|
|
| Page 1 of 2 |
doobzilla
Posts: 1099
Location: Team America's Mount Rushmore Base. Stolen from Indians.
|
 Posted: Mon, 18th Feb 2013 02:31 Post subject: SLI uses only the first GPU's memory...right? |
|
 |
Currently, I'm running 3 EVGA GTX580's (FTW, Hydro-Copper2, 1536MB version) and was considering swapping one out with a newer GTX580 Classified 3072MB. I do believe that the new card will downclock itself to match the other two cards and I also believe that, when run in SLI, your computer only utilizes the first GPU's memory. If that is the case, as long as I install the new card as the GPU #1, I should then have 3072MB video memory, right?
if I'm wrong, then I'm guessing that I'll be in the market for an upgrade (which I was actually considering anyway, but have decided to wait until the "Haswell(?)" chips and mobos surface and stabilize). If I'm right, I'll drop the money on that card and increase my video memory (which, I've been running out of lately, hence the questions).
Thanks for any help!
edit: to clarify, I'm really only looking at doing this because I want more video memory, but I don't want to replace all of my GPU's right now (or buy 2 GTX680's), I want to be able to replace only my first card and then use it's memory alone. My apologies for any confusion that I might have created.
Hobo Zombie: TRAAAAAAAIIIINNNNNNSSSSSS
Woman Zombie: COMPLAAAAAAAIIIIIIINNNNNSSSSS
Englishmen Zombie: REFRAAAAAAAAAIIIIIINNNNNSSSSS
Thanks for the idea Lutz!
Last edited by doobzilla on Mon, 18th Feb 2013 02:50; edited 1 time in total
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sausje
Banned
Posts: 17716
Location: Limboland, Netherlands
|
| Posted: Mon, 18th Feb 2013 02:40 Post subject: |
|
|
I have no idea honestly if this is different with SLI.
But with crossfire, if one card is disabled, it sometimes only uses gpu1 and sometimes only gpu2. Same when running in windowed mode with crossfire still enabled...
(unless afterburner is displaying inaccurate data...)
Proud member of Frustrated Association of International Losers Failing Against the Gifted and Superior (F.A.I.L.F.A.G.S)
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Frant
King's Bounty
Posts: 24656
Location: Your Mom
|
| Posted: Mon, 18th Feb 2013 02:53 Post subject: Re: SLI uses only the first GPU's memory...right? |
|
|
| doobzilla wrote: | Currently, I'm running 3 EVGA GTX580's (FTW, Hydro-Copper2, 1536MB version) and was considering swapping one out with a newer GTX580 Classified 3072MB. I do believe that the new card will downclock itself to match the other two cards and I also believe that, when run in SLI, your computer only utilizes the first GPU's memory. If that is the case, as long as I install the new card as the GPU #1, I should then have 3072MB video memory, right?
if I'm wrong, then I'm guessing that I'll be in the market for an upgrade (which I was actually considering anyway, but have decided to wait until the "Haswell(?)" chips and mobos surface and stabilize). If I'm right, I'll drop the money on that card and increase my video memory (which, I've been running out of lately, hence the questions).
Thanks for any help! |
Since RAM on all three cards will be mirrored, if you're running them in Tri-SLI you will effectively have 1536MB even on the first card. What I DON'T know is what happens if you disable the two old cards. It's always the lowest common denominator that takes effect when you run two-three cards with different memory sizes/GPU frequencies. So your 3GB card would essentially be a waste since it would become a 1536MB card unless you run it in solo mode (not sure if that makes a difference).
Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn!
"The sky was the color of a TV tuned to a dead station" - Neuromancer
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sausje
Banned
Posts: 17716
Location: Limboland, Netherlands
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
doobzilla
Posts: 1099
Location: Team America's Mount Rushmore Base. Stolen from Indians.
|
| Posted: Mon, 18th Feb 2013 03:01 Post subject: Re: SLI uses only the first GPU's memory...right? |
|
|
| Frant wrote: | | Since RAM on all three cards will be mirrored, if you're running them in Tri-SLI you will effectively have 1536MB even on the first card. What I DON'T know is what happens if you disable the two old cards. It's always the lowest common denominator that takes effect when you run two-three cards with different memory sizes/GPU frequencies. So your 3GB card would essentially be a waste since it would become a 1536MB card unless you run it in solo mode (not sure if that makes a difference). |
I was afraid that this was the case. I remember reading somewhere that this is how SLI and CFX handle video memory...
