Widescreen Gaming Forum

Even though there are 4 separate clocks (DL-DVI/HDMI, SL-DVI, DP,DP) you still have to have that extra power to even use the DP extended...

Not sure what you mean there, but fundamentally, in terms of the display clock sources HD 6000 is the same as HD 5000; there are two sources for legacy ...

Newegg now have these available. Currently $26.99 with free shipping:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814999030&cm_re=sapphire-_-14-999-030-_-Product

http://support.amd.com/us/kbarticles/Pages/ATICat107aBetaDriver.aspx

Here is the driver...

http://support.amd.com/us/kbarticles/Pages/ATICat107aBetaDriver.aspx

I personally don't know the extent of the improvements, but the drivers above include some Eyefinity Crossfire (for >2 GPU's) improvements.

I agree!

Like this Sapphire combo deal with the VGA adapter for only $10 extra? ;-)

AFAIK this should be "Eyefinity Validated" and should move the HUD to the middle screen, and things like that.

The DVI outputs are full dual liink outputs, so they can go to 2560x1600. TH2G requires support of some non-standard modes though and they were not included in the driver code re-write that was required to support the new display pipeline of the HD 5000 series.

Its not something we actively test for at an individual board level, but PCI Express operating on a reduced number of lanes is part of the specification. Techpowerup actually runs a few graphics cards tests looking at operation on reduced numbers of lanes, and here's one in the same family at the HD ...

I'm really surprised no one's mentioned the apparent degrade of xfire scaling with resolution.

Scaling resolution down or up?

You'll always get lower Crossfire scaling with lower resolutions because the lower the resolution the less time is spent rendering a frame of the GPU and the more ...

Wasn't this a case of MS blaming Nvidia and Nvidia blaming MS, where who's to blame never got resolved?
That was actually based on hard data. Its based on the crash dump data that gets submitted back to MS when there has been a failure - this data never really becomes public, but was released ...

I don't care about ATI vs. Nvidia (sorry Dave, but thats the truth) and I buy whatever product I like.

No need to apologise to me. Its my job to try and make a product you will like! :)

http://www.zdnetasia.com/nvidia-to-blame-for-many-early-vista-crashes-62039536.htm

Thats a little historical case with hard numbers. Marketshare normalization didn't affect the underlying results much.

The OGL 4.0 extensions support for The Eyefinity 6 edition will be same as the rest of the HD 5000 series. Geeks3D posted this list from the initial preview drivers:

http://www.geeks3d.com/20100326/ati-catalyst-10-3-opengl-4-0-driver-20-new-opengl-extensions/

However the best supporting ...

As I said, its basically a wash and going to alter dependant on the titles tested.

Thanks for the info. I'm right about to go for Eyefinity with 3x24" and a 5870CF but in the forums one can read several problems with CF plus Eyefinity. That's why I haven't decided yet. It's ridiculous - ATI which brings inferior Dual-GPU technology (larger mircostuttering and worse scaling in CF ...

They better release Vista support, I've never had a problem with vista so I'm not paying for Windows 7 until there enough DX11 games

What, for you, is the correlation between DX11 and Windows 7?

and I am holding a fist full of cash ready and itching to spend it on 2 cards to go multi monitor gaming (as my matrox has failed) Looks like the only player in the market is ATI....

Just curious - what are you waiting for...?

Actually, I've been at the brunt of most of the bashing here - despite the fact that not all of the facts our at everyones disposal, especially not ours. Again, how can we comment when the application is not ours and the fact that it exhibits this behaviour is as much a surpise to us as it is to you?

And I don’t understand why ATI is avoiding giving answers.
We aren't, we've commented a lot in this thread and elsewhere, as far as we can.

Remember this i not our application - how this is enabled and why it is enabled this way has to be discussed with the developer and then we have to talk ...

I'm curious, why start with us and why not start with asking Matrox?