Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

128bit vs 256bit Memory Bus?

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
May 20, 2007 10:30:54 PM

Right, I still havent bought a gfx card for my PC. I've been planning on getting a 1950xt for a while now, but the 2600xt is going to be released soon, and from everything I've read it's suppost to be in the same price range as the 1950xt, ~$200. So I figured I would just wait a couple weeks. Instead of a dx9 part with decent performance, I would get a dx10 part with awesome performance.

Only problem is, the 2600xt might NOT have awesome performance. I learned today that it only has a 128bit memory bus, which I've heard can have a severe effect on performance.

So, how do you guys think I should do? Buy the tried and true 1950xt with a 256bit bus, or wait 3 or 4 weeks on the 2600xt, hoping it performs well? Also, I just looked at the 1950xt on Newegg, there are only 3 variations left! They must be cleaning house for the 26xx series. If I do decide to wait, and the 2600xt is a flop, I might have to buy it anyway on account of the 1950xt being discontinued.
May 20, 2007 10:53:54 PM

I would wait, in the hopes that it doesn't suck. Even if the x1950xt gets discontinued, I don't think the world will run out of stock in 3 or 4 weeks. It will probably take a while for them to totally sell out what they already have in stock So, if the HD 2600xt does suck I don't think it would be a problem to pick up a x1950xt later.

Good luck,
Pete
May 20, 2007 10:55:54 PM

well, first of all, i too am really disappointed on hearing that... why do the current mid-level cards BLOW? i mean, the 2600 could still be awesome, but this is making it sound like another 8600! :cry: 

anyway, i think that your decision depends a lot on your spending/how often you upgrade. how long do you expect to keep this next card of yours? i personally don't really like this current 1st gen of dx10 cards from either company and would rather skip till the next wave... but you want something now. this really is a tough decision... as long as the 2600 isn't WORSE then it'll probably be worth going for... tough decision.

i'd say wait. assuming that the 2600 costs the same, and performs about the same as the 1950, it'd probably be worth it to go with the newer card just to have the dx10. however, that 128 bit bus is REALLY smelling like another 8600. i realize that you've probably been waiting for a while to buy a card... but... COULD you hold out for a while longer?
Related resources
May 20, 2007 11:02:08 PM

i'll say wait, newegg is not the only store online right? though it is one of the cheapest and most reliable but you can still add a couple of dollars and get it from other stores.

as for your question , x2600 might have 128bit but it can compensate this lack with better clock speed and better technology overall. for exemple:

8600 gts -- 128 bit - 3dmark 2006 5573

x1900 xt -- 256 bit -- 3dmark 2006 5713


as you can see the performance is almost on par. this is the high end ati of last gen VS the middle from nvidia. but one big advantage: 8600 GTS is a directx10 card and so is x2600.

last word: wait.
May 20, 2007 11:25:41 PM

this is true, but the thing that i worry about is this: if dx10 is bigger/better/prettier than dx9, how can a mediocre dx9 card with dx10 support be worth it? thats what i worry about. i mean, the first dx10 cards won't utilize a lot of tough things, as it takes time to tap into the full potential of things like that, but... why would you buy a crappy dx9 card and expect it to be good at dx10?
May 20, 2007 11:45:58 PM

you see my friend, at worst, the performance will be slighly less than the x1950, but you will get a dx10 card regardless of how it performs, i mean it can't be that bad... directx 10 games will use efficiently the architecture of 8600 GTS , this card will be good enough to run crysis, may be not with insane resolution and 4aa enabled , but you can still manage to have a neat resolution with all visual features on , so i think it's worth the wait, IMHO it's crazy to buy a directx9 card today.
May 21, 2007 12:17:11 AM

Right, guess I'll wait. Thanks guys.

If worst comes to worst (ie: the 2600xt is complete and utter failure and the 1950xt is nowhere to be found.) I can just redirect some of the budget for my next pc into getting something like an 8800gts.
May 21, 2007 12:31:16 AM

I like ATI but looking at all the cards out there now the 8800gts320 will walk all over the 1950's for a few bucks more. I'm thinking of getting one myself.
May 21, 2007 12:38:45 AM

Quote:
i'll say wait, newegg is not the only store online right? though it is one of the cheapest and most reliable but you can still add a couple of dollars and get it from other stores.

as for your question , x2600 might have 128bit but it can compensate this lack with better clock speed and better technology overall. for exemple:

8600 gts -- 128 bit - 3dmark 2006 5573

x1900 xt -- 256 bit -- 3dmark 2006 5713


as you can see the performance is almost on par. this is the high end ati of last gen VS the middle from nvidia. but one big advantage: 8600 GTS is a directx10 card and so is x2600.

last word: wait.
3DMark scores are incredibly misleading. As soon as you enable antialiasing and anisotropic filtering the 8600GTS will fall far behind the X1900XT. The 8600GTS is only about as fast as the 7900GS under Direct X9.
May 21, 2007 12:49:34 AM

I think the 8600's are weak card.If u wanna game in the future I don't believe its a good deal.If you just want to hook it up to your HDTV and watch videos maybe but the 8500 will do that.
May 21, 2007 1:05:39 AM

Quote:
directx 10 games will use efficiently the architecture of 8600 GTS


The funny part is, the software industry actually wants faster parts so they have to do less optimizing. :lol: 
May 21, 2007 1:17:48 AM

I would like some faster parts.
May 21, 2007 1:32:32 AM

Quote:
I would like some faster parts.


