Motherboards Memory Storage Cases/Cooling/PSUs IT Computing Displays Mobile Mac CPUs & Chipsets Video Digital Cameras Linux Gadgets Systems Trade Shows Guides Home Increase Font Size Decrease Font Size Change Page Size
Budget Battle: HyperMemory vs. TurboCache
Budget Battle: HyperMemory vs. TurboCache
Date: May 12th, 2005
Topic: Video Card
Manufacturer: Various
Author: Derek Wilson
 
 


Introduction

Affordable, full-featured cards have been long in coming from ATI and NVIDIA. With the HyperMemory and TurboCache cards, we are finally able to recommend a budget card that can absolutely play the latest games with all the eye candy that developers have built in. The tradeoff that we have to make for the lower price is resolution and filtering options, but we no longer need to sacrifice effects or realism and are rewarded with the immersive experience that modern games are able to deliver at a reasonable price.

For those who have experienced huge resolutions with AA and AF enabled, it would be very hard to go back to playing games at an aliased 800x600 with no filtering. On the upside, casual computer users who may not have any real gaming experience now have a cost-effective way to add DX9 level graphics to their next computer upgrade.

Another major upside of the current landscape is that when the bear minimum in graphics cards supports DX9 level graphics, the minimum requirements of games will shift up to the DX9 level. Designing for DX9 at the outset will change the way that game developers approach their work. This is really the excuse that we need to see gaming experiences jump up to the next level.

In this look at ATI's HyperMemory and NVIDIA's TurboCache parts, we will be trying to determine which card is the best value for the money. Something that we also want to learn is whether the cheapest budget card can still hold its own, and whether the most expensive card that we test is worth the price difference.

We have already written about the technology behind TurboCache. Today, we talk about HyperMemory and concentrate on what these products are actually able to deliver.

Round 1: Architecture   Next Page

 
  Index

Tools Share
Digg   del.icio.us   E-mail  
Print This Article Print this article  

33 Comments - Last by A554SS1N, 1648 days ago
Username:
Password:
No Subject by erinlegault, 1653 days ago
Unfortunately, I don't think this was a completely fair test of hypermemory, since the Radeon X300 (synonymous with 9200) is complete crap, while Geforce 6200 is probably adequate for most users (I think there equivalent or better than the Radeon 9600's)

Reply
No Subject by erinlegault, 1653 days ago
LOL. I beat the losers who care about having the 1st post.

Reply
No Subject by DAPUNISHER, 1653 days ago
I'm on my first cup of coffee, so help me out here Derek,what was the test setup config please?

Reply
No Subject by Marlin1975, 1653 days ago
Do you have the 32mb and 64mb cards backwards?

Reply
No Subject by gimpsoft, 1653 days ago
be alot better if it could be the other way around taking video card memory and using it for windows then ill really pay for it lol letting video card borrow system memory bad idea for the future

anyways that's just me

Reply
No Subject by Marlin1975, 1653 days ago
OK I think it is a mis-tpe, not the graohs that are wrong on page 7...

"Unreal Tournament 2004 shows our 32MB HyperMemory performing on par with the 64MB TurboCache part in the middle of the pack. The 16 and 32 MB TC cards round out the bottom and top of the pack respectively."

Reply
No Subject by Icehawk, 1653 days ago
I don't see the machine specs anywhere either? I'm curious if these were tested on the "standard" uber-machine or tested on what kind of PC someone buying these would actually have. Somehow, by the #s generated I think this was on the uber-machine. While interesting to see ultimate performance I think end-users would also be served by showing more realistic performance #s.

A couple of minor typos ;)

Reply
No Subject by InuYasha, 1653 days ago
#4 the 32MB and 64MB results are not backward.

if i remember correctly from HOCP, the 32MB has faster memory and that makes a huge difference than the amount of memory.

Reply
No Subject by CrystalBay, 1653 days ago
#3 I was wondering the same thing myself, hmmm.

Reply
No Subject by bob661, 1653 days ago
Does anyone know what motherboard and how much ram was used in their test system?

Reply
Comments Page 1 of 4

Download Microsoft Visual Studio ® Team System
Streamline Dev processes, Reduce time to market. Try Microsoft Visual Studio Team System, FREE!
Unlicensed Software at Your Last Company
Anonymously Report Unlicensed Software with Our Form Now. Get Up to $1 Million.
Special Offer from The Economist
Get 12 issues of The Economist for $12. US subscribers only.
Free Forrester Risk Management Report
Demystifying Enterprise Risk Management. Download Free With Registration.
Report Unlicensed Business Software Use
Earn Up to $1 Million by Reporting Unlicensed Software Use. Fill Out Our Form!




Latest news by
DailyTech

 November 20, 2009

Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank

 November 19, 2009

Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank




pipeboost
Copyright © 1997-2009 AnandTech, Inc. All rights reserved. Terms, Conditions and Privacy Information.
Click Here for Advertising Information