1GB 8800GT wtf?

Ok, so most people know that Palit has a 1gb 8800gt on the market. Is it true that because the video card is 256 bit it can actually only use 512mb of vram anyway? Could someone provide me with an informative link explaining the said question?Churchill_Croc

That's not really true.
The card isn't really going to gain any performance increases going from 512mb to 1gb but maybe with some extreme game mods, like huge texture packs for Crysis/Stalker/Oblivion, you might see a small increase.

Heck R600 had a 512bit memory interface, 1024bit ringbus, and it didn't even gain much when there was 1gb on it. In the future when these megatexture stuff gets even bigger, then we might see a gain. Epic was talking about how they would like to see more memory on GPUs, so they can really start to push the limits.

256-bit just uses 512mb of ram efficiency. Think of the BIT as the size of the highway and the RAM as the amount of cards. If your wanting to move a efficient number of cars across the highway, then a 128-bit highway with 512mb of cards will jam up. 256-bit highway with 256megs of cards will be a barren highway. 256-bit highway with 512mb of cars will flow and not conjest and have a highly effective turnover.

So with 256bit highway and 1024mb of cars you jam up and be a slower less effective yield. I.E. its slower.

The 1gb 8800GT is slower than the 8800GT with 512mb of ram. It becomes a jammed up mess.

256-bit just uses 512mb of ram efficiency. Think of the BIT as the size of the highway and the RAM as the amount of cards. If your wanting to move a efficient number of cars across the highway, then a 128-bit highway with 512mb of cards will jam up. 256-bit highway with 256megs of cards will be a barren highway. 256-bit highway with 512mb of cars will flow and not conjest and have a highly effective turnover.

So with 256bit highway and 1024mb of cars you jam up and be a slower less effective yield. I.E. its slower.

The 1gb 8800GT is slower than the 8800GT with 512mb of ram. It becomes a jammed up mess.CreasianDevaili

That isn't necessarily true and is a huge oversimplification.
There are many more variables that come into play other than memory interface and amount of Vram.
Such as-
The way the memory controller is designed
Bandwidth, speed of the memory and size of the memory interface
Plus there are probably even more variables that I don't know about

More importantly there needs to be a reason for having that much Vram.
1 and 2gb cards GREATLY increase performance with certain renders and other apps, mainly CAD/workstation related, even if it is on a 128bit interface.

[QUOTE="CreasianDevaili"]256-bit just uses 512mb of ram efficiency. Think of the BIT as the size of the highway and the RAM as the amount of cards. If your wanting to move a efficient number of cars across the highway, then a 128-bit highway with 512mb of cards will jam up. 256-bit highway with 256megs of cards will be a barren highway. 256-bit highway with 512mb of cars will flow and not conjest and have a highly effective turnover.

So with 256bit highway and 1024mb of cars you jam up and be a slower less effective yield. I.E. its slower.

The 1gb 8800GT is slower than the 8800GT with 512mb of ram. It becomes a jammed up mess.LordEC911

That isn't necessarily true and is a huge oversimplification.
There are many more variables that come into play other than memory interface and amount of Vram.
Such as-
The way the memory controller is designed
Bandwidth, speed of the memory and size of the memory interface
Plus there are probably even more variables that I don't know about

More importantly there needs to be a reason for having that much Vram.
1 and 2gb cards GREATLY increase performance with certain renders and other apps, mainly CAD/workstation related, even if it is on a 128bit interface.

[QUOTE="CreasianDevaili"]256-bit just uses 512mb of ram efficiency. Think of the BIT as the size of the highway and the RAM as the amount of cards. If your wanting to move a efficient number of cars across the highway, then a 128-bit highway with 512mb of cards will jam up. 256-bit highway with 256megs of cards will be a barren highway. 256-bit highway with 512mb of cars will flow and not conjest and have a highly effective turnover.

So with 256bit highway and 1024mb of cars you jam up and be a slower less effective yield. I.E. its slower.

