Is >512MB video RAM needed for 2560x1600?

I'm building a new computer which will run on a monitor with native 2560x1600 resolution. I'll watch TV and movies on it, and maybe play a game or two occasionally. It will mainly be used for pro audio stuff, multitasking + software development, and other non-graphics stuff.

I'm thinking the HD4850 is fine for my needs. I'd like to get a quiet card with an aftermarket cooler, and there are finally a few available (e.g. powercolor).

Would I benefit from 1GB RAM, or should I just get a 512MB model?

I can't find a 1GB HD4850 with aftermarket cooling anywhere (yet).

Sapphire makes a 1GB model, but they simply say the extra RAM is useful for "graphics rendering". I assume that doesn't include video transcoding. And does it even include gaming?

Thanks for your help.

at 2560 you will need atleast GTX280 the 4870 still wont cut it. so your only option is GTX280 or 4870X2 or the smaller card in dual card config.

Don't listen to these guys, they are Idiots--the 4850 will be fine for your application. You could get by with the 512 version, but the 1GB may benefit you more later down the road. The biggest problem with the 4850 is its small memory bus--this will limit the use of the full 1GB frame buffer and high FPS.

Since you aren't gaming, it shouldn't matter.

*ahem* sorry excuse me can you turn on 8xAA and 16AF with all detail on MAX please!!!

OP believe actual benchmark with the latest game not some aging old game that barely pushing the hardware to their limit.

You will be fine, Since you stated that gaming won't be the biggest priority, and if you do i'm assuming you won't need everything cranked up.

Please ignore a couple of previous posts. They seem like little kids, who just look at crysis numbers.

Heh see what I mean. "crysis crysis crysis" Its a badly coded game, same **** as most of the futuremark software. two years from now and future mark 06 will still run like crap.

You seem to be an audiophile, so just do your thing.

*ahem* do you actually play the game or are you one of those nerds who're just stuck with the graphics options and runs a quick flyby to see how many fps he can get?

people who do play games spends more time shooting things than noticing that the smoke coming out from the burning tank has too much aliasing.

for the OP:

i dont know about you but when you're shooting people, dodging rockets, throwing grenades at 25x16 resolution you wont notice the jaggies on the edge of your gun or on the wall, uh uh. if you do, you must have a very good eyesight or you're playing too close to your monitor.
Anti-aliasing is not the option that pleases me the most. im happier with Vsync-On, makes the game more fluid. but im guessing you'll be happier with a 4870 than a 4850 ( i was supposed to have one, my psu cannot handle it ).

Is there something in the water or what ? The op has clearly said gaming isnt a priority so stop prattling on about Crysis

@ mike brie,
Hi lets get some questions answered and asked.
1. Definatly get a 1GB model casual gaming has a way of creeping up on you and although im sure you wont feel the need to have all the whistles and bells on when you do game the software does catch the hardware up at a pace. The extra Ram is used either at higher resolutions like yours or at slightly lower resolutions to enable said whistles and bells.
2. Does your chosen motherboard feature Crossfire ? If so then you can get a single 4850 and if needed add another further down the line. Failing that my recomendation would be to get a single 4870 which would cope well with what you have planned for the PC to do. There are as has been said some bandwidth limitations with the 4850 and to be 100% honest i dont know if they would be an issue with your set up or not, but why take the risk ?
3. ATI cards are very good where video transcoding is concerned and they have some good features with this in mind.
4. Where are you shoping USA/UK ?

Mactronix

IMO, if you were NOT gaming, 512MB would be fine, you don't need more for 2D even with HD video content.

The "problem" is gaming, more precisely AA, AF and resolution, together they are the greatest video RAM factors. If you run out of video RAM, then performance drop like crazy (to the point where old cards with more RAM would beat the crap out of yours). So, you will either have to lower resolution for gaming, disable AA/AF or get a card with more than 512MB of video RAM.

I would also like to tell you, if you didn't already know, that 2 cards with 512MB in Crossfire/SLI will not make 1GB of video RAM. Also note that a single dual-GPU card with 1GB of video RAM, would actually have 512MB per GPU, not 1GB shared; it is actually just "Crossfire/SLI-on-a-card".

ah!so i see you game at 640x480 everything at LOW with no AA/AF at 50hz. no comment. i wonder why AMD/Nvidia develop the RV770 and GT200 since 6600GT/X1800XT can do it at 640x480.

EDIT:forgot you are seeing blocks of stickman walking across the screen!

