Quake3World

Almost every one of those can be controlled, with the exception of Windows memory handling.

But Windows doesn't handle the memory once an application requests it - at least it doesn't in most games and 3D applications.

R00k wrote:Almost every one of those can be controlled, with the exception of Windows memory handling.

.

I like your optimism although I would discourage the dilussionism

What's that?

R00k wrote:

shadd_ wrote:this seems to be the best price/performer deal i've seen.

http://www.us.ncix.com/products/index.p ... omoid=1001

Thanks man, that's exactly what I've been shopping for. I've been told that OCZ has better deals with comparable performance, but so far I wasn't able to find the price differences everyone was talking about. :icon14:

edit: I even found it 7 bucks cheaper at the place I was planning on buying the rest of my gear, since I had the part number:
http://www.monarchcomputer.com/Merchant ... ode=140226

If you don't mind a mail in rebate, newegg is $26 cheaper here:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6820227210

I just always like to use newegg, so I'd get it there anyways.

R00k wrote:

[FTF]Pyro wrote:

R00k wrote:No, that's not what I'm saying at all. We already know that AMD processors perform differently than similarly clocked Intels, in several different ways.

Bah I dont have a clue what you are looking for here...... I mean DDR double data rate.


1000mhz = 500 mhz ddr


If it doesnt perform exactly the same as SDRAM at 1000 mhz then its got to be 99.999% as good as. If you ask me. your being slightly pedantic unless of course this is for some sort of project that will prove something.

Well yea, it's slightly pedantic, but this is a benchmark we're talking about here.

In fact, if no one has proved that they are exactly the same, then that should be one of the caveats in their review/comparison, along with the reduced pipes and such.

R00k, stop right there.
Both cards use GDDR3. Same kind of memory, man. Just set at different speeds for the retail samples. They adjust this for the benchmark by setting it at the same speed.

Who the fuck uses SDRAM anymore? This entire page is a fucking waste of the Internets.

i still have a machine running on 768mb sdram. it even runs doom3 at acceptable framerates.
shove it

Psyche911 wrote:R00k, stop right there.
Both cards use GDDR3. Same kind of memory, man. Just set at different speeds for the retail samples. They adjust this for the benchmark by setting it at the same speed.

Oh okay. When I first asked, you made it sound like one was DDR and one wasn't, that's why I brought up the point. I wasn't trying to start a debate, merely pointing out good benchmarking practices.

I still don't understand why one says 500 and one says 1000. I just assume that if they are clocking them to the same speed, then they will report the same speed.

It's trivial anyway, as the benchmark results show they're closely matched, but I'm just curious.

Grudge wrote:Who the fuck uses SDRAM anymore? This entire page is a fucking waste of the Internets.

I've got SDRAM in my current PC.

R00k wrote:

Grudge wrote:Who the fuck uses SDRAM anymore? This entire page is a fucking waste of the Internets.

I've got SDRAM in my current PC.

Yes, but it's over 3 years old, right? This review was about stuff that have just been released.

I figured that I made it sound like that, sorry.
But the article does state in the text that both were set at 1,000MHz. It's just the screenshots show the utilities, one of which apparently displays the actual speed and one displays the effective speed.