The Myths Of Graphics Card Performance: Debunked, Part 1

Page 6 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Jaroslav Jandek

Honorable
Jan 13, 2014
103
0
10,680
@photonboy: you are correct (well said), except:
It works on the principle of data usage: the most used data are allocated in the fastest memory available (VRAM, then RAM, then disk) - the same principle behind Windows virtual memory. In case VRAM is full, a running game will force most of "DWM data" off VRAM (depends on the applications you are running beside your game) - of course, it is still better to run demanding games in full-screen exclusive mode.
 
Sep 22, 2013
482
0
10,810


I may have been exaggerating but its still an older game in terms of graphics, though I think it still looks pretty damn good. Also, it runs on DX9. It was also built with a slightly updated version of the Creation Engine which was used for Fallout 3.

The point was not the age of the game but it's relevance in modern graphics. A game running in DX9 that you can max out and still barely tax a card from a year ago isn't a good comparison in the world of DX11 GPUs, DX11 games, upcoming heavy-graphic titles like Star Citizen, and current titles like BF4, COD:G and Titanfall. Certainly not a good comparison when considering VRAM usage and how you should be choosing your next GPU.
 

spellbinder2050

Distinguished
Sep 7, 2008
175
0
18,680
"The second system's main advantage is more overclocking headroom. Our Core i7-4770K sits at a stable 4.6 GHz on air, while the Core i7-950 can't exceed 4 GHz cooled by water."I've been running my Core I7 950 at 4.0 ghz with a Prolimatech Megahalems. My Vcore was randomly chosen and sits at 1.25v with idle temps around 35-43 degrees, and gaming temps that never exceed 56 degrees. All of this was stress tested with Prime95 and Intel burn test of course. I'm pretty sure I could push it even further. Is there something I'm missing, or am I just lucky?
 

lol13222

Reputable
Feb 22, 2014
1
0
4,510
My reaction time per those links is 42ms for sound and 163 for visual ....something is wrong there or I am better the those pilots :p
 


That is crazy quick. I got 300ms for visual and 160 for audio
 




2x 690's will behave the same as 4 2GB cards not one very fast 4GB card as your post implies.
 
Sep 22, 2013
482
0
10,810


The point wasn't about the number of GPUs, and my post doesn't imply that 2x 2GB cards will = a 4GB card. It states, quite clearly, that 2x 4GB cards will act like 1 4GB card. In the unique case of a 690, which is dual-gpu, it will actually act like 1, very fast 2GPU card with however much ram is found on one card, in this case it's two cards in one, so 2GB.

The point is that his statement in the article is very convoluted. If you have 2 cards with X amount of VRAM each, assuming that they both have equal amount of VRAM, the result will not be 1/2X or 2X, it will just be X.

In the unique situation of a single 690 with 4GB VRAM, each GPU has 2GB dedicated to it's processes, resulting in a 2GB SLI scenario occurring on a single card.

In the case of, say MY setup where I have 2x, single-GPU 770s w/4GB of VRAM, my cards behave like either 1) An 80% faster 770 w/4GB of VRAM (or you could say) 2) Like 2x SLI 770 4GB w/only 4GB of available memory.

Either way, the article is misleading in terms of how VRAM operates in SLI and using a dual-GPU card as an example makes it confusing.
 

Achoo22

Distinguished
Aug 23, 2011
350
2
18,780
The image he shows does not represent an integral multiple of screen refresh rate, nor does a single dropped frame logically translate into a halving of frame rate.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.