Core Speed and Memory Speed

By kimgesch
Mar 9, 2006
  1. Obviously higher is better, which is more important? Would a card with less memory (64MB) and higher speeds run better than a card with more memory (128 or 256MB) and lower speeds? If speeds are = then a card with more memor would work better, correct?
  2. CrossFire851

    CrossFire851 TS Rookie Posts: 766

    List the models you are comparing to.
  3. Jesse_hz

    Jesse_hz TS Maniac Posts: 545

    Well normally having more ram is always better, but it also depends on the speed of the ram you have.
  4. kimgesch

    kimgesch TS Rookie Topic Starter Posts: 19

    What I have: Nvidia GeForce4 Mx 420 64MB

    I'm looking at: GeForce FX5500, FX5800 FX5950, Radeon 9500, 9600.

    I'm limited to my 250W power supply on my Dell 4550 P4 2.4 with 512 Ram.

    I want to get better performance out of FS2004.
  5. Cartz

    Cartz TS Rookie Posts: 82

    Well I was going to say that memory bus width is actually more important then memory clock speed, but I think all the cards you've listed are 128 bit, so it's a moot point...

    You want to look at core speed first and foremost, but also consider the number of pixel pipelines available on the card, as that also has a direct coorelation to speed.

    Think of it this way,

    Core Speed * Pixel Pipelines = max theoretical speed (or fill rate, for those 'in the know') Thats literally how many dots the card can draw per second under ideal conditions.

    Then your Memory clock speed and your bus width (wider bus = better) determine the max memory bandwidth available to the processor, and the memory bandwidth always limits the theoretical speed to some extent.

    Thats a very rough evaluation, I know it's not perfect, but it should be a good enough guide to let you figure it out...

    I'll dig up the old video card guide and post it if you want me to as well. It'll tell you exactly what all the stats are for each of the cards you're looking at.
  6. cman21

    cman21 TS Rookie

    Upgrade the power supply too while you are at it, 350watts are dirt cheap now (~$15 CDN)
  7. kimgesch

    kimgesch TS Rookie Topic Starter Posts: 19

    That would be great.
  8. Cartz

    Cartz TS Rookie Posts: 82

  9. kimgesch

    kimgesch TS Rookie Topic Starter Posts: 19

  10. Cartz

    Cartz TS Rookie Posts: 82

    If you replace the PS the X800 is head and shoulders above the 9600XT, but power issues make me shy away from recommending it with only 250W to drive it.
  11. kimgesch

    kimgesch TS Rookie Topic Starter Posts: 19

    They must have changed the link, I was not looking at the X800, a little out of my price range :). I was looking at the 9600XT and a card that took a AGP and a PCI slot. Is there any advantage to this type of card?

    After looking on newegg, it must have been a typo. Anything I've seen with the AGP/PCI setup was pretty expensive, and the card I saw was by Abit just over $100.
Topic Status:
Not open for further replies.

Similar Topics

Add New Comment

You need to be a member to leave a comment. Join thousands of tech enthusiasts and participate.
TechSpot Account You may also...