I guess that this means that I'll just have to make do with what I have for now... First-world problems, man. Motherfucking first-world problems.
Hobo Zombie: TRAAAAAAAIIIINNNNNNSSSSSS
Woman Zombie: COMPLAAAAAAAIIIIIIINNNNNSSSSS
Englishmen Zombie: REFRAAAAAAAAAIIIIIINNNNNSSSSS
Thanks for the idea Lutz!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Frant
King's Bounty
Posts: 24656
Location: Your Mom
|
| Posted: Mon, 18th Feb 2013 03:10 Post subject: |
|
|
| sausje wrote: | Well you say mirrored, but there are games that do see my crossfire setup as 2gb instead of 2x1gb mirrored..
MP3 was one of these, see:
 Spoiler: | |
Odd thing is that this could just be a visual bug, but having those settings and being able to play on 60 fps without any stuttering... It shouldn't be possible.
So could it be that it depends on the engine what it does with the GPU ram? |
Doesn't matter what a certain game or tool says.. when you run crossfire/sli with 2x1GB cards, you effectively have 1GB unique RAM. Exactly same textures and data must be mirrored since the GPU's are working with the same datasets and can't access each others memory to "share" a bigger combined pool. It's all down to drivers how CF/SLI is handled. And GPU's in CF/SLI accessing each others RAM in a game would be too slow while simultaneously copying new data from PC RAM to GPU-RAM every cycle by some miraculous memory handler that could keep up with such a scenario.
Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn!
"The sky was the color of a TV tuned to a dead station" - Neuromancer
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sausje
Banned
Posts: 17716
Location: Limboland, Netherlands
|
| Posted: Mon, 18th Feb 2013 03:16 Post subject: |
|
|
Then explain to me why i'm not stuttering like a motherfucker when running at those settings?
It should stutter like crazy because it's unable to pump almost 2gb of texture data into 1gb...
In GTA4 it actually does display only 1gb and limits me with graphic settings..
And honestly, i thought it was like you explained all these years, but being able to put 1.9gb of texture data on 1gb and NOT stutter or have framerate loss at all makes me scratch my head 
Proud member of Frustrated Association of International Losers Failing Against the Gifted and Superior (F.A.I.L.F.A.G.S)
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Frant
King's Bounty
Posts: 24656
Location: Your Mom
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sausje
Banned
Posts: 17716
Location: Limboland, Netherlands
|
| Posted: Mon, 18th Feb 2013 04:21 Post subject: |
|
|
No shit sherlock, i already knew that (and i said that)....:
| sausje wrote: | | And honestly, i thought it was like you explained all these years, but being able to put 1.9gb of texture data on 1gb and NOT stutter or have framerate loss at all makes me scratch my head |
So unless you can show my a plausible explanation as to why 1.9gb of texture data is loaded into 1gb without stuttering, i will be scratching my head... i still find it very odd that it is able to do so..
Proud member of Frustrated Association of International Losers Failing Against the Gifted and Superior (F.A.I.L.F.A.G.S)
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Frant
King's Bounty
Posts: 24656
Location: Your Mom
|
| Posted: Mon, 18th Feb 2013 04:25 Post subject: |
|
|
| sausje wrote: | No shit sherlock, i already knew that (and i said that)....:
| sausje wrote: | | And honestly, i thought it was like you explained all these years, but being able to put 1.9gb of texture data on 1gb and NOT stutter or have framerate loss at all makes me scratch my head |
So unless you can show my a plausible explanation as to why 1.9gb of texture data is loaded into 1gb without stuttering, i will be scratching my head... i still find it very odd that it is able to do so.. |
How do you know there are 1.9gb of unique texture data in the combined vRAM on your cards? Have you written a special program to copy the contents from each card to compare contents to be different?
I mean, that argument shows you haven't really properly understood the mechanisms of CF/SLI memory handling yet. GPU-Z, Afterburner and several games show wrong RAM values because they read from both cards as if they were separate, not taking into consideration that it's a CF/SLI set. In short, you don't have 1.9GB of unique data in your cards, you have 950MB of the SAME data in both cards.
btw. MP3 didn't stutter in any way on my single 7950 either on highest settings minus MSAA.
Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn!
