1. Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

GPU-Z 0.4 doesn't show correct bandwidth for GTX 275!

Discussion in 'GPU-Z' started by Duker5, Mar 30, 2010.

  1. Duker5 New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2010
    Messages:
    7 (0.00/day)
    Thanks Received:
    0
    Version 0.39 shows the correct bandwidth as being 127.0 gb/s

    [​IMG]

    Version 0.40 shows incorrect bandwidth as being 124.0 gb/s

    [​IMG]

    Is this a known bug?
     
  2. erocker

    erocker Super Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2006
    Messages:
    39,892 (13.08/day)
    Thanks Received:
    14,295
    Previous versions were wrong. It is now listed correctly.
     
  3. dark2099

    dark2099

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2008
    Messages:
    4,400 (1.78/day)
    Thanks Received:
    755
    Location:
    where everyone wants to be
    W1zzard re-did how the bandwidth is read out, from GiB/s to GB/s, so it is reading it correctly, just since it is a different unit is the reason for change.
     
  4. Duker5 New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2010
    Messages:
    7 (0.00/day)
    Thanks Received:
    0
    How do you mean previous versions were wrong? I've only just downloaded version 0.40 and I can tell you for sure that the bandwidth of the gtx 275 is and always has been 127.0 gb/s so what are you on about dark?

    It hasn't changed from GiB/s to Gb/s as you can quite clearly see in the screenshots it's always been Gb/s and it doesn't change the fact that the gtx 275's bandwidth is definitely 127.0 gigabytes a second NOT 124.0 gigabytes a second! So version 0.40 is definitely showing incorrect information because it's widely known gtx 275 gfx cards have a bandwidth of 127.0 gb/s.
     
  5. Solaris17

    Solaris17 Creator Solaris Utility DVD

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2005
    Messages:
    17,348 (5.12/day)
    Thanks Received:
    3,656
    Location:
    Florida
    is it widely known because everyone was using an older GPU-z?
     
  6. dark2099

    dark2099

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2008
    Messages:
    4,400 (1.78/day)
    Thanks Received:
    755
    Location:
    where everyone wants to be
    Don't mean to sound argumentative, but check the change log and forums, here is a quote from the change log

    and link to W1zz explaining what I said http://forums.techpowerup.com/showpost.php?p=1825929&postcount=6
     
  7. Duker5 New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2010
    Messages:
    7 (0.00/day)
    Thanks Received:
    0
    Are you actually stupid? It has nothing to with people running an older version of GPU-Z, so here are some cold hard facts to ram down your throat!

    http://www.nvidia.com/object/product_geforce_gtx_275_us.html

    Which says without a shadow of a doubt that the GTX 275 gfx cards have a bandwidth of 127gigabytes a second! Do you or the creator of this program really no more about graphics cards than NVIDIA do about the cards they make! No I don't think so.

    "And as for Wizzard saying it has labeled it GB/s but calculated GiB/s .. now it calculates what it claims"

    What a load of rubbish it's always listed it as GB/s in the program so what the bloody hell is everyone waffling on about GiB/s? WHen it's NEVER been that.

    Enjoy the cold hard facts once again see here http://www.nvidia.com/object/product_geforce_gtx_275_us.html

    Their is no way you can dispute that the gtx 275 has a memory bandwidth of 127.0 Gb/s! Because it always has!
     
  8. jellyrole

    jellyrole

    Joined:
    May 11, 2009
    Messages:
    1,020 (0.50/day)
    Thanks Received:
    206
    Location:
    Manhattan
    Someone woke up on the wrong side of the tea and crumpets...

    It has been calculating GiB's up until this version, however, it has been labeled as GB's. If you'd learn how to read and listen to what other people are saying you would have gathered that by now and wouldn't have gone off on your little pissy fit..
     
  9. francis511

    francis511

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2006
    Messages:
    2,547 (0.86/day)
    Thanks Received:
    271
    Location:
    N.Ireland
    Imma stir this up a bit.
     

    Attached Files:

  10. human_error

    human_error

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2008
    Messages:
    1,755 (0.80/day)
    Thanks Received:
    489
    Calm that tone down, no need to call people names. W1zzard has said that gpuz before 0.4.0 always calculated in GiB, i think he would know how his own program calculated the bandwidth, and now 0.4.0 results in a GB/s bandwidth reading. Yes it was always marked as GB/s but that's the same as HDD manufacturers marking their hard drive capacities with GB when they format to a lower volume due to the gigabyte vs gigabit readings - nvidia are probably doing the same on their spec page showing the GiB value but marking it GB.

    Hell if you don't believe us calculate the bandwidth yourself and see what number you get.
     
  11. W1zzard

    W1zzard Administrator Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2004
    Messages:
    15,007 (3.90/day)
    Thanks Received:
    11,877
    please watch your language.

    let me do the math again for you with data from nvidia's page:

    1134 mhz memory clock * 1,000,000 (to hz) = 1,134,000 hz

    1,134,000 hz * 448 bit bus width = 508,032,000 bits per second * 2 (gddr3) = 1,016,064,000 bits per second

    1016064000 / 8 (to convert to bytes) = 127008000 bytes per second

    to convert from bytes to gigabytes you divide by 1024*1024*1024

    --> 121.124267578125 GB/s

    when you divide by 1000/1000/1000 you get: 127.008000

    feel free to point out flaws in my math.

    in your opinion, what is the correct way to calculate gigabytes?
     
  12. Duker5 New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2010
    Messages:
    7 (0.00/day)
    Thanks Received:
    0
    Hard to admit your wrong and have been backed into a corner and that the newest version of the program is actually flawed, i'm not having a pissy fit at all love, i'm right and i've proved it, you gonna tell me the facts on Nvidias own website are wrong!

    Oh not to mention the screenshot just given by francis511 showing the bandwidth as 126.0 gb/s! Now tell me the program isn't f*cked so clearly it's you who cannot read.

    And human_error do not tell me to calm down who really gives a flack if it's GiB/s or GB/s, fact is the bandwidth of the Gtx 275 is 127.0 gigabytes a second and that's a fact, like I said is Nvidias very own website lying?
     
  13. human_error

    human_error

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2008
    Messages:
    1,755 (0.80/day)
    Thanks Received:
    489
    Yep. W1zzards' math above proves it, as i explained nvidia are putting the GiB value with the GB designation, so yes they are lying. As for your attitute i'll refer you to teh forum rules to be polite and courtious to other users.

    I have a feeling you're going on a vacation over you refusing to acknowledge that a reading has correctly been changed, making you have a terrible attitude.
     
  14. Duker5 New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2010
    Messages:
    7 (0.00/day)
    Thanks Received:
    0
    The flaw in your math is that it's taken you up to 40 versions of the program to suddenly change how you calculate by apparently using GiB/s instead of GB/s and explain to me why the screenshot given by Francis511 clearly shows in version 0.40 the bandwidth is 126.0 GB/s.

    Somethings wrong somewhere clearly, maybe you should go and work on your program a bit more? And iron out all the bugs my dear friend :shadedshu

    EDIT: Human_error I'm not on any vacation at all sweetie, I'm going to eat my tea now thank you, and will be back later.
     
  15. W1zzard

    W1zzard Administrator Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2004
    Messages:
    15,007 (3.90/day)
    Thanks Received:
    11,877
    Code:
    	double memBw=c->m_busWidth*mem/8./1024.;
    	if (c->GetMemType().Find(_T("DDR"))!=-1)
    		memBw*=2;
    	if (c->GetMemType().Find(_T("DDR5"))!=-1)
    		memBw*=2;
    
    	m_result.Set(_T("MemBandwidth"), Format(_T("%.1f"), memBw));
    
    my program code, please advise
     
    3dc_member says thanks.
  16. human_error

    human_error

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2008
    Messages:
    1,755 (0.80/day)
    Thanks Received:
    489
    Code:
            if(user=="Duker5")
                    multi=1000
                    //this gives a GiB reading, but some people just don't trust what they are told
            else multi=1024
    	double memBw=c->m_busWidth*mem/8./multi.;
    	if (c->GetMemType().Find(_T("DDR"))!=-1)
    		memBw*=2;
    	if (c->GetMemType().Find(_T("DDR5"))!=-1)
    		memBw*=2;
    
    	m_result.Set(_T("MemBandwidth"), Format(_T("%.1f"), memBw));
    
    seems that would remove the complaint.
     
