X-bit labs

Started by: cheeseman | Date 03/06/08

Comments: 14 | Last Comment:  03/10/08

[1-10]

1. Geez, this is a waste on the 9600. I don't think the GF10800 will make use of this much RAM.

I wonder if this will help in GPGPU applications ??

For gaming shouldn't 1 Gb be enough right now ?

2. Dont you need a 5xxx by 3xxx monitor to be able to use that much ram anyway?

3. LOL. Even the 512MB of memory are enough for an 8800GTX, but 2GB on a 9600????????!!! LOL!!!!! Stupid people, go go and buy it, the only diference between this and an 512MB, is your money running from your poket!

4. This is as bad as the 512MB Geforce 6200 made by Chaintech a few years ago.

On newegg, that 512MB 6200 had all sorts of people calling it a godly video card just because it had more memory than many 7800GTXs...lol

5. no one seemed to notice the major problem in this i guess, problem would be that the maximum total amount of memory recognized by most popular operating systems nowadays "XP,Vista 32-bits" is 4GB, so, you are limiting your machine with around 2GB of memory by adding 2GB of graphics card memory on board, which is ... stupid?!

Also, i hate this marketing strategy, more ram == better == stupid, i spent around 30 minutes trying to convince someone to get x1950pro 256MB instead of the 7300GS 512MB for the sake of better performance with no use, ppl are still convinced that more is better, so why not sell some crappy stuff over priced for those ppl?!

Also, this will increase the power consumption of the card as well.

Yes its probably stupid to get this card if your not prepared to install a 64-bit OS.. but there have been 64-bit CPU's avalible for years.. so its time to put them to use, don't you think.

Exactly!

I'm willing to bet that most of the readers on this website don't understand what you're talking about, let alone the average user/ gamer. Lack of memory ADDRESS SPACE will be a problem with this particular card on any 32 bit op-sys, ironically where more memory is desired.

This is simply taking advantage of people's ignorance (lack of knowledge). No disrespect intended.

6. well i had about the same issue with some ppl that cant graps the fact that more is not always better, in some case's less is more but then again most ppl i try to explain it are noobs so its just a waist of my time and theres

its the law of dimnishing returns, its better up to a certain point, depending on wich applications you are using of course.

2 Gb of graphics memory is probably questionable atleast in the current generation of games. The real question is, in what apps have they found a performance increase from this behemoth amount of memory ?

This is what I would like to know =)

7. This is lame.

I see this as bolting a huge supercharger on a 1.2 liter four banger.

8. The only cards that could potentially use more than 1GB on board are the dual-GPU ones (and that's still "only" 1GB per core, since they can't share the memory, and the benefits over the standard 2x512MB solutions would only be observable in 1920x1200 or higher which is out of 9600GT's reach). Still, at least the memory isn't underclocked, as was often the case with such cards in the past, so the only undersides are the price and a slight latency increase caused by quadriplying the buffer size.

9. And um... why?

10. Pointless. By the time games are using 2 gigs there will be far better video cards out then this current generation. I'll get a 2 gig card alright. Two probably. But that'll be at least 3-4 years from now.

[1-10]