JavaFox

Okay, as I see it, stupid people have two major problems when it comes to video cards.

One, they assume that the more memory, the better. This is one of my biggest pet peeves. I don't know how many times during the course of the day I have to fucking tell some stupid redneck that, really, the amount of RAM really doesn't determine what makes a card fast. I sigh loudly, look them in the eye and say "After 32MB, STOP considering RAM. It really does not matter. 64MB, maybe -- but just because a card has 128MB doesn't mean it's faster than one with 64MB." It's the speed of the RAM and the speed of the chipset that matters, not the amount of RAM, st00pid

---
On a side note, people seem to think RAM in general is a miracle worker. They always bring their 300MHz Celerons to me and expect more RAM to make it perform like my system. Somebody teach people the LAW OF DIMINISHING RETURNS! The higher you go, the less of a difference there is between each step. 64MB to 128MB? Significant, definitely. 128MB to 256MB? I'd notice. But 256MB to 512MB? 512MB to 1GB? Only if you're video editing. It won't make your Celeron perform like an Athlon, DAMN IT!
---

And two, they assume that the higher the model number of something is, the better the cards is. Case in point: the GeForce4MX vs the GeForce3. Enough said.

In an ideal world, it would be painful to be stupid.

Midnight_sky

are you new to computers or just slightly retarded? ill guess the latter.

more memory is better, otherwise we would still all be on 1 meg video cards, more memory means possibly higher texturing and detail for future games, speed is not related, make your mind up. your first paragraph contradicts itself. speed, or better? better for sure. as for speed, depends on the ram clocking, bga etc.

your side note paragraph is also quite ludicrous but at least it gave me quite a smirk in work, my co engineers have actually printed your posting out and are going to email it to http://www.dickheadswithhardware.com.

your "law of diminishing returns" statement, didnt you nick that statement from someone else in here who was flaming you last week.

And btw the geforce4MX is nearer in spec to a geforce II ultra, not a geforce III.

while its entertaining to read your postings, and im sure you are the driverheaven "Joker", I recommend you go post this faeces in a dedicated hardware forum section to give the members a laugh, then you will see REAL flaming.

and btw people bring their celerons to you? well I advise next time you stick them in your mouth to stop the crap pouring out. do you even know what one looks like? no its not the thing hanging off your head covering your eyes, thats your dick.

and I think btw, your ideal world for you is already quite painful.

Yeti

Oh god...Midnight_sky over there really missed the point. :
Oh and i am very seriously led to think that this is a troll for one of our dear friends (although i'm not gonna speculate as to which one ) (c'mon... 2 posts and you were here last week ??... suspicious!!!!) :
In any case... i can agree with JavaFox... ram doesn't necessarily matter... But i don't agree about the specifics. sorry

IMHO (in my humble opinion) the proper amount of ram for a vidcard is 64MB (for 1024x768 with ample room for textures, 32 just aint enough ... sry). And as for sys ram...i HAVE seen a significant difference between 256 and 512. (got a 96, 256 and 512 system... there is a NICE boost).

I'm done for the while.

__________________
--Oh lord not again

Malus

Um, Java was refering to how memory has nothing to do with the speed of the card. He doesn't contradict himself. For an engineer, your reading comprehension skills are lacking.

What's so funny about that? It's actually true. People think buying a stick of RAM makes your computer a lot faster. Java was refering to how people put RAM is a 300 mhz system and expect it to perform like a 2.0 ghz system.

Again, your reading comprehension skills are lacking. He said that people think higher numbers are always better, where in this case it isn't. We wasn't comparing the specs, he was stating how a higher number doesn't always signify newer techonology or faster speeds.

I've seen five year old that have a better vocabulary than you. You're a disgrace to all engineers, you are not even fit to wallow in their shit. Perhaps you should learn to comprehend what he is trying to say instead being the fucking little troll that you like to be.

I'm not sure if that flame is worth posting, but what the hell, maybe I'll get flamed back.

