quad core

Post Reply New Topic

I'm sorry, but almost everything you just said was wrong.

Really? Almost everything I just said was wrong?

Let's look point by point.

nvidia... Most of the top end gaming rigs have nvidea cards... there's a reason for it... but let's assume that htis is the intel vs amd debate... a matter of taste...

Was I wrong about the ram on board a video card? Nope... that was accurate... ddr3 is the standard for most video cards, but the nicer ones are getting into dd5...

Was I wrong about the ram on the video card being dedicated to the video processor... nope... that is a fact...

Was I wrong about an on mainboard video chip not being as good as separate video card? Nope... that's a fact...

Was I wrong about the fact that ram allocation of shared resources actually taking compute cycles and therefore slowing the system down a bit? Nope... They teach that in basic comp sci...

Was I wrong about the fact that the bus between the GPU and the main board is slower than the frontside ram bus and therefore limits performance of shared resources for graphics processing? Not in the slightest...

So... what was I wrong about, precisely? I would really like to know, so I can go tell my school that they gave me my degree in error...

Hey, you've got the degree - you wouldn't believe me anyway.

I've only been doing this 20 years - what do I know.

You already started to correct a few things when you responded... like nVidia (not invidia) and GDDR5 (which has been around for years.)
AMD and nVidia have been battling back and forth for years and neither has consistently held "top dog" for long. They both have their place, they both have their dedicated game vendors that optimize for one or the other... AMD typically offers a little better price:performance value as well as lower voltage, but nVidia's new 6xx lineup closes the gap this time 'round.

And of course, nVidia just released its new $999 "Titan" to take the speed crown... (for the next 3-6 months at least.)

ACTUALLY... everything you stated I did not mention was inherent in my statements and one, I did mention directly
"these days, you get ddr3 on board the card, and the memory is dedicated... "

"No - all benchmarks favour Intel since the 1155 socket (2nd & 3rd generation.) The only times AMD wins this time is with its APU series, giving good graphics on the same processor, and the 8-core FX under a certain few multiprocessing applications."
For on board graphics cards, yes... As far as I know, the 950 intel graphics engine is only available on board.

"You're getting desperate - you never mentioned this earlier. Plus, with the argument you're trying to make, the slower bus from CPU to PCIe GPU would mean a dedicated card is slower than resources shared on the faster CPU->RAM bus. Because there's more factors than that, dedicated card vs. shared resources is irrelevant. The speed of the GPU in question is. The shared RAM of an IGP doesn't guarantee slower graphics performance - the processing power of the GPU itself is the deciding factor, which is why the AMD APU IGP is decidedly faster than a dedicated card like the Radeon 6450 or Geforce GT 620."
That's like saying the fort taurus performs better than a yugo... I'm sorry, when people were talking about decent cards, I assumed that was the topic.

For the record... IN PRACTICE... Take an integrated radeon and a card with the same processor... set aside the same amount of ram that is on the card and there will be a MARKED difference...

Ironically enough, your snarky commentary aside, I won't make more money than you in this field... because I just don't care enough about it (in spite of the degree) to work in this field... However... if you don't make a lot in this field, it will be because of attitude in discussing with others... just like so many other aspies...

My two cents... invest in a good chipset with a decent amount of ram on the card, and don't go integrated... for your graphics needs...

Same fallacy... more video RAM has nothing, nothing to do with video performance/speed - only that it can handle larger textures on-screen.

It seems a foreign concept to many that a 512MB video card (with a faster GPU) can easily run circles around a 2048MB card with a crummy, slow GPU.

For the same reason, an AMD A8/A10 APU or Intel HD4000 onboard IGP will easily outperform a $50 crappy dedicated card without changing how fast the CPU performs. The CPU will still deliver 100% of the same processing power whether or not you use the IGP.



As you can see, the CPU cores are separate from the IGP. When in use, yes, there will be some traffic, but no more than if the traffic were going to the PCIe16 slot instead.

I don't remember saying anything about more ram equaling more performance... but hey... what ever...

i didnt know this topic would blow up into gpus but...

wouldn't a APU be faster than a discrete GPU because the GPU is in the inside the same chip as the CPU and would theoretically would communicate faster with the cpu without going through separate buses?

Sound theory, but it also depends on the "muscle" of the onboard GPU (a.k.a. IGP)

The A8-3870K IGP has 400 shaders/GPU cores @ 600MHz, but a Radeon 7750 video card has 512 @ 800MHz.

There's a lot of factors to consider what equals real-world performance.