Yes and one and one makes two, but you still have not explained just how you magically excpected a performance *decrease* on the P4 using SLI
Are you really this dense? AMD's CPUs have better FP. AMD's CPUs are running the DX code faster than Intel's. To say the same inversely, Intel CPUs have a performance decrease when compared to AMD's.
Using SLI allows for better quality settings and larger size settings. Higher settings result in a higher DX CPU usage. This higher DX CPU usage combined with AMD's better performance in DX results in AMD platforms running SLI better than Intel's. It's <explitive never entered> simple.
let alone why the slightly worse memory performance of P4 versus A64 would somehow explain this (or have anything to do with it, for that matter).
Just as <explitive never entered> simple as the above, is the same here. AMD's memory system has a lower latency and identical bandwidth. So CPU usage of memory runs faster on AMD, so DX runs faster on AMD, and likewise GPU usage of <i>system</i> memory runs faster on AMD.
Or do you just think that AMD's better performance in so many games comes from magic fairy dust and prune juice?
Do you consider yourself a good DX programmer ? Allow me to laugh when you do.
Sorry to disappoint, but actually I'm a Python\Qt programmer that does some 3D rendering in OpenGL for multiplatform compatability. While I'd prefer to use DX, Linux ain't got none. I try to keep up with the technology at home all the same, but I don't think I'd call myself a DX programmer yet since I haven't made any money (or made anyone happy) doing it. I'm an OGL guy.
edit: I misread your second paragraph on SLI, you seem to be roughly saying what I said, only that this again in no way explains what we are seeing here, a performance DEGRADATION which you "expected".
Hello? Who ever said that the performance degradation that I expected isn't a simple factor of sublinear scaling between two differing platforms where one performs a DX task better than the other? DX performs worse on Intel than on AMD. So pushing DX further using SLI results in an <i>even worse</i> difference between AMD's and Intel's performance in DX. It's <explitive never entered> simple.
and if you don't, it ought to work just as fast as a single card, NOT (considerably) SLOWER
You have a real problem understanding what you read, don't you? I never even so much as suggested that without driver support you'd have anything worse than single-card performance from your SLI system.
You're seem to be all hopped up on some notion that any performance difference I express is some gigantic thing, when the truth is that I never even so much as implied that. The expected Intel vs. AMD performance hit on SLI is small. It'll only get worse as things advance, but it's still small. Not that the performance difference race isn't won by small. And the performance hit of a driver not supporting your game is dropping to single-card. I never said otherwise. Why do you keep trying to make a mountain out of a molehill?
(And as a side note, for someone who complains so much about dualcores running single-threaded apps like crap, I don't know how you can simultaneously take a stance that using only one card in an SLI system isn't considerably slower. Can't you even be consistent?)
<pre>
😱 <font color=purple>I express to you a hex value 84 with my ten binary 'digits'.
😱 </font color=purple></pre><p>@ 185K -> 200,000 miles or bust!
, good show from nvidia, but its nothing like the boost that AMD got from nForce1.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram