# ATI Radeon HD 2900 XT DDR4 1GB Graphics Card



## DaMulta (Jun 9, 2007)

LINK



> Extreme PC Exclusive SI Diamond Radeon HD2900XT 825Mhz Core | 1GB 2100Mhz DDR4 PCI-E DX10 /2 DVI/ HDTV/ AVIVO/ HDMI/ AC3 5.1 Sound
> 
> Our Price: $649.95
> 
> ...


----------



## Agility (Jun 9, 2007)

.....source?


----------



## DaMulta (Jun 9, 2007)

http://www.extreme-pc.ca

link is on the top.....


----------



## Agility (Jun 9, 2007)

Omg that's nuts. Imagine 2 1GB in crossfire O.O


----------



## TonyStark (Jun 9, 2007)

Agility said:


> Omg that's nuts. Imagine 2 1GB in crossfire O.O



OMG you know what is even more nuts? Two 8800GTX's in SLI.


----------



## Wile E (Jun 9, 2007)

TonyStark said:


> OMG you know what is even more nuts? Two 8800GTX's in SLI.


I doubt that.


----------



## WarEagleAU (Jun 9, 2007)

Not really, we've seen the 8800GTX. Id like to see what these offer.


----------



## TonyStark (Jun 9, 2007)

Wile E said:


> I doubt that.



Look at the benchmarks, sparky. The GTX's are faster, cooler, quieter, and less power-hungry. 




WarEagleAU said:


> Not really, we've seen the 8800GTX. Id like to see what these offer.



More heat, more power, more noise, slightly faster performance than the 512MB version -- but still no match for the GTX.


----------



## Wile E (Jun 9, 2007)

TonyStark said:


> Look at the benchmarks, sparky. The GTX's are faster, cooler, quieter, and less power-hungry.


Do you have a link to the 1GB GDDR4 version benchmarks?


----------



## Zubasa (Jun 9, 2007)

TonyStark said:


> More heat, more power, more noise, slightly faster performance than the 512MB version -- but still no match for the GTX.


Price - Performance wise the GTX is not impressive what so ever


----------



## TonyStark (Jun 9, 2007)

Zubasa said:


> Price - Performance wise the GTX is not impressive what so ever



True ... price/performance ratio is best in mid-range cards such as the x1950 PRO. If you want the best performance, expect to pay premium.


----------



## mandelore (Jun 9, 2007)

i linked this on my thread  http://forums.techpowerup.com/showthread.php?t=32491

in crossfire /  sli, only sli'd 8800 ultras beat it, but at an insane price hehe


----------



## hv43082 (Jun 9, 2007)

Alright someone buy it and benchmark it for the rest of us.  I can provide the benchmark for the 8800GTX and even SLI.  Remember, 3Dmark means nothing compared to real game play and performance.  Hell I think either Anandtech, THG, HardOCP, or VR-zone will get their reviews in soon enough.


----------



## DaMulta (Jun 9, 2007)

They have benchmarks on that site. The Ultra SLI scored only 200 points more.


----------



## DOM (Jun 9, 2007)

ATI Radeon HD 2900 XT DDR4 1GB 
http://www.iamxtreme.net/video/hd2900xt/hd2900xt1gb_17.PNG

Nvidia 8800GTX Ultra 
http://www.coolaler.com.tw/coolalercbb//WINFAST8800ULTRASLI/3D06_3.gif


Also the Ultra is OCed and the XT is @default


----------



## mandelore (Jun 9, 2007)

that xt really is a monster! im gonna get me one  got my folks in the USA atm and gonna get them to try and track one down after the 14th

also, what ya thinks gonna happen to that xt score with some improvements and tweaking on the drivers?
im hoping a decent boost, but price for price, the 1gb xt is great, the ultra rocks too, but for so much more money


----------



## Pinchy (Jun 9, 2007)

DOM_ATI_X800XL_PCI-E said:


> ATI Radeon HD 2900 XT DDR4 1GB
> http://www.iamxtreme.net/video/hd2900xt/hd2900xt1gb_17.PNG
> 
> Nvidia 8800GTX Ultra
> ...



Isnt that one Ultra vs two 2900's tho :S?


----------



## DOM (Jun 9, 2007)

No its CF vs SIL

For a comparison, here is the Nvidia 8800GTX Ultra in SLI score ($1880 + tax CND in GPUs):

3Dmark06 701/1163 SLi.............19819


----------



## Dippyskoodlez (Jun 9, 2007)

Agility said:


> Omg that's nuts. Imagine 2 1GB in crossfire O.O



Doesn't matter, nothing can use the memory. 

