HD 2900xt 2gig (thats right, TWO)

[enz660hp]

http://www.engadget.com/2007/0...-2gb-vfx-2000-pro-gpu/

Thoughts? Other than it will cost you an arm, maybe an eye as well to obtain.

 

[JustaGeek]

Totally redundant, unnecessary, and useless for all the 32-bit OS'.

 

[manimal]

If you buy this your e-peen skill gets a +1 bonus on all saving throws.

 

[Lord Banshee]

It is not "Totally redundant, unnecessary" it is a workstation card!

Have you ever did real work, the power and Mem is needed. Also it isn't expenisive to a company doing real work that spending 100's thousands to millions on R&D and/or animation or modeling.

But it would be Totally redundant, unnecessary for gaming though.

 

[JustaGeek]

Originally posted by: Lord Banshee
It is not "Totally redundant, unnecessary" it is a workstation card!

Have you ever did real work, the power and Mem is needed. Also it isn't expenisive to a company doing real work that spending 100's thousands to millions on R&D and/or animation or modeling.

But it would be Totally redundant, unnecessary for gaming though.

The 2900 series cards are not meant for professional applications like animation or modeling.

 

[biostud]

Originally posted by: JustaGeek

Originally posted by: Lord Banshee
It is not "Totally redundant, unnecessary" it is a workstation card!

Have you ever did real work, the power and Mem is needed. Also it isn't expenisive to a company doing real work that spending 100's thousands to millions on R&D and/or animation or modeling.

But it would be Totally redundant, unnecessary for gaming though.

The 2900 series cards are not meant for professional applications like animation or modeling.

The ATi/AMD FireGL line is though, and this "Diamond planning HD 2900 XT-based 2GB VFX 2000 pro GPU" is in this line.

 

[JustaGeek]

Well, as an application based card for a specific program, perhaps it makes sense in a 64-bit environment.

In this case, we can obviously only speculate as to who, why and when will ever need it. Maybe in 2-3 years it will benefit gaming, too?

Anyone with the name of the actual application...?

 

[miker75]

Justageek, you should've really stopped after your first comment...

ATI are bringing out FireGL cards based on the 2000 series GPU's.. (much like they have with nearly every other Radeon chip in the last 3-4 years)..

who or why someone would need it? I could see a lot of use for these cards... and honestly this shouldn't even be an issue.. "gaming" GPU's have been used in high-end cad/design cards for quite some time...Nvidia does the same thing...

I suggest you have a clean pair of shoes on as it seems your foot is heading in the vicinity of your mouth...

 

[Lord Banshee]

justageek,

You really should read the article, it says hd2900 based. This is how Nvidia and ATi has been doing pro card for year and years now. They modify the drivers so certain features are only allowed for pro-cards and cad program take advantage of these features, resulting in a performance increase from 0-400% sometimes even more.

IT is not designed for one application it is designed for "ALL" professional 3D Apps:
3dsmax, Maya : 3d animation/modeling for games and movies
SolidWorks, Unigraphics: Solid modeling for packaging and surface design, like cars or phones

They also can be used for gaming if one wants to but the performance is going to be just as good not better than a HD2900, but mostly a little less, 5%, due to different driver optimizations.

This is a short list but those four apps can cost 5 times or more as much as this card is going to cost so as you can see the price isn't the issue for where the card's market is.

Also what does this have to do with the 32-bit OS and 64-bit OS... I'll tell you, nothing

 

[JustaGeek]

Originally posted by: miker75
Justageek, you should've really stopped after your first comment...

ATI are bringing out FireGL cards based on the 2000 series GPU's.. (much like they have with nearly every other Radeon chip in the last 3-4 years)..

who or why someone would need it? I could see a lot of use for these cards... and honestly this shouldn't even be an issue.. "gaming" GPU's have been used in high-end cad/design cards for quite some time...Nvidia does the same thing...

I suggest you have a clean pair of shoes on as it seems your foot is heading in the vicinity of your mouth...

Who the hell are you...?

I can voice ANY opinion I have, and you should be able to dispute that opinion without being offensive.

Otherwise, you just make yourself look stupid.

Lots of angry people there, I tell ya...

Have a good weekend, too!

 

[miker75]

Originally posted by: JustaGeek

Originally posted by: miker75
Justageek, you should've really stopped after your first comment...

