hi everyone =]
I just want to ask what's the relationship between the GPU memory and the output resolution, given the core speed are the same. Like, will a 1GB 4870 give a better performance in high resolution then a 512MB 4870 with same other setting?
I've been watching your post and hoping someone more educated than myself would respond... and maybe they will... but for now here's what I got...
You really want to match up the amount of memory with the GPU... just an example... I've seen a laptop online with an ATI Radeon 3650 w/ 1 GB of RAM. Uhh... no. That's just silly. That GPU will totally not have the muscle necessary to game at ultra high resolutions with things like AA enabled... so the extra memory is pretty pointless. In the case of your 4870... I'd be inclined to get the 1 GB... especially if you're not having to settle for slower clocked memory.
Again, I'm hoping someone gives you a better response than this.
Well it goes like this. The bigger your resolution the more stuff is on the screen at once. More stuff on the screen means the video card needs to keep more things like textures and models in memory. I read an article on this a while back let me see if I can find it again...
From what I have seen, the 512MB HD4870 is doing pretty amazing at high res with fsaa. It more than competes against the GTX260 at 19x12 with 4xaa. And even at 25x16 res 4xaa (settings I'd have to think are pushing it for 512MB), it's trading blows with the 896MB GTX 260. I haven't seen it take a dive in any charts like we see 256MB cards do when they reach their limit. (8800GT for example ) http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3341&p=14
I wonder what is the next step up from 2560x1600? I believe soon they may be pushing out higher res 30" or 40" panels. I know they do for professional series monitors. But the 1gb on the 4870 would be preferable if you are playing at 2560x1600, although 512 would be sufficient for 19x12 or less.