• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

32mb or 64mb Geforce2?

S

Shooters

Diamond Member
I've decided that I'm going to get a Geforce2 card, but I don't know if I should get a 32mb or a 64mb. I've heard that the 64mb won't make much of a difference except at high resolutions. Is this true? I don't play games any higher than 1024 by 768. Will the extra 32mb make a substantial difference in this case? Also, I play a lot of Unreal Tournament, but I play Quake III often as well. I know my Quake III fps will definitely go up, but how about UT? I've been told that Geforce cards don't handle UT as well as Glide cards. I'm using a Voodoo3 3000 AGP right now. I don't mind if the UT performance doesn't go up, but I just want to make sure that it won't go down. If it matters I'm running a PIII 700 with 128mb of RAM.

Thanks for the help,
Shooters
 
if you only play @ 1024x768, then the only reason to grab a GTS is if you're going to overclock

the 64MB versions overclock much better typically

the V3 will not run UT as well as a GTS will. Do you have the 2nd CD? If so, download the patch from Loki here (just look around) and play UT in OGL.

If not, then you will not get as good performance from the GTS as you would from a 5500 or a Radeon.
 
I don't quite understand your first statement. Do you mean overclock the card or the processor? And why do you say that this is the only reason that I should pick up a GTS?

Thanks,
Shooters
 
Also if you get the 64 MB version you can disable S3TC and fix the visual artifacts that Quake 3 based games exhibit on nVidia's boards.
 
I also heard the 64mb ones are more overclockable since they use Hyundai DDR SDRAM which is more overclockable than the Infineon DDR SGRAM. But IMO its not worth the extra cost for the extra 32mb.
 
If it's 1024x768 or so, then the 32meg is more than what you would need.
Your performance in UT will dramatically INCREASE by switching to a GTS.
With a Duron @935MHz, UT using a V3 3k, ran timedemo1 1024x768x"16bit" at 59.06. Switching to a stock clocked VisionTek GeForce2 GTS 32meg, and now 1024x768x"32bit" runs at 72.15.

Adding the 400megs of compressed textures from the second UT cd, (a little thing 3dfx cards cannot run), along with the patch RoboTECH mentions, and it is amazing how great UT is actually supposed to look!

You will be smiling for a long time once you switch from the V3 to a GTS.
 
If you are thinking about going with a 64MB GF2, go with the GF2 Pro.

It is nearly the same price as the standard 64MB GF2, but closer to GF2U speeds and tends to OC quite nicely on top of the faster defaults(200 core/400 memory versus 200 core/ 333 memory for the standard 64MB).

BTW- The proper link for the Loki patch🙂
 
Go and buy the Radeon 64MB or Voodoo 5 5500 😛 The Benchmarks that I saw didn't gave much more performance, but if you like the best and the biggest, then go with the GTS 64MB
 
Ben makes a very good point about picking up a GTS Pro

The 64MB GTS "classics" haven't come down in price like the 32MB GTS cards have.

Definitely a good idea if your'e in the market for a 3d card.

The 64MB Radeon is also an excellent buy in several circumstances.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top