The 1gb 8800GT is slower than the 8800GT with 512mb of ram. It becomes a jammed up mess.LordEC911

That isn't necessarily true and is a huge oversimplification.
There are many more variables that come into play other than memory interface and amount of Vram.
Such as-
The way the memory controller is designed
Bandwidth, speed of the memory and size of the memory interface
Plus there are probably even more variables that I don't know about

More importantly there needs to be a reason for having that much Vram.
1 and 2gb cards GREATLY increase performance with certain renders and other apps, mainly CAD/workstation related, even if it is on a 128bit interface.

My method of explaining is simple, and is a base to go off of. If you want to critic my method then I will wait here for you to come and give the "real deal". I would like you to explain why the 8800GT 256mb, the 512mb, and the 1gb versions are not all equal, when they have the same G92 core and memory interface. I certaintly dont have the time to explain it in a more technical format, and i figure he will google 128-bit vs 256-bit vs 386-bit and find oogles of threads dozens of pages long to explain it.

Just saying it isnt better or will work or that "with enough of this it might" dosent give any information for use. Many reviewers have used the analogy of the highway for alot of things BECAUSE it gives a simple picture that you can use to base and grow from.

Also as you know the Quadro and ATI Fire series are meant to take the load OFF the cpu. That is why they can be 128-bit with 1-2gb of memory. Gaming gpu's are a totally different beast and what's this thread is about.

My method of explaining is simple, and is a base to go off of. If you want to critic my method then I will wait here for you to come and give the "real deal". I would like you to explain why the 8800GT 256mb, the 512mb, and the 1gb versions are not all equal, when they have the same G92 core and memory interface. I certaintly dont have the time to explain it in a more technical format, and i figure he will google 128-bit vs 256-bit vs 386-bit and find oogles of threads dozens of pages long to explain it.CreasianDevaili

Just saying it isnt better or will work or that "with enough of this it might" dosent give any information for use. Many reviewers have used the analogy of the highway for alot of things BECAUSE it gives a simple picture that you can use to base and grow from.CreasianDevaili

Also as you know the Quadro and ATI Fire series are meant to take the load OFF the cpu. That is why they can be 128-bit with 1-2gb of memory. Gaming gpu's are a totally different beast and what's this thread is about.CreasianDevaili

Lol......oh my. I don't mean to butt into your guys little argument here, but Lord, did you even read his comment? He does say that with a 256 bit architecture 256 RAM would be a barren highway and 512 would be much more efficient......firefox59

I did read that... but with the length between my posts I had forgotten...
That only makes his original post even more ridiculous.

[QUOTE="CreasianDevaili"]My method of explaining is simple, and is a base to go off of. If you want to critic my method then I will wait here for you to come and give the "real deal". I would like you to explain why the 8800GT 256mb, the 512mb, and the 1gb versions are not all equal, when they have the same G92 core and memory interface. I certaintly dont have the time to explain it in a more technical format, and i figure he will google 128-bit vs 256-bit vs 386-bit and find oogles of threads dozens of pages long to explain it.LordEC911

Just saying it isnt better or will work or that "with enough of this it might" dosent give any information for use. Many reviewers have used the analogy of the highway for alot of things BECAUSE it gives a simple picture that you can use to base and grow from.CreasianDevaili

Also as you know the Quadro and ATI Fire series are meant to take the load OFF the cpu. That is why they can be 128-bit with 1-2gb of memory. Gaming gpu's are a totally different beast and what's this thread is about.CreasianDevaili

Dude.. calm down and explain it in detail so the OP can understand WHY its not a good idea. I dont need to fight here. I want to hear you explain all the mumbo jumbo.

You cant even explain why the 8800GT 256mb, 512, and 1gb are different. I think your one of those peeps that just READS crap off the internet and never goes deeper to see. He wanted to know WHY.

Here.. you have your chance. EXPLAIN THE CONCEPT. Or do you not know it yourself?