...who wouldn't?
May 21, 2007 2:30:23 AM

As much as ATI,Nvidia,AMD. have moved the tech along I believe even a duopoly is not enough anymore.With their capital and expertise much more capable hard ware could be in our hands.Low,mid or high end.It would be an opportunity for someone to come along with brains and money and givethe big boys a run for their money. Maybe we wouldn't see cards like the 8500 8600 2900. But they are the only game in town. Could a Via,Sis or other such entity ever kick things in the ass.
May 21, 2007 5:28:43 AM

I'd really like to see Matrox release a kick ass card, that would be awesome.

They wouldnt even have to use an in-house design. In a couple months if AMD doesnt start genorating some profit, I'm sure they would licence/sell one of their older designs to Matrox.

I'm not sure how hard it would be to convert a dx9 arch to dx10, but Matrox can figure it out!

I mean, even if they only released cards to compete with the lower end of the dx10 lineup, it would still generate massive amounts of cash for Matrox. Especially since ATM they're only selling cards targeted at extreme niche markets.
May 21, 2007 10:54:45 AM

Oh yeah forgot Matrox.I don't see why they couldn't have thier own design with a little investment of time and money.Just something to shake things up a bit.Can you imagine a card like the 8800 gts released as the lowend budget gamer?
May 21, 2007 11:17:54 AM

Why not pushing your money a little further and get a 8800GTS 320MB instead budy?
That card will Rock your C2D setup! :twisted:
May 21, 2007 11:33:38 AM

If you are too frustrated to wait, I'd say add a couple extra dollar and go for 8800GTS 320Mb. You won't be dissapponted and you can't go wrong with it. It's far more better than X1950XT and X2600XT and 8600GTS in performance and also DX10 and 320 Bit already, so you won't ending up to hope X2600XT will performed well in its 128 Bit or hoping ATI will make their X2600XT to 256 Bit, am I right? :wink: ...hopefully :wink:
May 21, 2007 11:36:17 AM

Quote:
I'd really like to see Matrox release a kick ass card, that would be awesome.

They wouldnt even have to use an in-house design. In a couple months if AMD doesnt start genorating some profit, I'm sure they would licence/sell one of their older designs to Matrox.

I'm not sure how hard it would be to convert a dx9 arch to dx10, but Matrox can figure it out!

I mean, even if they only released cards to compete with the lower end of the dx10 lineup, it would still generate massive amounts of cash for Matrox. Especially since ATM they're only selling cards targeted at extreme niche markets.


Agreed. Yet, they simply canĀ“t compete with Nvidia or AMD. They lack the budged, the experience - the resources.
May 21, 2007 3:07:17 PM

Matrox has that multi-monitor graphics card to play a game spanned over several monitors.
May 21, 2007 3:09:27 PM

as impressive as that is, it doesn't really mean that they could just up and release a competitive dx10 card.
May 21, 2007 3:26:25 PM

matrox video cards?? how can they hold up to nvidia and ati-amd. matrox video cards+matrox hard drives= kick ass?? :lol: 
May 21, 2007 4:11:48 PM

i think you would be happier with the 8800 320mb. . Paying more than what a 8800 320 is worth is just too risky imo.it plays dx9 games superbly and 8600 might not run crysis well or other non-dx10 patched games. i would not hesitate if i were you.

if you cant wait...

if you really want to play it on the safe side just buy a 7900 gs cheap like the evga
May 21, 2007 7:38:02 PM

Budget- No problem, they just take out a massive loan.

Experience- Kinda a problem, but they just took out a massive loan. They can hire new people!

Resources- I'm not sure if they have their own fab(s), but if they don't they can just pull an ATi, use TSMC or a similar company for their fab needs.

This really all comes down to the money I guess. Maybe Acquicor Tech (Now Jazz Technologies.) will buy Matrox. I mean, if anybody can do it, it's Woz.


Anyway, yeah, the 8800gts is an option. I'll just wait until the 2600xt is out, if it's a great card, I'll buy it. If the 8800gts goes down in price a little or the 1950xt's sell out Ill buy it. If neither happen, I'll buy the 1950xt.
!