"The sky was the color of a TV tuned to a dead station" - Neuromancer
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sausje
Banned
Posts: 17716
Location: Limboland, Netherlands
|
| Posted: Mon, 18th Feb 2013 04:34 Post subject: |
|
|
Set the same settings and see how much data is loaded into your card, then we do know.
| Frant wrote: | | I mean, that argument shows you haven't really properly understood the mechanisms of CF/SLI memory handling yet. GPU-Z, Afterburner and several games show wrong RAM values because they read from both cards as if they were separate, not taking into consideration that it's a CF/SLI set. In short, you don't have 1.9GB of unique data in your cards, you have 950MB of the SAME data in both cards. |
If you think so, in order to know how multigpu works, you already know how the memory works.
Each card has to render the same shit, only it can do it at twice speed due to it being able to assign a frame per card. But both cards still need the same resources in order to do so..
Yet i don't see why such a thing is impossible, isn't the crossfire bridge or whatever both connects, fast enough to transfer ONLY the data that it needs for that frame?
Oh and the game might not stutter for you, it has 3x the amount of memory as mine does.. so that was kinda capt obvious >.<
So go set the same settings and see how much gpu memory it uses, only then we know how much memory is actually needed for that setting, so my point is still valid untill then.
What would be a plausible explanation is that it is already counting the double amount needed per setting?
Because i ran into this screenshot, with almost the same settings (except the ambient occlusion set to SSAO instead of HDAO, but i doub't that it makes 1gb difference).
| Spoiler: | |
So IF they did show it like i said above, why the fuck do that and make people confused?!
Proud member of Frustrated Association of International Losers Failing Against the Gifted and Superior (F.A.I.L.F.A.G.S)
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Frant
King's Bounty
Posts: 24656
Location: Your Mom
|
| Posted: Mon, 18th Feb 2013 04:49 Post subject: |
|
|
Because the programmers doesn't give a shit? They have code that see cards #0 and #1, counts the RAM, prints it out. Their code doesn't differentiate between CF/SLI or non-CF/non-SLI.
But perhaps you're right, the MP3 coders managed to rewrite a whole CF/SLI engine on their own that use RAM on both cards as combined unique RAM and then use the second GPU as a slave to the first, receiving data from the first card, processing it, then sending the processed data back? It should only take what, 150ms of latency or more to do?
I can't give you any more answers or explanations. If you believe you have 1.9GB of unique data in your two crossfired 1GB cards, then so be it.
Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn!
"The sky was the color of a TV tuned to a dead station" - Neuromancer
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sausje
Banned
Posts: 17716
Location: Limboland, Netherlands
|
| Posted: Mon, 18th Feb 2013 04:56 Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Frant
King's Bounty
Posts: 24656
Location: Your Mom
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DXWarlock
VIP Member
Posts: 11549
Location: Florida, USA
|
| Posted: Mon, 18th Feb 2013 05:20 Post subject: |
|
|
| sausje wrote: | Set the same settings and see how much data is loaded into your card, then we do know.
| Frant wrote: | | I mean, that argument shows you haven't really properly understood the mechanisms of CF/SLI memory handling yet. GPU-Z, Afterburner and several games show wrong RAM values because they read from both cards as if they were separate, not taking into consideration that it's a CF/SLI set. In short, you don't have 1.9GB of unique data in your cards, you have 950MB of the SAME data in both cards. |
If you think so, in order to know how multigpu works, you already know how the memory works.
Each card has to render the same shit, only it can do it at twice speed due to it being able to assign a frame per card. But both cards still need the same resources in order to do so..
Yet i don't see why such a thing is impossible, isn't the crossfire bridge or whatever both connects, fast enough to transfer ONLY the data that it needs for that frame?
Oh and the game might not stutter for you, it has 3x the amount of memory as mine does.. so that was kinda capt obvious >.<
So go set the same settings and see how much gpu memory it uses, only then we know how much memory is actually needed for that setting, so my point is still valid untill then.
What would be a plausible explanation is that it is already counting the double amount needed per setting?
Because i ran into this screenshot, with almost the same settings (except the ambient occlusion set to SSAO instead of HDAO, but i doub't that it makes 1gb difference).
| Spoiler: | |
So IF they did show it like i said above, why the fuck do that and make people confused?! |
I think its a matter of what it reports doesn't mean it actually allocates/uses that much. just what it reports it has
Like GTA4 you COULD set it to 16g of vid memory with the ini file, it it will report in the settings you have that much to use (and how much its using, which is a 'guestimate').
But i know in SLI/crossfire, is what frant said. the memory is mirrored. When I had the 2 cards in CF the memory used/free on both was usually roughly the same.
