Rumor: Radeon R9-290X-X2 to Bring Double the Hawaii?

[alidan]

with all the problems that sli/crossfire has, i cant understand why anyone would do that.

because we want moar. people with one gfx card find it easier to add one more of the same to boost gfx performance no matter how cheap/costly it is, from dual radeon 6570 cfx to dual 7990/tri-780ti.

1920x1200 monitors, any 300$ card can handle
2560x1600 monitors, a 500$ card can deal with it

any? current cards can do that (after multiple price drops) now. the older gfx cards can't, without compromises. however, most current gpus can handle multimonitor for basic tasks except ones that tax gpu and vram e.g. gaming.

multi monitor, why are you even doing that?

because of wider area of vision, multi-tasking, (this is gonna piss off some "real gamers and enthusiasts" -) power saving, etc. iirc 3-4x 768p/900p (and some 1080p, even ips) monitors were cheaper than one 1440/1600p. syncing and calibrating would be issues, but those can be solved with some effort.
when i tried dual monitors, i realized that it was better than having multiple virtual desktops on one 1080p screen, or using softwares like dexpot.

and multi monitor setups will hopefully die with the oculus rift and others like it.
the problems that you gain with a multimonitor and than a multi card just arent worth the hassle.

occulus has a Looooong way to go before becoming ubiquitous. even then people will prefer multidisplay to a v.r. headset stuck to their faces (wide planar surface vs 3d v.r.).

now, correct me if im wrong, but from how i remember it, the 2 tiers of gpus every generation (without going multi chip) were always able to drive the best setups at the time (without going asinine). yes, there are some limitations to what you can get out of a single card after a year or so, or when a game like crysis comes out and decided not to build a game for hardware that currently exists.

all i see multi card solutions as is a pain to set up, and than when you get a game that doesnt play nice with multi gpus you have to turn one off, killing half your investment, and even when you do have 2 cards, it was only recently that you got what 80% extra preformance? for a while it was hovering around 65-75%

the only time i dont think multi monitor isn't stupid, is when its a 3 monitor setup for a driving sim, outside of that, i just cant see how you can deal with it.

and i think you severely underestimate the oculus rift and what it can/will bring to the gaming experience.

 

[de5_Roy]

all i see multi card solutions as is a pain to set up, and than when you get a game that doesnt play nice with multi gpus you have to turn one off, killing half your investment, and even when you do have 2 cards, it was only recently that you got what 80% extra preformance? for a while it was hovering around 65-75%

yes, you have to face some issues setting up - imo calibrating was the most painful.
as for games that don't play nice with multi-display, i blame the software support, not multigpu nor multidisplay. both amd and nvidia have popularized multi-gpu as well as multi-display to the point where drivers as well as games should have optimizations.

the only time i dont think multi monitor isn't stupid, is when its a 3 monitor setup for a driving sim, outside of that, i just cant see how you can deal with it.

i had problem with first person shooters... and may be some of the beat 'em up games.
racing was fun, but biggest improvements were roleplaying games and strategy games. 3rd person shooters weren't bad either. once you get done setting up, the optimized games play well. otoh, the unoptimized games can look distorted or just refuse to cooperate. the problem was with software most of the time.

and i think you severely underestimate the oculus rift and what it can/will bring to the gaming experience.

i don't underestimate "rift"'s potential. i think that the device and other v.r. headsets need a lot more optimizations, software support and sw/hw improvements (e.g. 60-120hz per eye, in perfect sync) for user comfort before they become widespread. that will take time. and some people will always choose planar over 3d.

 

[alidan]

all i see multi card solutions as is a pain to set up, and than when you get a game that doesnt play nice with multi gpus you have to turn one off, killing half your investment, and even when you do have 2 cards, it was only recently that you got what 80% extra preformance? for a while it was hovering around 65-75%

yes, you have to face some issues setting up - imo calibrating was the most painful.
as for games that don't play nice with multi-display, i blame the software support, not multigpu nor multidisplay. both amd and nvidia have popularized multi-gpu as well as multi-display to the point where drivers as well as games should have optimizations.

the only time i dont think multi monitor isn't stupid, is when its a 3 monitor setup for a driving sim, outside of that, i just cant see how you can deal with it.

i had problem with first person shooters... and may be some of the beat 'em up games.
racing was fun, but biggest improvements were roleplaying games and strategy games. 3rd person shooters weren't bad either. once you get done setting up, the optimized games play well. otoh, the unoptimized games can look distorted or just refuse to cooperate. the problem was with software most of the time.

and i think you severely underestimate the oculus rift and what it can/will bring to the gaming experience.

i don't underestimate "rift"'s potential. i think that the device and other v.r. headsets need a lot more optimizations, software support and sw/hw improvements (e.g. 60-120hz per eye, in perfect sync) for user comfort before they become widespread. that will take time. and some people will always choose planar over 3d.

from my understanding, the rift is a single screen that is split by a divider of some sort, so little sync issues as possible. the rest is mostly software issues which once it comes out i doubt will be there enmass. most genres where multi monitor is used i can see the rift doing a great job at being the go to, and will probably be the go to if not for the only reason you are driving just 1 1080p display (720 on the dev kits) that can replace a 5760X1080 and at some point a 5400x1920 setup.

the way i see it, i can turn my head a bit and see another monitor, the rift could just do that in software but only require 1 1080p image to be rendered opposed to 3, in games where you aren't first person, i can see the rift being just the camera and moving your head moves the camera just the way you want. granted most of what assume is just how i think its designed, cant wait to get one in my hands.

 

[iam2thecrowe]

AMD will put a reference cooler on it....and we will watch it throttle back to 100mhz....

 

[rishiswaz]

IF they could fit if into a 375W TDP AND include a cooling solution that allows hawaii to really flex its clock speeds they will have a winner. Probably will need to run 290s and have them at somewhere around 750MHz stock with uber up to ~900.

 

[hannibal]

How about 260 X2. That would be more sensible beast.

 

[rishiswaz]

They already have Tahiti running in a dual GPU in the 7990 and Hawaii/XT is the flagship and afaik only non-rebadge of the new RX-2XX series so to actually have a real successor to the 7990 it would need Hawaii so 290/X or if they tried to pull a fast one and use Tahiti XT and say " it is a stepping above the 7990" on whatever the dual GPU card this generation will have

 

[THUNDERHAWK]

Dual Hawaii?
No way in hell will a triple fan design cool it. This thing will have to ship with a custom water block along with a pump and radiator. Combine that with 2 Hawaii chips and you're looking at a 1300-1400 dollar price tag.

Just wait for the GTX 790. It will run cooler and more efficient.