Report, edit, etc...Posted by Deathawk on 2006-10-18 at 10:36:14
http://theinq.com/default.aspx?article=35062
Comparing this to nvidia's g80, with GDDR3, and like a 384bit bus, the r600s look like they are better..
This is what I've been waiting for for a while now..
Comparing this to nvidia's g80, with GDDR3, and like a 384bit bus, the r600s look like they are better..
This is what I've been waiting for for a while now..
Report, edit, etc...Posted by DT_Battlekruser on 2006-10-18 at 17:52:41
You must have missed the "very expensive" part.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Deathawk on 2006-10-18 at 17:55:44
I never buy new technology, that's not just me. But I buy old technology that is cheap because new technology is overpriced 
But yeah, expect these things to put a big hole in your pocket unless you're rich
But yeah, expect these things to put a big hole in your pocket unless you're rich
Report, edit, etc...Posted by DT_Battlekruser on 2006-10-18 at 17:56:29
The only reason the Conroe blew AMD out of the water is because it was so affordable.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Deathawk on 2006-10-18 at 18:07:00
Yeah, I don't know exactly why AMD have major price cuts on the FX series, and higher x2 series(and the cheaper x2's raised a bit in price.)... at least until later, when like 5000+ prices dropped... but still..
The prices of the FX series(62 and 60..) are about 3x the price of an e6300... yet the performance is worse once you factor in overclocking...
The prices of the FX series(62 and 60..) are about 3x the price of an e6300... yet the performance is worse once you factor in overclocking...