Jump to content

AMD Dual graphics possible?

dvb8699
 Share
Go to solution Solved by threadysparrow,

You're basically adding a poodle to a dog sled team. The poodle's going to hold them back, even though you're adding another dog to the team and theoretically it would make them faster. (I love analogies) With these high end graphics cards, you want all of the CPU power you can get from the CPU and an APU simply can't provide that power. It has to divide the die into CPU and GPU instead of giving the entire die the CPU. They are compatible but your benchmarks are either wrong or someone is lying to you. Benchmarks don't tell the whole story. In a few specific applications, dual graphics might work, but when you get into 1080p and beyond, your GPU is going to do the bulk of the work and any benefits from the APU's GPU are going to be canceled out by the poor CPU on the APU. Just take our words for it, we know what we're talking about. 

 

 

All these abbreviations are driving me nuts.

Posted

Just a question though why go for the R9 280X toxic? The R9 290 is better and damn near always about the same price?

RIG: I7-4790k @ 4.5GHz | MSI Z97S SLI Plus | 12GB Geil Dragon RAM 1333MHz | Gigabyte G1 Gaming GTX 970 (1550MHz core/7800MHz memory) @ +18mV(Maxed out at 1650/7800 so far) | Corsair RM750 | Samsung 840 EVO 120GB, 1TB Seagate Barracuda | Fractal Design Arc Midi R2 (Closed) | Sound Blaster Z                                                                                                                        Getting: Noctua NH-D15 | Possible 250GB Samsung 850 Evo                                                                                        Need a console killer that actually shits on every console? Here you go (No MIR/Promo)

This is why you should not get an FX CPU for ANY scenario other than rendering on a budget http://linustechtips.com/main/topic/286142-fx-8350-r9-290-psu-requirements/?p=3892901 | http://linustechtips.com/main/topic/266481-an-issue-with-people-bashing-the-fx-cpus/?p=3620861

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

I mean look:

http://pcpartpicker.com/part/sapphire-video-card-100363txsr - R9 280X toxic $370

http://pcpartpicker.com/part/sapphire-video-card-1003622sr - R9 290 Tri-x $415

 

$45 difference but the R9 290 is a much more capable card.

RIG: I7-4790k @ 4.5GHz | MSI Z97S SLI Plus | 12GB Geil Dragon RAM 1333MHz | Gigabyte G1 Gaming GTX 970 (1550MHz core/7800MHz memory) @ +18mV(Maxed out at 1650/7800 so far) | Corsair RM750 | Samsung 840 EVO 120GB, 1TB Seagate Barracuda | Fractal Design Arc Midi R2 (Closed) | Sound Blaster Z                                                                                                                        Getting: Noctua NH-D15 | Possible 250GB Samsung 850 Evo                                                                                        Need a console killer that actually shits on every console? Here you go (No MIR/Promo)

This is why you should not get an FX CPU for ANY scenario other than rendering on a budget http://linustechtips.com/main/topic/286142-fx-8350-r9-290-psu-requirements/?p=3892901 | http://linustechtips.com/main/topic/266481-an-issue-with-people-bashing-the-fx-cpus/?p=3620861

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

Just a question though why go for the R9 280X toxic? The R9 290 is better and damn near always about the same price?

You did not just suggest an APU and 290. No. I refuse to believe this forum has gone down that much. 

Please quote/tag ( Found by typing @DarrenP) In all posts directed at me. I do not check my current content. 


Intel Core i7-4790K - Gigabyte Z97X-UD5H-BK - 16GB Corsair Vengeance Pro 1866Mhz - EVGA GTX 980 - 256GB MX100 - 2TB WD RED - 900D - H100I - Corsair HX1050 - DNS 320L 2x2TB Seagate Barracuda 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

What's wrong with using an APU and a 290 vs using a 280x?

An APU is for budget low end systems. it's got shitty cores. Just because it's a high clocked quad core means nothing. He shouldn't even be considering using an APU if he want's a GPU like that. 

Please quote/tag ( Found by typing @DarrenP) In all posts directed at me. I do not check my current content. 


Intel Core i7-4790K - Gigabyte Z97X-UD5H-BK - 16GB Corsair Vengeance Pro 1866Mhz - EVGA GTX 980 - 256GB MX100 - 2TB WD RED - 900D - H100I - Corsair HX1050 - DNS 320L 2x2TB Seagate Barracuda 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

An APU is for budget low end systems. it's got shitty cores. Just because it's a high clocked quad core means nothing. He shouldn't even be considering using an APU if he want's a GPU like that. 

