GTX260 with 1792mb of VRAM

[thilanliyan]

http://forums.vr-zone.com/news...d-1796mb-memories.html

 

[AzN]

waste

 

[error8]

Yes, there is a lot of Vram there, but games like GTA4 might have some benefits from this.

 

[SlowSpyder]

Pretty soon graphics cards will use all the space available in a 32bit OS.

 

[Leyawiin]

Originally posted by: Azn
waste

Which is what people were saying about 1GB cards in the not too distant past.

 

[Arkaign]

Originally posted by: Leyawiin

Originally posted by: Azn
waste

Which is what people were saying about 1GB cards in the not too distant past.

Well, there's a match that makes sense with powerful GPUs and enough Ram.

A 1GB 7800GT wouldn't have made much sense, as anything requiring that much video memory would have likely crawled on that GPU.

Nearly 2GB on a 260GTX seems odd at this time. ~2GB cards will make a lot more sense when power increases in GPU ability speed up again. We've been pretty stagnant for a while now, that will change when the true next-gens replace the Radeon 4000s and GTX 200s.

 

[Lonyo]

Originally posted by: Leyawiin

Originally posted by: Azn
waste

Which is what people were saying about 1GB cards in the not too distant past.

And it was true.

 

[Denithor]

Actually there are some cases already where that could be beneficial.

Crysis Warhead on High quality at 25x16 & 2AA grinds even TripleSLI GTX 280 cards to a near halt (linky). If you look at the 19x12 spot under the same settings, the single GTX 280 runs 32fps, dual SLI GTX 280 runs 50fps and triple SLI GTX 280 runs 55fps (so you see increases from more GPU power). At 25x16 all three run 14-17 fps so no real difference, they're obviously hamstrung (and the article authors blame it on inadequate memory).

 

[josh6079]

Hawt :thumbsup:

 

[SlowSpyder]

Originally posted by: Denithor
Actually there are some cases already where that could be beneficial.

Crysis Warhead on High quality at 25x16 & 2AA grinds even TripleSLI GTX 280 cards to a near halt (linky). If you look at the 19x12 spot under the same settings, the single GTX 280 runs 32fps, dual SLI GTX 280 runs 50fps and triple SLI GTX 280 runs 55fps (so you see increases from more GPU power). At 25x16 all three run 14-17 fps so no real difference, they're obviously hamstrung (and the article authors blame it on inadequate memory).

Not sure if I'm reading that right or not, but at 25x16 a single 4870x2 is getting 24FPS in comparisson. I think the ultra low scores you're seeing are a driver/SLI issue more then a memory issue. That is assuming I'm reading that right.

 

[AzN]

Originally posted by: Leyawiin

Originally posted by: Azn
waste

Which is what people were saying about 1GB cards in the not too distant past.

That's because 512mb of vram was boarder line @ 1920.

GTX 260 is good for 1920x tops. Now why would you add more memory on a GTX 260? 896mb is enough for that resolution and then some. It's nothing more than a marketing gimmick much like all those noobs buying up the card with most memory because they think it's somehow more powerful than the card with less memory when all that vram is just sitting there doing jack.

 

[AzN]

Originally posted by: Denithor
Actually there are some cases already where that could be beneficial.

Crysis Warhead on High quality at 25x16 & 2AA grinds even TripleSLI GTX 280 cards to a near halt (linky). If you look at the 19x12 spot under the same settings, the single GTX 280 runs 32fps, dual SLI GTX 280 runs 50fps and triple SLI GTX 280 runs 55fps (so you see increases from more GPU power). At 25x16 all three run 14-17 fps so no real difference, they're obviously hamstrung (and the article authors blame it on inadequate memory).

Maybe on triple SLI GTX or even GTX 280 SLI. Then again this is just a single GTX 260.

GTX 295 seems to choke harder than the 4870x2 at 2560x1600. Bad memory management. It might be useful there but not much else.

 

[OCGuy]

Im going to have to go with overkill on this one....

 

[taltamir]

Originally posted by: SlowSpyder

Originally posted by: Denithor
Actually there are some cases already where that could be beneficial.

Crysis Warhead on High quality at 25x16 & 2AA grinds even TripleSLI GTX 280 cards to a near halt (linky). If you look at the 19x12 spot under the same settings, the single GTX 280 runs 32fps, dual SLI GTX 280 runs 50fps and triple SLI GTX 280 runs 55fps (so you see increases from more GPU power). At 25x16 all three run 14-17 fps so no real difference, they're obviously hamstrung (and the article authors blame it on inadequate memory).

Not sure if I'm reading that right or not, but at 25x16 a single 4870x2 is getting 24FPS in comparisson. I think the ultra low scores you're seeing are a driver/SLI issue more then a memory issue. That is assuming I'm reading that right.

no that just means ATI uses less ram as overhead.

 

[Denithor]

Originally posted by: taltamir

Originally posted by: SlowSpyder
Not sure if I'm reading that right or not, but at 25x16 a single 4870x2 is getting 24FPS in comparisson. I think the ultra low scores you're seeing are a driver/SLI issue more then a memory issue. That is assuming I'm reading that right.

no that just means ATI uses less ram as overhead.

Originally posted by: Azn
GTX 295 seems to choke harder than the 4870x2 at 2560x1600. Bad memory management. It might be useful there but not much else.

Exactly. What I've noticed is in some cases the GTX 260 and GTX 295 choke while the 1GB 4870 keeps trucking right along.

 

[PCTC2]

Does the GTX 260 even have the effective memory bandwidth to use all that RAM in real world situations?

 

[dguy6789]

Well the 4870 1GB does have more memory than those two cards. If a game used more memory than those cards have, but not more than the 4870 1GB has, it would cause those kinds of performance issues.

 

[toyota]

Originally posted by: Leyawiin

Originally posted by: Azn
waste

Which is what people were saying about 1GB cards in the not too distant past.

1gb is a waste if its on a card that cant utilize it. hell there was a time when 512mb and 256mb would have been a waste too you know.

a gtx260 would almost never encounter a situation where 896mb of ram isnt enough because the rest of the card lacks the power to run a game at such resolutions and settings.

 

[alcoholbob]

Well if you are on XP you're really shafted with this card since you max out at 1.5GB of RAM.

 

[PCTC2]

Originally posted by: Astrallite
Well if you are on XP you're really shafted with this card since you max out at 1.5GB of RAM.

I thought it was just 4 GB of total addressing space, not any specific amount for a single component?

 

[alcoholbob]

The addressing space isn't dynamic. You boot up and the space is addressed.

In XP with my SLI setup (2 x 1GB cards) I see about 1.5GB of RAM even though I have 6 gigs.

 

[Denithor]

Originally posted by: PCTC2
Does the GTX 260 even have the effective memory bandwidth to use all that RAM in real world situations?

Plenty. (448/8)*2000 = 112GB/s

Originally posted by: toyota

Originally posted by: Leyawiin
Which is what people were saying about 1GB cards in the not too distant past.

1gb is a waste if its on a card that cant utilize it. hell there was a time when 512mb and 256mb would have been a waste too you know.

Exactly. Like the 2900XT 1GB card that showed zero improvement over the 512MB version.

 

[Zap]

That's about as useful as the card I saw at Fry's a few weeks ago. It was a 9600 GSO with 1.5GB of DDR2 (not GDDR3).

 

[toyota]

Originally posted by: Zap
That's about as useful as the card I saw at Fry's a few weeks ago. It was a 9600 GSO with 1.5GB of DDR2 (not GDDR3).

thats about as useful as putting a heavy duty towing package on a Honda Fit.

 

[Denithor]

Tits on a bull.