Recently there was a heated debate in the graphics card forum about the amount of memory on graphics cards and the overclock ability of said cards. The crux of the matter was that the more memory you have, the lower the overclock ability of the card would be.
Now I understand that if you have 2x4 ddr3 sticks versus 4x4 ddr3 sticks in a motherboard the 4 sticks would probably be harder to clock, but what about chips of different densities 2x4 versus 2x8 for example?
Then does it equate across to the memory on graphics cards?
Are there more chips on a 3GB card than a 2GB card?
Does it really only come into play at the extreme ends of the cards overclocking ability?
Any light you could shed on this subject could be very informative.
( A quick note to anyone who may want to come in here and restart that argument. don't bother I'm quite sure that 8pack will stand for no nonsense and close the thread as soon as there is any trouble.
)
Now I understand that if you have 2x4 ddr3 sticks versus 4x4 ddr3 sticks in a motherboard the 4 sticks would probably be harder to clock, but what about chips of different densities 2x4 versus 2x8 for example?
Then does it equate across to the memory on graphics cards?
Are there more chips on a 3GB card than a 2GB card?
Does it really only come into play at the extreme ends of the cards overclocking ability?
Any light you could shed on this subject could be very informative.
( A quick note to anyone who may want to come in here and restart that argument. don't bother I'm quite sure that 8pack will stand for no nonsense and close the thread as soon as there is any trouble.
)