Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (100689)	3/29/2000 4:10:00 AM
From: Joe NYC	of 1575991

Tenchusatsu, I forgot. For graphics memory, 810 just takes a part of main memory (i.e. DRAM). Probably 4 MB. If 810 needed more graphics memory, it would just reserve even more DRAM for graphics. By the way, the 810-DC100 and the 810e also features a 4 MB SRAM display cache for 3D Z-buffering. 810 probably can use main memory for display buffer, but most implementations use separate SDRAM buffer, which is limited to 4 MB. This memory is used for Z-buffer I guess, but the main purpose is to hold the display buffer. Actually, the bad rep of the 810 chipset is undeserved. That rep comes from those hardware web sites who aren't satisfied until they can get 60 FPS at 1280x1024. When you want to run 3D games, you definitely want a 3D card. But 90% of computers never run 3D games, and don't need a monster FPU either. I would be perfectly happy with the on-board graphics for the office applications, if the graphics buffer was larger than 4MB (with adequate RAMDAC). 21' monitors are really affordable these days, and a computer with 810 / 810e is wasted on it on this monitor. If 815 is limited to the same 4MB and mediocre RAMDAC, it will be yet another miscalculation by Intel. Joe

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next