Printable View
Why dont they just make vid cards like motherboards sell the customer a PCB and have them buy special ram / gpu to plug into slots on the vid card PCB that would be the best and would allow for people with little money and rich people to build the card that suits their needs the best. Purely a theory I have no idea how/if this could ever be done, just think it would be neat
we already select our own aftermarket fans for the vid cards and they cost us enough money over the stock price. Imagine putting seperate ram and GPUs on two SLI boards :)
it would be nice if companies actually made use of the pci-e bandwidth by making a software sli solution
How would that add to the hardware solution ??Quote:
a software sli solution
it doesnt...but the cards that dont use the hardware solution...Quote:
Originally Posted by perkam
1. read the article on losticrcuit wich shows just that.Quote:
Originally Posted by perkam
2. the bandwidth is unimportant as the article shows, thats why there probably wont be a difference between pciE 8x and 16x.
had the same idear as well a long time ago :DQuote:
Originally Posted by stayfrosty
the problem is that each new generation of videocards includes brand new features and every second generation already has a new type of memory. so the innovation speed is much much higher than for cpus and mainboards... but i still agree, such a solution would be nice and i DO think it would actually work!
at least they should sell cards without memory and you can then pick the memory chips you want and stick them onto the pcb like in a tiny cpu socket :D
old cards actually had the option to upgrade the memory like this! :D
saaya..going back to you saying how sli isn't very practicle for Middle endusers, I think its still a very good option, say I get the 6800 rite now, its half the price of the 6800ultra, in a year, for prob 200 you can get it, and the ultra will still be at 400, pllust.2 6800 will def surpass the 6800ultra..by a lot im sure
See, even if you seel the 6800 it still won?t be enough for the 6800ultra
no, but it will put you $150-200 towards the 6800U which you could add to the $200 you would spend getting the 6800U to make $350-400 which should get you a 6800U..
Later that could be sold for $200-250 and you could get whatevers next for only ~200-300 depending on when you upgrade etc.
Agree with stevil...
SLI is ok.. But its just a bit... You know...
2x6800U@480/1340 should do like 12-13k with a good CPU in 05 ;)
But the question is... Do they OC as good??? And can they work at the same speeds as 1 card??
4x ram work worse than 2x... So who knows???
looking at the price of the 9800pro and the 9600pro...the 9800pro was for a long time at 400..the 9600pro could be bought for 160 at the same time
the 6800 will still be much less than the ultra, plus, just like you said if you did sell it for 150, and kept the 200, im pretty sure the 6800ultra will still be at 400, you'll still be short
$50 isnt too much more. Just skip the movies or whatever a couple times ;)
On the point of running out of card memory and going to main memory over the PCI express bus :-
http://www.hexus.net/content/reviews...JsX3BhZ2U9NA==
check out the diagram. The 6600GT has 128MB of RAM on board but also has a 128 bit bus. At 1024x768 in 05 it does 65% of the score of the 6800GT but with 4xAA and 8xAF it does 33% of the score.
Now is this because it has run out of memory and going over the PCI-e bus or because the 128bit bandwidth becomes a limitation to the onboard memory. I get a feeling it is the latter, but I am not sure.
Why this is interesting is because of
http://www.komplett.co.uk/k/kl.asp?bn=10488
Gainward are doing a 6600GT with 1.6ns memory rather than 2ns, but MSI are doing 256MB of standard speed ram on the card .. which would be best?
If you are thinking of doing SLi on 6600GT this is even more of an issue because although each gpu only works on say half the screen the whole screen has to fit into each cards memory ( it is not split ) so you do not want to be limited by either the speed or quantity of RAM.
I'd reall like to see the Gainward "Goes Like Hell" :rolleyes: and MSI tested in SLi configuration to see what is most important.
Regards
Andy
overclock the memory of the card and see what % performance increase vs. clock you get.
second overclock the agp bus a couple mhz to see if performance rises.
third bump the fsb by one or two and see what happens..
or just test a 128/128 vs a 128/256 card clock/clock :D
I believe in one of the articles about AGP vs PCIe they ran a test which pushed a massive ammount of textures through the interface, and the PCIe performed 60% better, although it was synthetic it does represent a huge increase in bandwdith.