Just to answer the OP's question; when you look at a gpu's core bit size (128, 256, 320, 384), it determines the type of memory configurations possible on the card. There is a limited amount, it's just that you/we don't know how much it is, probably because we haven't taken to time to find out, and if we did, what would it matter? Most cards you will see are 256bit, which handles 256mb, 512mb, and 1gb. No real need to go higher at this point. 320bit cards have 320mb, and 640mb. 8800gtx and ultra are 384bit, hence the 768mb memory size.

As for the 1gb cards not performing well... http://www.fudzilla.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=4618&Itemid=40

Dude.. calm down and explain it in detail so the OP can understand WHY its not a good idea. I dont need to fight here. I want to hear you explain all the mumbo jumbo.

You cant even explain why the 8800GT 256mb, 512, and 1gb are different. I think your one of those peeps that just READS crap off the internet and never goes deeper to see. He wanted to know WHY.

Here.. you have your chance. EXPLAIN THE CONCEPT. Or do you not know it yourself?CreasianDevaili

Yep. You caught me... I read stuff off the internet and have no idea what I'm talking about...
If you would like to read my posts, I have already given specifics as to why it isn't that simple.
Seeing as how I don't have a masters/doc in EE, I cannot go indepth as far as you would like.
I can tell you that I do have a lot of knowledge with GPUs and I am sure a lot of people will agree with me.

[QUOTE="CreasianDevaili"]Dude.. calm down and explain it in detail so the OP can understand WHY its not a good idea. I dont need to fight here. I want to hear you explain all the mumbo jumbo.

You cant even explain why the 8800GT 256mb, 512, and 1gb are different. I think your one of those peeps that just READS crap off the internet and never goes deeper to see. He wanted to know WHY.

Here.. you have your chance. EXPLAIN THE CONCEPT. Or do you not know it yourself?LordEC911

Yep. You caught me... I read stuff off the internet and have no idea what I'm talking about...
If you would like to read my posts, I have already given specifics as to why it isn't that simple.
Seeing as how I don't have a masters/doc in EE, I cannot go indepth as far as you would like.
I can tell you that I do have a lot of knowledge with GPUs and I am sure a lot of people will agree with me.

I am asking you to display your knowledge and tell the OP "why" the 8800GT cannot truely make use of 1gb of ram, not that it isnt worth it and leave it at that.

You know.. like how the 1gb would help with high-res with aa/af but since the 8800GT cant reach ultra high resolutions the impact of 1gb memory is null to performance since it cant help what the 8800GT cant do at high resolutions; AA/AF. The 8800GTS 512, with more stream processors and texture filtering, CAN hit the really high resolutions where 1gb has a higher chance to help rather than bog down the performance.

Heck R600 had a 512bit memory interface, 1024bit ringbus, and it didn't even gain much when there was 1gb on it. LordEC911

Dear god man.. it has a 256-bit memory interface with 512-bit ring bus, which means to and from it is pretty much just 256-bit. I am unsure where you learned that information but... guess i cant expect more with how you've acted in this thread.

You want to revisit the Quadro thing as well? Cause on the part of Rendering I got a few more things to say on your scoff at what I said.

[QUOTE="LordEC911"]

Heck R600 had a 512bit memory interface, 1024bit ringbus, and it didn't even gain much when there was 1gb on it. CreasianDevaili

Dear god man.. it has a 256-bit memory interface with 512-bit ring bus, which means to and from it is pretty much just 256-bit. I am unsure where you learned that information but... guess i cant expect more with how you've acted in this thread.

Hmm... So you are trying to tell me my FACTS are wrong?
You probably should have learn quite awhile ago not to get into arguements with me...

Since when does 8x64 = 256bit? Oh, yeah, never...
I guess I have to state it again for you, R600 has a 512bit interface and a 1024bit ringbus.

Whoops...

