New 6950 with only 1gb of memory comming, cheaper!(FZ)

[happy medium]

"The 6950 is on average 7-10% faster than the 5870"

Source: http://www.anandtech.com/show/4061/amds-radeon-hd-6970-radeon-hd-6950/25

A heavily overclocked HD 5870 might do the job to beat a stock HD 6950, but also the HD 6950 overclocks well, kinda odd seeing HD 5870 2GB near $400 while an HD 6970 costs less. :awe:

Why did you quote me and repeat what I said?

What are you agreeing with me or............?
Is you native language english?

 

[Skurge]

A overclocked 5870 1gb is equal to a 6950 and sometimes faster.

Now you still say 6950's are useless in x-fire, so that means all those who bought 5870's overclocked and x-fired them @ 1920x1080 have useless systems?

You are NOT likely to run out of ram with a 5870 1gb card @ 1920x1080.

Please show me some proof of this theory, or take back this blantent lie.

Here is a true statement.
You don't need more then 1gb or ram unless you have a 2500x1600 monitor or run eyeinfinity or surround.
Care to challenge that statement?

A 5870 is NOT a 6950, no matter how many times you say it, it isnt they have very different characteristics. Like a 2 6950s have 90% scaling, 2 5870s have about 75% scaling. It will be overkill for 1920x1080 and it wont have enough ram for 2560x1600 or 1920x1080 with something like SSAA.

Do you get why I say it will be useless for crossfire?

You called me a lair to something I never said? I said there are times when 1gb of vram is exceeded and you claim I said 1gb isn't enough? I suggest you choose your words carefully.

 

[happy medium]

A 5870 is NOT a 6950, no matter how many times you say it, it isnt they have very different characteristics. Like a 2 6950s have 90% scaling, 2 5870s have about 75% scaling. It will be overkill for 1920x1080 and it wont have enough ram for 2560x1600 or 1920x1080 with something like SSAA.

Do you get why I say it will be useless for crossfire?

You called me a lair to something I never said? I said there are times when 1gb of vram is exceeded and you claim I said 1gb isn't enough? I suggest you choose your words carefully.

Translation.......you knew the answer you gave was bogus and was trolling me.

 

[Skurge]

Translation.......you knew the answer you gave was bogus and was trolling me.

Or you need to learn to understand what people write.

Tell me. what was bogus about my answer to your question? You started a thread about vram usage and right of the bat, someone with crysis get 1.1gb of vram usage.

Was I right or was I wrong. Don't answer that.

 

[happy medium]

Or you need to learn to understand what people write.

Tell me. what was bogus about my answer to your question? You started a thread about vram usage and right of the bat, someone with crysis get 1.1gb of vram usage.

Was I right or was I wrong. Don't answer that.

Ok but anyone can do that! I have a 8400gs with 2gb of ram, hey mabe I'll turn up the setting to enthusiast and enjoy the slideshow.

that guy was not playing Crysis at 1920x1080 all maxed with a gtx470 using 1100 mb of memory. It would be a slide show. He was mearly showing me how much memory there was at max settings @ 1080p.

Whats my point? ANYbody can turn up the details on a chosen 10 games and use over 1000 mb of video memory but how many single cards have the power to turn 30fps plus with those peticular settings ? None!
Sure not no 6950 or gtx560 anyhow.

ok mabe a overclocked gtx580 or 6970...mabe!

 

[Skurge]

Ok but anyone can do that! I have a 8400gs with 2gb of ram, hey mabe I'll turn up the setting to enthusiast and enjoy the slideshow.

that guy was not playing Crysis at 1920x1080 all maxed with a gtx470 using 1100 mb of memory. It would be a slide show. He was mearly showing me how much memory there was at max settings @ 1080p.

Whats my point? ANYbody can turn up the details on a chosen 10 games and use over 1000 mb of video memory but how many single cards have the power to turn 30fps plus with those peticular settings ? None!
Sure not no 6950 or gtx560 anyhow.

ok mabe a overclocked gtx580 or 6970...mabe!

So you are calling him a lair when he said it was playable?

 

[happy medium]

So you are calling him a lair when he said it was playable?

Na, BUT, After some googling, I also see that 1100mb of memory @1900x1080 with no AA is also a lie.

 

[Skurge]

Na, BUT, After some googling, I also see that 1100mb of memory @1900x1080 with no AA is also a lie.

So you are calling him a lair.

 

[poohbear]

So you are calling him a lair.

No hes calling him a "liar". He cant possibly be a "lair". but i think a better term would be "misinformed". Very different meanings as liar means there is deliberate deceit & is more of an accusation.

Anyways, my 5870 burns through everything @ 1900x1080. Never even considered that the 1gb was an issue. If an anomaly happened wherein a game spiked above 1gb for .5 seconds i never would've noticed. Just my 2cents.

