GF6200 using extended TurboCache exposed
Forum Graphic & Displays : Graphics Cards - GF6200 using extended TurboCache exposed
We've read about ATI's HyperMemory and nV's TurboCache, well here's how the system views the GF6200 with 32mb of memory. The InQ's got a screenie of it in action, well at least in apperance if not action.
<A HREF="http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=20212" target="_new">http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=20212</A>
It's appearing as 256mb of onboard memory. It's like 'advanced' integrated using system memory to extend available texture memory. Quite interesting potential for 'entry level' and rare 'gaming' solutions.
Looks like a good cheapo solution, but I don't think it will benifit the top end cards as much. Basically a step up from IGP.
- You need a licence to buy a gun, but they'll sell anyone a stamp <i>(or internet account)</i> ! - <font color=green>RED </font color=green> <font color=red> GREEN</font color=red> GA to SK 
Yeah like Cleeve said, things are a little different now.
It's still far from being as good as onboard, but if it's a question of 'needing' more texture memory on RARE occasions and not paying for it, it's a wise solution. Imagine what people with 32mb GF3tis could do with this option, maybe extend their purchase another year. Would a 'GAMER' care about this? No. Would a parent who bought a PC at WalMart and hasn't the funds to buy a gaming rig for his kid, sure. It's likely still faster than old IGP and a fairly cheap solution, and with a GF6200/X300 core you get the modern features, and if your resolution is limited by the power of the core anyways, you might not use more than the 32mb of onboard memory except in rare cases. And HL2/D3 running at 640x480 using fast (but in this case cheap) 32mb of onboard memory might be good enough. As long as the games offer those smaller texture blocks then low res gaming may never need access the system memory, but if it does need it, hey you have the option.
Think about D3 and if Ultra was only ever possibly playable with 512-1024MB of memory, well there's no cards (for gaming) like that right now, and they would be wicked expensive to make due to memory costs. Now The far FAR faster solution would be the on board memory, but if it gave you the option to SEE Ultra on your X800XTPE/GF6800UE, even if it were 15fps versus 30-45fps of High, then you could experience the difference and KNOW what you're missing. And will AGP did does do this, it's nowhere near as fast as these new hyper-memory-cache solutions.
In many cases the impact wouldn't be this bad, for the cards we are talking about, but my example is the only one I can think of that would be somewhat similar and in that case you'd take a far grater hit IMO because the speed of the memory would have greater impact. If you can 'pre-load' textures even at low res, it may significantly speed things up. Of course this might only be demonstrrable in benchmarks and demos and real games may hiccup far more than anticipated, but we'll have to see once they start testing this a little more thoroughly.
- You need a licence to buy a gun, but they'll sell anyone a stamp <i>(or internet account)</i> ! - <font color=green>RED </font color=green> <font color=red> GREEN</font color=red> GA to SK
| Quote : GF3tis |
GF<b>2</b>tis.
It's ok, I'm hella tired too. 
--
<font color=blue>Ede</font color=blue>
I have no time to read the review, but can someone explain to me how the heck they still find solace in making 32-bit memory? 
--
<font color=blue>Ede</font color=blue>
Please mind
You are about to answer a thread that has been inactive for more than 6 months.
If you still wish to proceed, please ensure that your posting is original and does not duplicate or overlap any prior responses to this thread.
