The Personal Computer Thread

[gold_heart007]

I am a little lost here.
Of course its a no-brainer that a 1GB 512-bit card will be faster than a 1 GB 256 bit card.
I didnt really get your point about 1GB 256 bit card being slower than 512 MB 256 bit card?
Can you please explain the statement in bold?

I thought you understood! Ok, again..!
A 512MB and 1GB card will yield same results while playing at similar resolutions. Now, unless and untill, u want to crank up the resolution, a 512MB card will in general provide better results. As for Why...I've already answered that in my previous post. Now if u dont know about Latencies...i suggest you study a bit about it.
See, Core always matters More; i.e. the Graphic Processing Unit.
Ok, tell me: What matters more: Your Pentium Quad Central Processing Unit or How many MB or GB of RAM you have? Huh?
Honestly answering, for General GPUs like 8600/8800/9800 series, sporting 1GB of vRAM is just another marketing tactics.

Thumb Rule: The more RAM just allows you to run Higher resolutions. And thats it. Dont expect faster frameates, unless and untill u have better GPUs to process all that large chunks of texture and fill rates with higher bandwidth.
See, i've said this again!

512MB is enough for any 20 inch monitor.
1GB is going to give you the same results if you play on 1280x1024 resolution. Plus, not many games utilizes that much of vRAM either.

Its when you start playing on huge 24-30 inch screens at 1920x1200 or 2560x1600 that 1gb of vRAM actually matters... But then again once you get that high, the GPU's on a GeForce 8 are definitely not capable of handling those huge chunks of data. Now, thats when you turn to GTX260s/GTX280s/9800 GTX+'s or even Radeon's 4870x2. (ie Better GPUs!)

GPU speed matters alot, but what matters the most is the number of transistors within the GPU. Search for that. The more you have, the more powerful your card is.
Dont worry about GDDR ram unless you have a giant hunk of a monitor.

A 1 gig card will NEVER be slower than a 512 mb card with the same specs. The 1 gb memory will result in higher frames per second at very high resolutions (especially 2560x1600). Thus the 1 gb card is better than the 512 mb one for high resolutions, although the difference varies from game to game and can be almost zero as well. For lower res both cards are equal in ALL cases. And I'm talking only gaming here.

I would say both Yes and No. What's really important is the graphics processor and data transfer rates between that and the graphics memory. But more memory does make the game (depending on what kind of game) more smoother.(Now, dont relate this with higher FPS. You can relate it with the term "Stuttering" though!) Graphics memory is used for storage textures and other stuff like polygons and data and instructions on how to shade/colour/light/transform up the objects in the game.
And FYI, your system also allocates additional graphics memory called Graphics-Aperture by using your System RAM.
Ok, lets see... What would you prefer? "A Faster Car Engine or A Bigger Fuel Tank ?"
Look, the game and its settings will determine how much of the video card's memory is actually needed to hold the necessary data, and the memory speed determines how fast the data can be retrieved and sent to the core. The core/shaders will take that data and execute calculations based upon it. A manufacturer designs the GPU by keeping all the necessary credentials in mind. Just think, why the new G92 wasn't launched with 256MB of vRAM? huh? Instead it was launched with 512MB one. Which was integrated keeping all the essentials for the optimum gameplay experience.
A 1GB will be able to store more chunks of data, no doubt. But to process all that chunk of data, ofcourse more Core/Shader speed is required.
1 GB on a graphics card is only helpful if the actual application uses more than , say, 512 MB. Most recent games don't require more than 512 MB, or the Vram is fast enough to cope with the slight overheads. But there are certain games that do go over 512 MB, and do gain in performance with the additional frame buffer.
The increase in performance is not drastic though, it'll be more relative to that particular card, meaning a 1GB 8800GT should be better than a 512 MB 8800GT in certain particular cases only, but by no means will a 1 GB 8800GT be better than a 512 MB HD4850! Hope that gets my point through.

[tanay]

You're quoting the same, that i've said earlier!
Ok, here is how it works..
A card that has 1GB of RAM and a 256bit bus will only be able to address 512mb consistently fast... the more RAM you use on the card, the more latency increases so it will be sufficiently slower in memory intensive apps than a card that has 1GB and a 512bit Bus.
See, it depends on what Graphics card you buy really.
A 1GB card with a 256bit bus may be a little faster in professional programs due to the increased RAM, but Gaming wise it will be the same as the 512MB card, or slower in some cases too!