 

[Skurge]

No hes calling him a "liar". He cant possibly be a "lair".

My 5870 burns through everything @ 1900x1080. Never even considered that the 1gb was an issue. If an anomaly happened wherein a game spiked above 1gb for .5 seconds i never would've noticed. Just my 2cents.

Lol.

I never said it wasnt enough, I think it is, but the claim that it no game will ever exceed it even for a second is just false.

 

[happy medium]

Lol.

I never said it wasnt enough, I think it is, but the claim that it no game will ever exceed it even for a second is just false.

Toyota's testing it for me now.

 

[poohbear]

Lol.

I never said it wasnt enough, I think it is, but the claim that it no game will ever exceed it even for a second is just false.

Sure but if its inconsequential then the whole argument is moot. Lotsa things spike very briefly in software & hardware (eg sudden usage of all cores, sudden energy surge, sudden spike in temps)but they have no effect on performance as they last less than a second.

 

[happy medium]

Sure but if its inconsequential then the whole argument is moot. Lotsa things spike very briefly in software & hardware (eg sudden usage of all cores, sudden energy surge, sudden spike in temps)but they have no effect on performance as they last less than a second.

Skurge is just doing the backpeddle.
He knows except in extreme situations 99% of the time 1gb is fine @1080p and even then the game is unplayable that 1%.

 

[SickBeast]

Crysis runs beautifully on my GTX 460 768mb at 1920x1200 with textures set to "very high" and 16X CSAA.

I've read that Crysis will use around 700mb of VRAM at 1920x1200.

 

[Skurge]

Sure but if its inconsequential then the whole argument is moot. Lotsa things spike very briefly in software & hardware (eg sudden usage of all cores, sudden energy surge, sudden spike in temps)but they have no effect on performance as they last less than a second.

Well I didn't specifically say it would only be for second. Just used that as an example.

 

[Skurge]

Skurge is just doing the backpeddle.
He knows except in extreme situations 99% of the time 1gb is fine @1080p and even then the game is unplayable that 1%.

Backpedal from what? So when you say 1% you admit you were wrong when you said NEVER?

You are putting words in my mouth just cause you were wrong when you said it never happens and I said it did, even in small cases.

At least I can remain civil and not go calling everyone who doesn't agree with me a lair.

Once again, I ask, can you link to a post of mine that says 1GB is not enough?

 

[toyota]

Crysis runs beautifully on my GTX 460 768mb at 1920x1200 with textures set to "very high" and 16X CSAA.

I've read that Crysis will use around 700mb of VRAM at 1920x1200.

so are you saying you run high settings with textures set to very high and then also use 16x AA? at those settings it would exceed 768mb for sure. I just checked and using those settings even at a lower 1920x1080 I was hitting 822mb of vram so yours would be even higher. even with just 8x AA I was still hitting 740mb.

 

[happy medium]

At least I can remain civil and not go calling everyone who doesn't agree with me a lair.

I just checked and using those settings even at a lower 1920x1080 I was hitting 822mb of vram so yours would be even higher

He was lying and toyota proved it. He got 1100 mb of memory, 278mb more then toyota.
I trust Toyota's word. So it was justified.

 

[Rifter]

so are you saying you run high settings with textures set to very high and then also use 16x AA? at those settings it would exceed 768mb for sure. I just checked and using those settings even at a lower 1920x1080 I was hitting 822mb of vram so yours would be even higher. even with just 8x AA I was still hitting 740mb.

he said 16X CSAA, which is alot lower memory hit than SSAA or MSAA or any other kind of AA for that matter. What type of AA were you using?

 

[toyota]

he said 16X CSAA, which is alot lower memory hit than SSAA or MSAA or any other kind of AA for that matter. What type of AA were you using?

whatever AA that the game uses.

 

[Rifter]

whatever AA that the game uses.

probably msaa. You can force it to use whatever type you want though through the profiles in the nvidia control panel.

 

[toyota]

probably msaa. You can force it to use whatever type you want though through the profiles in the nvidia control panel.

how though because it says nothing about CSAA in the control panel?

 

[Rifter]

how though because it says nothing about CSAA in the control panel?

perhaps the GTX 260 does not support it?

 

[toyota]

perhaps the GTX 260 does not support it?

not sure since I dont really keep up with AA that much. I rarely use it and when I do its just from within the game.

 

[badb0y]

I didn't read through the entire thread but what exactly are we arguing here? In my opinion this is awesome if it comes in at 250$~, this thing is, what like 10% slower than a GTX 480/GTX 570/ AMD 6970? If it comes at 250ish we all win as I don't think cutting the RAM will really affect the game play in 1080/1200 resolution . High amounts of RAM is for higher resolution who cares if it 1GB or 2GB when the standard at the moment is 1080P.