6600GT pcie 128mb.. how much will 128mb hurt me?

[sufood]

Well I'm able to find the 6600GT pcie all over now, but only in a 128mb version. The vanilla 6600 seems to have 256mb offerings but not GT so my question is how much would it hurt me to go with the 6600GT 128mb? Does this have a huge imact on games? I'd like to wait a couple months to let everything settle but Half-Life 2 is next week. Argh.

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: sufood
Well I'm able to find the 6600GT pcie all over now, but only in a 128mb version. The vanilla 6600 seems to have 256mb offerings but not GT so my question is how much would it hurt me to go with the 6600GT 128mb? Does this have a huge imact on games? I'd like to wait a couple months to let everything settle but Half-Life 2 is next week. Argh.

It will anihiliate the shiznit out of you. J/K. 128 is fine as long as you don't play the latest games at super High resolution with AA and AF cranked. It goes severely downhill if you do that.

 

[Hyperlite]

the vanilla may have a 256mb version, but take a look at the clock speeds on the vanilla vs the GT. the stock clocks on the vanilla are 300mhz core, and 550mhz memory.....while the stock clocks on the GT are 500 core, 1000 Mem.

Explination: the amount of memory is irrelevant if the GT can load and unload its memory 3 times as fast as the vanilla. regardless of the mem size, the GT will pound the vanilla.

though that does raise an interesting question....does the vanilla use the same core as the GT? if so, shouldn't you be able to clock the core up to 500mhz?

 

[kylebisme]

I'd image the highest texture detail setting will require some video RAM swapping with a 128mb card, but it is hard to say until the game comes out.

 

[James3shin]

unless you plan on playing a game well above 1024x768, i don't think one would need the extra 128MB. Thats just my two cents, the 6600gt is gonna be the uber card, i hope they make one with a red pcb.

 

[gobucks]

Look at it this way - You will be able to play all games out currently, even Doom3, at good resolutions and with AA/AF on. Future games, like in a year or 2, will start to show differences between 128MB and 256MB ones, but that will be a while. In order to get a card that will play games well now and have 256MB, you'd be looking at a X800SE or a 256MB 6800 (rare but evga hase one). Both of these cards are running around $350, so it'd be wiser to just get a GT in that case for $25 more. Either way, you'd end up spending $150-200 more getting one of these cards, or almost double the cost of a 6600GT. So by the time you really start to notice the speed lag, you can go out and get a brand new midtrange card (7700GT or whatever) with 256MB or 512MB memory, basically with the money you saved by not buying the 6800GT.

I feel that the 6600GT is perfectly balanced, in the sense that the performance will be considered slow around the same time that 128MB memory starts to become inadequate. This is a very good situation, since you are not "wasting" anything. A 6800's speed might hold up for longer than the 6600GT, but it doesn't do much good if the memory is too low. On the other side, getting a 6600 256MB will have enough memory for Doom 3 and future games, but if they only run at 10FPS, what good is that? I personally think that the 6600GT is the best move by nvidia since the Ti4200, and wouldn't be surprised if they sell like absolute hotcakes after all the PCIe AMD chipsets hit shelves. One of these is going into my system for sure, maybe 2 eventually if the Asus SLI board isn't too expensive.

 

[bigal40]

Originally posted by: gobucks
Look at it this way - You will be able to play all games out currently, even Doom3, at good resolutions and with AA/AF on. Future games, like in a year or 2, will start to show differences between 128MB and 256MB ones, but that will be a while. In order to get a card that will play games well now and have 256MB, you'd be looking at a X800SE or a 256MB 6800 (rare but evga hase one). Both of these cards are running around $350, so it'd be wiser to just get a GT in that case for $25 more. Either way, you'd end up spending $150-200 more getting one of these cards, or almost double the cost of a 6600GT. So by the time you really start to notice the speed lag, you can go out and get a brand new midtrange card (7700GT or whatever) with 256MB or 512MB memory, basically with the money you saved by not buying the 6800GT.