Its like using a 1000hp car with tires only capable of 40mph. Yeah the engine can go faster, but you don't have the tires(GAMES) to use the speed!

GPU memory is purely e-peen and bragging rights now. It really is useless. Now, if they get the low end cards to catch up, games might start using that much.


----------



## Pinchy (Jun 9, 2007)

Dippyskoodlez said:


> Doesn't matter, nothing can use the memory.
> 
> Its like using a 1000hp car with tires only capable of 40mph. Yeah the engine can go faster, but you don't have the tires(GAMES) to use the speed!



Yeah, if you have 2GB of RAM, 256mb of video memory is probably enough. Nothing would use more than 512mb atm.


----------



## Chewy (Jun 9, 2007)

big screen with theses new cards features of 24AF and like 16AA newer dx10 games willl prob use more memory.. though like my 256mb 1900gt can handle practically any dx9 game maxed (-Oblivion completly maxed) @ 17" monitor resolution that was when I had my card maxed. I think the 512mb 2900xt will be like that.. just enough, might need some oc down the road.


----------



## Dippyskoodlez (Jun 9, 2007)

Chewy said:


> big screen with theses new cards features of 24AF and like 16AA newer dx10 games willl prob use more memory.. though like my 256mb 1900gt can handle practically any dx9 game maxed (-Oblivion completly maxed), I think the 512mb 2900xt will be like that.. just enough might need some oc down the road.



I'd be impressed if a game available actually made *functional* use of 512mb. Letalone >512. Theres no market for it, so game designers won't bother, unless its for bragging rights.


----------



## Wile E (Jun 9, 2007)

Dippyskoodlez said:


> I'd be impressed if a game available actually made *functional* use of 512mb. Letalone >512. Theres no market for it, so game designers won't bother, unless its for bragging rights.


What about people gaming on those 30" monster monitors from the likes of Apple, Dell, etc.?


----------



## Chewy (Jun 9, 2007)

even when full blown dx10 games come out? I can just speculate xD. damm I was just thinking about mabe going with this card though I shouldnt drop all my money on a video card  ahwell I think I wait it out a bit more.

 I thought that at 1950x1200 (24" monitor) resolution everything maxed on a dx10 game it might just ask for more memory than 512.


----------



## theonetruewill (Jun 9, 2007)

Large memory is only needed for very high resolution - hence why there is no point getting a X1950Pro for example, with 512MB's. It simply isn't powerful enough to work at resoltuions that require that amount of memory and thus is utterly pointless.

However in the future I believe the multiple texture samples in DX10 will require more memory and thus it will be needed. Also the 2900XT is far more powerful than most GPU's. On paper anyway.


----------



## Wile E (Jun 9, 2007)

theonetruewill said:


> Large memory is only needed for very high resolution - hence why there is no point getting a X1950Pro for example, with 512MB's. It simply isn't powerful enough to work at resoltuions that require that amount of memory and thus is utterly pointless.


Right, that's why I mentioned the 30" displays. 2650x1600.

I'm willing to bet that 1GB frame buffer would come in handy at that res with DX10 games.


----------



## x800professor (Jun 9, 2007)

theonetruewill said:


> Large memory is only needed for very high resolution - hence why there is no point getting a X1950Pro for example, with 512MB's. It simply isn't powerful enough to work at resoltuions that require that amount of memory and thus is utterly pointless.
> 
> However in the future I believe the multiple texture samples in DX10 will require more memory and thus it will be needed. Also the 2900XT is far more powerful than most GPU's. On paper anyway.



Well...mine was using it for something.  I averaged 100MB free of the 512MB while playing oblivion on my MSI X1950PRO 512.


----------



## theonetruewill (Jun 9, 2007)

x800professor said:


> Well...mine was using it for something.  I averaged 100MB free of the 512MB while playing oblivion on my MSI X1950PRO 512.



But it wouldn't have needed it. Just 256 would have been fine.


----------



## Wile E (Jun 9, 2007)

theonetruewill said:


> But it wouldn't have needed it. Just 256 would have been fine.


I don't quite follow your logic here, theone. He already stated that it was using over 400MB of the frame buffer. 400 is clearly more than 256.

EDIT: Please note, I don't intend for this to sound rude or harsh in any way.


