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

512mb gfx card

Discussion in 'Graphics Cards' started by Willbo, 2 May 2006.

  1. Willbo

    Wise Guy

    Joined: 28 Jul 2004

    Posts: 1,219

    Location: Solihull, Birmingham

    Hey everyone, just wondered whether a 512mb card is worth getting and if so which one?
    do you really find much improvement in games over a 256mb card?
     
  2. Cyber-Mav

    Capodecina

    Joined: 30 Jul 2005

    Posts: 15,145

    Location: Midlands

    deffo worth it, the way games are these days 256mb is a bare minimum.
     
  3. Willbo

    Wise Guy

    Joined: 28 Jul 2004

    Posts: 1,219

    Location: Solihull, Birmingham

    would it be better trying to get hold of an identical for sli or get hold of a 512mb card on its own and cash in on my 256mb card to put towards the cost?

    if so what 512mb cards would you recommend? and it doesnt have to be the most expensive if possible
     
  4. man_from_uncle

    Wise Guy

    Joined: 9 Jan 2006

    Posts: 1,349

    I agree with Cyber-mav to a certain extent; 512 cards are the way forward. However you really have to playing at a minum of 1600x1200 to notice a real difference; and unless you are playing at 2048x1536 then clocks speeds on core and memory can more than make up for it. If you're into overclocking and modding, then with the right tweaks the 7900gt can power well into (and by if you go up to 1.55v, beyond) 7900gtx territory at 1600x1200 and below. If the 512 versions of the card can be modded in the same way then you can get a REAL monster for under £300 that'll destory even the XXX version of its bigger brother.
     
  5. Willbo

    Wise Guy

    Joined: 28 Jul 2004

    Posts: 1,219

    Location: Solihull, Birmingham

    well i'm not really into overclocking or anything as i've never really tried but i suppose if its easy enough to do and risk free i could be tempted,
    but primarily the card would be used "as is" at a resolution of 1680x1050 per 20" widescreen monitor in a dual monitor set up.

    i run games like hl2, quake4, oblivion, ghost recon, cod2.
    all of which run well, but i have noticed the newer ones like quake 4 (really struggles and automatically puts my system as medium spec) and ghost recon (also puts my pc as medium texture ratin and spec) even though i have a amd x2 4400 with 1gb of memory, and 256mb 7800 gfx card.

    i will soon be upgrading to 2gb of ddr400 memory.
     
  6. man_from_uncle

    Wise Guy

    Joined: 9 Jan 2006

    Posts: 1,349

    If you were using a 7800gtx before then no single card set-up will give you THAT much of a boost. I'd consider going SLi.
     
  7. Darkwave

    Capodecina

    Joined: 25 Oct 2005

    Posts: 13,780

  8. easyrider

    Caporegime

    Joined: 24 Dec 2005

    Posts: 39,769

    Location: Autonomy

    AT widescreen resolutions the extra ram pulls ahead.. At ultra settings in quake 4 etc 512mb of ram is a must.
     
  9. Darkwave

    Capodecina

    Joined: 25 Oct 2005

    Posts: 13,780

    Really? Because the link I just posted shows 512MB gaining only 0.3fps in Quake 4 at 2048x1536 with 4x antialiasing.
     
  10. Willbo

    Wise Guy

    Joined: 28 Jul 2004

    Posts: 1,219

    Location: Solihull, Birmingham

    mmm getting mixed opinions.....reviews say theres hardly any performance difference between the two but i'm being told that the extra memory would make a difference in widescreen and enable better settings in games.

    is it worth selling my geforce 7800gtx 256mb to get a 512mb ati or nvidia card, is it worth trying to get a similar card so i can have sli, or just keep what i've got?

    i'm presuming the cheap £150 512mb gfx cards arent worth thinking about with such big new games at top resolutions and settings?
     
  11. Darkwave

    Capodecina

    Joined: 25 Oct 2005

    Posts: 13,780

    I wouldn't bother unless you'll be buying an X1900 series card, the 7800GTX is still great and it's my honest opinion that the extra RAM wouldn't even help you out much.
     
