256mb or 512mb?

[jackace]

http://promotions.newegg.com/N...FL090707&ATT=Moredeals

They have the x1950gt in both the 256mb and 512mb versions. The price difference is ~$25. I play mainly WoW so will the extra ram help frame rates enough to be of value?

 

[onlyCOpunk]

I'm having the same pickle myself. I suppose it depends how long you normally keep GPU's around. I don't think any games use all that extra ram, but I could be mistaken. I think I'm going to get the 512 version myself.

 

[Aznguy1872]

For 25 dollars more, why not?

 

[jackace]

that was my thinking too, but this card would more then likely be replaced at or after the holidays. Depending on the deals available and release of new hardware.

 

[myocardia]

The older the game, and the lower the resolution you play it at, the less onboard RAM you need. The newer the game, and the higher the resolution, the more onboard RAM you need. The only thing that changes those factors is using high levels of AA. For WoW only, 256MB is plenty, as long as you aren't playing it at rediculously high resolutions, or trying to use the card's maximum amount of AA.

 

[kmmatney]

This card will be a little faster for the same price as the 512 MB card:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/...x?Item=N82E16814133186

 

[onlyCOpunk]

So let's say for Quake 4, when you try to play in Ultra settings it states that over 500MB of GPU memory is needed and it is not recommended. Would 256MB be sufficient to run at Ultra Settings on the Doom 3 engine? Or is 512 necessary in this case?

 

[Dazed and Confused]

9 times out of 10 more ram = slower performance. They generally end up using ram with higher timings ( bad ) when they increase the ram on a video card. This is why the 256mb 9800 Pro's often performed worse than a 128mb version The ram was runnign at the same speed but instead of having 128mb of ram with tight timings they laxxed the timings up in order to add more ram.

Think of it like this :

256mb card = 2-2-2-5 timings

512mb card = 3-4-4-8 timings

Cards with high ammounts of ram are marketing gimmicks to start with. They use cheaper higher density ram for these eye bulging high mem cards to make you think it's better, they hope you'll focus on the ammount and not notice the cheap IC's they used to make those large numbers possible

 

[JustaGeek]

Originally posted by: onlyCOpunk
So let's say for Quake 4, when you try to play in Ultra settings it states that over 500MB of GPU memory is needed and it is not recommended. Would 256MB be sufficient to run at Ultra Settings on the Doom 3 engine? Or is 512 necessary in this case?

It would not make sense to turn the Ultra on - the amount of textures exceeds 500MB, and everything in excess of 256MB would have to be stored in slower system RAM.

Perhaps not as slow, but compare it to the situation with RAM and the Swap File on your Hard Drive. You will not run out of RAM in most of the cases - the system will make it available on your HD as a Virtual Memory.

So the access time will increase, and that will cause your games to either stop and wait for the next few frames, or cause a "jittery" performance throughout the play.

 

[JustaGeek]

Originally posted by: Dazed and Confused
9 times out of 10 more ram = slower performance. They generally end up using ram with higher timings ( bad ) when they increase the ram on a video card. This is why the 256mb 9800 Pro's often performed worse than a 128mb version The ram was runnign at the same speed but instead of having 128mb of ram with tight timings they laxxed the timings up in order to add more ram.

Think of it like this :

256mb card = 2-2-2-5 timings

512mb card = 3-4-4-8 timings

Cards with high ammounts of ram are marketing gimmicks to start with. They use cheaper higher density ram for these eye bulging high mem cards to make you think it's better, they hope you'll focus on the ammount and not notice the cheap IC's they used to make those large numbers possible

I'm sorry, I just can't agree with your logic.

9800...? How much processing power did that have...? And wasn't it using the DDR memory...?

It's like running Pentium III with 2GB of DDR2 RAM - it just doesn't make sense...

 

[WhipperSnapper]

Once you start talking about $120, wouldn't it be better to look for a256 mb x1950 Pro? I've seen them for $130 after rebate.

 

[onlyCOpunk]

I must thank you jackace for that deal notice. I went ahead and picked one up for $120 shipped.

 

[SPARTAN VI]

Originally posted by: Dazed and Confused
9 times out of 10 more ram = slower performance. They generally end up using ram with higher timings ( bad ) when they increase the ram on a video card. This is why the 256mb 9800 Pro's often performed worse than a 128mb version The ram was runnign at the same speed but instead of having 128mb of ram with tight timings they laxxed the timings up in order to add more ram.

Think of it like this :

256mb card = 2-2-2-5 timings

512mb card = 3-4-4-8 timings

Cards with high ammounts of ram are marketing gimmicks to start with. They use cheaper higher density ram for these eye bulging high mem cards to make you think it's better, they hope you'll focus on the ammount and not notice the cheap IC's they used to make those large numbers possible

Like your name implies, I think you may be confused.

I know for certain the 320mb vs 640mb version of the 8800GTS will refute your claim. I know the 7800GTX 512mb is not slower than the 7800GTX 256mb either.

 

[onlyCOpunk]

I think the 512 and 256 argument only applied to video cards from 2 years ago. I had this same debate when I was buying my last video card. But now I always see that 512 memory is the same speed as the 256. Now it's just down to how much money you want to spend, and if you will actually see an improvement.

 

[SPARTAN VI]

Originally posted by: onlyCOpunk
I think the 512 and 256 argument only applied to video cards from 2 years ago. I had this same debate when I was buying my last video card. But now I always see that 512 memory is the same speed as the 256. Now it's just down to how much money you want to spend, and if you will actually see an improvement.

Perhaps low-mid range offerings as well.

 

[Dazed and Confused]

Mainly the low to mid range which includes the card I orriginally remarked about , The X1950 GT/Pro

This is most noticeable on the low range where the cheapest ram is used to make a normally 256mb card into a 512mb card.

High end cards usually get special care when they have thier memory added upon, but mid range cards are often gimmicks when they have double the normal memory slapped on them.

And for all you nubs that said this isn't so why don't you do yoru research and start reading reviews of X1600 Pro's and 7300GT's and 7600GS's and X1950 Pro's that compare a 256mb version to a 512mb version You'll notice a trend where the 512mb cards are sporting lower FPS at low to mid range resolutions than the 256 mb varriants This would be due to the slower memory used to double the installed memory on the card

God I love being right

 

[JustaGeek]

So many smileys...

So little substance...

 

[JustaGeek]

Dazed and Confused,

Please stop sending me your Private Messages.

You are not going to convince me on the private grounds either.

If you would like to continue, please post your messages here, on public forum.

Let others judge your statements, too.

Thank you.