R600 sports a 512-bit external memory bus, interfacing with an internal, bi-directional 1024-bit ring bus memory controller, with support for dozens of internal memory clients and GDDR3 or GDDR4 memories for the external store.Beyond3d

Maybe you need pictures?


http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=2988&p=9

So, I find it amusing that someone telling me I don't know anything about GPUs has no idea what he is talking about. Do some research than try to argue.

I will redefine my arguement then. I took your R600 notion as the overall series, not just the 2900XT. I like to look at the entire series of a archie rather than just one card that was deemed a failure and revisions of it that surpass it's performance with half the bit and bus.

RV670 has the same processing power as the R600.

By your logic the G80 8800GTS 320 has the same memory controller as the G80 8800GTX. This is showing just how limited your scope is. Your basing your entire RV600 Line over the 2900XT? Possibly right in line with the nvidia FX series in Failures?

RV670 IS the RV600 series. The only thing that changed on the processing power was a die shrink. The next thing was they did better on the memory optimization BECAUSE the 512-bit and 1024 bus ring was a utter failure. It was a waste.

I dont sum up a entire line with one card. You might, but I dont. The 2900XT would have done better if they stuck with the GDDR3. Regardless, the heat and power consumption with how they had it setup was just a waste. Too much bandwidth that nothing used which lead to worse performance.

If you wanted me to comment on the 2900XT, then you need to mention it. Otherwise, I will talk the only RV600 based ATI cards anyone thinks is a success.. the 3xxx run.

So if I asked you about the G80 series.. how is it that the 8800GTS and 8800GTS have different bit memory interfaces? I dont see how I was wrong correcting you. If you wanted to specify a specific model, you should have said.

This is the reason people are upset with the Geforce 9 series. It is just a die shrink, not a new architecture. So it gets the lower heat and power consumptions, and allows for alittle better performance due to less limitations on burning up the gpu, but it is still based on the same architecture as the G80.

Do you know WHY the R600 sucked so bad? It had, as i said, too much bandwidth that no game used, and as such while 3Dmark06 looked awsome, in reality all of it went to waste. Kind of like a barren highway.

Man LordEC911 deserves some kind of gamespot award for having to educate all these newbs. Anyone that has had some experience with GPU's can tell you that with the memory bus of the 8800GT it wont benefit alot from 1GB of VRAM. filmography

Man LordEC911 deserves some kind of gamespot award for having to educate all these newbs. Anyone that has had some experience with GPU's can tell you that with the memory bus of the 8800GT it wont benefit alot from 1GB of VRAM. filmography

Educate? He has yet to say anything but what he thinks in this thread. I gave the analogy of a highway because it fits. Of course more stream processors and texture filters make a difference, but the base line is very simple. I asked him to explain why in detail to give the OP a better understanding, and he still just "tells" it isnt good. Yet he insists mine is wrong and way too simple, yet the idea was a baseline.

Then he insists that a quadro card shares the load with the freaken ram, which isnt correct. It shares the rendering load off the damn cpu and anyone who does this knows this. Of course most people also know that Quadro dosent help anymore nearly as much as it used to, and only when your using Gelato which not everyone uses. Without a workstation graphic card, 3d rendering and CAD applications use software based rendering on the CPU which is why a Fast quad-core helps a ton. I.E. A workstation graphic card shares the rendering load off the cpu, and if your cpu is fast enough then you wont benefit from a workstation Quadro nearly as much than if you were using a slower single or duo core processor. Even then, its a matter of application and compliance.

The 8800GT cant utilize the 1gb of ram because the ram is what helps with AA/AF at high resolutions. In order to use the 1gb, the 8800GT has to sustain acceptable FPS at high resolutions and still be able to use AA/AF period. It cant do this at super high resolutions, and as such the 1gb will never get the chance to DO ANYTHING because it cant hit the mark where it becomes a factor.

See this is your problem... You know little to nothing about GPU architectures.