ATI are bringing out FireGL cards based on the 2000 series GPU's.. (much like they have with nearly every other Radeon chip in the last 3-4 years)..

who or why someone would need it? I could see a lot of use for these cards... and honestly this shouldn't even be an issue.. "gaming" GPU's have been used in high-end cad/design cards for quite some time...Nvidia does the same thing...

I suggest you have a clean pair of shoes on as it seems your foot is heading in the vicinity of your mouth...

Who the hell are you...?

I can voice ANY opinion I have, and you should be able to dispute that opinion without being offensive.

Otherwise, you just make yourself look stupid.

Lots of angry people there, I tell ya...

Have a good weekend, too!

Who am I? Look to the left...

You sure can voice any opinion you have!! And I reserve the right to point out that your opinion was completely rubbish..

Make myself look stupid? No.. that's what you did...

Thanks! I'm having a great weekend!

 

[JustaGeek]

Originally posted by: Lord Banshee

Also what does this have to do with the 32-bit OS and 64-bit OS... I'll tell you, nothing

In a 32-bit OS, 2 GB of physical memory is "apportioned" for the applications, and 2 GB for the hardware/system.

If you take 2GB for the VRAM, you will be able to access perhaps 1.5 GB of your RAM, and that makes absolutely no sense (to limit your memory to only 1.5GB.)

And that is a fact for a 32-bit system.

 

[miker75]

Originally posted by: JustaGeek

Originally posted by: Lord Banshee

Also what does this have to do with the 32-bit OS and 64-bit OS... I'll tell you, nothing

In a 32-bit OS, 2 GB of physical memory is "apportioned" for the applications, and 2 GB for the hardware/system.

If you take 2GB for the VRAM, you will be able to access perhaps 1.5 GB of your RAM, and that makes absolutely no sense (to limit your memory to only 1.5GB.)

And that is a fact for a 32-bit system.

If I'm not mistaken.. the 512MB/1GB/2GB of ram on a video card isn't counted towards system memory, and what a 32/64 bit OS "appoints" to applications... (unless of course it's shared.. but that's not what we're talking about here is it)..

 

[JustaGeek]

Originally posted by: miker75

Originally posted by: JustaGeek

Originally posted by: Lord Banshee

Also what does this have to do with the 32-bit OS and 64-bit OS... I'll tell you, nothing

In a 32-bit OS, 2 GB of physical memory is "apportioned" for the applications, and 2 GB for the hardware/system.

If you take 2GB for the VRAM, you will be able to access perhaps 1.5 GB of your RAM, and that makes absolutely no sense (to limit your memory to only 1.5GB.)

And that is a fact for a 32-bit system.

If I'm not mistaken.. the 512MB/1GB/2GB of ram on a video card isn't counted towards system memory, and what a 32/64 bit OS "appoints" to applications... (unless of course it's shared.. but that's not what we're talking about here is it)..

Yes it does:

http://h20331.www2.hp.com/Hpsu...M_w-Windows_08Ap07.pdf

 

[miker75]

Originally posted by: JustaGeek

Originally posted by: miker75

Originally posted by: JustaGeek

Originally posted by: Lord Banshee

Also what does this have to do with the 32-bit OS and 64-bit OS... I'll tell you, nothing

In a 32-bit OS, 2 GB of physical memory is "apportioned" for the applications, and 2 GB for the hardware/system.

If you take 2GB for the VRAM, you will be able to access perhaps 1.5 GB of your RAM, and that makes absolutely no sense (to limit your memory to only 1.5GB.)

And that is a fact for a 32-bit system.

If I'm not mistaken.. the 512MB/1GB/2GB of ram on a video card isn't counted towards system memory, and what a 32/64 bit OS "appoints" to applications... (unless of course it's shared.. but that's not what we're talking about here is it)..

Yes it does:

http://h20331.www2.hp.com/Hpsu...M_w-Windows_08Ap07.pdf

Well look at that... I was wrong

 

[Modelworks]

Hardly useless.
When I do texturing in 3dsmax I can easily use 2GB or more textures in one scene.
The benefit of having those textures on the cards ram versus in system ram is great.

If you go beyond what your video card ram is in textures when working on a scene, the scene will still display.
Its just that when you go to rotate a camera in the display you will get pauses, up to a few seconds, where the scene will freeze and then update as the textures are transferred to the card.

