I've seen in a couple of posts that there is a problem with the 192 bit cards from NVIDIA. Could someone explain or point me to an article?
Thanks,
Butch
I've seen in a couple of posts that there is a problem with the 192 bit cards from NVIDIA. Could someone explain or point me to an article?
Thanks,
Butch
The 'problem' is likely that those cards perform noticeably worse than their 256-bit counterparts. That does not automatically mean that the performance is crap. As an example the GTX 460 came first out as a 1GB version (with a 256-bit memory bus) and a 768MB version (with a 192-bit memory bus). Both were excellent cards when they came out, although (us?) technofreaks gave a hard time for the loser, which obviously was the 768MB version.
Actually its more than this. It used to be easy.. the 1GB version was a noticeably better performer than the 768 version with its 256 vs 192bit bus, (though the 768 wasn't awful at launch) so you could say: get the 1GB version, its better. Now the partners are selling 1GB versions that only have the 192-bit bus. When you look at newegg now you see a whole bunch of GTX 460 1GB's but these are not the equals of the original 256-bit model and it would be fairly easy for a less tech-savvy person to make the mistake of buying a neutered card. Its the classic crap that both GPU makers pull towards the end of a product line's life... dump old stock by disabling features to lower cost and trick people into thinking they're buying yesterday's quality card at a low price, when really they're buying something entirely different.
Rules to live by: do extra homework when a product line is approaching EOL and always AVOID any GPU that ends in "SE" (aka SLOW EDITION)