  12. Willbo

    Wise Guy

    Joined: 28 Jul 2004

    Posts: 1,219

    Location: Solihull, Birmingham

    if i got a fair bit for my card i would consider going for an ati x1900 card with 512mb.

    i just dont understand why games determine my pc as medium spec when its :
    amd x2 4400, 1gb ddr400, 150gb raptor, audigy 2 zs, geforce 7800gtx
     
  13. Darkwave

    Capodecina

    Joined: 25 Oct 2005

    Posts: 13,780

    What game is telling you that? :eek: Oblivion detects my system as "ultra high" and that's with my old CPU etc. Your system kicks the crap out of mine, shouldn't be having any problems at all.
     
  14. easyrider

    Caporegime

    Joined: 24 Dec 2005

    Posts: 39,769

    Location: Autonomy


    Get an up to date link thats about underclocking a 7800 GTX down to test memory.

    The other is with an x800xl with slack latency ram.

    Just like the 256mb 6600 cards using slower ram than the 128 versions.
    The 128 mb cards being faster due to faster ram.

    It even states that if you want to run oblivion at ultra high settings then the 512mb provides improved performance.
     
  15. easyrider

    Caporegime

    Joined: 24 Dec 2005

    Posts: 39,769

    Location: Autonomy

    Oh no here we go again.

    Mediocre 3d mark scores and yet your system detects to ultra high settings in oblivion. :confused:
     
  16. Darkwave

    Capodecina

    Joined: 25 Oct 2005

    Posts: 13,780

    Yep, because apples to apples comparisons sure are a terrible thing. It's a sound methodology, if my links are so inaccurate then feel free to provide better ones and I'll eat my words.

    You missed the 7900GT 512MB vs. 7900GT 256MB comparison then? :confused:

    It even states that if you want to run oblivion at ultra high settings then the 512mb provides improved performance.[/QUOTE]
    I'd like to see where you said that, since on my screen it says "Based on all this, it looks like you’ll only see improved performance with 512MB cards if you’re running Oblivion with the highest graphics settings, and even then, only under limited conditions." :confused:

    Not sure what your problem is mate, sorry.
     
  17. Darkwave

    Capodecina

    Joined: 25 Oct 2005

    Posts: 13,780

    [​IMG]

    Problem? :confused: You know I really am tired of this stalking, it was amusing at first but I'm beginning to feel harrassed.
     
  18. easyrider

    Caporegime

    Joined: 24 Dec 2005

    Posts: 39,769

    Location: Autonomy

    I'd like to see where you said that, since on my screen it says "Based on all this, it looks like you’ll only see improved performance with 512MB cards if you’re running Oblivion with the highest graphics settings, and even then, only under limited conditions." :confused:

    Not sure what your problem is mate, sorry.[/QUOTE]

    No problem.

    Having ran a 256 mb card and 512 mb card with my 20" widescreen at that res the 512mb was better across the board.
     
  19. easyrider

    Caporegime

    Joined: 24 Dec 2005

    Posts: 39,769

    Location: Autonomy

    Its discussion nothing more nothing less.
    You give a link to a review and state "enough said"

    I am merely highlighting the fact that at widescreen resolutions the 512mb cards pull ahead.

    Many will agree with me ;)
     
  20. Darkwave

    Capodecina

    Joined: 25 Oct 2005

    Posts: 13,780

    As far as I know quoting benchmarks is not a discouraged practise here, and I consider AnandTech and Firing Squad to be more than reliable. I am not trying to start a flamewar about this, just posting my opinion with plenty of what I consider to be reliable evidence.

    Like I said, you're free to post your own benchmarks or use sources from other sites. If they reasonable then I'm more than happy to say that 512MB is good enough, since I only bought a 256MB card to last me until Q1 '07, to cut cost, and because the sources I've seen all say more isn't really needed at the moment.