Newer 512mb GTX might be using 1.25 or 1.429 ram ic's

Printable View

12-09-2005, 02:59 PM
Dynasty

Newer 512mb GTX might be using 1.25 or 1.429 ram ic's

With short supply of 1.1ns ram there has been evidence that some card
manf. are starting to place 1.2/1.4ns ram on 512mb GTX cards.

Asus EN7800GTX/512Mb DDR3 is now definitely using 1.2ns ram not 1.1ns.

I know some people here have removed original stock cooler
and you can easily check too see what ram you really have on your card.

Samsung:
K4J52324QC-11 (1.1ns)
K4J52324QC-12 (1.25ns)
K4J52324QC-14 (1.429ns)
K4J52324QC-16 (1.667ns)

My XFX 512mb GTX was from very first batch and has 1.1ns.

I am curious as too newer gtx cards that are now showing up on
e-tail/retail of what ram they have on card.
Post your findings if you remove your stock cooler.
It is printed right on the ram ic.

Thanks regards Dyn. :toast:
12-09-2005, 03:15 PM
mdzcpa

My XFX 512s also have the 1.1s.

Hmmmm....this could get interesting.
12-09-2005, 03:17 PM
perkam

Cool. This'll help lower its price.

Perkam
12-09-2005, 03:38 PM
Cooper

Looks like all o` those chips are the same - just different time. Maybe some leftovers from fastest one 1.1. IMO if some cards will have slower mem it could be oced with some volts and BIOS tweaking
12-09-2005, 04:18 PM
Dynasty

Yep some increase of vdd and bios tweaking on mem. can surely help. :)

The 1.2ns can still handle atleast 1950+ range with proper vdd increase,
but 1.4ns ram will be not as good of an overclocker.
12-09-2005, 04:35 PM
Ub3r-L33ch

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dynasty

Yep some increase of vdd and bios tweaking on mem. can surely help. :)

The 1.2ns can still handle atleast 1950+ range with proper vdd increase,
but 1.4ns ram will be not as good of an overclocker.

If I'm correct in saying this, I remember hearing that the increase in RAM speed did almost nothing for performance from the GTX 256, it was the clock speed that helped so much. So it doesnt matter if they are using even 1.4, thats probably not gonna be much worse at all, plus the cards will be a bit cheaper.
12-09-2005, 05:33 PM
mdzcpa

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ub3r-L33ch

If I'm correct in saying this, I remember hearing that the increase in RAM speed did almost nothing for performance from the GTX 256, it was the clock speed that helped so much. So it doesnt matter if they are using even 1.4, thats probably not gonna be much worse at all, plus the cards will be a bit cheaper.

I don't think so. I experience significant gains when clocking the memory higher on my GTX 512s
12-09-2005, 08:28 PM
deathman20

Although not related to the nVidia cards so to say. My ATI card gives better results clocking the core more then the memory, yet they are still pretty close preformance wise. So it will really suck if they can't get the faster ram for it to OC more.

But that ram difference wonder how much it could hurt stock speeds.
12-09-2005, 11:44 PM
ahmad

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dynasty

but 1.4ns ram will be not as good of an overclocker.

I disagree. My 1.4ns on the x1800XL managed 1540Mhz with only .05v increase and that was at 70*C stock cooling. Thats about 115MHz above what its rated at under not so optimal conditions. I am pretty sure 1700MHz shouldn't be out of the question with them (as we have seen some do already, with 1800 and 1900 not too far off).
12-10-2005, 12:17 AM
neoman

They have to lover the price of 7800GTX 512mb now , wich is good news
12-10-2005, 07:10 AM
da-key

Quote:

Originally Posted by mdzcpa

I don't think so. I experience significant gains when clocking the memory higher on my GTX 512s

I'd have to agree that is generally true with most higher end cards period.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ahmad

I disagree. My 1.4ns on the x1800XL managed 1540Mhz with only .05v increase and that was at 70*C stock cooling. Thats about 115MHz above what its rated at under not so optimal conditions. I am pretty sure 1700MHz shouldn't be out of the question with them (as we have seen some do already, with 1800 and 1900 not too far off).

1.1 ns will clock higher than the 1.4 ns. No question's there. What the 1.4 does the 1.1 will do better or we would all still be using 2.0 ns.
12-10-2005, 09:43 AM
ahmad

Quote:

Originally Posted by da-key

1.1 ns will clock higher than the 1.4 ns. No question's there. What the 1.4 does the 1.1 will do better or we would all still be using 2.0 ns.

Obviously :). Just saying no need to bash 1.4ns :p:
12-10-2005, 03:32 PM
Dynasty

Quote:

Originally Posted by ahmad

I disagree. My 1.4ns on the x1800XL managed 1540Mhz with only .05v increase and that was at 70*C stock cooling. Thats about 115MHz above what its rated at under not so optimal conditions. I am pretty sure 1700MHz shouldn't be out of the question with them (as we have seen some do already, with 1800 and 1900 not too far off).

My friend is suppose to pick up his Asus or BFG 512mb gtx, he will probably put water cooling on card.
With this said, I plan taking note of ram used
on card and saving his bios and checking what mem. timings are in it.

What I plan to do is A & B my XFX to his card, if in fact his has
1.2/1.4ns ram.
Test will be done with same bios and same mem. timings.
Purpose is too see how 1.2/1.4 compares and high it can clk compared to
1.1ns ram. Both cards will use same VDD.
I know 1.1ns on GTX 512mb can hit 1900+ quite easily with stock VDD or very little increase if need be.
when I finish test I will post any findings an compares. :toast:
12-10-2005, 10:40 PM
freecableguy

First flight BFG 512 cards...1.1ns GDDR3 here.