ASUS Designs Own Monster Dual-GTX 285 4 GB Graphics Card

[Roph]

How much power will this beast suck up?

 

[3870x2]

32bit OS's use a max of 3.2GB (I think?) of ram, and that includes GPU ram, so if you have 2GB of ram and then a 4GB card in, it may cause conflicts.

Anyone feel free to correct me if Im wrong.

Im sure this has already been replied to, but it is 2x2gb, each GPU addressing only 2, meaning there are 2 different pots of memory. 32-bit will address the whole 4GB, unless i've missed something.

 

[Mussels]

Im sure this has already been replied to, but it is 2x2gb, each GPU addressing only 2, meaning there are 2 different pots of memory. 32-bit will address the whole 4GB.

32 bit applications have a 2GB address space limit per application, so... no. Sure, you'll have 2GB for the card and 2GB usable for the OS, but once it starts duplicating into ram (assuming you're using a DX9 app, 32 bit OS likely means XP) then you're totally screwed.

 

[3870x2]

32 bit applications have a 2GB address space limit per application, so... no. Sure, you'll have 2GB for the card and 2GB usable for the OS, but once it starts duplicating into ram (assuming you're using a DX9 app, 32 bit OS likely means XP) then you're totally screwed.

I see your point, here are my counterpoints:

It is like saying that a total of 3.2 GB of ram can only be addressed. So if you already have 3GB of ram, you can only address .2GB of your graphics card ram?
Also, who ever needs more than 3.2GB in any game? im sure no game needs more than 2GB at its max.

Im sure you are probably right, but it just doesnt seem right. If it is per application, it is just bad programming, as games can, and have before, ran as more than 1 application (check "processes" tab on your games)

 

[mlee49]

This is with liquid nitrogen thermal solution installed on the cards. I didnt have time to insluate well enough so cards are only running -40C with 1.175V set via software (up from 1.15V). There is headroom

http://www.kinc.se/mars3.jpg

Nice to meet you Kinc, I'm glad to see an Asus rep here. Any chance for more pics?

 

[Mussels]

I see your point, here are my counterpoints:

It is like saying that a total of 3.2 GB of ram can only be addressed. So if you already have 3GB of ram, you can only address .2GB of your graphics card ram?
Also, who ever needs more than 3.2GB in any game? im sure no game needs more than 2GB at its max.

Im sure you are probably right, but it just doesnt seem right. If it is per application, it is just bad programming, as games can, and have before, ran as more than 1 application (check "processes" tab on your games)

check the link in my sig and take the conversation over there.

 

[3870x2]

check the link in my sig and take the conversation over there.

As said before, you have more knowledge than I on this matter, ill take your word for it

 

[W1zzard]

32 bit applications have a 2GB address space limit per application, so... no. Sure, you'll have 2GB for the card and 2GB usable for the OS, but once it starts duplicating into ram (assuming you're using a DX9 app, 32 bit OS likely means XP) then you're totally screwed.

did nobody read the link?

any normal app won't need access to the full video memory. you tell directx, "give me that", and you get a memory pointer back to the object. then you do the same with the next object. vista/directx are smart enough to shuffle stuff around, and use memory pages so you can use all these 2 gb.

 

[werez]

some what true but there are small differences between th 512mb > 1024mb cards & it all depends on how you run your games. from my understanding running with 16xAA is better with a 1024mb card due to the space available to buffer/store all the textures.

Depending on the resolutions, settings u play at & also games. you may see upto 3-5fps increase. but for performance boosts on anything above 1024mb then thats still debatable but from what I have read it hardly makes any difference at all unless u play at super high resolutions on a 40-60" monitor. - its all debatable.

