• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

768MB vs 1024mb - GTFX

GangsterSte

GangsterSte

GangsterSte

Associate
Joined
12 Aug 2010
Posts
125
Is there a noticable difference between OcUK Value GeForce GTX 460 768MB GDDR5 PCI-Express Graphics Card and the 1024MB version? There is a price difference of £22. Is the difference between the cards noticable as I could only afford the 768 version and am now having second thoughts :(
 
Marine-RX179 said:
Well, here's a comparison between the two:
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/156?vs=180

Personally, I'd try to save up £20 more to get the 1GB version...but if you absolutely can't afford more than the £150 range, the 768MB version is still a decent card for the price, and faster than a simliarly priced 5830 is most cases.
Click to expand...

That is a great site, thanks, added it to my fav's! It seems as tho there is literally a 10% difference in frame-rates in most cases. This translates into a frame-rate difference of i.e:

Crysis Warhead - 1920x1200

768 Card = 20.1
1GB Card = 23.3

In most cases there is a 4-7 frame-rate difference, is this going to be noticable or am I paying the extra £22 for a frame-rate number?

Also I couldn't help but notice the temprature seems to be lower on the 768 version, does this mean it will be more "over-clockable?" Also, would like to know if there is a significant difference in an over-clocked 768 card in general, is it worth doing? I can't seem to find any guides on over-clocking the 768 card.

I guess in most cases the difference seems minimal, so for better bang for your buck the 768mb is the way to go.
 
4-7 FPS wont make much difference to how playable a game is under 30 FPS.

Sub 35 FPS and the game is not smooth enough IMO. Moving from 35 FPS to 42 is very worth while in terms of game play.
 
Go for the one you want. If you dont care about the little more FPS then go for 768MB one. But I always say... A little more FPS never hurts :)
 
1 Gb GTX 460 - 1024 mb, 32 rops, 256 bit memory interface.
768 Mb GTX 660 - 768 mb, 24 rops, 196 bit memory interface.

Many people view the two cards as being comparable to each other as the 5830 is to the 5850.

I personally wouldnt go for the cut down models.
 
jigger said:
4-7 FPS wont make much difference to how playable a game is under 30 FPS.

Sub 35 FPS and the game is not smooth enough IMO. Moving from 35 FPS to 42 is very worth while in terms of game play.
Click to expand...
The frame rate he quote are minimum frame rate.

GangsterSte back to answer your question, games need at least 25fps minimum frame rate to be considered playable smooth without noticing huge slow downs. The 1GB version of the GTX460 has better chance of pushing the minimum frame rate to between 25-30fps than the 768MB version when overclocked, consider it is 23.3fps at stock speed vs 20.1 at stock speed.
 
Cheers for the responses chaps.

Think I am going to have to settle for the lower version. Would love to have the higher version, but it's really beyond my budget having already overspent. I think when I lose the student tag, I will be going to the higher mg cards, but for now I'll settle for this nice value over-clocked one, and hope with the AMD Phenom II X6 Six Core 1055T overclocked at 3.80hz + 4gb ram, + this lower version card, I will be able to play Metro on on the 19xx x 12xx resolution, with medium graphics (aka above the recommended 25-35 fps).

Cheers,

Steve.
 
coupe69 said:
Yeah I'd probably agree with this.
Click to expand...
Yea but 80%~90% of the general games ain't as demanding as Crysis Warhead and should easily have minimum frame rate at above 30~35fps no problem.

I think we all know minium 35fps would be much smoother than 25fps, but for people on a tight budget, don't think they can really afford that kind of expectation for demanding game on a mid-range graphic card...so either accept 25fps, or turn down the graphic details.

With that said, the GTX460 768MB does not run well on Metro 2033, neither does the high end single GPU cards, considering it is one of the most demanding game around:
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Axle/GeForce_GTX_460_768_MB/27.html (the frame rate shown in the graphs are average frame rate, not minimum frame rate I believe)

To be honest, you should leave this game, and revisit it in a few years time when you got better hardwares; it ain't even that great a game anyway from the reviews I read.

Also, what CPU you got? The last thing you'd want is your system bottlenecking the card.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom