X-bit labs: 8 Series shootout- GTS 320 vs 640 gap closed?

[fornowagain]

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/video/display/geforce8-roundup.html

The GeForce 8800 GTS, with 640MB or 320MB of graphics memory, runs modern games at an acceptable speed and provides comfortable gaming conditions in resolutions up to 1600x1200 and, occasionally, even to 1920x1200. The results of the two versions of the card are in fact identical and purchasing the more expensive 640MB version isn’t reasonable. You may want to add some more money and buy a GeForce 8800 GTX instead.

 

[fornowagain]

The S.T.A.L.K.E.R tests with 8800GTS dont add up tbh, ive run tests using the 320mb and 640mb versions using same PC build with said game, 640mb version was always faster. Rest of tests i can't comment on.

In Vista with 158.24's? Can we exclude the possibility NV were deliberately holding back the 320Mb? Is it possible the offset was there to create a price point until they had a little 'competition'?


8800 GTS 640MB vs. GeForce 8800 GTS 320MB
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/video/display/msi8800gts-640.html

Same place, only XP 97.92, though different system. Strange, the 320Mb improves quite a lot in their latest test.

 

[fornowagain]

In fact, they've completely changed their testbed and comparing some of the scores with the previous benchmarks don't add up. Seems like a FX60/DDR system beats a X6800/DDR2 system in certain cases.

Looks like they changed back in May for the 2900XT review. As far as graphics bottlenecks go, I don't see as valid any direct comparison between the two systems with different operating systems and drivers.

 

[fornowagain]

Ok in older DX9 titles there is no difference - but in games that can load more than 300megs of texture data in higher quality settings theres going to be a huge huge performance difference...

Same thoughts here, but care to speculate why in this particular review the 320 version sees improvements in Vista over XP? Same texture limits after all, someone back in the thread said CoH definitely used around 500mb of ram, should limit it. Wherever it lagged in XP, in Vista its now mysteriously alongside the 640 in all ten games. Even the GTX has improved, just not the GTS 640. Um, just seems a bit odd that.

Vista vs XP

 

[fornowagain]

Yeah sorry fixed, linked to earlier, but I've put a link/title.

Can't be system ram, ever used a HyperMemory/TurboCache card? Slooooow, never get the fill rates needed.