----------



## Dippyskoodlez (Jun 9, 2007)

Wile E said:


> Right, that's why I mentioned the 30" displays. 2650x1600.
> 
> I'm willing to bet that 1GB frame buffer would come in handy at that res with DX10 games.



This card can play games at 2650x1600 with aa/af?!!

Dear god, get me a wet nap, I think I made a mess.


Yeah, I doubt you're going to be pulling decent framerates at that resolution.

Though, better luck finding a game that supports it! lol.


----------



## Wile E (Jun 9, 2007)

Dippyskoodlez said:


> Yeah, I doubt you're going to be pulling decent framerates at that resolution.


That's what Crossfire is for. lol


----------



## DaMulta (Jun 9, 2007)

Dippyskoodlez said:


> This card can play games at 2650x1600 with aa/af?!!
> 
> Dear god, get me a wet nap, I think I made a mess.
> 
> ...



You never know untill you try it.


----------



## theonetruewill (Jun 9, 2007)

Wile E said:


> I don't quite follow your logic here, theone. He already stated that it was using over 400MB of the frame buffer. 400 is clearly more than 256.
> 
> EDIT: Please note, I don't intend for this to sound rude or harsh in any way.



OK what I said was very over-simplified. Thus you've been able to pick flaws in it.
However, to put it a little more expertly;
There isn't much point using a 512MB mid-range card for current games as "most of the time" games will never use that amount of memory unless you game at very high resolutions (1920x1200 an up). However a X1950 Pro's GPU is not powerful enough to power this resolution anyway. 256MB's is enough to power any game (DX9.0c) at lower resolutions so in a DX9.0c card I find it futile. However I also feel that the the 2900XT's 1GB maybe slight overkill. However I've not studied DX10 fully enough to actually give a fully reasoned argument on this so I merely mention it. On the ohter hand in the future when DX10 games that are as complicated and textured as Oblivion was for DX9.0c, then maybe the full 1GB maybe utilised or even required.

A little conclusion
DX9.0 games - 128MB's should be fine
DX9.0c games - 256MB's should be fine
DX10 games - Not enough knowledge for this, but 512MB should probably be fine.

Oh and no offense taken at all - you merely pointed out the flaw in my over-simplification.


----------



## Dippyskoodlez (Jun 9, 2007)

Wile E said:


> That's what Crossfire is for. lol



If a game is using 400mb now, upping the framerate I doubt will magically "enlarge" textures to double that even, so why would you need 2Gb?


Texture memory is only useful if you have higher quality textures to upgrade to. If you have textures designed for 1600x1200, and stretch it to 3200x2400, you shouldn't see an increase.... because there are no higher quality textures to use. Its simply going to have to stretch the 1600x1200 textures.

I also doubt you'll see a decent framerate at that resolution though. I would love to see someone try.


----------



## Wile E (Jun 9, 2007)

Dippyskoodlez said:


> If a game is using 400mb now, upping the framerate I doubt will magically "enlarge" textures to double that even, so why would you need 2Gb?
> 
> 
> Texture memory is only useful if you have higher quality textures to upgrade to. If you have textures designed for 1600x1200, and stretch it to 3200x2400, you shouldn't see an increase.... because there are no higher quality textures to use. Its simply going to have to stretch the 1600x1200 textures.
> ...


The 400MB comment was in reference to Oblivion.

I was hinting more towards a heavy duty DX10 game. Tho I doubt 2GB would be necessary, the extra gpu could go a long way towards making 2650x1600 playable.

Regardless, it's all speculation at this point, anyway.


----------



## theonetruewill (Jun 9, 2007)

Wile E said:


> Regardless, it's all speculation at this point, anyway.


Agreed


----------



## Agility (Jun 9, 2007)

There should be a review though about these babies in crossfire. If they are near to a 8800GTX in sli performance then it goes to show that DDR4 really did help the ati cards. But strange thing is they came out a DDR3 instead.


----------



## Pinchy (Jun 9, 2007)

theonetruewill said:


> OK what I said was very over-simplified. Thus you've been able to pick flaws in it.
> However, to put it a little more expertly;
> There isn't much point using a 512MB mid-range card for current games as "most of the time" games will never use that amount of memory unless you game at very high resolutions (1920x1200 an up). However a X1950 Pro's GPU is not powerful enough to power this resolution anyway. 256MB's is enough to power any game (DX9.0c) at lower resolutions so in a DX9.0c card I find it futile. However I also feel that the the 2900XT's 1GB maybe slight overkill. However I've not studied DX10 fully enough to actually give a fully reasoned argument on this so I merely mention it. On the ohter hand in the future when DX10 games that are as complicated and textured as Oblivion was for DX9.0c, then maybe the full 1GB maybe utilised or even required.
> 
> ...



