Who's getting a GTX 280 in June ?

[TQ]

Taking a guess I'd say it moves to 55nm just in time for Christmas. Wouldn't want to tick off all those folks who had just plunked down $650 for the 65nm part...at least not too soon.
That's just one of the things that bugs me about this product. Perhaps I've been spoiled by the length of time my 8800GTX has been working wonderfully well, but I just don't get a sense of longevity with the 280. It's likely to have a die-shrink in a few months. It could move to GDDR5 by next spring. For that much cash I'd like a sense that it's not going to be replaced by a significantly improved product in a short time.

[XJ.]

Yeah - it wouldn't be too good to p*ss off so many people who have just plunked down a wad of cash. I only want to know because I think the die shrunk part will be less expensive and I'd like one when I get back into folding because the GTX 280 is a MONSTER folder (in PPD). No rush for me though, I do have this little issue of finding a new job first

[Kimbo]

here's the situation:

with my 8800gtx with 768mb
the system during boot showed 3328mb (windows shows 3.25gb)
that was ok and made sense (i understand how the 4gb barrier works)
that's how i used it since nov '06
all was good and all that

now with my gtx 280 with 1024mb
it still shows 3328mb ram
so... huh ???
shouldn't i have lost around 256mb, now that the gpu has another 256mb ??
i was expecting to see something like 29xxmb or such. i mean 4096-1024=3072 and than there should be another few mb or so reserved for other things.....

anyway, other than this all is ok. i ran 3dmark several times, installed and played many games including crysis, grid etc..., gpu-z shows all correct gpu info, the system is stable to the nth degree and all that. it's not causing any issue other then some slight confusion. hmmmm..


info:
~~~

the system has 4gb ram
i use 32bit os only
in bios i have the "memory remap feature" setting disabled (as it should be - see above statement)
the cpu bios setting of "execute disable bit" is set to disabled

[johnrr6]

GPU memory is totally independent of CPU memory....

doesn't affect each other in the sense of decresing or incresing values.....

Your CPU memory will remain totally the same regardless of what graphics card you put in the machine----with whatever GPU memory is tied to the card.

The one exception to this is onboard graphics....

Onboard graphics borrows directly from CPU memory as it has no memory of it's own

Does this help??

[Kimbo]

eh... i guess so..

...wasn't the "web consensus" that if you add a gpu with more ram you would loose whatever ram it had to the 4gb barrier ???
so by your definition even if i had a gpu with 2gb or say 4gb i would still see and have available 3.2x gb system ram ?? (that's good to know)

i guess i "knew" wrong.....

[johnrr6]

Originally Posted by Kimbo

eh... i guess so..

...wasn't the "web consensus" that if you add a gpu with more ram you would loose whatever ram it had to the 4gb barrier ???
so by your definition even if i had a gpu with 2gb or say 4gb i would still see and have available 3.2x gb system ram ?? (that's good to know)

i guess i "knew" wrong.....

Never heard of that "web consensus".....interesting....

bottom line----they are totally independent of one another (except onboard)...

so yes----even if you had a gpu with 2gb or even 4gb of GPU memory on the card----you would still see and have available the original 3.2x gb system ram (which in your case comes from 4 gigs of CPU RAM and you are using a 32 bit system----which can only "see" that amount)

If you had a 64 bit system----you'd "see" all 4 gigs

somewhat confusing----I know....

[ephekt]

Originally Posted by johnrr6

bottom line----they are totally independent of one another (except onboard)...

This isn't entirely true. They are separate in the sense that they are logically and physically discrete, but memory from both still gets counted against the address space. A 32 bit system can only address a total of 4GB of RAM (without PAE) - that includes RAM on video cards and other peripherals, BIOS etc.

What SP3 and SP1 did was allow Windows to report the total amount of RAM In the system, but it still does not address it. A 32 bit system with a 512MB video card will be able to address at most 3.5GB of RAM (probably less). This is simply a limit of the 32 bit address space.

[XJ.]

Video ram is accessed through an API and not subject to windows memory mapping (unless you are talking about AGP cards).

[WhiteEclipse]

Originally Posted by TQ

Taking a guess I'd say it moves to 55nm just in time for Christmas. Wouldn't want to tick off all those folks who had just plunked down $650 for the 65nm part...at least not too soon.
That's just one of the things that bugs me about this product. Perhaps I've been spoiled by the length of time my 8800GTX has been working wonderfully well, but I just don't get a sense of longevity with the 280. It's likely to have a die-shrink in a few months. It could move to GDDR5 by next spring. For that much cash I'd like a sense that it's not going to be replaced by a significantly improved product in a short time.

What about the people that bought a 8900, I mean, 9800 just a few weeks ago. How long was that the top dog, two months?

[sammy2066]

I seem to not be able to keep with the graphics card industry either. I'm either getting old, or losing interest. I think I'm losing interest.

[TQ]

Originally Posted by WhiteEclipse

What about the people that bought a 8900, I mean, 9800 just a few weeks ago. How long was that the top dog, two months?

The 9800GX2 is still top dog in several game tests. And it's $150 cheaper than the GTX280.
These new nVidia cards are just not bringing enough to the table to justify the price.
I'm going to take the next several weeks, likely well into August, to see what ATi's partners come up with and then spring for a 4870 with a stout cooling solution. It significantly betters my 8800GTX for a price I can live with.
Not bad, ATi, not bad at all.

[hansje]

I agree TQ...have done a lot of research myself.

ATI seems to have winners on their hands this time

Thinking of buying one 4870, if I need more...always can buy another one extra in the future. (Crossfire)

Hans

[WhiteEclipse]

Originally Posted by TQ

The 9800GX2 is still top dog in several game tests. And it's $150 cheaper than the GTX280.
These new nVidia cards are just not bringing enough to the table to justify the price.
I'm going to take the next several weeks, likely well into August, to see what ATi's partners come up with and then spring for a 4870 with a stout cooling solution. It significantly betters my 8800GTX for a price I can live with.
Not bad, ATi, not bad at all.

The 9800gx2 has well documented problems, like erratic fps/minimum fps, and microstutter, even though the avg fps may be higher.

I'm with you - just going to hang on for a while and see what develops.

[zapionics<alt>]

Originally Posted by WhiteEclipse

The 9800gx2 has well documented problems, like erratic fps/minimum fps, and microstutter, even though the avg fps may be higher...

I didnt know that, can you give us a link to some info please,especially on the micro-stutter issue?

I thought the GX2 was defeating the 280 by a few fps in Crysis ... and its cheaper at the same time. The 4870's in crossfire may outperform a GX2 in some games, but what about the risk - afaik crossfire still has issues in many games and is subject to the occassional dreaded freeze.

I can pickup a GX2 for about the same price, or a little less, than a pair of 4870's at the moment.

[TQ]

Originally Posted by zapionics<alt>

I can pickup a GX2 for about the same price, or a little less, than a pair of 4870's at the moment.

As the GX2 is still just SLI on a stick any CF/SLI related issues will remain. Neither nVidia's nor ATi's multi-GPU solutions are glitch free. The ATi's apparently have excellent multi-monitor support in CF, though.