|
|
GTX 295, is it real ?
http://www.hardocp.com/news.html?new...VzaWFzdCwsLDE=
http://www.overclockersclub.com/reviews/gtx295/ http://www.engadget.com/2008/12/11/t...pected-at-ces/ http://www.fudzilla.com/index.php?op...156&It emid=1 http://www.crunchgear.com/2008/12/11...le-gpu-gtx295/ Apparently it is GTX 295 is basicly 'GTX 280 GX2' that is, two GTX 280s crammed together on a single board. It's got 480 SP (2x 240 SP) 1,792 MB GDDR3 should be launching at CES in January. |
GTX 295, is it real ?
On Thu, 1 Jan 2009 11:56:58 -0800 (PST), NV55
wrote: http://www.hardocp.com/news.html?new...VzaWFzdCwsLDE= http://www.overclockersclub.com/reviews/gtx295/ http://www.engadget.com/2008/12/11/t...pected-at-ces/ http://www.fudzilla.com/index.php?op...156&It emid=1 http://www.crunchgear.com/2008/12/11...le-gpu-gtx295/ Apparently it is GTX 295 is basicly 'GTX 280 GX2' that is, two GTX 280s crammed together on a single board. It's got 480 SP (2x 240 SP) 1,792 MB GDDR3 should be launching at CES in January. Old news. Actually 2 face-to-face sandwiched boards each containing the 55nm shrink of the GT200 GPU. No functional upgrade of the original GT200. No doubt a market-position placeholder awaiting nVidia's next-gen performance-equivalent single-chip GPU solution, presumably Dx11 compatible. GTX 295 is distinctly not a future-proof purchase. John Lewis |
GTX 295, is it real ?
"Memnoch" wrote in message ... On Thu, 01 Jan 2009 21:35:59 GMT, (John Lewis) wrote: On Thu, 1 Jan 2009 11:56:58 -0800 (PST), NV55 wrote: http://www.hardocp.com/news.html?new...VzaWFzdCwsLDE= http://www.overclockersclub.com/reviews/gtx295/ http://www.engadget.com/2008/12/11/t...pected-at-ces/ http://www.fudzilla.com/index.php?op...156&It emid=1 http://www.crunchgear.com/2008/12/11...le-gpu-gtx295/ Apparently it is GTX 295 is basicly 'GTX 280 GX2' that is, two GTX 280s crammed together on a single board. It's got 480 SP (2x 240 SP) 1,792 MB GDDR3 should be launching at CES in January. Old news. Actually 2 face-to-face sandwiched boards each containing the 55nm shrink of the GT200 GPU. No functional upgrade of the original GT200. No doubt a market-position placeholder awaiting nVidia's next-gen performance-equivalent single-chip GPU solution, presumably Dx11 compatible. GTX 295 is distinctly not a future-proof purchase. What would be a future proof purchase? Or at least one for any significant length of time nowadays. I doubt there are any. The best future proof purchase is one which is around the $120, usually a GPU like the 8800GT where it will still be worth a decent amount if eBayed in 18 months time to fund your next purchase. |
GTX 295, is it real ?
"Schrodinger" wrote in message ... "Memnoch" wrote in message ... On Thu, 01 Jan 2009 21:35:59 GMT, (John Lewis) wrote: On Thu, 1 Jan 2009 11:56:58 -0800 (PST), NV55 wrote: http://www.hardocp.com/news.html?new...VzaWFzdCwsLDE= http://www.overclockersclub.com/reviews/gtx295/ http://www.engadget.com/2008/12/11/t...pected-at-ces/ http://www.fudzilla.com/index.php?op...156&It emid=1 http://www.crunchgear.com/2008/12/11...le-gpu-gtx295/ Apparently it is GTX 295 is basicly 'GTX 280 GX2' that is, two GTX 280s crammed together on a single board. It's got 480 SP (2x 240 SP) 1,792 MB GDDR3 should be launching at CES in January. Old news. Actually 2 face-to-face sandwiched boards each containing the 55nm shrink of the GT200 GPU. No functional upgrade of the original GT200. No doubt a market-position placeholder awaiting nVidia's next-gen performance-equivalent single-chip GPU solution, presumably Dx11 compatible. GTX 295 is distinctly not a future-proof purchase. What would be a future proof purchase? Or at least one for any significant length of time nowadays. I doubt there are any. The best future proof purchase is one which is around the $120, usually a GPU like the 8800GT where it will still be worth a decent amount if eBayed in 18 months time to fund your next purchase. That or a even card thats a bit more expensive but not at the front edge and that can be crossfired or SLI'd as requirements inevitably ramp up say a 8900gtx+ .There is a chance of getting bitten in that some new rendering drawing or fill technique(etc) will be incorporated in DirectX ?? but since the software houses are slow to jump on the band wagon its unlikely to happen overnight like 64 bit programmes it takes a while to filter through. DerekW |
GTX 295, is it real ?
