Thursday, October 22nd 2009
EVGA and NVIDIA Design Unique Multi-GPU Graphics Accelerator
EVGA and NVIDIA are readying a unique multi-GPU graphics accelerator this Halloween, slated for October 30. To celebrate its launch, the two have organized a launch party for 300 lucky participants who will go to the NVIDIA Plaza in Santa Clara, CA and witness the launch of the new GeForce product. The accelerator packs two GPUs: a G200b, and a G92b. That's right, a GeForce GTX 200 series GPU, with a GeForce GTS 250 GPU. This is perhaps the first graphics accelerator to pack two entirely different GPUs. How it works, however, is interesting: the G200b GPU handles graphics, while the G92b is dedicated to PhysX processing. The accelerator could have 896 MB of graphics memory, with 512 MB of dedicated memory for the PhysX GPU. You can sign up for the event here.
Source:
Bright Side of News
80 Comments on EVGA and NVIDIA Design Unique Multi-GPU Graphics Accelerator
Oh wai-
I'd keep one if I got it for free, sounds 'cool', but screw paying for one.
teh lame
it hardly affects performance at all, using a second GPU for it is pointless.
this entire GPU is an exercise in futility - its like strapping a jet engine to a donkey to make it go faster, but not bother to include fuel - or something to be transported
the fanboy game that is :D
Do you believe this can beat the GTX 295?
Fermi is still far I would get one as Christmas gift.
microsoft is celebrating by releasing windows 7 to the public.
(23rd here is 22nd in the USA - they're getting the timing just right ;))
Im in Perth so still 20 minutes for me, but it must be 23rd for you right now :toast:
I'd take one of these and quad MARS cards, and out-fold everyone on the planet!
Can you link me benchmarks showing a second gpu is not necessary for physx when using a gpu that already supports physx?....
I tried googling "physx benchmark" with some variants (+"gt200"), but so far all I have found is this test showing that adding a dedicated physx card is clearly better then running physx on a gpu that is trying to draw the graphics. In that link 2xgtx280+9600gt performs better then 3xgtx280+no-dedicated-physx-card. I for one tend not to trust anything unless it can be backed up by multiple sources/experiments so I don't truly trust just that one link, however I also don't trust comments saying that a dedicated physx card is pointless when using a gpu(or multi gpu) that can run physx.
What can be said is that the performance increase from adding a dedicated physx card is minor(does anyone care about 37fps vs 42fps?) and so is not worth the extra price of adding such a card; related to this is that there are very few physx games to begin with, and those games that do have physx can be played with physx on low without much impact to the game which again means its not really worth messing around with a dedicated physx card.
Do I think this card is pointless? Yes, but thats because I don't really care about the extra performance the g92 will bring to physx games that I'm not really interested in playing. Someone somewhere will want that extra performance boost or smaller footprint(compared to gpu+dedicated-physx-card), and to them I say :toast:
I notice some mention the super expensive mars; my feeling of the mars was the same: I would never want a mars due to its insane price, but to those who do :toast: