Question about running Radeon 6950 2GB on WinXP32bit

Discussion in '3D Hardware, Software & Output Devices' started by Shtal, Dec 18, 2010.

  1. Shtal

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2005
    Messages:
    1,344
    Likes Received:
    3
    I' am planning to get Radeon 6950 2GB.

    I have a dual boot: Win7 ultimate 64bit and WinXP 32bit.

    I currently have Radeon 4850 512MB and my OS WinXP shows 3.25GB Ram available out of 8GB Ram I have. (I know the limit is 4GB Ram in 32bit OS)
    (Running 64bit OS with 8GB ram is great) but my question upgrading video card to R6950-2GB, will 32bit OS limit show now 2.0GB available since I have quad graphic more memory.

    Thanks in advance :)
     
    #1 Shtal, Dec 18, 2010
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 18, 2010
  2. rpg.314

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2008
    Messages:
    4,298
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    /
    Some sort of reduction in available system RAM will definitely be there. AFAIK, probably a bit less than 2GB for a various MMIO regions.
     
  3. I.S.T.

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2004
    Messages:
    3,174
    Likes Received:
    389
    You have it right.

    Really, though, most PC games don't use up too much RAM(Console ports, lols), so 2 gigs should be fine. That said, heavily modded games will, so be careful.
     
  4. Thowllly

    Regular

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2002
    Messages:
    551
    Likes Received:
    4
    Location:
    Norway
    I believe that with GPUs with more than 256MB ram the CPU still only have a 256MB window into the GPU ram. So even with a 2GB card you should still have more than 3GB system memory.
     
  5. swaaye

    swaaye Entirely Suboptimal
    Legend

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2003
    Messages:
    8,567
    Likes Received:
    652
    Location:
    WI, USA
    What about that BIOS option that remaps expansion board memory to over 4GB?
     
  6. Kaotik

    Kaotik Drunk Member
    Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2003
    Messages:
    8,860
    Likes Received:
    2,792
    Location:
    Finland
    It AFAIK only affects 64bit OS users
     
  7. Lightman

    Veteran Subscriber

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2008
    Messages:
    1,817
    Likes Received:
    491
    Location:
    Torquay, UK
    This is the case. Only when utilising Multi-GPU configs your usable memory in 32bit Windows will shrink even more.
     
  8. Shtal

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2005
    Messages:
    1,344
    Likes Received:
    3
    I bought Radeon 6950 2GB card

    By the surprise and I don't understand but windows XP 32bit still show 3.25GB RAM available.

    And at idle CCC shows 500MHz core and 1100MHz memory, should it supposed to be lower for the GPU clock ??
     
  9. OpenGL guy

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2002
    Messages:
    2,357
    Likes Received:
    28
    In 32-bit mode, the PCI address space is 512MB. If the GPU used all of that, none of your other PCI devices would be able to map memory, plus it would severely restrict the amount of physical memory you would be able to use. This is why we limit the amount of video memory we map to the CPU.

    Once everyone is using 64-bit OSes, then this won't be an issue anymore and all of the video memory can be mapped.
    Are you using two monitors? If so, using two monitors restricts what power states are available.
     
  10. Shtal

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2005
    Messages:
    1,344
    Likes Received:
    3
    Thank you for explanation for 32bit OS.

    I have ONLY single DELL 24inch monitor.
    When I first loaded drivers it showed 150MHz GPU, once I rebooted windows it went to 500MHz GPU.
     
  11. Shtal

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2005
    Messages:
    1,344
    Likes Received:
    3
    I have ASUS P5K-Deluxe 775 motherboard (PCI-E ver. 1.1)
    Intel quad Q9650 OC @ 3.6GHz (400X9)
    DDR2 1066MHz memory 5-5-5-15 timing
    Corsair HX series 750Watt power supply.
     
  12. Shtal

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2005
    Messages:
    1,344
    Likes Received:
    3
    I usually play with Windows 7 64bit, but I decided for fun under WindowsXP - running 3DMark2001SE benchmark @ default settings.

    [​IMG]


    EDIT: 1024x768x32 default settings.
     
    #12 Shtal, Jan 3, 2011
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 9, 2011
  13. Grall

    Grall Invisible Member
    Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2002
    Messages:
    10,801
    Likes Received:
    2,174
    Location:
    La-la land
    Interesting 3dmark results! I haven't run the 2001 version in an age and a half.

    Back in the day, I got about 5xfps in Nature I believe, getting 10 times more today is pretty awesome. :)

    "Advanced" pixel shader is far, far faster than the regular one. Longer pixel shader programs map better to the massive amount of execution units available in today's hardware, actually giving better performance?
     
  14. Davros

    Legend

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2004
    Messages:
    15,699
    Likes Received:
    2,847
    just for fun
    q6600 @2.4ghz
    gtx260
    xp32 4gb

    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
     
  15. Shtal

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2005
    Messages:
    1,344
    Likes Received:
    3
    I'm curies how GTX260 has 604.9 FPS in Nature test in 3Dmark2001.
     
  16. Lightman

    Veteran Subscriber

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2008
    Messages:
    1,817
    Likes Received:
    491
    Location:
    Torquay, UK
    nVidia is better in Nature. Something to do with them having better emulation of T&L in drivers than AMD. Also Nature scales better with CPU on AMD cards :)
     
  17. Davros

    Legend

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2004
    Messages:
    15,699
    Likes Received:
    2,847
    T&L is emulated ie: run on the cpu ?
    wouldnt the higher clockspeed of shtal's cpu compensate for any improved efficiency of nv's t&l algorithm ?
     
  18. Lightman

    Veteran Subscriber

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2008
    Messages:
    1,817
    Likes Received:
    491
    Location:
    Torquay, UK
    Well, it surely does but it's not enough :smile:

    I read long time ago (GF6800/7800 times) that nVidia still had hardware support for T&L in their GPU's. Maybe this is true till today?

    Some insider info from both camps would be much appreciated!
     
  19. Davros

    Legend

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2004
    Messages:
    15,699
    Likes Received:
    2,847
    i thought T&l was now done on the vertex shaders ?

    plus shtal has 1216 (over 600%) more shaders than me ;)
     
  20. Shtal

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2005
    Messages:
    1,344
    Likes Received:
    3
Loading...

Share This Page

  • About Us

    Beyond3D has been around for over a decade and prides itself on being the best place on the web for in-depth, technically-driven discussion and analysis of 3D graphics hardware. If you love pixels and transistors, you've come to the right place!

    Beyond3D is proudly published by GPU Tools Ltd.
Loading...