Incorrect information reported by GPUZ for an ATI Radeon X300 SE HyperMemory

[red-ray]

While testing SIV on my ATI Radeon X300 SE HyperMemory I noticed it reported it's memory size @ offset 0x00F8 as 32 MB when it's actually 128 MB and when I checked GPUZ it also incorrectly reported 32 MB. I also noted other errors in GPUZ.

1. Memory reported as 32 MB when it should be 128 MB.
2. Resizable BAR reported as Enabled
3. Default Memory Clock reported as 297 MHz when it should be 300 MHz
4. Die Size Unknown when it's 74 mm²
5. I was unable to report these issues from GPUZ as it could not connect to it's server.

Maybe the size is at other than offset 0x00F8, either way I feel GPUZ should be fixed, will it be?

 

[P4-630]

ATI Radeon X300 SE

Was my first own desktop GPU, it overclocked like mad, even though it was passively cooled!

 

[thewan]

Memory reported as 32 MB when it should be 128 MB.

32MB is correct. I remember reading reviews about these back then. The hyper memory series from ATi shares some of your system RAM to reach its total memory capacity. The X300 SE HyperMemory has 32MB of onboard VRAM, and it shares up to 96MB of your system RAM to achieve 128MB total. If you had a X550 HyperMemory, that had 128MB of onboard VRAM and shares up to 128 MB of system RAM to achieve 256MB. The HyperMemory was a response to NVidia's Turbocache series, which also does the same thing. Its a costcutting measure to sell really cheap GPUs while still boasting "high" amounts of memory.

Edit: Quote a source review:

ATI Radeon X300 SE HyperMemory 128MiB

My evaluation of such low-end hardware using the latest graphically challenging games might seem pointless at first glance. Look twice and you'll see that while both HyperMemory and TurboCache boards were generally really unhappy with the latest games, analysis of UT2004 shows that in older...

hexus.net

I covered TurboCache back in December, NVIDIA applying the technology to a low-end, fairly crippled GPU (NV44). Performance was much better than anything integrated and the feature set is pretty strong and with the best TurboCache SKUs fairly cheap worldwide. ATI have a range of HyperMemory SKUs available now, too. Encompassing the X300 and X600 product ranges, HyperMemory boards usually have either 32MiB of on-board memory (using BGA DRAMS) and augment 96MiB of system memory to create a 128MiB total memory size, or they have 128MiB on-board (TSOP pieces) and augment another 128MiB space in system memory to create a 256MiB product.

 

[Aquinus]

32MB is correct. I remember reading reviews about these back then. The hyper memory series from ATi shares some of your system RAM to reach its total memory capacity. The X300 SE HyperMemory has 32MB of onboard VRAM, and it shares up to 96MB of your system RAM to achieve 128MB total. If you had a X550 HyperMemory, that had 128MB of onboard VRAM and shares up to 128 MB of system RAM to achieve 256MB. The HyperMemory was a response to NVidia's Turbocache series, which also does the same thing. Its a costcutting measure to sell really cheap GPUs while still boasting "high" amounts of memory.

Edit: Quote a source review:

ATI Radeon X300 SE HyperMemory 128MiB

My evaluation of such low-end hardware using the latest graphically challenging games might seem pointless at first glance. Look twice and you'll see that while both HyperMemory and TurboCache boards were generally really unhappy with the latest games, analysis of UT2004 shows that in older...

hexus.net

^ This. I used to have a x300 for a headless machine and I can back up this claim. The GPU only has 32MB of VRAM. The 128MB of "hypermemory" is a fancy way of saying that the GPU will use system memory after that 32MB. This was literally the cheapest PCIe GPU you could buy at the time and it behaved like one.

 

[red-ray]

The hyper memory series from ATi shares some of your system RAM to reach its total memory capacity.

Thank you for the background, I have adjusted SIV and added a note to my code about the X550 memory.

I feel https://www.techpowerup.com/gpu-specs/radeon-x300-se-hypermemory.c515 should be fixed to say 32MB + 96MB system memory

I suspected the Resizable BAR reported as Enabled was a general problem so I installed my nVidia NV41 [GeForce 6800 XT] and ran GPUZ, this resulted in a BOSD, but the .DMP is too big to attach.

I tried another GPU and it looks like it is, further PCIe config space can be read and when I pressed [ Close ] GPUZ crashed, again I could not send the report and got the same error 6.

 

[P4-630]

But then, how many people are using Windows XP these days?

 

[red-ray]

But then, how many people are using Windows XP these days?

I suspect more than are using Windows 2003 x32 Enterprise Terminal Server R2

If GPUZ does not support a OS then it should say so rather than report incorrect information or trigger a BSOD

Next you will imply Windows 11 is too new when the fact it bugs are bugs and should be fixed! I found some more

 

[Keullo-e]

Few MHz differences on clock speeds in any software isn't anything special, I've got used to that for about 20 years. And like said, the card has 32MB of local VRAM and it uses the system RAM after that. Just like Nvidia did with TurboCache with their low-end cards during that time.

 

[red-ray]

Few MHz differences on clock speeds in any software isn't anything special

For measured speeds ± 100 KHz is easy enough for well designed and implemented software, the 300 MHz is a specified speed and should match the specification.