• 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.

Whats the best 128mb video card for the money?

K

kyle1745

Member
I am in the market to replace my trusty Geforce 2 MX 32MB card.

I really think the current price on the Geforce 4600's is a bit more than I want to spend.

So what does everyone think? I have always been a nvidia guy, but the new Radeons seem promising other than some driver issues.


I am currently leaning towards a PNY Geforce 4 4400, but can not deceive since it seems the Radeons may be a bit cheaper.


Kyle
 
128mb of vid ram is UTTERLY USELESS AND A WASTE OF MONEY. No games use 128mb, VERY VERY FEW OF THEM EVEN BENEFIT FROM 64 vs. 32mb.

Buy the cheapest Geforce 4 (NOT THE MX VERSION!) you can find or go with a high-end Geforce 3 or Radeon 8500
 
i agree with wormy in that 128mb is NOT worth the money... not yet

if ya have to get one go with radeon 8500
 
I too agree that 128MB is a gimik and a complete waste of money.

Do you honestly upgrade your videocard every few months? Do you plan to? I have a GeForce3 64MB and this will last me a helluva long ass time. I would think it should do the same for you, too. There's no reason to pay premium for a card that will benefit one game. LOL 😛

My $0.02
 
Only certain games or applications at extreme resolutions will benefit from 128mb, and only then will it become noticable.

Go with a Radeon 8500, which is currently the video card best buy.
 
Ok, then what do I get?

Gainward T1200?

I can not see spending $200+ and not just getting a 4400, they are only $280.

Now if we are talking saving $100 or more then thats different.


Kyle
 
I would say that right now your best bet is to wait till the Ti 4200's come out. Either that or get a geforce3 Ti 200. Or if you feel like you want to spend the money get a 4400. But obviously it's all up to you. Either way you'll get a big performance boost from your MX. happy hunting.
Scoob
 
I am looking to not need a new card when Unreal II comes out.

I am starting to lean towards a geforce 3 TI 200 then overclocking it to or close to a ti 500.

I hear tha abit, and the gainward are good for that.

How soon will the 4200's be out?

Kyle
 
With 128mb of video memory, you won't have to swap textures as much. That can be good for some games (Wolfenstein, etc.). Perhaps more memory is good for multiple monitors also. There are a few decent 128mb GF3's (I believe Ti200's) from Leadtek and a few other manufacturers.
 
Ok, I have heard the ideas and here is what I ordered:

Gainward Geforce 3 TI 200, 128mb

Should be able to overclock it to the speed of a TI500 and still have 128mb ram.

All for $182 shipped from newegg.

Kyle
 
Good choice. I had a Radeon 8500 and it was not the card I thought it was going to be considering the hardware. ATI's drivers are written by school children I think. I have the Gainward Golden Sample Ti200 128meg and it runs 240/501 with no problems. Just a tick slower than a Ti500, but a lot cheaper. Also, I don't want to ever buy another video card for this system (P3 1gig) either. It should do fine when Doom3 and UnReal 2 come out.
 
Just my two cents on this one - I went with a GeForce 3 w/128 ram because the price difference was about 30 bucks. While it's true that most of my games will never need that kind of memory, it sure sounds cool as hell.😉
 
Um what current games benefit from the 64mb more than 5% over the 32 mb versions of the cards from 2 years ago?

And kyle why did you post this thread if you've already pretty much decided that you wanted a geforce ti 200? The first four posts say that 128 mb of ram wont help you much in games, im sure Unreal2 wont benefit by more by more than 5%. What makes you think that Unreal II will use 128 mb of ram? Games are always 1-2 years behind the hardware thats currently out. the creators are designing unreal 2 to be played by geforce 2/3s and radeons. Those cards have 32/64 mbs of ram with a few exceptions mentioned in this thread, which have just recently been released.
And I dont know what you are smoking, but 50 dollars is alot. You completely contradict yourself when you say "why try to save 50 bucks when itll just be replaced in a few months." You just answered your own question.

Like craigory said, 128 mb of ram is just for braggin rights. At this point in time, a geforce 3 ti200 or a radeon 8400 with 64 mb of ram for about 140 dollars would be best. But I guess you've made up your mind already, even though these two cards will play unreal II perfectly fine.

IM personally going with the 4400, but then again, I'm upgrading from a 8500.

-Steve
 
1st - I had not made up my mind when I posted this.
2nd - If you read the title I said best for the money.


I am looking for a card that will work well with what is out now and what is to come. My current card has been slow for awhile, and I think the Geforce 4's are a little too much. So from my stand point (really wanting a geforce 4) I saved about $100 over a geforce 4400. True I could have saved another $30 and got a 64gb card, but if I game comes out that supports 128mb that wouldn't help much now would it?

