• 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.

Interesting artical with regards to 256mb vs 512mb vram.

SkeeterUK

SkeeterUK

SkeeterUK

Soldato
Joined
24 Oct 2005
Posts
16,417
Location
North East
***LINK DELETED , DIRECT COMPETITOR LINKS ON THAT PAGE***

Seems like a good artical so i thought id share it with you all. For me its definatly made me decide to get 512mb card. For one thing it will hardly ever stutter games like it would if you had to use a 256mb card with full AA and AF on a good res like 1280 or 1600x. And since i like AA and AF and 1280 and 1600 res [if fps allow] then this is a no brainer.

HIS 512mb AGP x1950pro here i come. Just PLEASE go on "this week only" on thursday so i can buy it a bit cheaper. :)

--

Edit - I know im hoping a lot for the 512mb version going cheaper for a week on thursday when they change "this week specials deals" but how likely or unlikely is the chance of it being on this thursday?
 
Last edited:
Isn't the price difference like £10 or £20 between the 256 and 512meg cards anyhow? :confused:

With that sort of difference who WOULD choose the 256. Just makes no sense at all.
 
Erm no the 256mb version is 144 with postage whilst the 512mb version is £198 in all. So miles more than simple £10/20 difference. [AGP version btw]
 
Stonedofmoo said:
Well the Sapphire one is £150 for the 512meg

No need to spend mega bucks on what is basically the same product
Click to expand...

Or waste the silicon on uneeded ram.The industry needs to get their hneads around this. When its gone its gone folks.
 
Wolv34ine said:
Or waste the silicon on uneeded ram.The industry needs to get their hneads around this. When its gone its gone folks.
Click to expand...

I hope you take short beathes to preserve the dwindling reserves of oxygen on planet earth too.
 
I use a 256MB X1900XT and get no stuttering whatsoever in any games in 1280x960 or 1680x1050, I can also run Quake 4 in Ultra High with no stuttering. :confused:
 
Wolv34ine said:
Or waste the silicon on uneeded ram.The industry needs to get their hneads around this. When its gone its gone folks.
Click to expand...

Take a deep breath.. go to your nearest beach. Look at the sand. Look at all the sand. It is silicon. There is more then we will ever need.
 
Wolv34ine said:
Or waste the silicon on uneeded ram.The industry needs to get their hneads around this. When its gone its gone folks.
Click to expand...

Just because a card has 512meg doesn't mean it physically has more chips, it might have the same number just twice the capacity.
 
512 is the way to go

I just purchased a Gainward 7800GS + AGP from Overclockers UK and it works perfectly on maximum settings on all the latest games. It wasn't long ago that an X-tra 256mb of ram on anything would almost break the bank.
It's very reasonable for what you get now. I highly recommend 512mb and this card. I live in the US and we can't buy Gainward products here anymore so I'm sure glad to have located Overclockers UK and it was a pleasure to do business with them. ;)
Asus P4C800-E Deluxe, 2gb OCZ gold ddr, Audigy2 ZS, 3.4ghz P-4
water cooled.... except for my new video card and it ALL overclocks great.
It doesn't stutter or flutter on FEAR or GRAW at max settings.
 
Last edited:
they use a program called "video memory watcher" in that article. you can use it yourself to measure how much video ram is used. i gave it a quick run.....

pro evo 6 - 80mb video ram used
hl2 ep1 all settings max, 4x aa, 8x af, 200mb used
call of duty 2, all settings max, 4x aa, af set in game, 325mb used

and i only have a small screen - 1440x900 which is less pixels than 1280x1024 so it would seem 512mb is worth it for cod2 at least.... :p

http://www.nonatainment.de/web/Default.aspx?tabid=62
 
blast - I missed my chance to read the article (not blaming the rules, just was interested in the article) ..thought I would kill a few dull minutes at work hahahaha

oh well never mind
 
So would a 512mb card be worth the extra £20 over the 256mb card? I'm looking at the HIS x1950pro which'll be running at 1280x1024 with a core 2 duo 6300 and 2gb RAM. Will i see much of a performance difference? Or is it a case of 5fps at best?
 
Using high AA and AF levels the 512mb will keep fps higher than 256mb due to the increase of memory needed. This becomes most apparent at 1600 res i think it was tho will still help a lot at 1280 res.
 
Cyber-Mav said:
looks like systems with 1gb of ram will see good benefit going to a 512mb gfx card.
Click to expand...

Well interestingly enough I wondered if that would be the case when I moved from a 256meg to 512meg card. For example in FEAR I had to use Medium textures to keep peak commit charge below 1gig (on High it was around 1.2gig or so)

However, I found that adding an extra 256meg of video memory made negligible difference to memory usage - it was still using 1.2gig!

I think there must be a requirement to load all textures into system memory prior to video memory or something because getting a 512meg card has been no help whatsoever in keeping my system memory usage down in games.
 
Vid memory is used when your running vid memory intensive games etc. You will always have a small part be in system memory as in the artical that was removed showed most of the time system memory always contained 20mb ish. Rest of what was needed was put on the gfx card. The gfx card memory gets fuller the more you go higher res and max details in games and using AA and AF. Using these things will put more of it on your gfx card if it has room there.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom