] ?