Hmm, i hooked up my comp to my 32" 1080i LCD TV downstairs and it ran so well on all my games. I hooked up a friends comp (he came over for a lan party, similar specs...only difference was that he had an e6600 and he only had 256mb X1950 PRO), and you could really notice the difference...


----------



## Steevo (Jun 9, 2007)

I have watched my free memory on  my X1800XT and on some games at high resolutions it drops quick. I will post screenies when I get home. HL2 with the high res pack installed uses over 400Mb of graphics memory. Since the same is pooled for CS:S you also get the effects, and the memory load.


----------



## mandelore (Jun 9, 2007)

i think this card will be ace for me, I run all games at 1920x1200 on my 24" hd widescreen with all settings maxed out, cant wait to hear if my folks track one down


----------



## mandelore (Jun 9, 2007)

Agility said:


> There should be a review though about these babies in crossfire. If they are near to a 8800GTX in sli performance then it goes to show that DDR4 really did help the ati cards. But strange thing is they came out a DDR3 instead.



look at the link, the comparison is between stock 1gb 2900xt's crossfired and 8800 ULTRAS OVERCLOCKED. therefore it will pwn 8800 gtx's, unless overclocked to ultra speeds, but then overclock the 2900s and the game is on  cant wait for overclocked 2900s crossfired and compared


----------



## Gam'ster (Jun 9, 2007)

Kick ass card and should be a good price in the uk 2 , On a different note is there an app that can measure the amount of vram ur using ?

Cheers gam


----------



## Agility (Jun 9, 2007)

Heard that you'll need a powerful processor to have two 2900XT normally. And for these two babies....what processor will it need for no bottlenecking?


----------



## mandelore (Jun 9, 2007)

Agility said:


> Heard that you'll need a powerful processor to have two 2900XT normally. And for these two babies....what processor will it need for no bottlenecking?



hmm, not sure,wouldnt a dual core @ around 3ghz + be ok? in the near future im upgrading to am2 and going for a quad, or at least a dualcore capable of 3.5ghz +, for now my opy 185 @ 3ghz will have to do


----------



## DaMulta (Jun 9, 2007)

I wonder how many of these will be out there. There are no X1950XTX or X1950 Cf cards to be found right now. So where did all of the DDR4 go?


----------



## Zeratul_uy (Jun 9, 2007)

DaMulta said:


> LINK



Hell ATi is comming!! Take that nVidia


----------



## DOM (Jun 9, 2007)

I think they stoped making them cuz look how much there going for and the DDR3 2900XT's are in the same price range so I guess they where to much money and decided to focus on the DDR4 1gb 2900xt's


----------



## TooFast (Jun 10, 2007)

this card will be faster than a gtx.


----------



## x800professor (Jun 10, 2007)

theonetruewill said:


> OK what I said was very over-simplified. Thus you've been able to pick flaws in it.
> However, to put it a little more expertly;
> There isn't much point using a 512MB mid-range card for current games as "most of the time" games will never use that amount of memory unless you game at very high resolutions (1920x1200 an up). However a X1950 Pro's GPU is not powerful enough to power this resolution anyway. 256MB's is enough to power any game (DX9.0c) at lower resolutions so in a DX9.0c card I find it futile. However I also feel that the the 2900XT's 1GB maybe slight overkill. However I've not studied DX10 fully enough to actually give a fully reasoned argument on this so I merely mention it. On the ohter hand in the future when DX10 games that are as complicated and textured as Oblivion was for DX9.0c, then maybe the full 1GB maybe utilised or even required.
> 
> ...



It really depends on the game.  I posted an article on here a while back where a review compared a 512MB 7800GT to a 256MB 7800GT in FEAR.  The 512 version kept the game playable at settings that the 256MB version could not.  The X1950PRO is more powerful than a 7800GT.  However, like I said, it depends on what you are running.  3dmark05 never used more than 200MB, even when I turned the resolution up to 2048x1536 (on my 22" P1220 CRT of greatness).  After that, I thought it was a waste of memory.  However, when I powered up oblivion, bam, it used more than 400MB....at 1280x1024!  I think draw distance has something to do with it as well.