Yes .
Picture this . I`m an average gamer that goes for the "gameplay" and not for the "eyecandy"
I do own a high end video card ( well it was kinda high end when i bought it ) Sapphire Radeon HD 4870 2GB version . Now , i game at different resolutions depending on the game .
I`m playing Counter-strike ( yes , i`m oldschool) , Fifa , Crysis , Unreal Tournament , COD4 , COD5 , Starcraft and so on . Fifa , Starcraft and Counter-strike don`t use the true power of my video card since , Starcraft is 2d , Counter-strike works on really lower end video cards . Now lets talk about Crysis . Ok , all settings high , higher resolution , you name it .
There is absolutely no difference between my video card , and the card a friend owns , a Sapphire Radeon HD 4870 1GB version in 1920x1200 with AA enabled . Now if people are buying a video card with 4 Gb of ram , i believe they are not playing Counter-strike , Day of Defeat or Starcraft . If you are going to buy that card to be "future proof" to play games based on engines like Crysis uses , you won`t have any performance increase. You need better GPU . 2 fps more in Crysis are not noticeable . However in Cod4 you will probably get 10 fps more at a higher resolution , but that won`t really matter since you already get 100 and you can`t see any difference . Now , in the EU the ASUS ENGTX295 is about 430E , but the starting pricepoint was 460 . Extra 2gb`s of GDDR3 and a custom cooler design increases manufacturing costs . Don`t forget that Asus has a higher price on the market than other competitors...
If a GTX295 was 460 Euros , i expect this card to be around 550-560 . So you pay extra money for that cool looking plastic shroud ? Well what happens when you realize you need a water block for your card ? that shroud must come off right ?
I believe Asus just wanted to show the world they can do more to improve a reference video card , other manufacturers can do that two but they don`t , because they know that 2gb extra ram are useless . Asus knows that too since they are just giving 1000 pieces away , don`t you think ?
Sorry for my bad English , but i hope you get the point ...

 

[Mussels]

did nobody read the link?

any normal app won't need access to the full video memory. you tell directx, "give me that", and you get a memory pointer back to the object. then you do the same with the next object. vista/directx are smart enough to shuffle stuff around, and use memory pages so you can use all these 2 gb.

i did. it doesnt use the full memory, but only whats required. but if you ask it to use 2GB of textures in a 32 bit app, somethings gotta give.

you have a better understanding than i do, cause you've programmed 3D apps. You're the w1zzard damnit, its not fair to argue with you. you need to share your knowledge more!

 

[3870x2]

WoW werez...
regardless of the addressing, I dont see using that much any time soon until modern warfare 2 or a round of 8 player BGH on stacraft II.

 

[W1zzard]

i did. it doesnt use the full memory, but only whats required. but if you ask it to use 2GB of textures in a 32 bit app, somethings gotta give.

you have a better understanding than i do, cause you've programmed 3D apps. you need to share your knowledge more!

nobody has a single 3d object that consumes 2 GB of memory. so you have lots of small thingies that are processed individually. imagine how you move ALL that is in your apartment and takes up so much space through the little door when moving

 

[Mussels]

nobody has a single 3d object that consumes 2 GB of memory. so you have lots of small thingies that are processed individually. imagine how you move ALL that is in your apartment and takes up so much space through the little door when moving

i can imagine an epic fail.

so to summarise your analogy: its not like its going to suck from the get go, but once the address space limit is full up, things are going to slow down until you got the old furniture out and the new furniture in.

Running x64 here just gives you a bigger door.

 

[werez]

I think we are forgetting something :
RV870 , DirectX11 are just around the corner . Nvidia is moving to GDDR5 . Gpu`s are currently hitting 1000MHZ . Imagine the performance boost . So do we need 4GB VRAM ? how do we benefit from that ? we don`t ... This is like the last line of defense , other manufacturers won`t respond to this "monstrosity" . A stock GTX295 is more than you need . And like i first said , two GTX 275 in SLI , will be a better solution to improve performance , and you will save money .

 

[Mussels]

if no one ever came out with top models with ridiculous amounts of ram, we'd all still be on 16MB cards werez.

 

[Kitkat]

sounds cool but also sounds pointless havent we been down this road to see no real result and only bragging rights.

