Results 61 to 68 of 68
19-04-2013, 09:09 PM #61
Last edited by b0rsuk; 19-04-2013 at 09:13 PM.pass
19-04-2013, 09:20 PM #62
As I only use a dated 19" "square" monitor with a native res of 1280x1024, my GTX260 (paired with a Core 2 Quad) has served me incredibly well for the last 3 years and will probably continue to for the next 1 or 2. Sure, it's only DX10 but the minor bling DX11 brings really isn't a huge loss. The only game to really trouble it so far on high settings is BF3, everything else has been smooth as butter.
20-04-2013, 02:58 AM #63
Passmark G3D Mark for 9600GT is 759
for 660 is 4082
of course when your 9600GT runs a game at 30 fps a 660 wont run it at 300 fps. There are limitations to that thing no matter how powerful you gpu. You can sli titans and you won't get 10 times the performance of 2005 gpu in 2005 game. Yet Titans will run a game at 60 fps while your 2005 will crash after first few frames (and not because of drivers or other software related problems)
Last edited by Lukasz; 20-04-2013 at 03:04 AM.
20-04-2013, 10:14 AM #64
- Join Date
- May 2012
Yeah, the Moore's law thing was an estimate. Plus, count the not only the HRz increase, but the chip/gate/core increase.
A Titan has 2688 Cuda cores. A 9800 has 256. That's like 10x the change in actual physical chips and resources. However diminishing returns, overheads and changing demands (DX9 in 2008 and DX11 now) means the actual performance varies greatly. That and limits to OS and other things.
Just to go over those specs...
Card GTX TITAN GPU Engine Specs: 9800 GX2 CUDA Cores 2688 256 (128 per GPU) Base Clock (MHz) 837 600 Boost Clock (MHz) 876 Texture Fill Rate (billion/sec) 187.5 76.8 Memory Clock Gbps 6.0 1 Standard Memory Config 6144 1024 (2x512) Memory Interface GDDR 5 3 Memory Interface Width-bit 384 2x256 Memory Bandwidth (GB/sec) 288.4 128 Transistor number (millions) 7100 1010
Note they don't seem to have clocked the chips much faster, but scaled the size of the die (so quicker/more efficient) and upped the work the chips can do at the same clock speed.
20-04-2013, 10:32 AM #65
- Join Date
- Apr 2013
I couldn't afford under normal circumstances to upgrade this machine. It will be with me for a long while. So all in all it may be a good thing this is an "off" year for hardware. I felt kinda irked when the better video cards came out and the one better desktop processor than mine (3970x) was released. Also, the PS4 comes out this year and spending the kind of cash to upgrade this and buy a Playstation 4 would not mix well.
20-04-2013, 11:01 AM #66
- Join Date
- May 2012
Personally I'd put any cash suggested for a PS4 XboxNeXt to something else. £500 to play a few games, or keep my current setup and play the "old" but new to me games, and use the £500 for something better. ;)
20-04-2013, 12:39 PM #67Nalano's Law - As an online gaming discussion regarding restrictions grows longer, the probability of a post likening the topic to the Democratic People's Republic of Korea approaches one.
Soldant's Law - A person will happily suspend their moral values if they can express moral outrage by doing so.
20-04-2013, 01:59 PM #68
This has been an interesting thread to follow. I was thinking of buying a new Pc or assembling one in the next couple of months. Does that make sense at this juncture?
Even if a new generation of hardware comes out this year I probably won't be able to afford the initial prices. My current pc (built in mid 2009) is holding its own but is starting to struggle with games like BF3, Hitman Absolution, and a few other recent titles...not to mention a couple of recent BSDs. I really want to position myself for Arma 3 and BF4 for example. I have the cash now for a mid-range build and thought about pulling the trigger and then slowly upgrading parts over the next couple of years (GPU refresh for ex.)
amd phenom 955
gtx 470 sc
8 gigs ddr2
Thanks for your thoughts.