2900pro (1024mb)

[decto]

Here: http://www.techreport.com/discussions.x/13267



and here: http://www.guru3d.com/newsitem.php?id=5947



Both very reputable sources.

I'd seen these but I don't take these as confirmed specifications. Without seeing the actual ATi guide it's fairly obvious that these cards will clock back to XT specs so the Powercolor quote is expected.

Perhaps there is an option for factory OC 2900Pro with the slimline pro bundle at a price somewhere between the stock Pro and the XT. Only time will tell.

Unless the TDP of the cores in the Pro are a little higher and therefore need more cooling to run at the better speed, thus requiring an improved assembler HSF or a more aggressive fan map I don't see why ATi would launch an SKU with the exact same spec as the XT 1GB but at a cheaper price than the XT 512Mb

AD

....... An AMD source said they'd have a 256bit memory interface, which they don't, so until hardware ships I'm a little skeptical of specs.

 

[xsnv]

I'd seen these but I don't take these as confirmed specifications. Without seeing the actual ATi guide it's fairly obvious that these cards will clock back to XT specs so the Powercolor quote is expected.

Perhaps there is an option for factory OC 2900Pro with the slimline pro bundle at a price somewhere between the stock Pro and the XT. Only time will tell.

Unless the TDP of the cores in the Pro are a little higher and therefore need more cooling to run at the better speed, thus requiring an improved assembler HSF or a more aggressive fan map I don't see why ATi would launch an SKU with the exact same spec as the XT 1GB but at a cheaper price than the XT 512Mb

AD

....... An AMD source said they'd have a 256bit memory interface, which they don't, so until hardware ships I'm a little skeptical of specs.

Very true. The memory on the 1GB Pro is clocked lower than on the 1GB XT so not the EXACT spec. Like I said. We will have to wait and see...

 

[HangTime]

now system memory are getting faster theres no need to buy a card with lots of memory on it.... ddr3 will be coming for system memory so it'll be very near video memory speed...

While I agree that there isn't necessarily a requirement for a large about of video memory, the stuff on high end cards obliterates system memory in performance terms.

DDR3 may sound nice in principal however the fast stuff is hideously expensive - e.g. over £400 for OCZ 2GB DDR3 PC3-14400C8 1800MHz.
Remember that DDR3 also has very slow timings.

Then when you factor in the overhead (needing to swap between onboard and system memory) it is obvious that for high end gaming cards it will always be bad news when it needs to 'page' to system RAM.

 

[gareth170]

While I agree that there isn't necessarily a requirement for a large about of video memory, the stuff on high end cards obliterates system memory in performance terms.

DDR3 may sound nice in principal however the fast stuff is hideously expensive - e.g. over £400 for OCZ 2GB DDR3 PC3-14400C8 1800MHz.
Remember that DDR3 also has very slow timings.

Then when you factor in the overhead (needing to swap between onboard and system memory) it is obvious that for high end gaming cards it will always be bad news when it needs to 'page' to system RAM.

prices will come down...

my point is if you have a card that as 256/512mb and a game needed abit more memory lets say extra 100mb it wouldn't be so bad to let it share that with the system memory even tho system memory are slower.

maybe by the time the ddr3 for system memory becomes widely used they'll may have better timings....

 

[drunkenmaster]

you can get ddr3 doing 7,8's throughout at 2Ghz plus, the prices are because of price gouging and small sales, the same chips will be available cheaper in thopefully not to long. they are idiots though, had the memory companies dropped prices a lot then they could have pushed for massive sales of ddr3 in back to school computer sales season which is the fastest computer sales time of year. complete idiots for missing the boat.

either way, ddr 3, 2Ghz, decent timings = i dunno 10gb/s, maybe 12-13, not entirely sure, not much more.

on board Gddr3 at 2ghz with looser timings 120-150gb/s, system memory can NOT be used to page normal textures in and out of cards quickly and keep framerate up, it destroys performance and is not that useful. its always really been a feature for low end cards to run basic apps with more texture than onboard chipsets supply.

theres supposed to be improvements in dx10 that could see memory used more effective, nvidia couldn't make their drivers work so MS "dropped" the requirement from dx10 cards so nvidia could still market as dx10. so its now a fairly unused thing, not entirely sure what it was even supposed to be doing so who cares.

doesn't the gddr4 on xt 1gb's clock significantly further than the gddr3 being used. so the extra £35 might just get you much higher mem clocks?