  17. W1zzard

    W1zzard Administrator Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2004
    Messages:
    15,007 (3.90/day)
    Thanks Received:
    11,877
    there are countless of lawsuits where hdd makers represented their gigabytes as 1,000,000,000 bytes to make the drives seem bigger, and they all lost
     
  18. ml2517

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Messages:
    31 (0.02/day)
    Thanks Received:
    5
    ... or you could stop whining about a tool that you've paid *NOTHING* for and suggesting that the maker of said tool do things how YOU want them to.

    Thanks for all of the effort thus far W1zzard!
     
    angelkiller says thanks.
  19. xrealm20

    xrealm20 New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2010
    Messages:
    467 (0.27/day)
    Thanks Received:
    129
    Location:
    Houston
    Yep --
    1 gigabyte = 1024 megabytes
    1 megabyte = 1024 kilobytes
    1 kilobyte = 1024 bytes.

    Wiz, as you already know, your math and code are accurate - nVidia is misrepresenting the bandwidth on their cards ... suprise suprise ---
     
    Last edited: Mar 31, 2010
  20. Molignar

    Molignar New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2010
    Messages:
    30 (0.02/day)
    Thanks Received:
    5
    After busting a gut laughing, I thought I'd throw in my inconsequential two cents. The fact Wiz even responded to such idiocy should tell you at the very least it's a stand up thing to do even though not required. If you have a problem with the program, code it yourself if it's that important. Mod's need an auto-close button for this kind of crap. Someone close this thread please...there has to be better things we can talk about than bashing someone who brings us software we use for free. Thanks Wiz, some of us actually appreciate the program from what it is.
     
    TVman says thanks.
  21. Solaris17

    Solaris17 Creator Solaris Utility DVD

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2005
    Messages:
    17,348 (5.12/day)
    Thanks Received:
    3,656
    Location:
    Florida
    what killed it for me is when he was like omg francis511s gb/s is higher than mine!!! then i saw that francis511s memory was clocked higher and lold
     
    majestic12 says thanks.
  22. 3dc_member New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2010
    Messages:
    15 (0.01/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1
    Use
    Code:
    	double memBw=c->m_busWidth*mem/8./1000.;
    	if (c->GetMemType().Find(_T("DDR"))!=-1)
    		memBw*=2;
    	if (c->GetMemType().Find(_T("DDR5"))!=-1)
    		memBw*=2;
    
    	m_result.Set(_T("MemBandwidth"), Format(_T("%.1f"), memBw));
    
    and display it as GB/s (which is what i prefer).
    Or use
    Code:
    	double memBw=c->m_busWidth*mem*1000^2/8./1024^3.;
    	if (c->GetMemType().Find(_T("DDR"))!=-1)
    		memBw*=2;
    	if (c->GetMemType().Find(_T("DDR5"))!=-1)
    		memBw*=2;
    
    	m_result.Set(_T("MemBandwidth"), Format(_T("%.1f"), memBw));
    
    and display it as GiB/s.
    The current implementation is sheer nonsense.
     
  23. option350z

    option350z New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2009
    Messages:
    119 (0.06/day)
    Thanks Received:
    28
    Location:
    Gurnee, IL
    Can a mod please close this thread because their is countless ones like it plus I think it should be posted in the thread W1zzard posted.
     
  24. W1zzard

    W1zzard Administrator Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2004
    Messages:
    15,007 (3.90/day)
    Thanks Received:
    11,877
    that's the first useful feedback in this whole discussion, i will implement the quoted method, thanks for pointing out my error .. now people will cry some more for losing more bandwidth

    i do disagree with 1 GB = 1024*1024*1024 being labeled as "GiB".. this whole GiB discussion is a complete waste of time. everybody serious uses it as "GB"
     
  25. animal007uk

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2009
    Messages:
    1,253 (0.60/day)
    Thanks Received:
    292
    Location:
    Warwick, Warwickshire, England
    The only flaw is the person using the program, its been known for years that companys use dodgy ways to rate there products to, i for one never trusted nvidia that much anyway. Also not every card is the same, they have diffrent revisions, My ati has lower memory bandwidth than most cards that are the same because it has slower ram.
     

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guest)

Share This Page