8800GT 1024mb
- Thread starter Sutareteiru
- Start date
toyota
Lifer
- Apr 15, 2001
- 12,957
- 1
- 0
and another http://hardocp.com/article.htm...Q0NiwsLGhlbnRodXNpYXN0
The GeForce 8800 GT GPU and memory bus are simply not powerful enough to realize the benefits of 1GB.
The GeForce 8800 GT GPU and memory bus are simply not powerful enough to realize the benefits of 1GB.
I'll bet that with two of these cards in SLI at 2560x1600 w/ AA, the 1gb of memory would be quite useful.
Everyone talks about the memory bus being such a limitation. Where is the evidence for this? The last time I checked, a 3870 is actually faster than a 2900XT, despite having a 256-bit bus, vs. 512 on the XT.
Everyone talks about the memory bus being such a limitation. Where is the evidence for this? The last time I checked, a 3870 is actually faster than a 2900XT, despite having a 256-bit bus, vs. 512 on the XT.
JPB
Diamond Member
- Jul 4, 2005
- 4,064
- 89
- 91
toyota
Lifer
- Apr 15, 2001
- 12,957
- 1
- 0
Originally posted by: SickBeast
I'll bet that with two of these cards in SLI at 2560x1600 w/ AA, the 1gb of memory would be quite useful.
Everyone talks about the memory bus being such a limitation. Where is the evidence for this? The last time I checked, a 3870 is actually faster than a 2900XT, despite having a 256-bit bus, vs. 512 on the XT.
wow what an ignorant comment about the memory bus. first off ATI and Nvidia uses completely different architectures. next the ATI card was too weak to actually take advantage of the 512bit bus. also if you look at the 8800gtx and Ultra cards they re still king at high res and with AA. theres your evidence right there because even a higher clocked 8800gt/gts is weaker in those situations and having one gig on the G92 cards did not change that.
Not really.Originally posted by: toyota
Originally posted by: SickBeast
I'll bet that with two of these cards in SLI at 2560x1600 w/ AA, the 1gb of memory would be quite useful.
Everyone talks about the memory bus being such a limitation. Where is the evidence for this? The last time I checked, a 3870 is actually faster than a 2900XT, despite having a 256-bit bus, vs. 512 on the XT.
wow what an ignorant comment about the memory bus. first off ATI and Nvidia uses completely different architectures. next the ATI card was too weak to actually take advantage of the 512bit bus. also if you look at the 8800gtx and Ultra cards they re still king at high res and with AA. theres your evidence right there because even a higher clocked 8800gt/gts is weaker in those situations and having one gig on the G92 cards did not change that.
If you look at the graphs in the above links, they are not really diverging as the resoultion increases. Even in the few cases where they do diverge, it is very minimal.
Memory bus was crucial in the days when most graphics cards were 128-bit. Now that all mainstream cards are 256-bit, its significance is greatly reduced.
The 8800GTX has a 384-bit bus vs. 256 on the GT. That's 50% more, yet you certainly do not see a 50% performance improvement, even though the GTX also has more ROPs and stream processors.
P.S. there was nothing ignorant about my statement. :light:
toyota
Lifer
- Apr 15, 2001
- 12,957
- 1
- 0
it was ignorant in the sense that your generalizing based on the 2900xt to 3870 results. also you were questioning if it was the amount of memory or the memory bus making the difference and its clearly the bus width. an 8800gt with 1gb does no better than a 512mb version.Originally posted by: SickBeast
Not really.Originally posted by: toyota
Originally posted by: SickBeast
I'll bet that with two of these cards in SLI at 2560x1600 w/ AA, the 1gb of memory would be quite useful.
Everyone talks about the memory bus being such a limitation. Where is the evidence for this? The last time I checked, a 3870 is actually faster than a 2900XT, despite having a 256-bit bus, vs. 512 on the XT.
wow what an ignorant comment about the memory bus. first off ATI and Nvidia uses completely different architectures. next the ATI card was too weak to actually take advantage of the 512bit bus. also if you look at the 8800gtx and Ultra cards they re still king at high res and with AA. theres your evidence right there because even a higher clocked 8800gt/gts is weaker in those situations and having one gig on the G92 cards did not change that.
If you look at the graphs in the above links, they are not really diverging as the resoultion increases. Even in the few cases where they do diverge, it is very minimal.
Memory bus was crucial in the days when most graphics cards were 128-bit. Now that all mainstream cards are 256-bit, its significance is greatly reduced.
The 8800GTX has a 384-bit bus vs. 256 on the GT. That's 50% more, yet you certainly do not see a 50% performance improvement, even though the GTX also has more ROPs and stream processors.
P.S. there was nothing ignorant about my statement. :light:
the g92 had some architectural differences that made it have more efficient use of memory so thats why the old g80 core with 50% more bus width doesnt scale as high. also different games can have different results because of how different game engines are. also do a little more research and you will see that with aa and af at high resolutions the 768bit bus width will beat out the faster clocked g92 cards.
You're grasping at straws here, inventing things that I somehow "said", and carrying on with a hostile tone. :thumbsdown:Originally posted by: toyota
it was ignorant in the sense that your generalizing based on the 2900xt to 3870 results. also you were questioning if it was the amount of memory or the memory bus making the difference and its clearly the bus width. an 8800gt with 1gb does no better than a 512mb version.Originally posted by: SickBeast
Not really.Originally posted by: toyota
Originally posted by: SickBeast
I'll bet that with two of these cards in SLI at 2560x1600 w/ AA, the 1gb of memory would be quite useful.
