Tom's Hardware > Forum > Graphic & Displays > Graphics Cards > What's the point of paying for 512 MB ???????

What's the point of paying for 512 MB ???????

Forum Graphic & Displays : Graphics Cards - What's the point of paying for 512 MB ???????

Tom's Hardware: Over 1.4 million members in 6 different countries available to answer all your high-tech questions. Sign up now! Its free!
Ask the community Add a reply
Word :    Username :           
 
Paul22000   12-19-2007 at 08:59:01 AM

Performance Difference:

http://img101.imageshack.us/img101/4827/256v512yw3.jpg

(Test out different resolutions and games and see the "results":
http://www23.tomshardware.com/grap [...] &chart=307



Now Price Difference:

A) http://img243.imageshack.us/img243 [...] iffhq7.jpg

B) GECUBE HV195PG3-E3 (R) Radeon X1950PRO 512MB 256-bit GDDR3 PCI Express x16 HDCP Ready CrossFire Supported Video Card - Retail
$171.99
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Prod [...] 6814241050

GECUBE HV195PG3-D3(RoHS) Radeon X1950PRO 256MB 256-bit GDDR3 PCI Express x16 HDCP Ready Video Card - Retail
$139.99
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Prod [...] 6814241038


Conclusion:

Is there ANY reason at all to pay for a 512 MB card??



Message edited by Paul22000 on 12-19-2007 at 08:59:30 AM
Add a reply
Sponsored Links
Register or log in to remove.
rosu9801   12-19-2007 at 09:25:12 AM
- 0 +

Cause they aren't free?

Message quoted 3 times
------------------------------

 

Reply to rosu9801

kainokai   12-19-2007 at 09:36:43 AM
- 0 +

rosu9801 wrote :

Cause they aren't free?



ROFL to the extreme, dude, they are just trying to get those who know little about computers to buy a more expensive card...


(^.^)V

Reply to kainokai
Paul22000   12-19-2007 at 10:30:18 AM
- 0 +

rosu9801 wrote :

Cause they aren't free?



I meant vs the 256 mb versions, since there is ZERO performance increase


Message edited by Paul22000 on 12-19-2007 at 10:30:32 AM
Reply to Paul22000
perzy   12-19-2007 at 10:41:56 AM
- 0 +

AT extremely high resolutions maybe it's an advantage?

Reply to perzy
liswara   12-19-2007 at 10:44:43 AM
- 0 +

in high res above 1600x1200, the 512 one will smash 256 one...

Reply to liswara
rosu9801   12-19-2007 at 10:54:02 AM
- 0 +

Yeah when enabling more AA, AF and increasing resolution the memory size becomes more important.
My GTS 320 is enough for me at 1280x1024 but since im planning on getting a new screen im looking at the GT/GTS(G92) or the 3870 atleast.
At my resolution the 3870 can't be justified as an upgrade but at higher resolutions the gap increase with the 320 cause of the memory.

------------------------------

 

Reply to rosu9801

Moebius078   12-19-2007 at 11:22:18 AM
- 0 +

You're not exactly comparing comparable products. It's GDDR3 (slower) versus GDDR4. The difference between 256 and 512 would be much more significant if you were to compare 256 GGDR4 versus 512 GDDR4.

Message quoted 1 times
Reply to Moebius078
Paul22000   12-19-2007 at 11:32:57 AM
- 0 +

Moebius078 wrote :

You're not exactly comparing comparable products. It's GDDR3 (slower) versus GDDR4. The difference between 256 and 512 would be much more significant if you were to compare 256 GGDR4 versus 512 GDDR4.



True...

However:

http://img137.imageshack.us/img137/5735/8800ve8.jpg

http://www23.tomshardware.com/grap [...] &chart=288


Is it that no games out on the market currently take advantage of 512 MB video cards??

Message quoted 1 times
Message edited by Paul22000 on 12-19-2007 at 11:34:23 AM
Reply to Paul22000
DeAtHrApToR   12-19-2007 at 12:36:28 PM
- 0 +

I would like to point out that some games for example Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter require 512 MB of vram to run on the highest graphical setting.

Reply to DeAtHrApToR
jaydeejohn   12-19-2007 at 12:57:29 PM
- 0 +

Textures, AI, AA and AF and resolution all effect ram. There are several games out that wont let you run maxxed out unless 512 is detected. Besides, as you reach a point of either getting eye candy or not in a game a little boost can make a difference. Depending on the demands of the game, the card you choose makes a difference, as this card the 2600xt, from your link, doesnt fair well, and when they came out I never have recommended them. But getting slide show at say 18 fps and playable at 22 will make difference in some games, and thats where the 512 will help. In other words, if you want a card that will play more demanding games, dont buy this (2600xt), but rather get a better card that will then be able to actually use the 512mb of ram in a demanding game

------------------------------ I went drifting, thru the capitols of tin, where men cant walk and cant freely talk, and sons turn their fathers in
 Reply to jaydeejohn
deuce271   12-19-2007 at 02:21:52 PM
- 0 +

As stated above, some games will not allow the use of the highest settings without at least 512MB of memory. Also as stated, at higher resolutions more memory is key.

------------------------------ Antec Nine Hundred, Gigabyte P35-DS3R, Intel Q6600 @ 3.2 Ghz, Thermalright Ultra-120 Extreme, eVGA 8800GT 512MB, G-Skill 4GB (2x2GB) DDR2-800 4-4-4-10, Seasonic S12 ATX 650W, Seagate Barracuda 7200.10 320GB SATA, 26" LCD Monitor (1900x1200), Windows XP Pr
 Reply to deuce271
WR2   12-19-2007 at 02:50:56 PM
- 0 +

Paul22000 wrote :

Is it that no games out on the market currently take advantage of 512 MB video cards??

