Originally posted by bridgman
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
AMD Radeon HD 6450
Collapse
X
-
-
Originally posted by bridgman View PostIIRC a GDDR5 card with 64-bit memory bus is still cheaper to build than a DDR3 card with 128-bit memory bus.
Comment
-
Yeah, the problem is that some fairly large percentage of buyers, maybe 99.9999999% or so (plus or minus a couple of '9's), still seem to make buying decisions based on the amount of VRAM rather than the performance characteristics of the memory. As with so many things in life, broken reward systems lead to seemingly undesireable or irrational behaviour. If buyers reward vendors for making cards with lots of slow memory it's not hard to predict what kind of cards you are going to see next time.
On the other hand, having too little memory can result in a fairly sharp performance drop at very high resolutions and this issue seems to be fairly well understood, so one could make a case that spending on amount of memory future-proofs you in a way that buying faster memory can not. By that logic a low end DX11 card with 1GB of DDR3 isn't that bad an idea, although it's not the tradeoff I would make.Last edited by bridgman; 10 September 2011, 02:20 PM.Test signature
Comment
-
Originally posted by LinuxID10T View PostSee, the thing is I would never compare it to Ontario's graphics because it is a desktop card while Ontario is integrated for netbooks. It is just with Llano being the desktop processor, I would compare it to a desktop card, such as the HD 6450. That being said, if the audience for the HD 6450 is just people wanting to upgrade an existing PC I could see that. I just can't see where AMD is trying to place it on its new desktop lineup.
Originally posted by DanL View PostI think it's pretty clear this card is aimed at HTPC's and it's a great product for Windows users. When the gallium3D VDPAU stack matures (and I have faith that it will with AMD's dedicated devs), this could be a perfect card for HTPC and/or general desktop use on Linux. It should be cheaper then too
Comment
-
Originally posted by QaridariumAMD still not sell any Arma2 proved Desktop card thats because arma2 needs more than 2,5gb vram!
my frend prove this with an gtx580 with 3gb vram.
on amd side you have to buy an 4gb vram fireGL card to play the game arm2.
What? This not the game? https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Arma2 Cause in came out years ago, and has much more modest requirements then you claim. Turn down the AA settings... If the game is really as heavy as you claim then why does no review site use it as a benchmark? Unigine Heaven and Crysis/Warhead seem to be ubiquitous as the heaviest benchmarks but according to you this game is even heavier?
Though I will say, why was there no Eyefinity6 version of the HD6970?
Comment
-
Originally posted by Kivada View PostMeh, it sucks even for an HTPC, better to go with the A series chips so you can at least play...
Comment
-
Originally posted by DanL View PostI guess your definition of an HTPC differs from mine, because I see HTPC's as low power stuff focused on playing audio/video, and not really used for gaming.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Qaridariumif you search for it there are benchmarks with arma2...
but hey its not the most popular game.
but its the game with the most hardware hunger!
Comment
-
Originally posted by DanL View PostI guess your definition of an HTPC differs from mine, because I see HTPC's as low power stuff focused on playing audio/video, and not really used for gaming.
If dumb, low power and cheap are what you want then get a $35 Raspberry Pi when they come out http://www.raspberrypi.org/?p=152 For everything else theres the A8-3850 w/ huge fanless block, 4-8Gb of 2.4Ghz ram, an SSD, a Seasonic X series fanless 90% of the time PSU and maybe some super quiet 800 or 1200RPM 120mm fluid bearing fans. I'll still be damn quiet, if not completely silent, just kick the video in from ye olde backup server. Hell get a Gigabyte UD4 mobo and be able to charge your phone off it when it's off as well.
So yes, I'd rather have the PC in the Home Theater instead of just a dumb video console.
Comment
Comment