__________________
quad (FreeBSD/amd64 8-CURRENT): Intel Q6600 - Asus P5E-VM HDMI - 2x2 GB Kingston PC6400 DDR2 Ram - Seagate 320GB 7200RPM HD - 2xSeagate 1TB 7200RPM HD in RAID 1 via ZFS - Lite-On 20x DVD Multi Recorder - Coolermaster Centurion 5

router (FreeBSD/amd64 8-CURRENT): Intel E4500 - Intel D945GCNL - 2 GB PC6400 Mushkin Ram - Lite-On 48x24x48x16 - Seagate 320GB 7200RPM HD - Silverstone SST-SG02-F

wanderer (FreeBSD/i386 7-CURRENT): Lenovo Thinkpad T61p

mini (OS X 10.5): Intel Core 2 Duo @ 1.8Ghz, 4 GB Mushkin PC5400 Ram - Headroom MicroDAC

Portable sound: Rockboxed iPod Video -> Westone UM2's
Not-So-Portable Sound: Headroon MicroDAC -> Singlepower PPX3-SLAM -> Grado RS-1's or Beyerdynamic DT-880's
Very-Not-Portable-Sound: Squeezebox v3 -> Denon AVR-1507 -> B&W 683's & Sunfire HRS-10

Yeti

Oh he's not an engineer.... lol LOL

__________________
--Oh lord not again

JavaFox

You totally missed my point. Which is fine -- considering how obtuse and ridiculous your post was, one can only conclude that you suffer from a severe mental impairment. And my heart goes out to you; it really does.

But perhaps I was unclear in my explanation? Surely I cannot place all the blame on you. So allow me to explain.

While we could debate the virtues of 512MB over 256MB ad nauseam, the undeniable fact of the matter is that we see diminishing returns. Now, granted, the Law of Diminishing Returns is an economic principle, but I can still use it to illustrate my point. I'll explain that law for you, in the most colloquial and simplified language I can muster. The Law of Diminishing Returns means, basically, the more you have of one thing --disregarding every other variable-- the less of a difference it makes. The less bang for your buck you get. Do you understand? What this means, assclown, is that the difference between an upgrade from 512MB over 256MB is less significant and does less for performance than an upgrade to 128MB over 64MB. Do you understand this point?

Perhaps my first paragraph was confusing to underdeveloped scum such as your self. The point was --and I most clearly stated this-- that RAM on a videocard ceases to be an indicator of performance after 32MB. I will perhaps modify this statement to 64MB, but the fact of the matter is still the same -- RAM, while important, is not the thing that determines the performance of a videocard. Are you saying that my GeForce3 Ti 200 with 64MB is about on par with an ATi Rage Fury Maxx with the same amount of RAM? Of course not. RAM is important, and if you don't have 32MB you'll be hurtin' -- but more RAM does not always make a card better. A 128MB GF2MX is still a GF2MX.

It's a bit like saying my car is faster than yours because I've got a full tank of gas and you're running on half a tank. If you can grasp that I'm using those things as examples. I'm not literally talking about cars, Forrest.



This statement is so utterly stupid I don't even know where to begin to start. Look, Midnight_sky, if you don't grasp basic arguments and don't understand me when I throw points out there, then maybe you should scoot off to a forum more suited to your... uh.. special needs, huh?

But I'm a reasonable man, and I don't mind explaining myself, even to invalids. Sit down, kid -- I'll teach you something. For starters, let's just reiterate what I said: "And two, they assume that the higher the model number of something is, the better the cards is. Case in point: the GeForce4MX vs the GeForce3. Enough said."

Okay, Midnight_sky, it's kind of like this. One is bigger than two, right? I mean, you'd rather have one piece of candy than two. You understand? Let me know if I'm going too quick for you. Okay, so most people think that two is better than one, right? But think... remember your favorite movie, Land Before Time. Yes, the one about dinos! Oooh, you're such a smartie. Now, remember how Land Before Time was a lot more funner than Land Before Time II? You remember? Goood! That's kind of what Uncle JavaFox is trying to say, sweetie -- some people think things with bigger numbers are better but in the case of the Land Before Time, or in the case of the GeForces, they're wrong. You get that?

I wasn't pitting the GF4MX against the GF3 in a performance test, I was simplying stating that people have a nasty habit of assuming the former is better than the latter. I used the phrase "case in point" to say "Hey, here's an example that illustrates my point."

Yeah, I'm proud of you, that was a lot of reading! Yes it was! Shall we go get ice cream now?

Zardon

my my, this is like battle of the egos in here

Malus

You bastard, Java, you repeated what I said! You just spent some time in the thesaurus while I tried to bullshit as quickly as possible.

