Here they are saying not only does memory size increase but also, memory bandwidth, vertices/s, pixel fill rate, and texture fill rate. They say that this new 7950 GX2 has 1 gb of on board ram.
Here is the box. Notice the right hand corner says you have 1GB of ram in this dual SLI graphics card.
I'm not sure what you're getting at. It has 1024MB ram because it is basically 2 512MB 7900 cards connected as one. it still takes 2 slots like 2 separate cards, but it has a link between them.
Yeah, the box really isn't a good indicator, as it will tell you anything to make the product more appealing. I remember the discussion though, and I didn't know what to say at that time, and I still don't. I believe the original argument is that SLI by nature splits the rendering of the screen into peices, and then each card renders half of the action. At least this is what it does in 3D. I haven't really heard how SLI/XF manages 2D. Since most people don't need 1GB of VRAM for desktops, it never comes up in tests. I could see SLI and XF not working this way in 2D mode to save energy and reduce complexity, but I'm no expert on the matter. I guess one sure way to find out is to try an SLI setup and see if it really does help over one card. Very few people consume that much VRAM, so you might be hard pressed to find others to test the theory.
i think thats correct. technically that card posted does have 1gb of ram. 2x512mb. it doesnt say it uses it combined.
edit
im guessing that if one card produces half the image, it uses its full 512mb to help do that. then, the other card uses its 512mb to render its half the image. so in real world it is using 1gb of memory to process info, just not in the way a single card 1gb solution would.
i think then the reason it doesnt show as increased performance is because you dont need 512mb to render half an image. so extra memory just wastes.
i dont really know though. its just a guess
Last edited by krupted; June 7th, 2006 at 06:31 PM.
ah give the software manufacturer's a chance. Don't worry it shouldn't be to long till we need that much memory on a video card.
Games that are like oblivion will run fine off of 256 MB of RAM, we just recently went to 512 MB. Now they are just going overboard, but then again, thats top of the line.
I know someday we will need that kind of RAM. To buy cards like that right now is a waste of money.
Instead of spending a ton of money today to run the games tomorrow at good graphics. How about you spend a decent amount today, to run todays games at max graphics, and spend a decent amount tomorrow, to run games at max graphics.
UH folks not every one games. I need as much video memory as I can. Hence the reason I have 3 512mb graphics cards in my home system running 6 monitors. You need to think out side of the box--->□.
I know what you're using these for, Mr Google Earth. I'm just not sure how SLI/XF applies to non-games. It's very possible that the drivers aren't designed to do anything in 2D mode. I'm still not all that convinced about the effectiveness of SLI/XF for 3D. Considering that adding a second identical card doesn't increase rendering power by 100%, or even the same % gain in every game, I think that SLI/XF can't double the resources.
Reply With Quote
I could see SLI and XF not working this way in 2D mode to save energy and reduce complexity, but I'm no expert on the matter. I guess one sure way to find out is to try an SLI setup and see if it really does help over one card. Very few people consume that much VRAM, so you might be hard pressed to find others to test the theory.
Originally Posted by nelsoncp21
Bookmarks