BoFox wrote:
Cool, looks like it'll be a great article. I personally doubt to see anything needing over 2GB. It's only in Skyrim when changing the .ini file by increasing the draw distances to something beyond the ultra max settings in the menu that racks up the memory usage, IIRC.. unless you're for custom-tweaking the .ini files, your article might just prove that 2GB is "GOOD ENOUGH" for anything retail, even with HD packs installed.
In your last article (part 2, on the OC'ed speeds), I wish I asked you in advance to analyze the memory overclock ALONE (without overclocking the core at all). Some are saying that overclocking the memory actually yields greater benefits than the core alone on the GTX 680. This analysis would have been even more interesting for me. Oh well..?
i don't know if i can get
Skyrim
i might have to buy a new MB really soon.
As to your memory request, i believe you did ask and you were satisfied what we did
Quote:
GTX 680 (1006/3004MHz stock)
1156/3029MHz >>> 1181/3579MHz) – 1181/3604MHz
HD 7970 (925/1375MHz stock)
1100/1400MHz >>> 1125/1575MHz >>> 1200/1575MHz
After comparing at stock, the first overclock is a big core increase. Then a tiny core increase and a big memory increase. Finally there is the max OC with voltage and fan rpm increase.
You can see how much performance comes from oc'ing the memory alone because you already know how the core scales. It pays to OC the memory on these new cards.
Hmm, it sure is just as conclusive to look at the bandwidth bottlenecking factor this way as well - thanks for reminding me again about your awesome work!
. Though its highly unlikely our company is going to upgrade from 2000$ quadros 
I got invited last time but couldn't make it