1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. 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.

    Dismiss Notice

1gb ddr4 cards?

Discussion in 'Graphics Cards' started by utherpendragon, 21 May 2006.

  1. utherpendragon

    Hitman

    Joined: 4 May 2006

    Posts: 508

    simple question really, when? Is it worth going for a x1900xtx/7900gtx or will they be a long time yet?
     
  2. VeNT

    Capodecina

    Joined: 9 Jan 2003

    Posts: 20,685

    Location: Cornwall

    why bother?
     
  3. FreeStream

    Capodecina

    Joined: 10 Apr 2004

    Posts: 13,371


    Exactly, why?

    512mb is MORE than enough, 256mb is barely used as it is...
     
  4. Cyber-Mav

    Capodecina

    Joined: 30 Jul 2005

    Posts: 15,117

    Location: Midlands

    256mb is not enough these days. 512mb minimum.
     
  5. OzZie

    Mobster

    Joined: 9 Jul 2004

    Posts: 4,525

    Location: Nottingham

    Eh, 512mb minimum? :o

    256mb is still far sufficient for anywhere up to 1600x1200 i would imagine with medium levels of AA/AF. Only a few games such as Q4, D3 and GRAW use so much texture memory, and even then i guess it only peaks above the extra memory available. :)

    Don't get me wrong, i'm all for better visuals, but the games that do go over the 256mb limit don't seem to show it imo. (based on screenshots) :)
     
  6. Van_Dammesque

    Wise Guy

    Joined: 4 May 2004

    Posts: 2,207

    Location: NE England

    I would say 512 Mb minimum nowadays, why pay >200 pound and not get a 512 Mb version. Also why pay >200 pound and NOT play the games you have mentioned.

    Also you cannot see the difference between textures in screenshots BUT you can tell when playing due to less hard drive access for the caching of textures.
     
  7. OzZie

    Mobster

    Joined: 9 Jul 2004

    Posts: 4,525

    Location: Nottingham

    If you are willing to pay £250> for a graphics card then 512mb would be indeed a good choice to go for in terms of future proofing yourself. However, it isn't at all the minimum requirement to enjoy games in my opinion. 128mb card's are the minimum (afaik) nowadays.

    I remember when D3 first got analysed with some of the first 512mb x800xl's and the screenshots showed the smallest increase in texture quality. The only downside with ultra quality with 256mb cards being the stuttering/cacheing of the memory causing slowdown.

    It's not like 256mb cards cannot play 99% of games on the market at a decent res and not require more than that. Also, you can still play all of the games mentioned on a 256mb card perfectly fine, but obviously not at ultra settings.

    I would say that 256mb is minimum today unless you have lots of cash to spend on the latest hardware. :)
     
  8. Rokusho

    Gangster

    Joined: 23 May 2005

    Posts: 302

    Location: In my chair

    Well, really unless you either:

    a) have a big moniter, at least 20"
    b) "Futureproofing" (lol, as if you can do that...)
    c) just want bragging rights
    d) an idiot

    256Mb is used to about 75% in games that are onyl a few months old (around 6), 512Mb is currently completly useless, Crysis will probably need this much, but that is still far away on the horizon.
     
  9. Darkwave

    Capodecina

    Joined: 25 Oct 2005

    Posts: 13,780

    256MB = more than enough.
     
  10. Goksly

    Capodecina

    Joined: 5 Mar 2003

    Posts: 10,623

    Location: Nottingham

    I would say 1GB cards will be out Jan/Feb. With Vista.... its going to be 512mb recommended, 1GB prefered.
     
  11. Darkwave

    Capodecina

    Joined: 25 Oct 2005

    Posts: 13,780

    I'll be a long time before we see "512MB Graphics Card" on a minimum required specifications list, or even recommended. A lot of games are still saying 64MB with DirectX 7 support, even Oblivion's minimum requirements only ask for a 128MB card, with only an X800/6800 as recommended.
     
  12. harris1986

    Mobster

    Joined: 4 Aug 2005

    Posts: 2,684

    512mb = minimum ROFLMAO :D
    what a load of ****, iirc there were some reviews that put the x188xt 256 v the x1800xt 512 and up to 1024x768 the 256 was as quick if not quicker, above that the extra memory indeed does come in handy! Personally i went from a x1800xt512 to a 7900gt256 have not noticed a difference in performance, if anything the 7900 feels smoother than the 512 (and that's with a healthy overclock)
     
  13. utherpendragon

    Hitman

    Joined: 4 May 2006

    Posts: 508

    I'd assume most of you here are on comparitivly low-res lcd screens. I'm running a crt @ 2048x1536, so extra memory would help alot. Looks like the ATI cards are launching at the end of the year as well.
     
  14. FreeStream

    Capodecina

    Joined: 10 Apr 2004

    Posts: 13,371


    Its still not going to be 512mb

    It is a waste of money and its just showing off.
     
  15. Vegeta

    Soldato

    Joined: 6 Nov 2004

    Posts: 5,760

    LOL 512 minimum, I've yet to see a game where theres a difference between the x1800xt 256mb and x1800xt 512mb, the only thing we can say for sure is that theres a big difference between 128mb and 256mb.
     
  16. Van_Dammesque

    Wise Guy

    Joined: 4 May 2004

    Posts: 2,207

    Location: NE England

    Has anyone actually seen reviews comparing 512 Mb and 256 Mb, it is not the framerate that differs, it does reduce stuttering (i.e hard drive access, a good example is FEAR, with that you have to have 1Gb mem and 512 Mb Gfx OR 2Gb mem and 256Mb for smooth gameplay).
     
  17. Vegeta

    Soldato

    Joined: 6 Nov 2004

    Posts: 5,760

    Seems to be perfectly smooth for me with 1gb of ram and 256mb gfx ram, only games i stuggle on are bf2 when I use textures at high and oblivion which i use top settings for also, but this is due to my 1gb ram I reckon and not my graphics card.
     
  18. Goksly

    Capodecina

    Joined: 5 Mar 2003

    Posts: 10,623

    Location: Nottingham

    Vegeta, not everyone plays at 8x6 resolution though....
    FEAR, for sure, gets a lot smoother game play from 2gb ram. If you do not think so, then I suggest you go to a medical professional as you are clearly living a life with visual stutters ;)
     
  19. Vegeta

    Soldato

    Joined: 6 Nov 2004

    Posts: 5,760

    How do you now what resolution I play at?
    I've got a dell 2005fpw.
    And theres no need for the attitude neither its pathetic to get pationate about something like this topic but if someone in the street gave you abuse no doubt you'd ignore them but if they said "OI 2GB pc ram and 512MB graphics ram is wasted in most situations!" no doubt you'll go and throttle him lol.
     
  20. Raikiri

    Capodecina

    Joined: 5 Jul 2005

    Posts: 17,692

    Location: Brighton


    Same here, although I do want to get 2gb of RAM. I also play at 1680x1050 btw Goksly.