I feel that the 6600GT is perfectly balanced, in the sense that the performance will be considered slow around the same time that 128MB memory starts to become inadequate. This is a very good situation, since you are not "wasting" anything. A 6800's speed might hold up for longer than the 6600GT, but it doesn't do much good if the memory is too low. On the other side, getting a 6600 256MB will have enough memory for Doom 3 and future games, but if they only run at 10FPS, what good is that? I personally think that the 6600GT is the best move by nvidia since the Ti4200, and wouldn't be surprised if they sell like absolute hotcakes after all the PCIe AMD chipsets hit shelves. One of these is going into my system for sure, maybe 2 eventually if the Asus SLI board isn't too expensive.

I agree with you buy midrange now and then buy another midrange later but if from now to the next time ne video cards come out you upgrade to a SLI motherboard you can get another 6600GT and probably get performance similar to a new midrange card and have the 256mb you were looking for.

 

[SonicIce]

We've seen this before with the 9800 Pro's and many other cards. I think both the 128MB and 256MB versions will have an extremely small performace differance (nothing that you would be able to tell unless you benched them, not noticable).

 

[Ishamori]

Originally posted by: Hyperlite


though that does raise an interesting question....does the vanilla use the same core as the GT? if so, shouldn't you be able to clock the core up to 500mhz?

A very interesting question indeed. What do some of you people more in the know thinkg about this. Would it be possible?

 

[shabby]

Originally posted by: Ishamori

Originally posted by: Hyperlite


though that does raise an interesting question....does the vanilla use the same core as the GT? if so, shouldn't you be able to clock the core up to 500mhz?

A very interesting question indeed. What do some of you people more in the know thinkg about this. Would it be possible?

The vanilla 6600 can be overclocked well past gt speeds, but its uber slow memory(550mhz) makes the speedy core kinda useless.

 

[happy medium]

over at Guru of 3d they say the 6600gt will be offered in 256mb versions. Thats the one I want.
http://www.guru3d.com/article/Videocards/160/2/

 

[kylebisme]

Originally posted by: gobucks
Look at it this way - You will be able to play all games out currently, even Doom3, at good resolutions and with AA/AF on.

With medium quality textures or a bit of hitching from swapping, where as with 256mb you get high quality textures or very high with a bit of hitching.

 

[stelleg151]

Hey guys, I heard about this other company called ATI, I've heard a few good things, and apparently they make a midrange card. Oh wait, theres a review of it here at AT. And it seems to do better on the source engine than the 6600gt. And the only version out happens to have 256mb, the x700pro. Oh yeah, and apparently it OCs to x700xt speeds and higher. But seriously, I kind of doubt that Shader 3.0 and SLI will be all that helpful for the 6600gt, at least not as helpful as 256mb of video ram goodness. Just my two cents. Actually I'm having the same dilemma, as both are good cards, and I am kind of tempted to get the 6600gt as it is sweeeet. But the 256 is really tempting for future performance as games require more textures.

 

[bigal40]

Originally posted by: stelleg151
Hey guys, I heard about this other company called ATI, I've heard a few good things, and apparently they make a midrange card. Oh wait, theres a review of it here at AT. And it seems to do better on the source engine than the 6600gt. And the only version out happens to have 256mb, the x700pro. Oh yeah, and apparently it OCs to x700xt speeds and higher. But seriously, I kind of doubt that Shader 3.0 and SLI will be all that helpful for the 6600gt, at least not as helpful as 256mb of video ram goodness. Just my two cents. Actually I'm having the same dilemma, as both are good cards, and I am kind of tempted to get the 6600gt as it is sweeeet. But the 256 is really tempting for future performance as games require more textures.

http://www.search4hardware.com...byte_GV-nx66t256D.html
256 mb 6600gt. Now you have Shader 3.0, SLI and 256mb of memory.