On Fri, 02 Jan 2009 13:23:36 GMT, Memnoch
wrote: What would be a future proof purchase? Or at least one for any significant length of time nowadays. I doubt there are any. Glock 21, one round of .45 ACP. Load, put in mouth, pull trigger. Not as sexy as the newest triple parallax boobie buffering video card, but definitely makes you future proof. |
GTX 295, is it real ?
On Mon, 05 Jan 2009 08:08:35 -0500, Tim O wrote:
On Fri, 02 Jan 2009 13:23:36 GMT, Memnoch wrote: What would be a future proof purchase? Or at least one for any significant length of time nowadays. I doubt there are any. Glock 21, one round of .45 ACP. Load, put in mouth, pull trigger. Not as sexy as the newest triple parallax boobie buffering video card, but definitely makes you future proof. I went with the XFX 9800 GX2 a number of months back, Very nice card and will hopefully complement the Intel i7 upgrade I am looking to get over the next week or so when I have decided on which motherboard I want. I bought the bits for my current system just over 2 years ago, an Intel X6800 and MSI motherboard. |
GTX 295, is it real ?
On Mon, 05 Jan 2009 14:38:50 GMT, Memnoch
wrote: On Mon, 05 Jan 2009 08:08:35 -0500, Tim O wrote: On Fri, 02 Jan 2009 13:23:36 GMT, Memnoch wrote: What would be a future proof purchase? Or at least one for any significant length of time nowadays. I doubt there are any. Glock 21, one round of .45 ACP. Load, put in mouth, pull trigger. Not as sexy as the newest triple parallax boobie buffering video card, but definitely makes you future proof. I went with the XFX 9800 GX2 a number of months back, Very nice card and will hopefully complement the Intel i7 upgrade I am looking to get over the next week or so when I have decided on which motherboard I want. I bought the bits for my current system just over 2 years ago, an Intel X6800 and MSI motherboard. Nice to be VERY rich.... And an "early adopter" . Anandtech is taking a bunch of flak in comments on their latest batch of X58 motherboard reviews, many of which reviews effectively say "after a few BIOS updates everything will be OK". Comments are coming back like "it seems that with all of these boards, none work acceptably well straight out of the box... the early users are a bunch of beta-testers..." It does seem, from the many reviews that I have read, that the current generation of i7 motherboards are not ready for prime-time, especially if you want to do any performance-pushing. And why else would you want to fork out over $300 for a motherboard? Also the current-generation i7 chips are optimised for servers and not desktop use. They are far too power-hungry, so you have to put up with more expensive cooling solutions if you are a performance-tweaker. Plus the outlandish cost of DDR3 memory, when you can get QUALITY DDR2 memory at rock-bottom prices. $40 or less for 4Gbytes. And for gaming, the bottleneck is at the GPU, not the CPU. A Q9550 Penryn Quad-core will keep even a triple-SLI/Crossfire fed happily for modern games such as Fallout3 or Far Cry2 or the horribly-coded GTA4 that make full use of multiple cores. Many of the current games still make little use of multiple-cores. Thus the current generation of quad CPUs have a lot of gaming compute-space still available and the upcoming game-engines are multi-core aware and make use of this currently mostly-wasted space. Give i7 another year and the performance/price equation might be reasonable. Right now invest in a 3GHz Penryn Quad, eg 9650 (or overclock a 9550) and your choice of graphics-capability on a stable proven multiple-PCIeX16 motherboard with DDR2 memory and you are going to end up with an exceptionally satisfactory gaming system. Also, avoid depending on SLI/Crossfire or any other multiple-GPU configuration for graphics. Better to buy the top-end single-GPU. Consistent gaming-support of multiple-GPU graphics solutions is very spotty and dependent on the driver support provided by the GPU hardware vendor. Support for new games on older-generation multiple-GPUs fades VERY rapidly. However, multiple-GPUs do have their place when one or more GPUs handle, say, physics and/or AI, and one GPU is dedicated solely for graphics. This is the upcoming pattern of use for multiple (GP)GPU-cards. Since Intel has never shown any ability to write 3D graphics drivers that actually work and that is unlikely to suddenly change with the arrival of Larrabee, it is very likely that Larrabee will find a place as an adjoint "GPU card" for physics or AI processing. Ideal, in fact, since Larrabee is very Cell-like in its architecture, but far easier to program. Sorry for rambling on here a bit, but maybe my input might help you save some money. John Lewis |
GTX 295, is it real ?
|
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:24 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HardwareBanter.com