I will redefine my arguement then. I took your R600 notion as the overall series, not just the 2900XT. I like to look at the entire series of a archie rather than just one card that was deemed a failure and revisions of it that surpass it's performance with half the bit and bus.CreasianDevaili

RV670 has the same processing power as the R600.CreasianDevaili

By your logic the G80 8800GTS 320 has the same memory controller as the G80 8800GTX. This is showing just how limited your scope is. Your basing your entire RV600 Line over the 2900XT? Possibly right in line with the nvidia FX series in Failures?CreasianDevaili

RV670 IS the RV600 series. The only thing that changed on the processing power was a die shrink. The next thing was they did better on the memory optimization BECAUSE the 512-bit and 1024 bus ring was a utter failure. It was a waste.CreasianDevaili

I dont sum up a entire line with one card. You might, but I dont. The 2900XT would have done better if they stuck with the GDDR3. Regardless, the heat and power consumption with how they had it setup was just a waste. Too much bandwidth that nothing used which lead to worse performance.CreasianDevaili

If you wanted me to comment on the 2900XT, then you need to mention it. Otherwise, I will talk the only RV600 based ATI cards anyone thinks is a success.. the 3xxx run.CreasianDevaili

So if I asked you about the G80 series.. how is it that the 8800GTS and 8800GTS have different bit memory interfaces? I dont see how I was wrong correcting you. If you wanted to specify a specific model, you should have said.CreasianDevaili

This is the reason people are upset with the Geforce 9 series. It is just a die shrink, not a new architecture. So it gets the lower heat and power consumptions, and allows for alittle better performance due to less limitations on burning up the gpu, but it is still based on the same architecture as the G80.CreasianDevaili

Do you know WHY the R600 sucked so bad? It had, as i said, too much bandwidth that no game used, and as such while 3Dmark06 looked awsome, in reality all of it went to waste. Kind of like a barren highway.CreasianDevaili

Educate? He has yet to say anything but what he thinks in this thread. I gave the analogy of a highway because it fits. Of course more stream processors and texture filters make a difference, but the base line is very simple. I asked him to explain why in detail to give the OP a better understanding, and he still just "tells" it isnt good. Yet he insists mine is wrong and way too simple, yet the idea was a baseline.CreasianDevaili

Then he insists that a quadro card shares the load with the freaken ram, which isnt correct. It shares the rendering load off the damn cpu and anyone who does this knows this. Of course most people also know that Quadro dosent help anymore nearly as much as it used to, and only when your using Gelato which not everyone uses. Without a workstation graphic card, 3d rendering and CAD applications use software based rendering on the CPU which is why a Fast quad-core helps a ton. I.E. A workstation graphic card shares the rendering load off the cpu, and if your cpu is fast enough then you wont benefit from a workstation Quadro nearly as much than if you were using a slower single or duo core processor. Even then, its a matter of application and compliance.CreasianDevaili

The 8800GT cant utilize the 1gb of ram because the ram is what helps with AA/AF at high resolutions. In order to use the 1gb, the 8800GT has to sustain acceptable FPS at high resolutions and still be able to use AA/AF period. It cant do this at super high resolutions, and as such the 1gb will never get the chance to DO ANYTHING because it cant hit the mark where it becomes a factor.CreasianDevaili

See this is your problem... You know little to nothing about GPU architectures.

[QUOTE="CreasianDevaili"]I will redefine my arguement then. I took your R600 notion as the overall series, not just the 2900XT. I like to look at the entire series of a archie rather than just one card that was deemed a failure and revisions of it that surpass it's performance with half the bit and bus.LordEC911

RV670 has the same processing power as the R600.CreasianDevaili

By your logic the G80 8800GTS 320 has the same memory controller as the G80 8800GTX. This is showing just how limited your scope is. Your basing your entire RV600 Line over the 2900XT? Possibly right in line with the nvidia FX series in Failures?CreasianDevaili

RV670 IS the RV600 series. The only thing that changed on the processing power was a die shrink. The next thing was they did better on the memory optimization BECAUSE the 512-bit and 1024 bus ring was a utter failure. It was a waste.CreasianDevaili