The fact you have 2 cards bridged doesnt change the way the cards work. The cards still 'load' the textures beforehand. the bridge doesnt change that into the question you asked of " isn't the crossfire bridge or whatever both connects, fast enough to transfer ONLY the data that it needs for that frame?"
Technically yes, the bridge could handle that bitrate, but its not what it does cardwise.
Each card gets its copy of the data for the memory it needs and runs as if its a single card as far as its rendering process is concerned (the steps it takes anyway), the bridge is just so the cards can 'talk' to each other about balancing, sync, render order, agreement on output head to display on..etc So it doesnt clog up the PCI-E channels with its 'chatter' back and forth to each other.
Think of it as the same as a renderfarm for data. Each server gets an exact same set of data, and all work on it 'together' talking over the network on which part each one is chewing on..but memory/data wise they all have the same exact data set.
-We don't control what happens to us in life, but we control how we respond to what happens in life.
-Hard times create strong men, strong men create good times, good times create weak men, and weak men create hard times. -G. Michael Hopf
Disclaimer: Post made by me are of my own creation. A delusional mind relayed in text form.
Last edited by DXWarlock on Mon, 18th Feb 2013 05:25; edited 2 times in total
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sausje
Banned
Posts: 17716
Location: Limboland, Netherlands
|
| Posted: Mon, 18th Feb 2013 05:23 Post subject: |
|
|
So the only explanation left as to why it's showing 1.9gb used is that it is already counting double the values per setting then?
Proud member of Frustrated Association of International Losers Failing Against the Gifted and Superior (F.A.I.L.F.A.G.S)
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DXWarlock
VIP Member
Posts: 11549
Location: Florida, USA
|
| Posted: Mon, 18th Feb 2013 05:27 Post subject: |
|
|
| sausje wrote: | | So the only explanation left as to why it's showing 1.9gb used is that it is already counting double the values per setting then? |
Or the programmers for the game is counting total memory seen, not the fact each is mirroring each other.
I mean you DO have 1.9g of memory technically in chip count and space, just its in a 'raid' setup of sorts.
Like having 2 500g HD in raid. if something was just adding total disksize seen regardless of how they are linked..it would say 1000G, but you would only have 500g of writable space..since its mirrored to each.
-We don't control what happens to us in life, but we control how we respond to what happens in life.
-Hard times create strong men, strong men create good times, good times create weak men, and weak men create hard times. -G. Michael Hopf
Disclaimer: Post made by me are of my own creation. A delusional mind relayed in text form.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sausje
Banned
Posts: 17716
Location: Limboland, Netherlands
|
| Posted: Mon, 18th Feb 2013 05:47 Post subject: |
|
|
Look at my top screenshot, you will see what i mean 
It's showing as usage: 1930/2048mb.
On the other screenshot i found online, it's almost the same settings yet (and they have 1 card) they only need 984mb to run it.
Granted that HDAO needs a little more then SSAO and i'm on a little lower res, then my usage can only be that high if it actually counts each setting as double the amount already (due to it being mirrored).
That is what i meant with the last thing
Proud member of Frustrated Association of International Losers Failing Against the Gifted and Superior (F.A.I.L.F.A.G.S)
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DXWarlock
VIP Member
Posts: 11549
Location: Florida, USA
|
| Posted: Mon, 18th Feb 2013 05:57 Post subject: |
|
|
Yea, I think the games just reporting it wrong. Same thing with GTA4. if you force it to think it has more than you do, you can go over what you actually have with the settings. And it first did the 'double amount' when it first came out. I had 2 512g cards, and it showed as 1g total. And both are made by rockstar.
Yea, so I think your right so I think its counting total used, not whats redundant. Since 984x2 is about around what yours showing usage is.
Plus I cant see max payne every actually using around 2g of vid memory if it wasn't shared.
-We don't control what happens to us in life, but we control how we respond to what happens in life.
