128 or 256 mb video card?

[HeroOfPellinor]

Originally posted by: apoppin
Great, ONE benchmark.

There's a half dozen on that site...feel free to check them all out.

of course, what is "relevent" to you . . ..

What's "relevent" is determined by the topic of the thread.

You jumped all over the guy who said "9800pro 256 is NOT ANY FASTER than 9800pro 128." He was right, as I proved by the link provided. You were wrong. Now, if you're going to compare a 9800XT to a 9800 Pro, you're not just comparing memory size, are you?

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor

Originally posted by: apoppin
Great, ONE benchmark.

There's a half dozen on that site...feel free to check them all out.

of course, what is "relevent" to you . . ..

What's "relevent" is determined by the topic of the thread.

You jumped all over the guy who said "9800pro 256 is NOT ANY FASTER than 9800pro 128." He was right, as I proved by the link provided. You were wrong. Now, if you're going to compare a 9800XT to a 9800 Pro, you're not just comparing memory size, are you?

You didn't prove anything as usual.

and - by you own admission +1% is FASTER so you are dead wrong.

letsee, then by your OWN admission you strayed "off-topic":

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor

Originally posted by: elcoro2005
Well i think im leaning towards the 9800pro 256mb and maybe flashing into an xt.

thanks for the help

Sounds good.

So i was actually able to HELP the original poster . . . what did you contribute to this thread - besides MORE OT crapping about the "6800" - TOTALLY UNrelated to this thread.

:roll:

 

[CraigRT]

Just get the 9800 Pro with 128MB.

 

[SonicIce]

I dunno about you guys, but when I said "9800pro 256 is NOT ANY FASTER than 9800pro 128.", I was looking at these benchmarks:
UT2003
Battlefield 1942
Call Of Duty
Quake 3 Team Arena
AquaMark 3
UT2003 4xAA/8xAF
Call Of Duty 4xAA/8xAF

You guys are right though, it's worth the extra bucks if you're going to make an XT out of it. But for most people its not worth the price at all. The biggest gap between framerates is like 2fps. The performace differance at stock is practically negligable.

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: SonicIce
I dunno about you guys, but when I said "9800pro 256 is NOT ANY FASTER than 9800pro 128.", I was looking at these benchmarks:
UT2003
Battlefield 1942
Call Of Duty
Quake 3 Team Arena
AquaMark 3
UT2003 4xAA/8xAF
Call Of Duty 4xAA/8xAF

You guys are right though, it's worth the extra bucks if you're going to make an XT out of it. But for most people its not worth the price at all. The biggest gap between framerates is like 2fps. The performace differance at stock is practically negligable.

umm . . . your links aren't workin for me.

The slightly 'older' games only show ~1-2% improvement . . . sometimes even that little makes a "difference"; i believe the newest games show a bit more (i "remembered" ~3-4%) . . .

HOWEVER, the flash to 'XT' is more noticeable - especially in NEW games; IF i couldn't flash my 256/256Pro > XT, i wouldn't have bothered to buy it at all - i'd have gone for a 9800p-128MB and saved a few bucks.

 

[SonicIce]

Yea, flashing to an XT is a great idea. Is 3-4% noticeable though unless you constantly look at a fps counter?