----------



## theonetruewill (Jun 10, 2007)

x800professor said:


> I think draw distance has something to do with it as well.



Draw distance does yes. immensely. What's the new game out like erm ArmA assault??...or is that the right one.... It's an army game sorry I can't remember but it has super (real) high view distances, and that really does need above 256MB for the full 100% rendering.


----------



## hat (Jun 10, 2007)

theonetruewill said:


> OK what I said was very over-simplified. Thus you've been able to pick flaws in it.
> However, to put it a little more expertly;
> There isn't much point using a 512MB mid-range card for current games as "most of the time" games will never use that amount of memory unless you game at very high resolutions (1920x1200 an up). However a X1950 Pro's GPU is not powerful enough to power this resolution anyway. 256MB's is enough to power any game (DX9.0c) at lower resolutions so in a DX9.0c card I find it futile. However I also feel that the the 2900XT's 1GB maybe slight overkill. However I've not studied DX10 fully enough to actually give a fully reasoned argument on this so I merely mention it. On the ohter hand in the future when DX10 games that are as complicated and textured as Oblivion was for DX9.0c, then maybe the full 1GB maybe utilised or even required.
> 
> ...



I agree on 1GB being overkill. They should have made it 768MB like the 8800GTX. Now I see why nVidia didn't go 1GB.


----------



## WarEagleAU (Jun 10, 2007)

I think the benches comparison is really astounding. I mean, at first it was getting handed its heiny by 8800GTX (which it shouldnt be competing against anyways). And now, this newer card comes along and it seems to be holding its own and sparring well. Simply Amazing to me. Thanks for the info Damulta.


----------



## Wile E (Jun 10, 2007)

hat said:


> I agree on 1GB being overkill. They should have made it 768MB like the 8800GTX. Now I see why nVidia didn't go 1GB.


We honestly can't say that for sure. We don't have the full grasp of what DX10 will take, and you also have to factor in resolution. Like I said earlier, all we can do is speculate at this point. Besides, wouldn't you rather have a little extra memory, than not have enough?


----------



## EastCoasthandle (Jun 10, 2007)

The memory argument is weak sauce IMO.  It's like arguing that you only need 150 thread count for a bed sheet instead of 300 or 400 thread count.  Or, arguing that your car only needs 130 horse power instead of the 200 horse power.


----------



## mandelore (Jun 10, 2007)

why should we have hardware that will only limit what developers of games think they can do, if 1gb becomes the norm, they can think, oh great, lets use muuuuchos better textures etc and the hardware will chomp it up

No harm in overkill, infact, its great! future proofed a bit


----------



## Dippyskoodlez (Jun 10, 2007)

EastCoasthandle said:


> Or, arguing that your car only needs 130 horse power instead of the 200 horse power.




not really, its more like arguing you want to have an engine that caps out at 10k RPM, when you have rev limiter capped at 8500 either way.


----------



## Chewy (Jun 10, 2007)

looks good, its going to be cheaper than any gtx card xD.


----------



## lane (Jun 10, 2007)

Yes... there's 100% of luck i will switch the 2900XT for this one... Preliminar test i have view let me imagine good things... I have wait for see if i go crossfire with 2900XT or take time for the release of the XTX.. now i know it's 2x XTX for me..

personally i like the 2900XT, and have just a little bit more will entirely give me satisfaction...


----------



## Judas (Jun 10, 2007)

Anyone know when the release date for theses cards are ?


----------



## lane (Jun 10, 2007)

current of June, i have not more precision... it can be middle.. like end of the month, or perhaps  begin of July.....


----------



## rampage (Jun 10, 2007)

its good to see ati have card to steal the crown, but now the 8800gtx is starting to become a lil aged in the pc world, so it is no suprise that ati will no be on top.  but i guess in a few months nvidia will fight back, but any who...  competition is always good to drive the market forward 
(now thinking forward what about dx 10.1 (is it called dx 10.1? ) when it comes afloat). im sure that will stir things up again


----------



## lane (Jun 10, 2007)

It's allways like that.. Nvidia will release a new GPU soon.. and then ATI will perhaps can launch the 0.55nm core..but.. difficult to say.. actually only the 2900XT is available... so..


----------



## Agility (Jun 10, 2007)

the 2600 and 2300 has news but not even out....