__________________
quad (FreeBSD/amd64 8-CURRENT): Intel Q6600 - Asus P5E-VM HDMI - 2x2 GB Kingston PC6400 DDR2 Ram - Seagate 320GB 7200RPM HD - 2xSeagate 1TB 7200RPM HD in RAID 1 via ZFS - Lite-On 20x DVD Multi Recorder - Coolermaster Centurion 5

router (FreeBSD/amd64 8-CURRENT): Intel E4500 - Intel D945GCNL - 2 GB PC6400 Mushkin Ram - Lite-On 48x24x48x16 - Seagate 320GB 7200RPM HD - Silverstone SST-SG02-F

wanderer (FreeBSD/i386 7-CURRENT): Lenovo Thinkpad T61p

mini (OS X 10.5): Intel Core 2 Duo @ 1.8Ghz, 4 GB Mushkin PC5400 Ram - Headroom MicroDAC

Portable sound: Rockboxed iPod Video -> Westone UM2's
Not-So-Portable Sound: Headroon MicroDAC -> Singlepower PPX3-SLAM -> Grado RS-1's or Beyerdynamic DT-880's
Very-Not-Portable-Sound: Squeezebox v3 -> Denon AVR-1507 -> B&W 683's & Sunfire HRS-10

JavaFox

Malus, I was typing that up while you were.

I have no interest in taking credit for your thoughts.

Yeti

Well, in any case... Midnight whats-his-name ran... he won't be coming back under that name again ... Wonder who controlled that puppet eh?

!!!!! Hey Zardon? I know this is bastardly evil, but can you check to see if Midnight's ip is identical to any of the other posters round here? LOL ---- feel free to say no!... its a thouroughly disgusting idea anyway.

__________________
--Oh lord not again

Silentst2000

I agree.
No its not.
That or he's an intelidiot who thinks more numbers is better.
[SIZE=xx-small]er wait...[/SIZE]
No you wern't...he's just a moron.
Sure you can. Quit being nice.
Of couse you can...512megs is CLEARLY better no matter what the case...
Well said.
lol
My 1.5ghz p4 with sdram is faster than your xp @ 1.466 ghz with ddr ram because I have 44 mhz higher than yours.
wow your getting more and more pissed off as you get into this?
You should have started the first post out as that and you wouldn't have this problem.
Good analagy(sp)
I'll bet he will dispute that. And you forgot gump...as we all know how he is...You just have to be real specific.
well that statement is true...its just off base. And it's missing the point.
sure fooled me.
No, no you don't...
Wow he must be a special "invalid" now?
I still think nvidia should carry on the geforce name for idiots like him. Oops off topic.
Don't bring land before times into this please. The first one made me cry as a kid. It was sad.
I had to re-read what you said...I almost though you did...for a second.
That is true.
LOL
Almost brings tears to my eyes....................
Can I come? Can you buy?

WOW i'm never doing this again.

__________________
P4@2.4ghz
Radeon 9700pro
DDR 400
Nuff said

Silentst2000

Thank god

__________________
P4@2.4ghz
Radeon 9700pro
DDR 400
Nuff said

Yeti

You replying to yourself now???

Jeez... we need a Silentist forum Eh, guys? -LOL

__________________
--Oh lord not again

Ryoko

really bored, huh?

Silentst2000

Yeah.

__________________
P4@2.4ghz
Radeon 9700pro
DDR 400
Nuff said

Silentst2000

You big baby quit crying.

__________________
P4@2.4ghz
Radeon 9700pro
DDR 400
Nuff said

Silentst2000

It's all your fault JERK!













[SIZE=xx-small]Ok ill stop.[/SIZE]

__________________
P4@2.4ghz
Radeon 9700pro
DDR 400
Nuff said

Ryoko

thank you. that was getting freaky weird.

Malus

I was just kidding. You know, great minds think alike.

__________________
quad (FreeBSD/amd64 8-CURRENT): Intel Q6600 - Asus P5E-VM HDMI - 2x2 GB Kingston PC6400 DDR2 Ram - Seagate 320GB 7200RPM HD - 2xSeagate 1TB 7200RPM HD in RAID 1 via ZFS - Lite-On 20x DVD Multi Recorder - Coolermaster Centurion 5

router (FreeBSD/amd64 8-CURRENT): Intel E4500 - Intel D945GCNL - 2 GB PC6400 Mushkin Ram - Lite-On 48x24x48x16 - Seagate 320GB 7200RPM HD - Silverstone SST-SG02-F

wanderer (FreeBSD/i386 7-CURRENT): Lenovo Thinkpad T61p

mini (OS X 10.5): Intel Core 2 Duo @ 1.8Ghz, 4 GB Mushkin PC5400 Ram - Headroom MicroDAC

Portable sound: Rockboxed iPod Video -> Westone UM2's
Not-So-Portable Sound: Headroon MicroDAC -> Singlepower PPX3-SLAM -> Grado RS-1's or Beyerdynamic DT-880's
Very-Not-Portable-Sound: Squeezebox v3 -> Denon AVR-1507 -> B&W 683's & Sunfire HRS-10

dipstick

When half of the memory of my R8500 died(only 32mb where still working) it wasn't any slower, but it did choke at high rez. Specificaly 1280 and above.

reno

dumb!

