X1800 XT 256 or 512?

[DeathByMonkey]

Hey there,

I'm gonna upgrade my graphics card and ive got my choices down to just a few, but I'm hard pressed to choose between them:

Sapphire X1800 XT 256mb @ £217

Connect3D X1800 XT 256mb @ £235

or

Powercolor X1800 XT 512mb @ £252

I'm very tempted by the Sapphire as its nice and cheap, and I've currently got a Sapphire that has served me well. I suppose what it boils down to is this: is 512mb worth the extra money? I'm upgrading to 19" lcd soon and I've heard 512 will help a lot in games. Any comments?

If the 512 isn't really worth it, should I just go for the cheaper Sapphire? How will it differ in performance from the Connect3D? Will it be £18 worth of pure gaming awesomeness or £18 of needless expenditure?

Cheers,

DeathByMonkey

 

[ACESHIGH]

The two 256MB cards will likely perform the same, infact Sapphire produce most ATI cards, so the Connect3D may be made by them too.

The 512MB helps at resolutions above 1280x 1024 & with AA/AF.
Also more games in future will be supporting 512MB i suspect & so this may be a worthwhile choice. Besides there isnt much price difference.

 

[smids]

Sapphire are actually bigger and better than C3D so I would get that if you choose 256MB. The powercolor is worht it if you like gaming with AA and AF at your native resolution as there is about an average 10fps difference at this resolution between the 256 and 512MB cards IIRC.

 

[DeathByMonkey]

Sapphire are actually bigger and better than C3D so I would get that if you choose 256MB. The powercolor is worht it if you like gaming with AA and AF at your native resolution as there is about an average 10fps difference at this resolution between the 256 and 512MB cards IIRC.

Cheers dude for the info. I think I'll go with 512mb for a bit of futureproofing. Getting a 256mb radeon 9600xt when most were going 128mb (a couple of years ago) has paid dividends for sure with the likes of bf2 and other newer games, so I think the same should apply here.