-Hard times create strong men, strong men create good times, good times create weak men, and weak men create hard times. -G. Michael Hopf
Disclaimer: Post made by me are of my own creation. A delusional mind relayed in text form.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Werelds
Special Little Man
Posts: 15098
Location: 0100111001001100
|
| Posted: Mon, 18th Feb 2013 10:02 Post subject: |
|
|
The games are reporting it wrong. It's not possible for them to address each GPU's memory space separately, no matter how much they would want to do so. One of the many problems with AFR, the rendering method both SLI and CFX use. The only way you can get some level of control over each is via CUDA (think 4.0 is the first one), but that's not useful for graphics and still has a bunch of caveats 
You can think, hope, wish or believe different, but that's how it is. SLI and CFX effectively put the VRAM into something that's almost RAID-1. The data contained in each GPU's memory will not be 100% identical, as each frame is different and the active buffers will change for each frame, but 90% of the data are shared assets. And the lowest common denominator is the one controlling everything, so with 2 1.5 GB cards and a 3GB card, you will still only have three separate (yet 90% identical) 1.5 GB framebuffers.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Mon, 18th Feb 2013 12:16 Post subject: |
|
|
Sausje its safe to say that the game doesnt use 1930mb VRAM, even tho it says so. You cannot run 2GB texture data on 1GB card.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sausje
Banned
Posts: 17716
Location: Limboland, Netherlands
|
| Posted: Mon, 18th Feb 2013 12:21 Post subject: |
|
|
Yeah i knew all of that, but what made me wonder was the 1930mb vram it said it needed for those settings.
I'm now copying over MP3 from the HDD to the SSD (otherwise i can't update) and see for myself.
Altho i'm almost 100% sure that it's already showing double the amount that is actually needed for those settings..
(Maybe because it does see 2gb, but it can't see that it's mirrored. Maybe it can only read the amount it has and how full it is. So when i change an option that is usually, let's say, 100mb. Instead of showing +100mb, it's showing +200mb because both cards load the same 100mb.)
Still it makes me wonder why R* would do such a thing, just to confuse people?
I mean, if it's standard that crossfire/sli can only use 1 cards memory and the rest mirror it, then why report double that amount of it detects already 2 or more cards?
Proud member of Frustrated Association of International Losers Failing Against the Gifted and Superior (F.A.I.L.F.A.G.S)
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sausje
Banned
Posts: 17716
Location: Limboland, Netherlands
|
| Posted: Mon, 18th Feb 2013 12:27 Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
doobzilla
Posts: 1099
Location: Team America's Mount Rushmore Base. Stolen from Indians.
|
| Posted: Mon, 18th Feb 2013 17:47 Post subject: |
|
|
I guess that I'll just have to wait for the next wave of cards to be released and then wait a bit for EVGA to watercool one that has >3GB so I can buy two of them...
NEVER will I go tri-sli again...NE-VER.
If EVGA would go on and water cool their 680 with 4096MB memory, I'd buy two of em right now.
In all honesty, I don't really need more than 1536MB VRAM right now, I just want to max out Skyrim with a bunch of mods and not CTD once the buffer fills. At least I assume that's where my CTD's are coming from since, after I lowered a few settings (thus lowering the amount of VRAM it uses to ~1450MB), I no longer get as many crashes. Unfortunately, I had to lower my shadowmap, and a few details settings so that I could achieve this feat and it just doesn't look as pretty as I want it to. Fucking first-world problems again. Oh well, I guess that I'll just go and eat half of my gigantic lunch now and throw the rest into the trash. Sometimes, being a white American does have its perks, you know?
And thanks again for the help, everyone. If/when I upgrade, I'll be sure to brag about it a bunch. I might even post some pictures with me in my sunglasses, Panama Jack hat, giving a thumbs up, and showering my computer desk with money and/or champagne. Then, I'll take out mah gun and shoot the computer since my non-existent daughter pissed me off and I have no better way to handle it other than to be a complete dick. Then, I'll go vote against any and all legislation that might give other people the same rights that I enjoy. 
Hobo Zombie: TRAAAAAAAIIIINNNNNNSSSSSS
Woman Zombie: COMPLAAAAAAAIIIIIIINNNNNSSSSS
Englishmen Zombie: REFRAAAAAAAAAIIIIIINNNNNSSSSS
Thanks for the idea Lutz!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
doobzilla
Posts: 1099
Location: Team America's Mount Rushmore Base. Stolen from Indians.
|
| Posted: Wed, 20th Feb 2013 00:16 Post subject: |
|
|
I do have one more question if anyone still cares to help:
When using tri-SLI, and Nvidia Surround, does each card render all of the frames on the monitor that is connected to it? If so, would the each card's VRAM still mirror the first card's? (I believe that it would, but don't know for sure, which is why I'm asking) I'm trying to figure out if my current rig could do surround very well...