Anyone remember the padshop demo for Quake3? The one that will practically fill up an entire 64 megs with textures? I remember turning off compressed textures in Q3 for that demo and dropping a full 20fps average, then I remember seeing a ti200 (clocked at 235/490 with 128meg of ram get an average 92fps on a 1.6A northwood compared to my 85fps on a 1.7 willy and 64meg ti500 (compressed textures, 32bit, 1280x1024, both shuttle av-40s on pc2100 ram; yes cache matters too, but to outperform me by that much, it's based on video memory much more unless 256k of cache really helps performance that much)

Fast memory in large amounts is always better than fast memory in okay amounts. 256meg of SDRAM on a pentium 3 750 to 512meg also shows about a 5% increase in performance in 3dmark2001.

I agree, a Geforce2 with 256meg of ram will see "diminishing returns" past 64megs, but to play high resolution, high texture quality games with antialiasing, 128 is almost too little. Look at the performance drop at 1600x1200 with 4xS AA on a ti4600...come on guys. Since when has "an okay number" been good enough for the speed crazed AthlonXp/Northwood crowd?

Agh!

If I gave you a Klipsch system with half the wattage of normal (RMS 100watts instead of RMS 200watts for a 4.1 system, and yes the klipsch 4.1s are only 200watts RMs/400watts peak for 30 seconds) you would blow off the system like it was a piece of junk, or labtec. I think you'd do likewise if I gave you an XP +2100 with 256meg of ram with a Geforce4 w/ 64megs of ram. Think people! Think!

Silentst2000

Well that and I didn't want spam patrol on me.

__________________
P4@2.4ghz
Radeon 9700pro
DDR 400
Nuff said

Billy

man I speak for most of us when I say "just shut the fuck up!!!!!!!", get a fucking life, you remind me of the kid in school everyone beatsthe shit out of, for being such a self absorbed opinionated little prick.

at least on a forum you can hide behind your oxford hard back dictionary, in the real world you would have your teeth punched out already. go back to sitting on your own at lunch time reading star trek novels and reading up on new technology, trying to fill the void of your everyday existance as the pretty girls walk you by, laughing at your puny little body, as you wonder how you will get one interested in you, and why your last conversation with the girl of your dreams about the pros and cons of watercooling and your geek talk didnt interest them.

you bore the tits off me kiddo. stop patronising people obviously more intelligent than you. (most of the member list).

at least this thread was interesting, seeing your name alongside "idiots and videocards" certainly rang true, I thought it was going to self-autobiographical.

Silentst2000

quit making different user names then.

__________________
P4@2.4ghz
Radeon 9700pro
DDR 400
Nuff said

Necrosis

Are you sure about this??? I had this same problem and it turned out to be a driver issue. I had to reinstall my OS to get the ram back.

JavaFox

Billy, just because you need a dictionary to understand my posts doesn't mean I need one to write them. Really, Billy, if you had graduated high school, you'd know a few words, too. Instead you resort to inventing your own words like "self-autobiographical." I can't help it if you lack verbal prowess, Billy -- you should've paid attention in class instead of fantasizing about having your professors pound you in the ass. I'm sorry you don't know how to place a comma, or how to use an apostrophe; I really am.


6' 1", 150 pounds -- I may be a little skinny, but I am not puny, thank you very much. At any rate, I don't make a habit out of discussing my love life, but mine is far more fulfilling and active than yours. And no, Billy, the terrific orgasms you've had with your vibrator don't count.

Ryoko

you know, some people actually pay attention in english class. that would be like saying a dingy was travelling at 12 knots an hour. oh, wait, you didn't get that either. well, putting it as simply as i can, autobiography means biography written by the author about himself. i hope that was simple enough.

dipstick

I'm pretty sure it's dead. I mean it runs like it has 32mb, definitely notice the difference at high rez. I have also heard of other people reinstalling and getting it back but I just don't have the time for all that. I would understand if it was just reporting 32mb but this thing chokes at high rez.

Ryoko

might wanna update your sig, eh?

i recently had one of my ram chips on my $450 gf3 melt, but the card still overclocks fairly well and has all 64MB register

dipstick

I have already ordered a preship RMA from ATi. Been over a week and still waiting