----------



## Judas (Jun 10, 2007)

This is an interesting read

http://www.pureoverclock.com/story1221.html


----------



## Chewy (Jun 10, 2007)

what the gm says on the fourm  under comments lol 

Smith:
how does it compair to say a 8800gtx?


Ciro (GM):
Not comparable

As far as i know the HD 2900XT would be good competition for perhaps an 8800 GTS.

 perhaps? no fanboyism there


----------



## Judas (Jun 10, 2007)

Yeah i thought the same thing  ....


----------



## Chewy (Jun 10, 2007)

hows its score with that system in 3d mark06 with a QX6850 @ 4.0GHz, 2900xt oc'd to 858/1153 and scoring 14 439? is that good?


----------



## TooFast (Jun 11, 2007)

I'm pretty sure this card will be faster than a 8800gtx. I also think the reason for the delay, was not because there were problems with it, because of a shortage of ddr4. nvidia would have been using ddr4 by now 4 sure.


----------



## Bret (Jun 11, 2007)

Hopefully this will mean an 8800 GTX price drop!


----------



## zOaib (Jul 8, 2007)

ok i grabbed one form newegg.com , but seems like as soon as i purchased the card the actual link to reviews and specs on the card dissappeared i got the oem version of sapphire 1gb ddr4 for only 480 dollars + 6.64 3 day shipping ........... i have been running it since friday now , and apart from the fan noise which u cna hear loudly when fan is at 100% , the card seems to pretty much rip my games without a hiccup , now i was runnign a 8800gts before this so this thing is considerably fast compared to that , which i cna tell  by just lookign at the frames i get in bf2142 , COD2 ..... havent run 3dmar06 yet , and mine came stock clocked at 740 / 1000
and i cant overclock yet because i am waiting on my 8 pin adapter for the 6 pin .......... will keep u guys updated


----------



## Chewy (Jul 8, 2007)

NIce choice the card pwns, you should try dl'in the Call of Juarez frames tester to see if your set-up performs better than mandelore's check out this thread http://forums.techpowerup.com/showthread.php?t=32937  You might be bottlenecked by your cpu running at 2.4ghz though.. see how you score sometime anyway @ 2.4 and 3.0.


----------



## zOaib (Jul 8, 2007)

@Chewy , i dont have vista32 on my system as an OS yet , any other recomendation how i shud test this out , thx ?


----------



## Dippyskoodlez (Jul 8, 2007)

Chewy said:


> NIce choice the card pwns, you should try dl'in the Call of Juarez frames tester to see if your set-up performs better than mandelore's check out this thread http://forums.techpowerup.com/showthread.php?t=32937  You might be bottlenecked by your cpu running at 2.4ghz though.. see how you score sometime anyway @ 2.4 and 3.0.



I would agree 2.4 could maybe bottleneck it..

But thats just a sign you need to pump up the eye candy and resolution.


----------



## SK-1 (Jul 8, 2007)

EastCoasthandle said:


> The memory argument is weak sauce IMO.  It's like arguing that you only need 150 thread count for a bed sheet instead of 300 or 400 thread count.  Or, arguing that your car only needs 130 horse power instead of the 200 horse power.



EXACTLY!,..Just as Bill Gates said once,...no computer will ever need more than 64MB. of ram!!!


----------



## Chewy (Jul 8, 2007)

zOaib said:


> @Chewy , i dont have vista32 on my system as an OS yet , any other recomendation how i shud test this out , thx ?



Humm thats alright, if you do get vista than you should add to the tests. no biggy Im sure more 1gb 2900's owners will pop up around tpu. 

 Though eventually you should OC your cpu (if you plan on overclocking at all), It will become a bottleneck but your system still pwns and prob plows trought all your games anyway.


----------



## TonyStark (Jul 9, 2007)

SK-1 said:


> EXACTLY!,..Just as Bill Gates said once,...no computer will ever need more than 64MB. of ram!!!










It scares me to think that such a man has this much power in the IT world. :shadedshu


----------



## zOaib (Jul 9, 2007)

http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=GX-062-OK&tool=3

some reviews of buyers of the 1gb 2900 in uk.


----------



## tkpenalty (Jul 9, 2007)

Dude... those guys dont even have the card... I can write a review whenever I want


----------



## zOaib (Jul 9, 2007)

tkpenalty said:


> Dude... those guys dont even have the card... I can write a review whenever I want



thats cud be true but ,  ill work this card out to give real results , so i am ordering vista today .


----------