I dont sum up a entire line with one card. You might, but I dont. The 2900XT would have done better if they stuck with the GDDR3. Regardless, the heat and power consumption with how they had it setup was just a waste. Too much bandwidth that nothing used which lead to worse performance.CreasianDevaili

If you wanted me to comment on the 2900XT, then you need to mention it. Otherwise, I will talk the only RV600 based ATI cards anyone thinks is a success.. the 3xxx run.CreasianDevaili

So if I asked you about the G80 series.. how is it that the 8800GTS and 8800GTS have different bit memory interfaces? I dont see how I was wrong correcting you. If you wanted to specify a specific model, you should have said.CreasianDevaili

This is the reason people are upset with the Geforce 9 series. It is just a die shrink, not a new architecture. So it gets the lower heat and power consumptions, and allows for alittle better performance due to less limitations on burning up the gpu, but it is still based on the same architecture as the G80.CreasianDevaili

Do you know WHY the R600 sucked so bad? It had, as i said, too much bandwidth that no game used, and as such while 3Dmark06 looked awsome, in reality all of it went to waste. Kind of like a barren highway.CreasianDevaili

I never said there was a RV600. I said Rv600 Series, which is based off the R600, which is the 2900XT. The RV670 is what the R600 could have been and is just changes to make all the wrongs right.

The r600 and the RV670 have the same Stream processors, texture units, and render backends. It has a die shrink, and opted at a 256-bit bus instead of 512 along with a higher memory frequency to not kill the performance. That and it is pci-e 2.0 and dirextx 10.1 It has the SAME processing power! Clock speeds and processing power is different! It is only clocked higher because they fixed the heat issues that allow it to be clocked higher because before it was a power eating on fire monster. With the power requirements and the heat issue reduced, the bus change and raising the memory frequency worked. Wouldnt have worked on the r600.

Whats the point in all of the bandwidth of the R600 if games didnt even need it? It was wasted. They learned with the RV670 which is a wonderful product, and if they had went with that approach initially they would have made alot more sales. The RV670 puts out alot less heat and requires less power consumption, yet has better performance with 256-bit bus and 512 memory, vs the 512bit bus and 1gb of memory.

[QUOTE="CreasianDevaili"]Educate? He has yet to say anything but what he thinks in this thread. I gave the analogy of a highway because it fits. Of course more stream processors and texture filters make a difference, but the base line is very simple. I asked him to explain why in detail to give the OP a better understanding, and he still just "tells" it isnt good. Yet he insists mine is wrong and way too simple, yet the idea was a baseline.LordEC911

Then he insists that a quadro card shares the load with the freaken ram, which isnt correct. It shares the rendering load off the damn cpu and anyone who does this knows this. Of course most people also know that Quadro dosent help anymore nearly as much as it used to, and only when your using Gelato which not everyone uses. Without a workstation graphic card, 3d rendering and CAD applications use software based rendering on the CPU which is why a Fast quad-core helps a ton. I.E. A workstation graphic card shares the rendering load off the cpu, and if your cpu is fast enough then you wont benefit from a workstation Quadro nearly as much than if you were using a slower single or duo core processor. Even then, its a matter of application and compliance.CreasianDevaili

The 8800GT cant utilize the 1gb of ram because the ram is what helps with AA/AF at high resolutions. In order to use the 1gb, the 8800GT has to sustain acceptable FPS at high resolutions and still be able to use AA/AF period. It cant do this at super high resolutions, and as such the 1gb will never get the chance to DO ANYTHING because it cant hit the mark where it becomes a factor.CreasianDevaili

So the last paragraph.. your saying the 8800GT can use 1gb of memory and make it work efficiently?

A workstation card just isnt more ram. It shares the rendering load WITH the cpu if the program allows it, and depending upon the card. A extremely fast quad-core without a workstation card vs a slower dualcore with a workstation card.. the first will do the job better, and with less driver issues.

