DDR3 or DDR5 graphics card? What's the difference?
103 replies, posted
[QUOTE=tratzzz;30918289]WOOOW.
Gman was wrong again![/QUOTE]
Technically I'm not. VGA itself is capable of 256 colors (in Mode 13, 320x200, in Mode X, 360x480), just not at full resolution.
And I did specify that it was VGA [i]resolution[/i], not VGA [i]graphics[/i].
[QUOTE=gman003-main;30923844]Technically I'm not. VGA itself is capable of 256 colors (in Mode 13, 320x200, in Mode X, 360x480), just not at full resolution.
And I did specify that it was VGA [i]resolution[/i], not VGA [i]graphics[/i].[/QUOTE]
I wish I could post iceburn right now :smith:
[editline]5th July 2011[/editline]
oh wait, he removed that one too!
I swear people in this section of the forum are retarded or just like lying.
Every time I see the same bullshit making the OP buy the highest end parts by saying stuff like "hurr durr bottleneck" or "It's not powerful enough"
For instance when the 5770 was released people where suggesting the previous top end cards to upgrade saying they would bottleneck, and now the 5770 is outdated they say that's going to suddenly by magic bottleneck hardware released at the same time, and a the moment I'm pretty sure the high end 4XXX series cards can run all the latest games fine, so what if it doesn't at 60FPS.
There hasn't been much change in game requirements since recent games anyway.
[QUOTE=gman003-main;30923844]Technically I'm not. VGA itself is capable of 256 colors (in Mode 13, 320x200, in Mode X, 360x480), just not at full resolution.
And I did specify that it was VGA [i]resolution[/i], not VGA [i]graphics[/i].[/QUOTE]
Sorry bro, you can't change what you said. You said 640x480x256, not 320x200x256. And way to be redundant VGA graphics = video graphics array graphics :downs:
[QUOTE=bohb;30936504]Sorry bro, you can't change what you said. You said 640x480x256, not 320x200x256. And way to be redundant VGA graphics = video graphics array graphics :downs:[/QUOTE]
640x480x256 [b]is[/b] VGA resolution, just not VGA graphics :v:
[QUOTE=Canary;30927304]I swear people in this section of the forum are retarded or just like lying.
Every time I see the same bullshit making the OP buy the highest end parts by saying stuff like "hurr durr bottleneck" or "It's not powerful enough"
For instance when the 5770 was released people where suggesting the previous top end cards to upgrade saying they would bottleneck, and now the 5770 is outdated they say that's going to suddenly by magic bottleneck hardware released at the same time, and a the moment I'm pretty sure the high end 4XXX series cards can run all the latest games fine, so what if it doesn't at 60FPS.
There hasn't been much change in game requirements since recent games anyway.[/QUOTE]
That 5770 will be bottlenecking an i5 750 in many games, it's not bullshit, sorry. My 6950 is clearly bottlenecking my i5 2500 when I play The Witcher 2 on max settings. Bottlenecking=/= Bad performance. Though The Witcher doesn't run that good on max anyway.
[QUOTE=GoDong-DK;30936823]That 5770 will be bottlenecking an i5 750 in many games, it's not bullshit, sorry. My 6950 is clearly bottlenecking my i5 2500 when I play The Witcher 2 on max settings. Bottlenecking=/= Bad performance. Though The Witcher doesn't run that good on max anyway.[/QUOTE]
There will always be some bottleneck of any part...
[QUOTE=thf;30936939]There will always be some bottleneck of any part...[/QUOTE]
Of course he was just using the middle-low-end card 5770 as an example for something that was recommended alot a year ago, but now people say those people should upgrade. I'm just saying it's not bullshit.
So DDR3 is better than GDDR3? What?
Yes
[QUOTE=digigamer17;30939120]So DDR3 is better than GDDR3? What?[/QUOTE]
GDDR3 is based on DDR2.
I was confused because of the name of the thread.
DDR5 is faster.
[QUOTE=Austin2;30968620]DDR5 is faster.[/QUOTE]
There is no fucking thing as DDR5 man.
GDDR5 is there, and GDDR5 is faster than GDDR3.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.