Using a 3 1/2 year old game like Doom3 maybe giving you the wrong conclusion.
And there are other factors to consider besides the amount of VRAM installed.
Just one example:

 


http://firingsquad.com/hardware/amd_rv670_performance_preview/images/cod21280.gif
(in this FiringSquad benchmark the X1950 Pro is 512MB version and HD 2900 GT is 256MB version @ $150)
$140 for a DX9 card or $150 for a DX10 card. Or $170 for a HD 3850?

 

Reply to WR2
vaker5   12-19-2007 at 02:53:06 PM
- 0 +

2900gt is hot but you can find it for 130$...

Reply to vaker5
bfellow   12-19-2007 at 03:15:27 PM
- 0 +

Take a look at Call of Juarez... it needs at least 8800GTX with bells and whistles on.

------------------------------ Q9400 @3.2Ghz-HD4870 512MB GDDR5-2GB DDR2-1066
"You figured it out. All new CPU's are nothing but overclocked Pentium 1's with a few bells and whistles added, ask any ol timer whose been around."

 

Reply to bfellow

valis   12-19-2007 at 04:17:57 PM
- 0 +

rosu9801 wrote :

Cause they aren't free?


FTW!!!

------------------------------ Valis Keogh
CEO
Valis Enterprises
http://www.valissoft.com
Reply to valis
LAN_deRf_HA   12-19-2007 at 05:42:25 PM
- 0 +

http://www23.tomshardware.com/grap [...] &chart=283

An example of a game that cares about memory, the problem is you're using tom's comparison chart. They have a ton of **** old games no one cares about on there. Newer games have seen increasing benefit from more memory.

Reply to LAN_deRf_HA
physx7   12-19-2007 at 08:09:21 PM
- 0 +

Quote :

They have a ton of **** old games no one cares about on there.



Who plays Doom3 or Dark messiah? I suppose they have a reason for using them?

------------------------------ E7200 @ 2.53Ghz, 2 gigs Mushkin ddr2 800, Gigabyte EP45-UD3R, Western Digital 640 gig, Gigabyte HD 4850 512MB, Asus DVD burner, HP w2007 monitor...
http://i299.photobucket.com/albums/mm282/alphahuman98/masterchiefdancing_4-1.gif

 

Reply to physx7

partialsum   12-19-2007 at 09:11:58 PM
- 0 +

To Paul22000. I have done much of the same research and even posted a very similar question on video memory not too long ago. In a nutshell there is little improvement with the extra memory. It only starts to count at higher resolutions and even then -how much- it counts for doesn't seem to be much. My comparisons were of the old gts with the 320/640 mb versions. I think there's about a 50 or 70 dollar difference in price, too.

Here's Oblivion at max:
http://www23.tomshardware.com/grap [...] &chart=298

Nothing.

MS Flight Simulator X max:
http://www23.tomshardware.com/grap [...] &chart=293

More nothing.

The big picture- compare all benchmarks:
http://www23.tomshardware.com/grap [...] &chart=318

Wow- what a difference. I mean, what a lack of difference. I'm no tech wiz with pc hardware but I can do basic research. I believe this is the most accurate answer to your question:

"ROFL to the extreme, dude, they are just trying to get those who know little about computers to buy a more expensive card..."

I would like to see Tom's switch out some of those gaming benchmarks though. At least put CoD4 in there.

Message quoted 1 times
Reply to partialsum
Paul22000   12-20-2007 at 12:37:21 AM
- 0 +

partialsum wrote :

To Paul22000. I have done much of the same research and even posted a very similar question on video memory not too long ago. In a nutshell there is little improvement with the extra memory. It only starts to count at higher resolutions and even then -how much- it counts for doesn't seem to be much. My comparisons were of the old gts with the 320/640 mb versions. I think there's about a 50 or 70 dollar difference in price, too.

Here's Oblivion at max:
http://www23.tomshardware.com/grap [...] &chart=298

Nothing.

MS Flight Simulator X max:
http://www23.tomshardware.com/grap [...] &chart=293

More nothing.

The big picture- compare all benchmarks:
http://www23.tomshardware.com/grap [...] &chart=318

Wow- what a difference. I mean, what a lack of difference. I'm no tech wiz with pc hardware but I can do basic research. I believe this is the most accurate answer to your question:

"ROFL to the extreme, dude, they are just trying to get those who know little about computers to buy a more expensive card..."

I would like to see Tom's switch out some of those gaming benchmarks though. At least put CoD4 in there.



Thanks partialsum. I really wanted to know if I was crazy or what, but yes, it looks like there's not much point to spending that extra 30-50 (!!!) dollars for barely any increase in performance.

Reason I'm asking is because this will be a Christmas gift, so definitely thank you all for the help :)


Message edited by Paul22000 on 12-20-2007 at 12:38:07 AM
Reply to Paul22000
Ask the community Add a reply
Tom's Hardware > Forum > Graphic & Displays > Graphics Cards > What's the point of paying for 512 MB ???????
Go to:

There are 631 identified and unidentified users. To see the list of identified users, Click here.

Forum map
Bestofmedia Forum ©
2000-2009 Bestofmedia Group
Page generated in 0.433 seconds
Please mind

You are about to answer a thread that has been inactive for more than 6 months.
If you still wish to proceed, please ensure that your posting is original and does not duplicate or overlap any prior responses to this thread.

Add a reply Cancel
Sponsored links
  • Ask the community now
  • Publish
Ad
Related Topics
See all relatives topics
They won a badge
Join us in greeting them
How do I win badges?