This bandwidth is unimportant in games because of the nature of games, however, in professional use such as high definition editing, where large textures and huge ammounts of information are going across the system bus, you really have no choice BUT pcie if you want to be productive
yeah, for example for HDTV at high resolutions... i still dont get what the hdtv hype is all about... tv at a higher resolution... so? im not wathcing tv and i dont think any of the current tv would look better with a higher resolution... so you can see the pimples on peoples faces in talk shows? :p:
and andi, its def the frame buffer limiting! aa and af need a lot of extra frame buffer and a lot of extra frame buffer bandwidth!
I give you, my prototype!
http://dac.liquidm3dia.com/X800dual.jpg
in person, it looks like a Sapphire X800Pro Toxic, but it is really my dual core single chip prototyle!
*insert Dr. Evil laugh here*
*wakes up from dream* whoah, what happened? :stick:
Quote:
Originally Posted by saaya
HDTV is your friend! I love watching dvd's upscaled to 1080i or 720p. If you think a dvd looks great on your progressive dvd player then you have to check out a pc that can pipe out those resolutions, you'll sell the dvd player :D
I would hope you don't completely agree with that. For one, UT2004 is also a TWIMTBP game... :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Massive
Secondly, it is ATi that is now under scrutiny in multiple areas for IQ issues. Also noted is the 1000+ gain for R420 that doesn't appear to noticably benefit more than one benchmark. NV on the other hand hasn't bothered to optimize for 05' and is now faster than ATi on the only available Source-based game (CS: Source). Of the three most graphically demanding games out (D3, CS:S, FarCry 1.2), NV takes two and ties the third. :stick:
Ironic that ATi has become the synthetic queen. And now SLi threatens that, because most of us can grasp that a cascade usually costs more than $450 and an immense overclock might or might not achieve a 170% performance increase (SLi average).
[/provocation]
ATI is faster than nVidia in FarCry (1.2 using 2.0b path).
And let's assume that nVidia is faster at 2 of those 3 games,
ATI is faster in all other games :)
- Nvidia is indeed faster in Doom3 _the game_, but when in comes to the engine itself, results can be very different; infact, D3's engine supports OpenGL2.0 features.
- Crytek said that the next Farcry is going to have full support in 3DC, TrueForm, Hyper-Z and SM2.0B. Also it was simply proven that you can't add SM3.0 support to a game that's already out, not like sm2.0b.
- We must wait for HL2 benchmarks before we can decide who is the king in the Source engine. (And I dont mean HL1:S and DOD:S).
But when it comes to SLI, ATI is simply :bananal:
That depends on the site you view. On settings 99% of the people with these cards use, NV is quicker.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mariachi
I dont even want to start on that bit of logic.Quote:
And let's assume that nVidia is faster at 2 of those 3 games,
ATI is faster in all other games :)
How could the results be different? There is only one game with the DOOM 3 engine. Its called... DOOM 3. NVidia is faster in DOOM 3. Think about this.Quote:
- Nvidia is indeed faster in Doom3 _the game_, but when in comes to the engine itself, results can be very different; infact, D3's engine supports OpenGL2.0 features.
You just made 3/4 of that up. The changelog is Here. At least you got SM2.0B right. Also, developers can add any shader model they please.Quote:
- Crytek said that the next Farcry is going to have full support in 3DC, TrueForm, Hyper-Z and SM2.0B. Also it was simply proven that you can't add SM3.0 support to a game that's already out, not like sm2.0b.
It is a well known fact that ATi paid Valve just over six million dollars for that title. If ATi didn't win, someone would get shot.Quote:
- We must wait for HL2 benchmarks before we can decide who is the king in the Source engine. (And I dont mean HL1:S and DOD:S).
Considering Joe Average has no idea what the hell SLi means, and will most likely end up with a 6200 inside his brand new Dell, I'll have to disagree.Quote:
But when it comes to SLI, ATI is simply :bananal:
What games do you mean by 'all other games?' Nvidia wins anything that is opengl, ATI sucks at opengl. So that takes all quake3 engine based games. I'm not sure about UT2KX, but I don't even consider that a good benchmark as it's very good benchmark, nothings bad with it, but I never liked the engine to begin with, it seems very limited to me. And The fps are so high, scores are often limited by the cpu anyways.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mariachi
What does opengl 2.0 have to do with ATI? Maybe I'm missing something and ati has really good opengl 2.0 support and crappy 1.1 support (isn't that what were at now?) but nvidia has always been known to have a huge leads in opengl. And what do you mean by 'the game itself' like.. what? 6800's favor the level design or something?Quote:
Originally Posted by Mariachi
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mariachi
Quote:
Originally Posted by changelog
Ok, an engine is an engine, there is no diff. in the cs:s than HL2 as far as a benchmark, they use the same engine, they will have very similar results. If you want to see how HL2 runs why not run the benchmark included with cs:s? That is the HL2 benchmark. the 6800's win (6800gt sometimes even did better than the xt as I recall) up untill you turn on AA and AF at 1600x1200 and then the x800's fair better.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mariachi
Not completely true and im not even gonna provide examples because your statement is WAY too broad: ATI doesnt suck at all opengl games and secondly - lets make sure we're not using the word "suck" when referring to an X800XT/X800Pro :eek:Quote:
Nvidia wins anything that is opengl, ATI sucks at opengl.
