Revisiting the SLI increasing memory size
Home | Reviews and Features | Special Reports | Forums |

Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: Revisiting the SLI increasing memory size

  1. #1
    ol' man is offline workin fingas to the bone
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Posts
    9,664

    Revisiting the SLI increasing memory size

    Awhile ago a few people told me that when you ran your graphics cards in SLI that you did not double your memory size.

    Why does this graph say that when you do run SLI that it does double your memory size?

    http://images.tomshardware.com/2006/...risontable.jpg

    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.


  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    maryland
    Posts
    279
    maybe cause it's a single card with 2 gpu's not two seperate cards in sli.So in all honesty 1 card does have 1g of ram.
    Athlon 64 4000 san diego, zalman 7700, Asus A8N32-SLI Deleuxe, XFX 7800 GT, 2x 1g corsair xms pc4000, 2X512 munshkin pc4400, samsung spinpoint sata 200g , plextor 712-sa, seasonic s12 500w, Lian Li V1000 modded, Firefly PC remote, Logitech MX1000, Logitech Z-5450, Sony KLV-S26A10 LCD TV

  3. #3
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Arkham Asylum, Cell 13
    Posts
    3,390
    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.

    http://www.guru3d.com/article/Videocards/353/

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    Independence, MO
    Posts
    8,071
    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.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Posts
    6,334
    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.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    maryland
    Posts
    279
    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.
    Athlon 64 4000 san diego, zalman 7700, Asus A8N32-SLI Deleuxe, XFX 7800 GT, 2x 1g corsair xms pc4000, 2X512 munshkin pc4400, samsung spinpoint sata 200g , plextor 712-sa, seasonic s12 500w, Lian Li V1000 modded, Firefly PC remote, Logitech MX1000, Logitech Z-5450, Sony KLV-S26A10 LCD TV

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Oklahoma, USA
    Posts
    1,253
    Quote Originally Posted by nelsoncp21
    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.

    Thats sorta how I see it..
    Intel 2500k @ 4.5 GHz | Sapphire 6870 1GB | 8GB DDR31600 | Gigabyte Z68A-D3H-B3 | 640 GB WD Caviar Black | 500GB WD something | ASUS Xonar DS | Logitech Z-5300e | Logitech G500 | Das Keyboard Cherry MX Brown | Dell S2740L

  8. #8
    ol' man is offline workin fingas to the bone
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Posts
    9,664
    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--->□.


  9. #9
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    Independence, MO
    Posts
    8,071
    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.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •