Rudster8161
BSOD
- Messages
- 6,556
everybody talks about how you need extra video ram on your card if you play at high resolutions. WRONG. dont waste your money on extra ram. for example, which performs better the 320mb or 640mb version the the 8800GTS, most people would say the 640mb at high resolutions. 1920x1200 is definitely considered a high resolution am i not right?
Bioshock 1920x1200 max quality, no AA, 8x AF from toms hardware
640mb 37.3 FPS
320mb 37.1 FPS
you payed an extra 100$ for another .2 frames
Lost Planet 1920x1200 max quality 4x AA, 8x AF max quality, medium shadows
640mb 20.5 FPS
320mb 16.4 FPS
a little bit more of a difference here but LP wasnt as optimized as Bioshock, anways its still only 4 FPS.
World in Conflict 1920x1200 4x AA 4x AF very high settings
640mb 6.0 FPS
320mb 3.0 FPS
obviously unplayable on either card but at least you got your moneys worth. your frames doubled with double the amount of ram.
Conclusion:
for people who took the 640mb version over the 320mb version you wasted your money. these results are all at 1920x1200, how many people with the 640mb version even have a monitor that can go that high, none on this forum. most people here are running 1400x900 or 1280x1024 where there is NO difference at all in performance.
overall the video card manufacturers have done a GREAT job in advertising. video ram is now the most over rated spec of any piece of hardware in your pc now IMO. kudo's to ever thought up the idea of putting large amounts of ram on a crap gpu and sell it for ridiculous amounts of money as a high end gaming card. whatever they did worked
Bioshock 1920x1200 max quality, no AA, 8x AF from toms hardware
640mb 37.3 FPS
320mb 37.1 FPS
you payed an extra 100$ for another .2 frames
Lost Planet 1920x1200 max quality 4x AA, 8x AF max quality, medium shadows
640mb 20.5 FPS
320mb 16.4 FPS
a little bit more of a difference here but LP wasnt as optimized as Bioshock, anways its still only 4 FPS.
World in Conflict 1920x1200 4x AA 4x AF very high settings
640mb 6.0 FPS
320mb 3.0 FPS
obviously unplayable on either card but at least you got your moneys worth. your frames doubled with double the amount of ram.
Conclusion:
for people who took the 640mb version over the 320mb version you wasted your money. these results are all at 1920x1200, how many people with the 640mb version even have a monitor that can go that high, none on this forum. most people here are running 1400x900 or 1280x1024 where there is NO difference at all in performance.
overall the video card manufacturers have done a GREAT job in advertising. video ram is now the most over rated spec of any piece of hardware in your pc now IMO. kudo's to ever thought up the idea of putting large amounts of ram on a crap gpu and sell it for ridiculous amounts of money as a high end gaming card. whatever they did worked
