1GB Cards will be High End Next Gen?

U

USMC2Hard4U

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Apr 4, 2003
Messages
6,157
I was wondering if you speculate if 1GB Cards will be the high end for next gen?

I feel that I want 2 - 1GB Cards in SLI / CF would be :cool:

Sure I know its not needed, but I want a 30 inch Display next (weather it be apple or dell) and want to play all my games at its native res :p
 
Sometime in the future we'll see 1 gb video cards, but not anytime soon.
I say we got 1 1/2 to 2 years before they pop up.


Edit: Then again, I could easily be wrong.

J32P2006
 
AppaYipYip said:
ok.
Click to expand...

Thanks for that productive post. You have added much to this topic.



I don't know, I don't think most games even use the 512 VRAM right now so 1 gb would probably be overkill. I do think that R600 will have 1gb of ram though, maybe not the next gen. My next monitor will be 30" also:)
 
HotkeyCC said:
Thanks for that productive post. You have added much to this topic.
Click to expand...


Well he asked us a question, then he answered it. What more is there to say? I posted the first thing that came to my mind. :)

Also, if he were asking a legitimate question I would of course help. However, this is a thread which looks into the future. I highly doubt that there are any "constructive" answers since it's purely for jest.

Ok, for the fun of it, lets speculate what the future of video cards will contain:

1+ Gig VRAM per card.
Socketed GPU's
All GPU's will be on-board
All future MB's will contain socketed GPU's, PPU's, and Sound processing.

How's that?
 
1gb is absolutly and horribly excessive. 512 is exvessive. 256 is alot. 128 is normal.

thats the way i look at it cuz im still on a 128mb card and there isnt a game out there i cant run. so i dont even see the point in 512mb. like the performance gain on the 7800gtx 512 cuz of the extramemory was soo small. overclock a 7800gtx 256 to 7800gt 512 (600mhz?) and you will see maybe a 2% on the 512 increase in 3dmark 06.

so 1gb is outta the question for a long while. im betting we wont see it until the nine series at the erliest, and even then its going to be uber excessive.

really graphics hardware technology is progressing faster then the games their designed to play. i mean its now all a matter of how much work the company wants to be put in if they want the extra polygones they gotta work for months. i mean doom to doom3 was a change in the script all together, now everythings done in 3dstudio max, from low budget not so great graphics games (such as wow, not the low budget part but its not gfx intensive) to the extreemly high quality of DOOM3, which wasnt able to be played at max quality when it came out. although itl be nice when computers are capible of calculating radicals (to give curves). but thats way more then 1gb on board memory needed.

keeping in mind, memory really is growing in powers, 512 is the norm now, and were boarder line 1gb. the new 64bit mem bus allows us something like a max of 3000 gbs. so after 1gb is the norm im betting 2gb will be, followed soon by the release of 2gbs in one stick, on something like a 20nm process (schveet). followed by 4gb beeing the norm and a 4gb stick on 2nm process (uber schveet) etc etc.
 
Talking about 1Gig ram video cards, what happens if you play games with one of these ones? I know they're not designed for video games, but I wonder if the games would play at all or what kind of performance you would get.



0320FireGL7350.jpg


http://aec.cadalyst.com/aec/article/articleDetail.jsp?id=314157http://aec.cadalyst.com/aec/article/articleDetail.jsp?id=314157
 
I posted about that monster card a few days ago (here ), and was wondering the same thing. What exactly is the difference between the workstation Quadro/FireGL cards and the gaming beasts we drool over? I see people have occasional success in modding a card to be a Quadro...why do that?
 
Socketed gpus is a good idea, wiht a socketed chipset, and a scoketed spu socket, so easier upgrades


its really a good idea thareq
 
That FireGL is just a modified X1800XT with a 1gig frame buffer. For PC gaming an X1900 is faster.
 
yeah, same cards, diffrent bioses, and ones made for 3d design and video, the other is made for gaming
 
512 is already being close to a bottleneck on some games, so yeah, I would expect so.
 
its obvious we will see 1gb cards......but cards will get more expensive aswell...but you can imagine ut2007 cant you? :p
 
Considering games are being showcased in quad-sli (UT07), I would say "yes" to the OP. The better current hardware becomes, so improves the graphical abilities of game devs.
 
MiG29TangentBoy said:
What exactly is the difference between the workstation Quadro/FireGL cards and the gaming beasts we drool over? I see people have occasional success in modding a card to be a Quadro...why do that?
Click to expand...

The Quadro mod isn;t so bad, it doesn;t subtract from the D3D functions and adds to the features but in the case of ATi, the drivers for the FireGL really hamper D3D, as they are designed for OpenGL first, with very little consideration to D3D.

Every FireGL I have seen, either converted from a Radeon or original, has had real performance issues with D3D games, and OpenGL games were slower as well, because they work at greater precision in all calculations.

Basically, a way overclocked FireGL would not be as good for games as a Radeon at the same speeds.
 
Yeah I also got a feeling future mobos will include a PPU, maybe sound (more business for creative) and def socketed GPU. The socketed GPU will be interesting especially to see how the implement the GPU's RAM. And of course there will be 1GB of RAM on board w/ 1GHz clock speeds unless there is a major architectural breakthrough which is able to compete a lets say 200MHz card with a 700MHz card but I just dont see it happening. But I really dont know why socketed GPU's becuase I like putting in a card and taking it out..i dont have to worry about bending pins or crap like that. Although i see the logical reason becuase they can run faster. Its kinda cool if you look at boards from back then, to now, and comparing them to future boards. My, how technology evolves fast, yet we still cant find a cure for cancer or AIDS :(
 
Dude, i have a 30 and a single 7900gtx rocks, dont sweat it
 
We won't see it for a while, because we won't even come close to needing it for a while and all it would do is drive cost up.
 
contaminant said:
We won't see it for a while, because we won't even come close to needing it for a while and all it would do is drive cost up.
Click to expand...


thats not how hard ware works my friend. hardware always comes out before you need it or software can utalize it.
 
I hope we have at least a year to go before we hit 1 GB video cards.

1 gig is nice but id rather have a dual gpu with 512mb per core
Click to expand...

That's kind of the way I'd like it as well.
 
lozaning said:
thats not how hard ware works my friend. hardware always comes out before you need it or software can utalize it.
Click to expand...
Yes but ATI and NV should know better than to drive up prices on something that is not at all needed. It's clear that they already could have 1GB cards, but 512 is still working perfectly, we will have 1GB before we need it, sure, but we won't need it for a long while and it will be some time from now before we start to see it.
 
When textures and other graphic data start getting big enough to fill up the RAM, then 1GB cards will happen. Right now, most of the RAM on your card is filled with the magical pixie dust, though I know Quake 4 has an option to use insanely high-res textures.
 
movax said:
When textures and other graphic data start getting big enough to fill up the RAM, then 1GB cards will happen. Right now, most of the RAM on your card is filled with the magical pixie dust, though I know Quake 4 has an option to use insanely high-res textures.
Click to expand...
doom3 and quake4 dont really look any different in ultra mode. i dont understand why its called ultra mode since it only moves the af to 8x. i cant tell any difference in doom3 at all. i took screenshots and they look exactly the same.
 
MiG29TangentBoy said:
I posted about that monster card a few days ago (here ), and was wondering the same thing. What exactly is the difference between the workstation Quadro/FireGL cards and the gaming beasts we drool over? I see people have occasional success in modding a card to be a Quadro...why do that?
Click to expand...

The drivers/hardware are aimed at absolutley perfect representation, no optimizations that sacrifice IQ for speed, they actually, usually suck for gaming because of that..
Some people mod the Nv cards to quadros, because if the mod is successful, they have just turned a $400 game card into a $700 or more workstation card.. If you have need of a workstation card that can really be a help to the wallet..
 
lozaning said:
thats not how hard ware works my friend. hardware always comes out before you need it or software can utalize it.
Click to expand...

Exactly. Look at SLI compared to Quad SLI. At first we couldnt even utilize SLI (its gotten a LOT better) to its potential and then they released Quad SLI. Like, work with getting the max out of 2 cards first before working with 4.
 
contaminant said:
Yes but ATI and NV should know better than to drive up prices on something that is not at all needed. It's clear that they already could have 1GB cards, but 512 is still working perfectly, we will have 1GB before we need it, sure, but we won't need it for a long while and it will be some time from now before we start to see it.
Click to expand...

uhh we dont need 512, nor do we need 256, as i said in a previous post i can run everything out there on my 128mb card.
 
You don't "need" anything more than a 6600GT to run most of today's games. Of course, to run these games, you have to dial down settings quite a bit....But we WILL eventually fully utilize 512MB of VRAM, Doom III already does. However, to my knowledge many games do not. But because game engines are forward-looking (that is, they are designed to beat the crap out of current high-end hardware) they are created to enable new features and new goodies on hardware that does not yet exist. In the same way that Ultra Quality on Doom III's engine was prepared to use 512MB of memory when it became availible, some games will require 1GB to enable their highest-end features.
 
trek554 said:
doom3 and quake4 dont really look any different in ultra mode. i dont understand why its called ultra mode since it only moves the af to 8x. i cant tell any difference in doom3 at all. i took screenshots and they look exactly the same.
Click to expand...

They make huge differences in lighting, just go to ultra mode and use the flashlight a while, then go back to high mode, you will see in ultra the shadows are real time on everything, in high mode they are not.
 
MrWizard6600 said:
uhh we dont need 512, nor do we need 256, as i said in a previous post i can run everything out there on my 128mb card.
Click to expand...


I have to disagree here, try AA with a 30 inch monitor @2560x1600 on a game that supports using 512 and your greatful to have a 512 card.
 
USMC2Hard4U said:
I was wondering if you speculate if 1GB Cards will be the high end for next gen?

I feel that I want 2 - 1GB Cards in SLI / CF would be :cool:

Sure I know its not needed, but I want a 30 inch Display next (weather it be apple or dell) and want to play all my games at its native res :p
Click to expand...

If by next gen you mean several years away, then yes. 512 megs is still ridiculously expensive and it's been out for a while. Wait for 512 to become more prevalent and then expect 1 gig to come out.
 
trek554 said:
doom3 and quake4 dont really look any different in ultra mode. i dont understand why its called ultra mode since it only moves the af to 8x. i cant tell any difference in doom3 at all. i took screenshots and they look exactly the same.
Click to expand...

And don't forget that in Ultra Mode, textures are fully uncompressed.
 
Xilikon said:
And don't forget that in Ultra Mode, textures are fully uncompressed.
Click to expand...
what does that actually mean? i still wish we could force 16x af but that option is greyed out in the doom3 profile within the nvidia control panel.
 
Don't forget all those people who will buy the 6600 LE with 1GB of video RAM and wonder why their games are so slow.

The amount of Video RAM only matters if your Texture/Vertex/Color Data becomes too large to fit into whatever amount of RAM your video card has.

If the data all fits in 64MB of RAM, then it doesn't matter if your video card has 658 terrabytes of RAM, it would not improve your video performance or quality over the exact same GPU with only 64MB of RAM.

Who cares how much RAM your video card has, as long as it is enough for the game/resolution you are playing at.

==>Lazn
 
i want a mobo with 4 socketed gpu sockets, 2 socketed cpu sockets, and 16 banks of ddr3 512 sticks.

why put a gpu on a card anymore? ATX?
 
Lazn_Work said:
Don't forget all those people who will buy the 6600 LE with 1GB of video RAM and wonder why their games are so slow.

The amount of Video RAM only matters if your Texture/Vertex/Color Data becomes too large to fit into whatever amount of RAM your video card has.

==>Lazn
Click to expand...

Ram size also makes a difference in high res antialiasing but I haven't seen a big memory induced issue sicne 256MB became the standard. :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top