Originally posted by: m21s
Originally posted by: Bobthelost
Originally posted by: m21s
HAHA It is photoshopped.
You're right, look between the fan, you can see the table.
Unless there is supposed to be a big hole in the card![]()
...or a big metal plate underneath?
Look at http://www.tagteam.dk/randompics/G804.jpg :roll:![]()
Uhm...please look at the first pic.
http://www.tagteam.dk/randompics/G801.jpg
Your telling me you cant see through the PCB and see the "plate" or "table"?
There is a hole in the card!
Photoshopped.
Originally posted by: m21s
HAHA It is photoshopped.
You're right, look between the fan, you can see the table.
Unless there is supposed to be a big hole in the card![]()
Originally posted by: JAG87
just like I said in another thread:
one 750 mhz core for DX9 and one 750mhz core for DX10 = 1.5 ghz rumour.
When one core works, the other one does not sit idling. It can be used for physics, or even simple rendering calculations. So from here I guess again:
256 bit + 512 MB to the rendering core, 128 bit + 256MB to the spare core = 384 bit bus and 768MB memory.
I think I am on to something here
Why? It's still going to have a G80 core. You'll have 128-bit, GDDR4 with a rockin core rather than 256-bit, GDDR3 with one that has been around for over a year.Assuming the DX9 core would be running the the 128bit bus and 256mb of memory, you're going to be severley limiting DX9 performance.
Originally posted by: josh6079
LOL!
The Inquirer....quite sure....
LMAO!
Originally posted by: josh6079
Also, if keys' pictures indicate the truth, those cores look like they have to be 65nm's.
Originally posted by: maxxxxel
Originally posted by: josh6079
LOL!
The Inquirer....quite sure....
LMAO!
Originally posted by: josh6079
Also, if keys' pictures indicate the truth, those cores look like they have to be 65nm's.
65nm LMAO!pure logic M8 thats its a 90nm or a 80nm, chip needs to be redesigned for 65nm. Do so some research
Originally posted by: Matt2
because you're talking about cutting the framebuffer size and the memory bandwidth in half.
Originally posted by: josh6079
Originally posted by: Matt2
because you're talking about cutting the framebuffer size and the memory bandwidth in half.
I guess that is true, but look at the X1900XT 256. It still performs well because of its core, even with the memory being half of what it initially was. Granted, it is still 256-bit.
Who knows, we'll have to see some benches.
Originally posted by: BlingBlingArsch
http://babelfish.altavista.com/babelfis...ine.com.cn%2ftopic.jsp%3ftid%3d6054769
PS: ATI R600 is 512bit reveals saves, the appearance should compare G80 to be also terrorist
