Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Compare cell phone plans using Wirefly's innovative plan comparison tool ×

Submission + - Animation Explains Multi-GPU Load-Balancing Tasks and Memory

Scott Michaud writes: While DirectX 12, Mantle, and Vulkan allow developers to list all GPUs in a system, and communicate with them individually, Crossfire and SLI accomplished that task in DirectX 11 and OpenGL. Apart from the very early implementations, which interleaved monitor scanlines (or otherwise cut up a single frame) between devices, these systems used the Alternate Frame Rendering (AFR) algorithm to divide work. Because neighbouring frames require roughly the same amount of work, and old APIs submit work through restrictive interfaces, memory was mirrored across GPUs and, except for AMD's Hybrid Crossfire and LucidLogix HYDRA Engine, GPUs needed to be roughly identical. The new APIs open the dialogue between software and hardware, but the load balancing algorithms, themselves, have their own limitations.

Comment Re:You forgot something (Score 3) 73

PC Perspective's new testing demonstrates the triple RAID-0 array having just 1/6th of the latency of a single drive.

That was with a queue depth of 16. Not exactly representative of a normal desktop user.

It's reasonable for peak power user load. Folks running / considering triple SSD RAIDs are not exactly 'typical desktop users' :)

Comment Re:This is retarded. (Score 4, Informative) 73

The SSD controller already does a form of this, as it is talking to multiple flash memory dies over multiple channels. RAID is just another layer to get even more performance out of more parallelism (and as we figured out in testing, to considerably drop the latency under load).

Allyn Malventano
Storage Editor, PC Perspective

Comment Re:Wut? (Score 1) 42

1. That is a false claim - Gamenab didn't even cite the correct FPGA model when he made that DRM claim.
2. G-Sync is actually good down to 1 FPS - it adaptively inserts additional redraws in between frames at rates below 30, as to minimize the possibility of judder (incoming frame during an already started panel refresh pass). FreeSync (it its most recently demoed form) reverts back to the VSYNC setting at the low end. Further, you are basing the high end of G-Sync only on the currently released panels. Nothing states the G-Sync FPGA tops out at 144.
3. I use the word 'experience' because it is 'my experience' - I have personally witnessed most currently shipping G-Sync panels as well as the FreeSync demo at this past CES. I have also performed many tests with G-Sync. Source: I have written several articles about this, including the one linked in this post.
5. I believe the reason it is not yet released is because Nvidia wants to be able to correctly cover more of the range (including the low range / what happens when the game engine hitches).

Comment Re:its Nvidia FREESYNC (Score 1) 42

Gamenab stumbled across the leaked driver and tried to use it to spread a bunch of conspiracy theory FUD. I hope most people here can correctly apply Occam's razor as opposed to the alternative, which is that he supposedly designed those changes, those changes going into an internal driver build that was inadvertently leaked and happened to apply to the exact laptop he already owned.

ExtremeTech picked apart his BS in more detail: http://www.extremetech.com/ext...

Comment Re:Wut? (Score 1) 42

1. The FPGA *was* required for the tech to work on the desktop panels it was installed in.
2. FreeSync (as I've witnessed so far) as well as the most recent adaptive sync can not achieve the same result across as wide of a refresh rate range that G-Sync currently can.
3. Nvidia could 'make it work', but it would not be the same experience as can be had with a G-Sync module, even with an adaptive sync panel (as evidenced by how this adaptive sync panel in this laptop intermittently blanks out at 30 FPS or when a game hitches.
4. ...
5. The driver was not a release driver, and was not meant to call the experience it gives 'G-Sync'. It was meant to be internal.

Conclusion - Adaptive sync alone is not the same experience you can currently get with a real G-Sync panel, which is why any possible future G-Sync that does not need a module it's not yet a real thing.

Submission + - Multi-Display Gaming Artifacts Shown with AMD, 4K Affected Too (pcper.com)

Vigile writes: Multi-display gaming has really found a niche in the world of high-end PC gaming, starting when AMD released Eyefinity in 2009 in three panel configurations. AMD expanded out to 6 screen options in 2010 and NVIDIA followed shortly thereafter with a similar multi-screen solution called Surround. Over the last 12 months or so GPU performance testing has gone through a sort of revolution as the move from software measurement to hardware capture measurement has taken hold. PC Perspective has done testing with this new technology on AMD Eyefinity and NVIDIA Surround configurations at 5760x1080 resolution and found there were some substantial anomalies in the AMD captures. The AMD cards exhibited dropped frames, interleaved frames (jumping back and forth between buffers) and even stepped, non-horizontal vertical sync tearing. The result is a much lower observed frame rate than software like FRAPS would indicate and these problems will also be found when using the current top end dual-head 4K PC displays since they emulate Eyefinity and Surround for setup.

Submission + - Console Manufacturers Want the Impossible?

Phopojijo writes: Consoles have not really been able to profitably scale over the last decade or so. Capital is sacrificed to gain control over their marketshare and, even with the excessive lifespan of this recent generation, cannot generate enough revenue with that control to be worth it. Have we surpassed the point where closed platforms can be profitable and will we need to settle on an industry body, such as W3C or Khronos, to fix a standard for companies to manage slices of and compete within?
Microsoft

Submission + - OpenCL has a competitor: Microsoft C++ AMP (pcper.com)

Phopojijo writes: "Microsoft was at AMD's Fusion Developer Summit with a keynote this morning outlining Microsoft's part in the unified computing initiative. Currently your options for easily utilizing all your computing power are limited to Apple-founded OpenCL maintained by the Khronos Group. Microsoft's alternative is called C++ Accelerated Massive Parallelism (or C++ AMP). Microsoft was clear to announce that C++ AMP would be an open specification. Any interested compiler developer would be allowed to support this specification."

Slashdot Top Deals

To do nothing is to be nothing.

Working...