It workable, but annoying if your trying to get something done in a hurry and it requires lots of camera adjustments.
Normally you just turn off any textures that you don't absolutely need at the time, but to have it where you don't have to do that would be nice.

oh, and the 64bit os thing isn't even thought about when it comes to 3d apps.
Almost everyone uses winxp x64 with atleast 4Gb of memory.

 

[Lord Banshee]

yeah me too about 32-bit thing... But i wonder if it will work like suggest in that paper. That paper isn't very technical at all, my guess is there is work around to this. I am not a Comp Eng. so i do not know but i would have thought VRAM would not be mapped 1:1 with physical address space.

About your opinion, well it seems your opinion was based off using this card in a market it wasn't designed for and thats why we backlashed at you

Everyone have a good weekend...

Go Gators

 

[JustaGeek]

Makes sense.

Are you actually using it on a 32-bit Operating system...?

 

[JustaGeek]

Originally posted by: Lord Banshee
yeah me too about 32-bit thing... But i wonder if it will work like suggest in that paper. That paper isn't very technical at all, my guess is there is work around to this. I am not a Comp Eng. so i do not know but i would have thought VRAM would not be mapped 1:1 with physical address space.

About your opinion, well it seems your opinion was based off using this card in a market it wasn't designed for and thats why we backlashed at you

Everyone have a good weekend...

Go Gators

There is no work around - 4 GB is an absolute maximum the 32-bit OS can address/manage.

64-bit OS's are another story - I myself am curious what kind of feedback we can get here.

 

[Lord Banshee]

I don't think anyone has such card, V8650, yet? i can not find a US store that sells them either.

But about price the retail price is stated to be $2799.00. Comparison 3dsmax cost $3495.00 and solidworks cost $4995.00.

When the price of the V8600 the 1GB version cost $1899. So is 900 dollars worth 1GB i say no.

 

[Lord Banshee]

Originally posted by: JustaGeek

There is no work around - 4 GB is an absolute maximum the 32-bit OS can address/manage.

64-bit OS's are another story - I myself am curious what kind of feedback we can get here.

Well if VRAM was made to be serial it would only have to map a certain amount of memory to the address space and serially input and output the data. I see this being possible due to the huge amount of clock speed advantage of GDDR compared to the GPU using it. I am not saying this is the way they do it as that would be a lot of work but it could be done and would solve the issue.

I also do not disagree with your either, if someone is buying top of the line hardware today they better be using a 64-bit OS or it just might be almost pointless to upgrade.

 

[JustaGeek]

See, the thing is that these amounts of Video Memory will become more and more common, and with the abilities of 64-bit OS', in 2-3 years all of us might be looking for cards like that.

Perhaps we need the software and hardware "slightly ahead of our times", but 99% of all users will be perfectly happy with the maximum of 1GB of VRAM and 3GB of RAM in their systems for another 1-2 years.

This thread kinda reminds me of another thread, when someone "jumped in" with 16 GB of RAM, and I thought it was ridiculous. And in terms of a "home user" it definitely was, as we have found and agreed on only 1 application (Photoshop) that can take advantage of maximum of 8GB of RAM.

There will obviously be the exceptions - I myself was using ProEngineer on a Silicon Graphics workstation over 10 years ago, and it would often crash during regeneration of complicated assemblies (especially during rendering). I don't even remember how much RAM or what Video Card I had on this Unix based machine, but today, even the "most economical" computers would beat that one. And it cost ~$30,000, with the annual maintenence/software budget of ~$5,000!

As of today, and for another year, IMHO maximum of 1GB of VRAM, and 4GB of RAM will be sufficient for about 99% of all users - and that includes the "gaming world".

 

[miker75]

Originally posted by: Lord Banshee

...

When the price of the V8600 the 1GB version cost $1899. So is 900 dollars worth 1GB i say no.

I'd wonder if anything over 1GB at this point is worth it. Do any of these users of these apps actually use textures? I thought most things were mostly wireframe or shaded?

Although I have been wrong before...

 

[Lord Banshee]

games modeling and animation use heavy amounts of textures in real time

I (More solid modeling) hardly use textures

 

[JustaGeek]

I just would like to see the developers/programmers learn how to properly manage and address the memory, that being PCI, VRAM and RAM, in the 64-bit environment first.

Until then, we can pack the most expensive hardware in our machines, learn how to make our hardware respond to the 2GB Video Cards and 16GB of RAM, and it will all be totally useless without the proper drivers and other applications.