A 1 gig card will NEVER be slower than a 512 mb card with the same specs. The 1 gb memory will result in higher frames per second at very high resolutions (especially 2560x1600). Thus the 1 gb card is better than the 512 mb one for high resolutions, although the difference varies from game to game and can be almost zero as well. For lower res both cards are equal in ALL cases. And I'm talking only gaming here.

Check this link for a comparo b/w 1gig and 2 gig GTX 285:
GeForce GTX 285 Gets 2 GB: Gigabyte's GV-N285OC-2GI : Wasn't 1 GB Already Enough? - Review Tom's Hardware

[outworldly maniac]

any thing for eye protection friends ?
obviously except for not looking at the screen

thanks

[Hyperion]

You're quoting the same, that i've said earlier!
Ok, here is how it works..
A card that has 1GB of RAM and a 256bit bus will only be able to address 512mb consistently fast... the more RAM you use on the card, the more latency increases so it will be sufficiently slower in memory intensive apps than a card that has 1GB and a 512bit Bus.
See, it depends on what Graphics card you buy really.
A 1GB card with a 256bit bus may be a little faster in professional programs due to the increased RAM, but Gaming wise it will be the same as the 512MB card, or slower in some cases too!

I am a little lost here.
Of course its a no-brainer that a 1GB 512-bit card will be faster than a 1 GB 256 bit card.

I didnt really get your point about 1GB 256 bit card being slower than 512 MB 256 bit card?

Can you please explain the statement in bold?

[gold_heart007]

Thats not necessarily true. Higher resolutions require high resolution textures which in turn require more memory. So if you play on higher resolution on a card with low on board memory, you are bound to exhaust the memory while loading textures this will cause the GPU to start thrashing(i.e. Load Textures from system memory Or even page file storage). That basically turns the gaming experience into a slide show.

You're quoting the same, that i've said earlier!
Ok, here is how it works..
A card that has 1GB of RAM and a 256bit bus will only be able to address 512mb consistently fast... the more RAM you use on the card, the more latency increases so it will be sufficiently slower in memory intensive apps than a card that has 1GB and a 512bit Bus.
See, it depends on what Graphics card you buy really.
A 1GB card with a 256bit bus may be a little faster in professional programs due to the increased RAM, but Gaming wise it will be the same as the 512MB card, or slower in some cases too!

[Hyperion]

Funny! Coz, as far as i know, higher capacity GPUs only aid higher resolutions, if they sport better bandwidth, memory speeds and texture fill rates. The difference is almost negligible in most of the cards. Plus, the card's price makes up for most of the cases. Consider any of them, e.g.
8600GT 256MB vs 8600GT 512MB or 9800GT 512MB vs 9800GT 1GB or 4850 512MB vs 4850 1GB!
However, if price difference between the two is considerable, then one should go for higher capacity model, provided..all technical details are similar.

Thats not necessarily true. Higher resolutions require high resolution textures which in turn require more memory. So if you play on higher resolution on a card with low on board memory, you are bound to exhaust the memory while loading textures this will cause the GPU to start thrashing(i.e. Load Textures from system memory Or even page file storage). That basically turns the gaming experience into a slide show.

[audesai]

Rpg

Fallout 3
the best freakin game ever...

kept me occupied... spent whole weekend... at one stage played non-stop for 36 hrs and finally finished it...

well that was couple of months back have finished it 3 time since thn

[gold_heart007]

cause according to me,buying 512MB and then lowering your resolution so that you can play smooth is not a good thing.the card should be capable to handle high resolutions.

Funny! Coz, as far as i know, higher capacity GPUs only aid higher resolutions, if they sport better bandwidth, memory speeds and texture fill rates. The difference is almost negligible in most of the cards. Plus, the card's price makes up for most of the cases. Consider any of them, e.g.
8600GT 256MB vs 8600GT 512MB or 9800GT 512MB vs 9800GT 1GB or 4850 512MB vs 4850 1GB!
However, if price difference between the two is considerable, then one should go for higher capacity model, provided..all technical details are similar.