Kyle
 
Again I say, like the first Four posts, which game uses 128mb of ram that will come out in the next few months, which you say is the lifespan of any video card purchase? Unreal II obviously does not need 128 mbs of ram, or are they expecting the 5% of the gaming population to be the only ones to play the game decently?

I think not.

-Steve
 
I say who cares...It's $30 to get the extra 64mb of ram on the Gainward Ti200 card. Go for it, because some day you might need it. It WILL give the card a longer life.

Just think about it...when 64mb cards came the same thing went on. And now look...almost all games benifit from the extra memory at certain points. It's just nice to have for the extra $30.

Now if you are interested in getting a Radeon 8500 I would say just stick with the 64mb version because the extra 64 is considerably more expensive. I think something to the tune of $90ish +. The 8500 already has 64mb of 3.6ns ram that is capeable of being run very close to 600mhz DDR. (Though the 128 versions I blieve are suppose to run that speed stock....maybe?)
 


<< I say who cares...It's $30 to get the extra 64mb of ram on the Gainward Ti200 card. Go for it, because some day you might need it. It WILL give the card a longer life.
 >>



128 MB is a waste of money, especially on a budget card. A $30 - $ 50difference is 20% - 25% at these price levels. In games like Unreal 2 and Doom 3, only the MAXIMUM texture settings will even have a chance of needing 128 MB. The budget cards of today won't even run those settings, so you'll be just as screwed as the rest of us mere 64 MB owners.

I swear, you can point at facts all day, but people will still point at the 128 MB on the box and say "that's better" and "that's faster." LOL.
 
Here is a question posed to an nV engineer in a GF4 review @ .Beyond3D

Memory available is now up to 128Mb, what is the biggest reason for supplying extra memory? FSAA? Textures? TnL vertex buffer storage? Why would we need 128Mb of memory?

Tony: Antialiasing requires 2x or 4x as much frame buffer storage as aliased (depending on 2x or 4x FSAA), that is a key reason to increase the size of the local frame buffer. But other reasons that you mention, higher resolution textures, vertex buffer storage, etc. all benefit from having more local frame buffer storage.

NV engineer: All of the reasons you mentioned are valid, but in my mind the biggest reason is for framebuffers. 1600x1200x32 /w 4X AA is a real option now, and the 4600 at least has the performance to back it up. But it requires 77+ MB of RAM.

Vertex buffers are another good one, because AGP 4X is really getting pushed. In many cases we need video memory buffers to get peak throughput
 
Again, I was looking for the best card for the money. I agree that at this point 128mb is overkill, but for $30 why not have it just in case. Now I do not think the extra $100 for a Geforce 4 is worth it for the reasons you all have posted. So I made an attempt to try to get the best of both for a good price. The Gainward TI200 with 128mb of ram overclocked to a TI 500 should play anything fine.

Kyle
 


<< Here is a question posed to an nV engineer in a GF4 review @ .Beyond3D

Memory available is now up to 128Mb, what is the biggest reason for supplying extra memory? FSAA? Textures? TnL vertex buffer storage? Why would we need 128Mb of memory?

Tony: Antialiasing requires 2x or 4x as much frame buffer storage as aliased (depending on 2x or 4x FSAA), that is a key reason to increase the size of the local frame buffer. But other reasons that you mention, higher resolution textures, vertex buffer storage, etc. all benefit from having more local frame buffer storage.

NV engineer: All of the reasons you mentioned are valid, but in my mind the biggest reason is for framebuffers. 1600x1200x32 /w 4X AA is a real option now, and the 4600 at least has the performance to back it up. But it requires 77+ MB of RAM.

Vertex buffers are another good one, because AGP 4X is really getting pushed. In many cases we need video memory buffers to get peak throughput >>



What a load of crap. The TI 4600, yes the top-of-the-line card today, can barely run TODAY's games at 1600x1200x16 with 4X AA, let alone at 32 bit color! If the GF4 4600 can barely do this, then how does this logic apply to the GF3 TI 200? Marketing gimmick.

Go read some reviews and let these engineers and marketing men babble to themselves.

Again, a $30 difference at this pricepoint is a considerable premium (20%). Why pay it when IT DOESN'T MATTER? Do you like to flush money down the drain? God, six months ago $30 was a stick of DDR RAM. There has to be something out there you can spend that $30 on.
 
The only game that will use the 128MB of memory is MS Flight Sim2002. Other than that you will waste your money.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top