# GPU-Z and multiple GPU's



## [Daniel] (Mar 30, 2009)

Greetings.  New GPU-Z user here.  I have *version 0.3.3* running right now on my i7 rig.

Here's some background leading into my question...  I bought a GTX260 Core216 (65nm) back in December.  Recently, GTX260's have been dropping in price.  In my area, only the non-Core216's were going on sale... so I decided to not "wait and see" and bought a GTX260 (192 Core) to enter the SLI arena with.

But I noticed when I opened the nVidia Control Panel and ran the System Info tool... both cards were reported as *Core216* models... I felt like I'd won the lottery for a moment, then questioned how "valid" the reading was.  I had heard stories about people receiving the Core216 when they had ordered a vanilla (192), so it was possible.

So I downloaded GPU-Z as a "second opinion", and it reports them the same... almost "_too identical_" tho... there is not one character anywhere that I can tell the difference between the 2 cards on the main "info" page.

I know I can pull my old card out and try take the readings of just the new on, but I am hoping to avoid that.  If GPU-Z "talks" to each card individually, I think I'd happy camper.

So, can I trust this reading?  Did GPU-Z query each card independently?  Or did it pull information from the "nVidia SysInfo Tool", which may or may not be correct.

Thanks in advance!

Daniel


----------



## alexp999 (Mar 30, 2009)

Normally if you are running a 216 with a 192, SLI causes both to run as 192SP GTX 260's.

Disable SLI, then see what GPU-Z says between the two.

EDIT: Just seen in GPU-Z SLi is disabled.

Looks like you got lucky and got another 216Sp!


----------



## W1zzard (Mar 30, 2009)

gpu-z reads from the gpu directly. make sure sli is off. if both are still 216 sp run some benchmarks on one card and then on the other (have just 1 card in the system to be sure)


----------



## [Daniel] (Mar 30, 2009)

Ah, you beat me to my edit 

Whether I have SLI enabled or disabled, the same information is presented.  In the attached scheenshot I added to the original post, you can see SLI is disabled.


----------



## alexp999 (Mar 30, 2009)

As w1zz says try some BM's, but to me it looks like you got another 216SP sitting there!


----------



## newtekie1 (Mar 30, 2009)

Could it be an issue with XP 64?

Anyway, I would do a driver wipe with DriverSweeper, then re-install the drivers.  See what it says after that.  If it is still the same, I would test with just the new card in the machine.


----------



## [Daniel] (Mar 30, 2009)

alexp999 said:


> As w1zz says try some BM's, but to me it looks like you got another 216SP sitting there!


Hmm, I never noticed if benchmarks allowed me to point to a specific card... I'll have to check that out.



newtekie1 said:


> Could it be an issue with XP 64?
> 
> Anyway, I would do a driver wipe with DriverSweeper, then re-install the drivers.  See what it says after that.  If it is still the same, I would test with just the new card in the machine.



That is what I did right before adding the new card...

uninstalled driver
booted into safe mode
ran driver sweeper
powered off
added new card
added SLI bridge
powered on
loaded driver


----------



## newtekie1 (Mar 30, 2009)

[Daniel] said:


> Hmm, I never noticed if benchmarks allowed me to point to a specific card... I'll have to check that out.



They don't, once you disable SLi, the benchmarks/games will use whichever card the monitor is plugged into.

I would just pull the old card out of the machine and get the readings on the new card alone.


----------



## [Daniel] (Mar 30, 2009)

I do run multiple monitors.  I didn't like how the nVidia driver would occasionally incorrectly handle which was the primary monitor when going in/out of SLI... more times than not, my 19" CRT would get the nod, and that was just plain wrong.

So I moved the 19" to the second (new) video card.  What this also allowed me to do was run CUDA GPU-folding instances (one per card) when not in SLI.

So it's too bad the bench tools don't check/ask... I would be ready for it


----------