Its actually quite true, Doom 3 is the biggest example of Nvidia's marketing and it has flowed huge abounts of cash into John Carmack's one venture. And please please PLEASE lets not forget about the 10s of millions of dollars Nvidia has given developers for TWIMTBP games - seriously, you're criticizing ATI for HL2 Sheesh - you barely see an ATi logo when running CS:Source or HL2Quote:
I dont even want to start on that bit of logic.
Too often gamers and media alike pick choose what information they want to hear and go with it. Doom 3 may run better on Nvidia but on in framerates and FPS isnt everything, John Carmack said himself: "Carmack said in the HardOCP article that there's more to consider than just frame rate. The frame rate difference even today is so minor, it's impossible to tell without diagnostic tools - ie: the end user experience isn't affected. And with ATI you get full-precision enabled all the time - we don't do PP (on R3XX and R4XX) like some of our competitors."Quote:
Nvidia is indeed faster in Doom3 _the game_, but when in comes to the engine itself, results can be very different
That PP by the way is Partial Precision, which Nvidia has used many times to skew its performance vs ATI.
Same thing happened with most games in the X700XT previews and I prefer the trend of higher performance at higher resolutions because, isnt that where we're coming from all this time ??Quote:
the 6800's win (6800gt sometimes even did better than the xt as I recall) up untill you turn on AA and AF at 1600x1200 and then the x800's fair better.
Though yes, I must agree krybtops, Nvidia does a better job of marketing its tweaking its cards for benchies than ATI, but ATI rocks as OCING !!! :D
Perkam
At higher resolutions (1600x1200) the 6800's won, not untill you turn on af and aa did the x800's have a lead is what I'm saying. And yeah the x800's are better at overclocking, but that is mainly because the x800's are really just 97/9800's with more pipes and a higher clock. Same exact architecture. While nvidia has a brand new design, you shoudl be seeing better overclocks with the 6900's hopefully. And I'm wondering if ATI will even beable to have a x900 or if they will have to go to the r520, because I heard that they were close to their yields with the x800xt. But then I heard that the yields were 700 core clock somewhere else, and that the 6800's didn't have much higher yields. So there's really no way to tell. 6800gt I think is a far better choice than the x800 pro tho, bad decision on ati's part to give it onnly 12 pipesQuote:
Originally Posted by perkam
ATI has done lots of tweaking their cards for 05 and from what I've heard nvidia hasn't done anything. I've had lots of problems with almost every driver release from ati since the 3.7's and lately it's really begun to piss me off.Quote:
Originally Posted by perkam
thats why i have my 20" monitor right next to my bed ;) thats where i watch all the movies :DQuote:
Originally Posted by PnoT
i dont need hdtv... not at all... :P
good movies are good movies, be it with 240x480 res or 1600x1200 res... only the crappy hollywood action smash hits look better with a higher res, but i really dont like that kind of movies that much...
they DO suck in all opengl games dude...Quote:
Originally Posted by perkam
yes an x800 doesnt suck, but in some opengl games its more or less as fast as a ti4200...
That is irrelevant, thats like saying a good game is a good game at any resolution. Fancy playing Doom3 at 640x480 ??? :D :DQuote:
good movies are good movies, be it with 240x480 res or 1600x1200 res... only the crappy hollywood action smash hits look better with a higher res, but i really dont like that kind of movies that much...
Driver, drivers, drivers...If the prime principle in real estate is location, location, location, then indeed, the most important thing in graphics development are drivers. But thats basically where the problem lies, Im sure if Nvidia had ATI hardware technology with its Forceware drivers, it would be a whole different story.Quote:
they DO suck in all opengl games dude...
yes an x800 doesnt suck, but in some opengl games its more or less as fast as a ti4200...
Dont tell me that the X800 pro sucks and has the same perf as a ti4200 (he should be showing up soon after this) because they are generations apart and, as you may know, many able to OC to XT !!! :D :D :D