4 ati graphic cards with 6 outputs each.
performance is ok but drops faster if you use complex geometry.need to make more tests. with fts vlc plugin its also possible to play videos across cards.
advantage compared to boygrouping is that you dont have to sync videos.
need to make more tests to find out about the pros and contras compared to boygrouping.
is this a single span across all the screens? i.e. one full screen renderer?
and what ati ?
I think you can make 1 span for each gpu
@xd_nitro - if you could span all with 1 renderer (generally possible in window mode, but generally not fullscreen, even with Quadro)
then all renderering would be performed on 1 card, and the output 'texture' would be 'shipped' across the PCI-E bus to each of the other cards
since you'd already be sending a lot of video data up to the graphics cards if you're doing video playback like in this example* you'd saturate your PCI-E bus and get unhappy fps
its 4 eyefinity groups, so its 4 devices=4 renderers.
we used the Radeon HD 6870 Eyefinity 6, 2GB.
as elliot mentioned theres a lot of traffic on the pci-e bus when streaming videos to textures, thats why we choosed this exotic board which can provide pci e 16x on all 4 slots. frame rates are ok if you dont do to complex stuff and surprislingly we can play quite some videos with a good frame rate. on the other hand framerate drops fast with some amount of geometry which i dont really understand as its loaded to the gpu just once.
we tried this as an experiment and we thought its an advantage that we dont have to sync videos over network.
i also experienced not so smooth animations via boygrouping, except if you really damp your values quite alot.
so for our application this solution works nice but it sure have also it drawbacks...
1. why 20 monitors not 6x4 = 24?
2. why 4 eyefinity groups? internet says that all 4 cards are used in rendering of one frame. they render square by square like a checkerboard.
anonymous user login