It still works for the time being. If you can manage to get at least 80% of the performance from the card (which in this case you can) it is entirely worth it until that person can do a system upgrade and get a more capable cpu.

.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

It still works for the time being. If you can manage to get at least 80% of the performance from the card (which in this case you can) it is entirely worth it until that person can do a system upgrade and get a more capable cpu.

No. You don't buy to plan to upgrade. That APU alone costs 170 CAD. You'll be able to get a 8350 for that when the prices drop in like 2 weeks. 

Please quote/tag ( Found by typing @DarrenP) In all posts directed at me. I do not check my current content. 


Intel Core i7-4790K - Gigabyte Z97X-UD5H-BK - 16GB Corsair Vengeance Pro 1866Mhz - EVGA GTX 980 - 256GB MX100 - 2TB WD RED - 900D - H100I - Corsair HX1050 - DNS 320L 2x2TB Seagate Barracuda 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

It's just a thought..

I'm not mad or anything. I'm just trying to explain to you why that's a bad idea. No hate man. 

Please quote/tag ( Found by typing @DarrenP) In all posts directed at me. I do not check my current content. 


Intel Core i7-4790K - Gigabyte Z97X-UD5H-BK - 16GB Corsair Vengeance Pro 1866Mhz - EVGA GTX 980 - 256GB MX100 - 2TB WD RED - 900D - H100I - Corsair HX1050 - DNS 320L 2x2TB Seagate Barracuda 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

I'm not mad or anything. I'm just trying to explain to you why that's a bad idea. No hate man. 

I know why it's a bad idea, but lets say they can only afford a computer without a GPU, they can go the APU route. Then get a beastly GPU, then a processor worth running.

 

Right off the bat getting an APU and anything at or above a 280x, nonsense and shouldn't be done.

.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

I never said he should get an APU and an R9 290 because it works together. I just made the suggestion since they are almost the same cost yet the R9 290 wins.

RIG: I7-4790k @ 4.5GHz | MSI Z97S SLI Plus | 12GB Geil Dragon RAM 1333MHz | Gigabyte G1 Gaming GTX 970 (1550MHz core/7800MHz memory) @ +18mV(Maxed out at 1650/7800 so far) | Corsair RM750 | Samsung 840 EVO 120GB, 1TB Seagate Barracuda | Fractal Design Arc Midi R2 (Closed) | Sound Blaster Z                                                                                                                        Getting: Noctua NH-D15 | Possible 250GB Samsung 850 Evo                                                                                        Need a console killer that actually shits on every console? Here you go (No MIR/Promo)

This is why you should not get an FX CPU for ANY scenario other than rendering on a budget http://linustechtips.com/main/topic/286142-fx-8350-r9-290-psu-requirements/?p=3892901 | http://linustechtips.com/main/topic/266481-an-issue-with-people-bashing-the-fx-cpus/?p=3620861

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
  • Solution

You're basically adding a poodle to a dog sled team. The poodle's going to hold them back, even though you're adding another dog to the team and theoretically it would make them faster. (I love analogies) With these high end graphics cards, you want all of the CPU power you can get from the CPU and an APU simply can't provide that power. It has to divide the die into CPU and GPU instead of giving the entire die the CPU. They are compatible but your benchmarks are either wrong or someone is lying to you. Benchmarks don't tell the whole story. In a few specific applications, dual graphics might work, but when you get into 1080p and beyond, your GPU is going to do the bulk of the work and any benefits from the APU's GPU are going to be canceled out by the poor CPU on the APU. Just take our words for it, we know what we're talking about. 

 

 

All these abbreviations are driving me nuts.

I get 60 frames at 1080p on a dual core APU. Ask me how.

AMD FX 8350 CPU / R9 280X GPU / Asus M5A97 LE R 2.0 motherboard / 8GB Kingston HyperX Blue 1600 RAM / 128G OCZ Vertex 4 SSD / 256G Crucial SSD / 2T WD Black HDD / 1T Seagate Barracude HDD / Antec Earthwatts 650W PSU / Coolermaster HAF 922 Case

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing Graphics Cards

×