http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/06/crossfirex-reviewed-its-a-start/ Engadget Comments for CrossFireX reviewed: it's a start http://www.engadget.com/media/feedlogo.gif http://www.engadget.com en-us Copyright 2012 Weblogs, Inc. The contents of this feed are available for non-commercial use only. Blogsmith http://www.blogsmith.com/http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/06/crossfirex-reviewed-its-a-start/http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/06/crossfirex-reviewed-its-a-start/Mar 6th 2008 7:32AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/03/06/crossfirex-reviewed-its-a-start/http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/06/crossfirex-reviewed-its-a-start/
[H]ard|OCP FTW. Real world testing > *]]>Mar 6th 2008 9:13AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/03/06/crossfirex-reviewed-its-a-start/http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/06/crossfirex-reviewed-its-a-start/
Another review here using 2, 3 and 4 GPUs in CrossFireX mode: http://www.pcper.com/article.php?aid=523]]>Mar 6th 2008 10:11AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/03/06/crossfirex-reviewed-its-a-start/http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/06/crossfirex-reviewed-its-a-start/
hmm...

"Not now mom, I'm playing my game. I'm trying to get going right..."]]>Mar 6th 2008 8:34AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/03/06/crossfirex-reviewed-its-a-start/http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/06/crossfirex-reviewed-its-a-start/
]]>Mar 6th 2008 9:24AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/03/06/crossfirex-reviewed-its-a-start/http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/06/crossfirex-reviewed-its-a-start/Mar 6th 2008 9:35AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/03/06/crossfirex-reviewed-its-a-start/http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/06/crossfirex-reviewed-its-a-start/
Don't forget the punctuation, either!]]>Mar 6th 2008 9:40AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/03/06/crossfirex-reviewed-its-a-start/http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/06/crossfirex-reviewed-its-a-start/I'm not being mean; I just think it is funny when people critique someone else's spelling when they make as much or more mistakes in their critique.
As far as the actual post:
CrossfireX is underwhelming at best. SLI has the definite edge here, admittedly CrossfireX is cheaper but for real performance you can't beat dual 8800 Ultras. ]]>Mar 6th 2008 10:05AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/03/06/crossfirex-reviewed-its-a-start/http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/06/crossfirex-reviewed-its-a-start/Mar 6th 2008 8:02PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/03/06/crossfirex-reviewed-its-a-start/http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/06/crossfirex-reviewed-its-a-start/Mar 6th 2008 10:01AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/03/06/crossfirex-reviewed-its-a-start/http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/06/crossfirex-reviewed-its-a-start/Mar 6th 2008 10:01AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/03/06/crossfirex-reviewed-its-a-start/http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/06/crossfirex-reviewed-its-a-start/
People just don't get it. If you've seen the nVidia Tri-SLI reviews you'd also see poor performance gains over Dual-SLI. People keep throwing expensive cards, hi-powered CPU's and all kinds of junk at this game. You know what obvious thing that no one has figure out? Crysis sucks. That's right, the same thing with Far Cry too. The software developers are pissing away hardware resources in their games, making them barely playable on most hardware. You think that's good coding? Benchmark after benchmark just proves that Crytek has done exactly what they did before. And they'll do it again. My advice is just to play a different game.]]>Mar 6th 2008 10:07AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/03/06/crossfirex-reviewed-its-a-start/http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/06/crossfirex-reviewed-its-a-start/Mar 6th 2008 10:33AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/03/06/crossfirex-reviewed-its-a-start/http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/06/crossfirex-reviewed-its-a-start/Mar 6th 2008 11:34AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/03/06/crossfirex-reviewed-its-a-start/http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/06/crossfirex-reviewed-its-a-start/Mar 6th 2008 10:39AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/03/06/crossfirex-reviewed-its-a-start/http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/06/crossfirex-reviewed-its-a-start/
Wait a minute...]]>Mar 6th 2008 11:30AM