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/v [...] 70-x2.html

OP read here and get an idea what you will get if you go for a HD4850 with 512MB of vram. upto such high resolution you need both graphics power and video memory, there are few titles in there which are heavier on memory it shows the GTX280 and HD4870X2 which both has 1GB ram per core beat the HD4870CF(512MB/core). but then again you can argue that some game dont even use up 512MB ram will all option to MAX.it really depend on what titles you will be playing.

but as said above if you can sacrifice graphics quality then get the 4850 will do.

but why waste such beautiful screen?if you only ask for the average stuff why did you get this baby at the 1st place?*wink wink*

Thanks for all the info guys! Sorry for the delay, I went to an awesome concert (power to the peaceful in SF).

Anyway, if I can't play crysis at that resolution it won't break my heart, as I've never played it yet anyway. I actually got the monitor for audio applications and some multi-table online poker playing, which benefits from really high resolution and looks beautiful on it. But I'll try a game sooner or later, even if it's a demo, I've just got to see what it looks like since I've been out of the loop for a while.

I appreciate the math cyberjock, it puts it into perspective. Mactronix, yes my mobo supports crossfire, but it's a P45, which might not handle it so well. Sounds like I'd benefit more from one good card than, say, 2 4850s with 512 MB RAM each.

iluvgillgill, thanks for the xlabs link, very valuable. They seem to emphasize that with games played at 2560x1600, memory is the main reason why the 4870X2 outperforms the 4870 and 4850. And it sounds like a 1GB 4850 would probably give me some benefits for gaming as well.

I don't want to shell out the money for a 4870X2, so I think I'll just go on the cheap and stick with a 4850 for now. If I really get into gaming then I could buy a 4870X2 down the road for less money (yes, my PSU will support it).

The 1 GB is only $20 more, so I think I'll go for that one, and figure out how to add an aftermarket cooler to keep things quieter. I assume adding a cooler on those cards is possible, and I'll probably be able to find the info in another thread somewhere. Thanks again all!

do you even know how to read? do you even know how to get the gist of what you're reading? let me paraphrase myself for you.

" you can compromise AA @ 2560x1600 "

i wonder where your low res crap is coming from?

crytek themselves admitted that crysis wasnt optimized "enough". but things are about to change once crysis:warhead hits the market 2 weeks from now. they said it'll run faster than the original.

Exactly yadge. This is why I susgested the 4850, and only get the 1GB version if he really wants that little extra hmpf, but he should not be spending over $200, which is the cost of the 1GB 4850.

This is an all too common misconception. Do you really think that the applications with some of the most advanced graphics in existence (Crysis and 3DMark Vantage) are going to run as well as a game like Team Fortress 2? Crysis is coded good enough (though I will admit that it could use a few optimizations), it just that it is more advanced then any game out there. 3DMark Vantage was created to stress graphics cards to the absolute max, so it could be used to help calibrate performance and compare (have there been any video card reviews since 2001 that havent used 3D Mark?). It doesn't matter if it runs fast or not.

Besides, the casual gamer shouldn't expect to play Crysis at max anyway....

For a casual gamer an 8800GT would be enough to play most games at medium-high 2xAA 4xAF or so, which should be more then enough for a casual gamer. I have always really liked this card: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Prod [...] 6814261012 But it doesn't appear to be available at newegg any longer. Aftermarket dual slot cooler 1GB RAM, factory overclocked (and I like the orange ). If you can find it somewhere, I don't think you would be disappointed.

For someone who does not game, and just does multitasking and what not at 25x16, a 8600GT GDDR3 512MB should be plenty, really. If you have a fast processor and lots of RAM, the graphics card really shouldnt be an issue.

Do NOT get anything lower then an 8800GT with 1GB of RAM. I love how companies put 1GB of RAM on a card like a 8500GT, when an 8500GT will only use like 256MB of it.

I know this is probably not very revalent, but a AMD3500, 2GB RAM and an onboard Geforce 6100 256MB (shared mem), ran 1680x1050 desktop absolutely flawlessly... then again it was XP.

Hi!

I tested Doom 3 and Quake 4 in 2560x1600 and had no problems. Performance is OK, but AA in Quake 4 does not work at that resolution (16x does in Doom 3, though).

My machine:
- Linux 64bit
- C2D E8400 3GHz
- 9600GT (512 MB)
- 8 GB RAM

PS: CPU usage is at 100% (one core) when playing D3, maybe the GPU is not the problem here (about 40fps during combat), even less for Q4. Memory usage is at about 1 GByte each.

PPS: With two of these cards I could play both games simultaneously I guess

Bye,
Carsten