I never said there was a RV600. I said Rv600 Series, which is based off the R600, which is the 2900XT. The RV670 is what the R600 could have been and is just changes to make all the wrongs right.

The r600 and the RV670 have the same Stream processors, texture units, and render backends. It has a die shrink, and opted at a 256-bit bus instead of 512 along with a higher memory frequency to not kill the performance. That and it is pci-e 2.0 and dirextx 10.1 It has the SAME processing power! Clock speeds and processing power is different! It is only clocked higher because they fixed the heat issues that allow it to be clocked higher because before it was a power eating on fire monster. With the power requirements and the heat issue reduced, the bus change and raising the memory frequency worked. Wouldnt have worked on the r600.

Whats the point in all of the bandwidth of the R600 if games didnt even need it? It was wasted. They learned with the RV670 which is a wonderful product, and if they had went with that approach initially they would have made alot more sales. The RV670 puts out alot less heat and requires less power consumption, yet has better performance with 256-bit bus and 512 memory, vs the 512bit bus and 1gb of memory.CreasianDevaili

RV600 is not a lineup, a series, nor anything... RV600 is something you have made up and refers to absolutely nothing.

RV670 has MORE processing power due to the HIGHER clockspeeds. If you want to argue how they have the same processing power, how do you calculate it?

RV670 is certainly limited in specific situations compared to R600.

So the last paragraph.. your saying the 8800GT can use 1gb of memory and make it work efficiency?CreasianDevaili

Would you STOP making assumptions and/or putting words in my mouth, implying that I said something I didn't.

[QUOTE="CreasianDevaili"]So the last paragraph.. your saying the 8800GT can use 1gb of memory and make it work efficiency?LordEC911

Would you STOP making assumptions and/or putting words in my mouth, implying that I said something I didn't.

You said "Right... keep saying it over and over again, it might eventually become true".

That was to me saying the 8800GT does NOT use 1gb well at all due to its inability to reach high resolutions at playable framerates and then use AA/AF, which is where the 1gb would help.

How was what you said NOT saying the opposite? Thus, you said it can.

this argument is becoming extremely pointless now, lord is right is right your analogy was an oversimplified but i think it was used correctly so as to not confuse the TC. The remainder of the argument is absoletely pointless however.yoyo462001

I know it was oversimplified. As you said, I just wanted to give a base line to understand why people generally dont like getting 512mb cards on a 128-bit bus, or a 256-bit bus with 256mb of ram. I figured since he was talking about the 8800GT with 3 different flavors of 256, 512, and 1024mb of ram that the highway analogy would fit.

Wouldnt have ever used it if he was talking about what is different between a ATI 3970 and a 8800GT. I've just argued in this thread since cause it has been fun. It has been over something so extremly stupid, and both me and lord have screwed up on some things, but overall its not personal on my end. I honestly dont mind if someone thinks I know nothing about gpu.

So I will concede.

I know it was oversimplified. As you said, I just wanted to give a base line to understand why people generally dont like getting 512mb cards on a 128-bit bus, or a 256-bit bus with 256mb of ram. I figured since he was talking about the 8800GT with 3 different flavors of 256, 512, and 1024mb of ram that the highway analogy would fit.

Wouldnt have ever used it if he was talking about what is different between a ATI 3970 and a 8800GT. I've just argued in this thread since cause it has been fun. It has been over something so extremly stupid, and both me and lord have screwed up on some things, but overall its not personal on my end. I honestly dont mind if someone thinks I know nothing about gpu.

So I will concede.CreasianDevaili

I have defended every single arguement you have had stating I'm wrong.
You haven't disproved anything I said, you were simply trying to twist my words and make me say something I didn't.

this argument is becoming extremely pointless now, lord is right is right your analogy was an oversimplified but i think it was used correctly so as to not confuse the TC. The remainder of the argument is absoletely pointless however.yoyo462001