ddr3 and sli

DDR3 is a waist of time unless you plan on waiting till June of next year to get your DDR3 sticks. DDR3 doesn't perform THAT much better than DDR2 and it's ALOT more expensive.

So if you want to upgrade to DDR3 you're probably better off waiting until this time next year. Who knows, by then maybe we'll be on our way to newer chipsets than the P35,X38 and nforce 700's.

Here is some more information about the 700 series.
http://www.nforcershq.com/article7913.html
 
I don't really understand that one either. Someone will come back at us for saying this but it's true. The same goes for crossfire on intel chipsets.
 
I dunno about it being a 780i but I know it's a 7 something. I also don't think 32x (PCIe 2.0)slots are going to be all that needed yet. Sure it'll reap better performance for those who want the new Nvidia G9* later on but that's pretty much it. I'm not even sure the 8800Ultra saturates all that the 16x slots have to offer.

I know I'm not going to run out and get another 500+ card just to be bottle necked by PCIe1.0 and I know if I got a PCIe2.0 slot it'd just be a waist of money for long time since 16x is still going to be pretty good. By the time 16x slot aren't fast enough it'll be at least a year and a half from now. Even then they will still be super fast, just not the fastest. It's like going from an 8800GTS to 2x8800ULTRA's in SLI with a QX6800. You can see that one system will be super-duper fast but the performance of the 8800GTS is still pretty darn good and the price difference is huge. Also like having a 1200watt PSU for a 8600GT(i.e, overkill) :roll:

I know one thing I'd like to see, and that's another one of those pci express bandwidth comparisons like THG did before. This time though I'd like them to include the GTS, the GTX, the Ultra, and the 2900XT.

I'm sure PCIe2.0 will be faster but at what cost and is it even needed?
 
wtf is nvidia still making amd chipsets...thats like giving money to the competition..cough cough ati and amd

how is it the competion? its not like intel owns nvidia. mad bought ati to have a answer for intel's intergrated graphics. many high end amd mother boards still use nvidia and since they are selling why would you not keep producing amd chips?
 
Everytime someone buys and Nvidia chipset for an AMD CPU they are basically giving money to the competition. Since all the money AMD makes from selling a processor is shared with ATI(Nvidia's competition) it's not too different than giving your competitor money.

I guess when it all comes down to it though I'm not sure what's more profitable, chipsets, CPU's, GPU's, BIOS's, boards....the list goes on for quite a ways but maybe there is a reason Nvidia hasn't started making CPU's. As far as I am concerned the guy that's going to make the most money is the repair man.
 
I don't think Intel and Nvidia will be 1 company for a long time if ever. What I do see happening though is a co-opperative business opportunity.
 
even better..if intel got into the gpu business and totally killlllllllllled ati and nvidia. Cuase they have the money to do it. And they made something like sli that was even better....

money is everything.................

THAT WOULD BE AWESOME
 
even better..if intel got into the gpu business and totally killlllllllllled ati and nvidia. Cuase they have the money to do it. And they made something like sli that was even better....

money is everything.................

THAT WOULD BE AWESOME

intel, doesn't need any more money, and nvida and ati are way better companies than intel. All intel cares about is money money money. look it took them 6 years to get rid of the pathetic netburst and couldn't touch amd for 3 years. the p3 was better than the p4 yet they tossed out the good cpu for 6 years and then brought it back.

It would cost intel lots of $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ to even catch a 7900 let along the 8800.
Intel wont be making a performnace gpu any time soon.
 

TRENDING THREADS