http://www.hexus.net/content/item.php?item=5326Amdahl’s law says that it is the algorithm that decides the speedup and not the number of processors, and you eventually reach a place where parallelization doesn’t buy you anything, the point of diminishing returns.
PHP Code:$s = new signature();
$s->sarcasm()->intellect()->font('Courier New')->display();
It's certainly a good bet that going from 2 to 3 GPUs will provide less of a benefit than that from 1 to 2, and quad SLI has formidable issues regarding power consumption and cooling to deal with That "dual-layer card" is going to be a challenge for anyone wanting to use watercooling or phase-change on their GPUs also.
However there is one case that would seem to be a good argument for multiple GPUs - surround gaming using 3 monitors and Matrox's Triplehead2Go. Having a GPU for each monitor would seem an excellent way of splitting workload and providing a better gaming experience. I just wonder why ATI/Nvidia never bothered following this up.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
SCAN.care@HEXUS
Posting Permissions
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Reply With Quote