Bout time we saw something unique. Go Asus!

nVidia, know your place! Get back to the fab and cook me more GPUs!

Thats funny I thought there place was childish arguments with intel???

 

[werez]

yes , but i can play Counter-strike with my 16mb video card , and it`s still the most played game out there , isnt it ?
That was my point , Mussels ...

 

[GSG-9]

if no one ever came out with top models with ridiculous amounts of ram, we'd all still be on 16MB cards werez.

yes , but i can play Counter-strike with my 16mb video card , and it`s still the most played game out there , isnt it ?
That was my point , Mussels ...

Sadly I think its surpassed by wow these days, and you have to count 1.5-/1.6/CS:CZ/CSS all separately, you cant count them as the same product. I love cs...

 

[3870x2]

He kinda has a point, I can play crysis full settings 1920x1200 at 20+ FPS on my 4870 while having warcraft III in the background. 512 MB ram. 4GB isnt really needed. 2GB isnt really needed. By the time you need any more than 1.5GB of VRAM, the GTX295 will be obsolete like the 7950GX2.

 

[Weer]

Calling it a "Limited Edition" card = They can charge a boat for it.

 

[btarunr]

Calling it a "Limited Edition" card = They can charge a boat for it.

I agree. 2x GTX 285 + digital PWM + 2x memory + third-party bridge chip..should cost something.

 

[W1zzard]

usually i am convinced that there is no point in going 2 GB VRAM. simply because any card would be too slow (fps wise) at such settings. no difference between 7 and 14 fps.. both isnt playable. with this card however, there might be chance that we could see some benefits.

only exception might be gta4 which seems to benefit nicely from more memory even at less demanding resolutions/AA. read: shit engine. not to mention the extremely gay DRM - i boycott it for benchmarks

 

[Weer]

He kinda has a point, I can play crysis full settings 1920x1200 at 20+ FPS on my 4870 while having warcraft III in the background. 512 MB ram. 4GB isnt really needed. 2GB isnt really needed. By the time you need any more than 1.5GB of VRAM, the GTX295 will be obsolete like the 7950GX2.

That's not completely false, but think 2560x1600. It needs 1024MB to run @ 20FPS. Now, are you going to get 20 FPS running Crysis @ 2560x1600 on this card? Yes. So, 1024-1536MB has a point. And the extra 512MB is always good to have.. sandbox editors, running multiple games, games that have texture issues that take up tons of RAM but look great.. I know all the issues that exist because I have an 8800 GTS 512. A card that had too little vRAM.

 

[h3llb3nd4]

usually i am convinced that there is no point in going 2 GB VRAM. simply because any card would be too slow (fps wise) at such settings. no difference between 7 and 14 fps.. both isnt playable. with this card however, there might be chance that we could see some benefits.

only exception might be gta4 which seems to benefit nicely from more memory even at less demanding resolutions/AA. read: shit engine. not to mention the extremely gay DRM - i boycott it for benchmarks

Now you know why there is extreme piracy...

@ weer: But 2560x1600 is rare and hardly anyone uses it...I bet you rich ppl wont buy those screens until they're more popular...

 

[Weer]

I agree. 2x GTX 285 + digital PWM + 2x memory + third-party bridge chip..should cost something.

Oh no, I just meant the two words. Pricey!

But this is technically how it goes. In order to produce a card better than the maximum, they'd have to call it something of a "Limited Edition", because otherwise no one would buy the "regular" GTX 295. Now that they have that title.. they can go wild.. and they have.

Do you remember the "Limited Edition" X1950XTX Limited-Crossfire-Edition? I'm sure you know when it came out. Two super-charged X1950XTX's in both looks and performance, with the best GDDR4, that came in a collector's silver-brushed metallic case, and cost about twice the price of the already not-worth-it X1950XTX.

But this card is definitely worth it.. for me and everyone else who wants to game this summer without waiting for GTX 380. If it costs 600$, I'll get it. But it's extremely unlikely, says me.