• 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.

7900GS 256Mb or 512Mb?

C

chotto69

Junior Member
Does anyone know (or can point me to a link where there's some sort of review) if there are any tangible differences between the two versions of this card? I'm thinking to get a Galaxy 7900GS-Zelman fan and I was wondering if the additional 256Mb were worth or not the additional price (60$ here in Japan).
Thanks.
 
If you game alot, plan to keep the card a while, and want to use highest texture settings in one or two new games (such as Ghost Recon: Advanced Warfighter) then 512mb is handy to have - it's also more viable if you plan to overclock your 7900GS too. If not, I'd just stick with the standard 256mb version, that's what I did (my card is a Leadtek though).
 
512mb makes some improvement at frame rate only played at much higher resolution, say 1680x1050 or higher. Otherwise stick with 256mb.
 
This is the last 256 vs 512MB test I remember seeing. It's about a year old. It shows a small spread in general for NV (and the spread for ATI probably got smaller judging from the last few driver release readme's), but if you game at high res with AA and max textures, you'd probably appreciate the extra RAM. It all depends on what that $60 is on top of, IMO. It sounds like a lot compared to the ~$200 a 256MB GS costs in the USA, and considering you can get a much faster 256MB X1900XT for ~$250 (though it'll draw more power and be louder, which seems to be important to you).

But prices are probably different in Japan.
 
Originally posted by: Pete
This is the last 256 vs 512MB test I remember seeing. It's about a year old. It shows a small spread in general for NV (and the spread for ATI probably got smaller judging from the last few driver release readme's), but if you game at high res with AA and max textures, you'd probably appreciate the extra RAM. It all depends on what that $60 is on top of, IMO. It sounds like a lot compared to the ~$200 a 256MB GS costs in the USA, and considering you can get a much faster 256MB X1900XT for ~$250 (though it'll draw more power and be louder, which seems to be important to you).

But prices are probably different in Japan.
Click to expand...


or most recently from FiringSquad x1900xt reviews
 
Thanks for all the input. I need a video card urgently (my 6600GT abandoned me...) for my new Conroe rig but as all sites suggest, i don't want to spend a lot of money on a card that will soon be obsolete with the new DX10 cards coming out soon.
I'm not getting an ATI at this stage because Adobe After Effects&Premiere Pro, the two applications i use most (of course i game too), recommend nvidia cards probably due to its superior OpenGL implementation.
The 256Mb card costs here in Japan 220$, the 512Mb as i said is 60 bucks more expensive. I'm leaning toward the "bigger sister" partially because my original budget was twice that much when i though i'd get a 7900GTX or ATI X1950XTX.

 
DX10 cards will NOT make DX9 cards obsolete anymore than a NextGen part makes a PreviousPart immediately obsolete.

We will not see any full DX10 games for another 2-3 years
 
512MB is required for games like GRAW, Serious Sam 2 and may be some more games or up coming games even at 10X7.

GRAW: High option requires 512mb, AFAIK irrespective of whatever, atleast from in game

SS2: 512mb at 10X7 with AA and AF, not that this card can play at these settings anyway
 
I know that DX10 will not make obsolete DX9 however it seems (at least on paper) that next generation will be a big leap forward.
As for the 7900GT, i thought of it however it's too noisy and the small additional performance doesn't justify (IMHO) the increase in price (at least with current Japanese prices).
 
Alot of these test miss the mark that makes 512mb beneficial(beyond Quake 4), the best example would be Oblivion. The reviewers can't discern a noticeable difference between X1900XT 512mb/256mb and 7900GT/7950GT, but none of the reviewers have been wise enough to do an -outdoor combat in foliage- loop ether. Its literally night and day at a decent resolution(1600x1200) unless you have grass/shadows watered down.

Lots of games have situations(causing memory swapping fps bombs) that benchmarks often miss yet your almost sure to run into often actualy playing.
 
7900GT can be overclocked like hell pushing it past the performance of a 7900GTX, it is worth it.

7900GTO is good as well s it can be unlocked AFAIK.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top