MOBO: EVGA X79 (whichever one had the northbridge water-cooled from the factory as I CBA to remember which one right now)
CPU: i7 975ee
RAM: 12GB Dominator 1866
HDD: Velociraptors (1x300GB, 1x1TB)
GPU: 3x EVGA GTX580 HC2 w/1536MB VRAM
Monitors: 2x Samsung P2770fh (soon to have a third, but it'll most likely be the newer version of the 27")
(in case whoever is helping doesn't want to re-read the OP)
I know how to get all three monitors connected, but I'm curious if these cards might handle some of the more recent games (Dead Space 3, Skyrim, Diablo III - not that I play it at all anymore, WRC3, Crysis 3, etc.) and some of the games that will release in the coming months (Bioshock Finite, etc.).
As always, any and all help is greatly appreciated.
Hobo Zombie: TRAAAAAAAIIIINNNNNNSSSSSS
Woman Zombie: COMPLAAAAAAAIIIIIIINNNNNSSSSS
Englishmen Zombie: REFRAAAAAAAAAIIIIIINNNNNSSSSS
Thanks for the idea Lutz!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DXWarlock
VIP Member
Posts: 11549
Location: Florida, USA
|
| Posted: Wed, 20th Feb 2013 02:20 Post subject: |
|
|
As far as I know they all render all the data...since the syncing is horizontally split not veritcally (is using balancing).
But any way chosen as render mode/order, surround or eyefinity it sees all 3 as one 'big' screen resolution, and the game is done as one 'scene' per frame at that resolution.
-We don't control what happens to us in life, but we control how we respond to what happens in life.
-Hard times create strong men, strong men create good times, good times create weak men, and weak men create hard times. -G. Michael Hopf
Disclaimer: Post made by me are of my own creation. A delusional mind relayed in text form.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
doobzilla
Posts: 1099
Location: Team America's Mount Rushmore Base. Stolen from Indians.
|
| Posted: Wed, 20th Feb 2013 03:37 Post subject: |
|
|
Got it. As usual, my assumptions were correct. I'm always right when it won't benefit myself as much... 
I did pick up another monitor tonight, but the a/c adapter (transformer) doesn't work, which I verified with my multimeter... Fucking bullshit. Oh well, I'll swap it for another ne tomorrow and we'll see how my computer does then.
Thanks for the info.
Hobo Zombie: TRAAAAAAAIIIINNNNNNSSSSSS
Woman Zombie: COMPLAAAAAAAIIIIIIINNNNNSSSSS
Englishmen Zombie: REFRAAAAAAAAAIIIIIINNNNNSSSSS
Thanks for the idea Lutz!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
doobzilla
Posts: 1099
Location: Team America's Mount Rushmore Base. Stolen from Indians.
|
| Posted: Thu, 21st Feb 2013 00:08 Post subject: |
|
|
After seeing this new Samsung LED-lit LCD, I've decided to sell my existing P2770fh's and buy two more Samsung S27B350H's. Even though they are 1ms slower than my existing monitors, the difference in picture quality is amazing. I figured that it was high time that I put my tri-SLI rig to use and see what I can make the bitch do.
BTW, if anyone in the US is interested in buying my old monitors, feel free to PM me and I can point you in the right direction. I hope that me saying this doesn't constitute a violation of the rules, and if it does, please let me know via PM instead of just banning me (either temp or perm). Thanks!
And thanks again to all of those that helped me figure these things out for certain. I do not like basing my decisions on my assumptions of how these things work and Google usually only leads me to other boards where people aren't usually so helpful (Facepunch is one such board, those guys usually just ask you why you want to do something instead of actually trying to help).
Hobo Zombie: TRAAAAAAAIIIINNNNNNSSSSSS
Woman Zombie: COMPLAAAAAAAIIIIIIINNNNNSSSSS
Englishmen Zombie: REFRAAAAAAAAAIIIIIINNNNNSSSSS
Thanks for the idea Lutz!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Frant
King's Bounty
Posts: 24656
Location: Your Mom
|
| Posted: Thu, 21st Feb 2013 07:10 Post subject: |
|
|
Never heard or seen a rule where it says it's forbidden to sell your own hardware on NFOhump. I do believe there's a thread for it though, but you worded it in a way that I can't see any repercussions coming from it.
Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn!
"The sky was the color of a TV tuned to a dead station" - Neuromancer
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Page 1 of 2 |
All times are GMT + 1 Hour |
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB 2.0.8 © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group
|
|
 |
|