Everyone talks about the memory bus being such a limitation. Where is the evidence for this? The last time I checked, a 3870 is actually faster than a 2900XT, despite having a 256-bit bus, vs. 512 on the XT.
wow what an ignorant comment about the memory bus. first off ATI and Nvidia uses completely different architectures. next the ATI card was too weak to actually take advantage of the 512bit bus. also if you look at the 8800gtx and Ultra cards they re still king at high res and with AA. theres your evidence right there because even a higher clocked 8800gt/gts is weaker in those situations and having one gig on the G92 cards did not change that.
If you look at the graphs in the above links, they are not really diverging as the resoultion increases. Even in the few cases where they do diverge, it is very minimal.
Memory bus was crucial in the days when most graphics cards were 128-bit. Now that all mainstream cards are 256-bit, its significance is greatly reduced.
The 8800GTX has a 384-bit bus vs. 256 on the GT. That's 50% more, yet you certainly do not see a 50% performance improvement, even though the GTX also has more ROPs and stream processors.
P.S. there was nothing ignorant about my statement. :light:
the g92 had some architectural differences that made it have more efficient use of memory so thats why the old g80 core with 50% more bus width doesnt scale as high. also different games can have different results because of how different game engines are. also do a little more research and you will see that with aa and af at high resolutions the 768bit bus width will be out the faster clocked g92 cards.
I never once questionned if it was the amount of memory or the memory bus making the difference. Please do not do this.
Citing the 3870 and the 2900XT as an example was anything but ignorant. IMO it's the best example of why we do not need a 512-bit memory bus yet (except for perhaps SLI/CF). Things get more murky when comparing the bus on the NV cards, but as I said above, it applies to them as well.
toyota
Lifer
- Apr 15, 2001
- 12,957
- 1
- 0
I misread what you said earlier. I thought you were saying the amount of memory might be more important than the bus width. anyway I explained the advantage of the 384bit buswidth and also let you know why the performance gap wasnt as big as you though it would be compared to the G92 256bit buswidth.Originally posted by: SickBeast
You're grasping at straws here, inventing things that I somehow "said", and carrying on with a hostile tone. :thumbsdown:Originally posted by: toyota
it was ignorant in the sense that your generalizing based on the 2900xt to 3870 results. also you were questioning if it was the amount of memory or the memory bus making the difference and its clearly the bus width. an 8800gt with 1gb does no better than a 512mb version.Originally posted by: SickBeast
Not really.Originally posted by: toyota
Originally posted by: SickBeast
I'll bet that with two of these cards in SLI at 2560x1600 w/ AA, the 1gb of memory would be quite useful.
Everyone talks about the memory bus being such a limitation. Where is the evidence for this? The last time I checked, a 3870 is actually faster than a 2900XT, despite having a 256-bit bus, vs. 512 on the XT.
wow what an ignorant comment about the memory bus. first off ATI and Nvidia uses completely different architectures. next the ATI card was too weak to actually take advantage of the 512bit bus. also if you look at the 8800gtx and Ultra cards they re still king at high res and with AA. theres your evidence right there because even a higher clocked 8800gt/gts is weaker in those situations and having one gig on the G92 cards did not change that.
If you look at the graphs in the above links, they are not really diverging as the resoultion increases. Even in the few cases where they do diverge, it is very minimal.
Memory bus was crucial in the days when most graphics cards were 128-bit. Now that all mainstream cards are 256-bit, its significance is greatly reduced.
The 8800GTX has a 384-bit bus vs. 256 on the GT. That's 50% more, yet you certainly do not see a 50% performance improvement, even though the GTX also has more ROPs and stream processors.
P.S. there was nothing ignorant about my statement. :light:
the g92 had some architectural differences that made it have more efficient use of memory so thats why the old g80 core with 50% more bus width doesnt scale as high. also different games can have different results because of how different game engines are. also do a little more research and you will see that with aa and af at high resolutions the 768bit bus width will be out the faster clocked g92 cards.
I never once questionned if it was the amount of memory or the memory bus making the difference. Please do not do this.
Citing the 3870 and the 2900XT as an example was anything but ignorant. IMO it's the best example of why we do not need a 512-bit memory bus yet (except for perhaps SLI/CF). Things get more murky when comparing the bus on the NV cards, but as I said above, it applies to them as well.
Under the right conditions, the amount of memory is more important than the memory bus width! Try running Far Cry on a 1024-bit card with 4mb of texture memory. Not gonna happen.
What I was saying was that perhaps the 1gb of texture memory on the 8800GT could come into play using SLI at very high resolutions and settings. A faster memory bus would help as well.
I have yet to read a review of two 1gb 8800GT's in SLI...this is all speculation at this point. If you come across a review, please LMK. :beer:
BTW you should check out BFG's new benchmarks re: memory performance.
toyota
Lifer
- Apr 15, 2001
- 12,957
- 1
- 0
well within reason of course. a 8600gt with 1gig wont do anything more than a 8600gt with 256mb. 8800gt with 1gb in sli doesnt really do anything over a 8800gt 512mb sli setup.
http://hardocp.com/article.htm...wzLCxoZW50aHVzaWFzdA==
With two NVIDIA GeForce 8800 GT 512MB video cards in SLI we found the exact same gameplay experience in Crysis as we did with two Palit 1GB 8800 GTs.
Given the results mentioned here, I have decided to recommend to my friend that he buy 2x 8600 1gb's and put in SLI. Thank you for your time and information.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 24K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter