Another stats page - Page 2

Panda Man · March 29th, 2007

BAH! Maybe I won't, i missed the part about the 256MB+ recommendation.

screwballl · March 29th, 2007

I was thinking the same thing with my older 9600XT but as soon as I saw X1900 cards I knew it wouldn't go anywhere

Panda Man · March 29th, 2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by screwballl

I was thinking the same thing with my older 9600XT but as soon as I saw X1900 cards I knew it wouldn't go anywhere

Who knows? They are after all, only 125MHz apart (core wise anyways). Of course taking everything into perspective such as pipelines and such

.

sbohdan · March 29th, 2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by Panda Man

Who knows? They are after all, only 125MHz apart (core wise anyways). Of course taking everything into perspective such as pipelines and such

.

hey panda - read the quote (in screwballs post). the 1900 series cards have a totally different core that has 48 pixel shaders. it's not about the clock speed this time - it's about the # of the pixel shaders. your 9600XT has 4 pixel shaders. the 1900 and up has 48

kapish?

besides the pixel shader advantage the 580 core over your cards (RV360) your card's core isn't even supported by the GPU client

Quote:

FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS
GPU and OS support
Which cards are supported?
We now support serveral classes of GPU boards, including X1600, X1800, and X1900 class GPU's from ATI. At the launch, we supported X1900 cards only. X1800 cards do not provide the performance seen in X1900's and so we strongly recommend X1900 class cards (although we now officially support X1800). X1900 and X1800 cards are actually quite different -- they have different processors (R520, R530 vs. the R580 [in the X1900 series]). The R580 makes a huge difference in performance -- its 48 pixel shaders are key, as we use pixel shaders for our computations. Also note that the card should have more than 256MB (i.e. at least 512MB) of RAM, otherwise the GPU client will put a huge load on the client machine (although we do note that the 256MB X1950Pro using PCIe does work reasonably well).

Panda Man · March 30th, 2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by sbohdan

hey panda - read the quote (in screwballs post). the 1900 series cards have a totally different core that has 48 pixel shaders. it's not about the clock speed this time - it's about the # of the pixel shaders. your 9600XT has 4 pixel shaders. the 1900 and up has 48

kapish?

besides the pixel shader advantage the 580 core over your cards (RV360) your card's core isn't even supported by the GPU client

I already figured that out sphincter boy :P

March 29th, 2007	#11
Panda Man Meow means woof in cat. Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Elba, AL Posts: 1,907	Re: Another stats page BAH! Maybe I won't, i missed the part about the 256MB+ recommendation. Intel Core 2 Duo E6420 Conroe @ 2.80GHz Cooler Master GeminII - Thanks Rich and HL! GIGABYTE GA-965P-DS3 (rev. 1.3) EVGA GeForce 8800GTS 320MB @ 726/962 CORSAIR XMS2 4GB (4 x 1GB) DDR2-800 OCZ GameXStream 600W PSU Maxtor 300GB 7200RPM SATA150 16MB cache HDD Seagate 500GB 7200ROM SATA300 16mb cache HDD Sony NEC Optiarc 18X DVD±R DVD Creative Sound Blaster X-Fi XtremeMusic 7.1 ZyXel m-202 802.11g adapter Antec Nine Hundred Creative 5.1 speakers Viewsonic Optiquest q20wb 20" LCD

March 29th, 2007	#12
screwballl Colonel Calamity Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Sandy South Posts: 6,279 Blog Entries: 6	Re: Another stats page I was thinking the same thing with my older 9600XT but as soon as I saw X1900 cards I knew it wouldn't go anywhere Thanks HL and Corsair! My opinions are my own and not representative of this site or its members.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
The whole Internet on this page	Capper	Internet/Networking	1	July 10th, 2008 08:00
Wot's ur CoH Stats page!	Zambini	Gaming	3	June 19th, 2008 15:14
Recommendation Page	halutzparilla	HL Lounge	7	May 13th, 2007 13:14
Cool Folding stats page	vaio	The HL F@H Team	1	March 9th, 2007 17:04
For those that like their stats	vaio	The HL F@H Team	17	March 9th, 2007 13:07