[pranay]

Between nVidia and ATI for similar spec'd cars which is a better buy? Isn't nVidia always priced a lil more than ATI

Thats like asking 'which is better? Hero Honda or Bajaj?'

ATI and NViDIA both are good and both of them keep cutting prices of their middle range cards to counter the other's new card/threat. As of now 4850 is the best VFM card. Its closest competitor is the 9800GTX which it beats as well (except for maybe Crysis textures which are better in Nvidia cards anyway).

[anvancy]

So how much would the 1gig variant cost and how much for the 4890?

Also, how much would the VX450 cost?

@Anvancy: I have a 20" lcd!

Between nVidia and ATI for similar spec'd cars which is a better buy? Isn't nVidia always priced a lil more than ATI

that would make your resolution beyond 1280*1024.my advice for you will be to simply buy the 1GB version if you going for ATI.check the prices of 4850 and 4870 of 1GB near ur place.

cause according to me,buying 512MB and then lowering your resolution so that you can play smooth is not a good thing.the card should be capable to handle high resolutions.

regarding nvidia or ATI it all comes down to fanism.so check for 9800GTX or GTS 250 or 260 for nvidia.

4800 series for ATI.now 4770 is also here.so choice is urs.

anvancy

anvancy.

[ceasar]

Edit the boot.ini file on c:\ , its a system file , hence go and make it visible first.

Else go to system properties , advanced , start up and recovery , settings and go and edit this file from here or change some options.

(P.S. this was in XP , I am expecting it to be same in Vista)

EDIT : run windows DOS(start->run->command) , type bcdedit.exe , now you will need to remove unwanted entries.

that is not visible i guess...system properties is aa good option..direct edit nothing else needed..
btw in linux that boot.ini is directly visible to us and u can edit that directly..

vista sucks a lot of time..man..btw u shouldn't be getting that two options ...did u upgrade it correctly??

[Praful]

A 512 MB 4850 will cost somewhere between 6-7K (plus the usual Bangalore tax). These prices are post the ATI price cuts and so may need some time to come into effect here.

A 4850 is great for running the current games at Medium to Highest settings but only at resolutions up to 1680X1050. At HD resolutions and above this card is held back by its 512 MB memory. If you play at HD resolutions then get the 1 GB variant or consider the 4890.
As you are running only one card any smps of around 450 W (for e.g the Corsair VX450) should be enough.

So how much would the 1gig variant cost and how much for the 4890?

Also, how much would the VX450 cost?

@Anvancy: I have a 20" lcd!

Between nVidia and ATI for similar spec'd cars which is a better buy? Isn't nVidia always priced a lil more than ATI

[anvancy]

Guys a lil piece of info required....

Approx. how much would the ATI Radeon HD 4850 512MB PCI-E card cost here in India?

How would you guys rate this card?

How much and which power supply would be suitable to run this?

I have the following mobo+processor - AMD Athlon X2 Dual Core 7750+, Gigabyte GAM61PME-S2 Mobo

what monitor you have?20 or 22inch?cause if you have that and if you are considering ATI then you will have to look for the 1GB version.

[tanay]

Guys a lil piece of info required....

Approx. how much would the ATI Radeon HD 4850 512MB PCI-E card cost here in India?

How would you guys rate this card?

How much and which power supply would be suitable to run this?

I have the following mobo+processor - AMD Athlon X2 Dual Core 7750+, Gigabyte GAM61PME-S2 Mobo

A 512 MB 4850 will cost somewhere between 6-7K (plus the usual Bangalore tax). These prices are post the ATI price cuts and so may need some time to come into effect here.

A 4850 is great for running the current games at Medium to Highest settings but only at resolutions up to 1680X1050. At HD resolutions and above this card is held back by its 512 MB memory. If you play at HD resolutions then get the 1 GB variant or consider the 4890.
As you are running only one card any smps of around 450 W (for e.g the Corsair VX450) should be enough.

[Praful]

Guys a lil piece of info required....

Approx. how much would the ATI Radeon HD 4850 512MB PCI-E card cost here in India?

How would you guys rate this card?

How much and which power supply would be suitable to run this?

I have the following mobo+processor - AMD Athlon X2 Dual Core 7750+, Gigabyte GAM61PME-S2 Mobo