NVIDIA graphics card question...
- Thread starter Rockrz
- Start date
- Status
RealBlackStuff
Posts: 6,450 +3
Any graphics card has its own memory, only on-board graphics share the PC-memory.
tripleione
Posts: 154 +0
The amount of memory a video card has doesn't determine the kind of performance it will have, or how good the image quality will be. Rather, it will be determined by the capability of its vertex and pixel shaders, the floating point precision of each shader, antialiasing and ansiotropic filtering techniques and other things. The performance will be determined by it's pipelines, texture units, clock speed and memory speed, memory bandwidth and other things as well.
I hope you do not go out and buy any card with label 128MB or 256MB because you think it will be faster than what you currently have. Do some research on the some cards (read reviews and benchmarks; go to forums and ask questions about different cards) before you buy.
I hope you do not go out and buy any card with label 128MB or 256MB because you think it will be faster than what you currently have. Do some research on the some cards (read reviews and benchmarks; go to forums and ask questions about different cards) before you buy.
I currently have a NVIDIA GeForce2 MX-MX 400, and I was having screen freezes frequently.
But, I just updated to the latest driver from NVIDIA and it made a difference. My card is only 64megs currently.
So, a 256 meg card wouldn't perform any better than the 64 meg card? It sure seems like it would.
But, I just updated to the latest driver from NVIDIA and it made a difference. My card is only 64megs currently.
So, a 256 meg card wouldn't perform any better than the 64 meg card? It sure seems like it would.
BrownPaper
Posts: 406 +0
not necessarily. more video memory allows your card to hold more textures. so a card with 256mb of memory can hold more textures than a card with 64mb of memory.
having more memory on a video card is not the only factor equating in how fast the card runs. the architecture and design of the card is a major factor of how fast a card runs.
for example, an ATi Radeon 9800Pro with 128mb of memory will be faster than an ATi Radeon 8500 with 128mb of memory. the reason for this is because the architecture of the Radeon 9800Pro is superior to that of the Radeon 8500. there are many reviews of the 9800Pro that will confirm my statement.
in addition, the speed of the GPU core and the speed of the memory are also important as well.
do not get me wrong however. more memory on the video card is always a good thing (although it means the card will be more expensive). it is just that memory size is not the only thing important about a video card.
So I guess the GPU core and the speed of the memory is what I need to look at for the best performance.
What do you think of the eVGA.com e-GeForce FX 5600 Ultra?
I found a review at: http://overture1-cnet.com.com/eVGA_...Ultra/4505-3025_7-30422569.html?tag=pdtl-list That said it was a decent unit.
It's only $200
What do you think of the eVGA.com e-GeForce FX 5600 Ultra?
I found a review at: http://overture1-cnet.com.com/eVGA_...Ultra/4505-3025_7-30422569.html?tag=pdtl-list That said it was a decent unit.
It's only $200
tripleione
Posts: 154 +0
What you should do is read some reviews and look at some video card roundups to determine the what the best price/performance ratio is for you.
I'll get you started: http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/video/display/graphics-cards-2003_16.html
I'll get you started: http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/video/display/graphics-cards-2003_16.html
MrGaribaldi
Posts: 2,488 +1
Isn't he 5700U supposed to be a much better buy than the 5600U? (Seem to recall something about that)
Anyways, stay away from the low-end cards with much memory... They're using cheap memory, which has a higher latency than those with less ram, and are thus slower...
You can get a Radeon 9700pro for 215$ which is a very good performer from here...
Check out this "shootout" from Tom's... [Size=1]Yes, I'm linking to Tom's, as for once they've got a decent shootout as long as you don't put too much weight on the conclusion..[/size]
Don't put too much weight on the F-Bucks (I'd ignore it if I were you), but rather look at how the cards perform compared to eachother in the games you play...
The 9700pro outperforms the FX5900 (not ultra) in most test, and is mostly near the top in every game...
The 9700pro was ATI's flagship model last year, and has proven to handle most anything you throw at it...
I've got one, and are loving it!
Another point for buying a Radeon 9500pr or higher is that they are excellent performers in DX9, and will last you much longer than a mid-level card from Nvidia will (if you want to play DX9 games)... They're also very good with FSAA & AF enabled...
The FSAA is better on the Radeon's, whilst the AF is better on the FX's..
Hope this answers some of your questions...
If not, don't be afraid to ask more specifics
(Reading the review you linked to btw)
.02$
Anyways, stay away from the low-end cards with much memory... They're using cheap memory, which has a higher latency than those with less ram, and are thus slower...
You can get a Radeon 9700pro for 215$ which is a very good performer from here...
Check out this "shootout" from Tom's... [Size=1]Yes, I'm linking to Tom's, as for once they've got a decent shootout as long as you don't put too much weight on the conclusion..[/size]
Don't put too much weight on the F-Bucks (I'd ignore it if I were you), but rather look at how the cards perform compared to eachother in the games you play...
The 9700pro outperforms the FX5900 (not ultra) in most test, and is mostly near the top in every game...
The 9700pro was ATI's flagship model last year, and has proven to handle most anything you throw at it...
I've got one, and are loving it!
Another point for buying a Radeon 9500pr or higher is that they are excellent performers in DX9, and will last you much longer than a mid-level card from Nvidia will (if you want to play DX9 games)... They're also very good with FSAA & AF enabled...
The FSAA is better on the Radeon's, whilst the AF is better on the FX's..
Hope this answers some of your questions...
If not, don't be afraid to ask more specifics
(Reading the review you linked to btw)
.02$
MrGaribaldi
Posts: 2,488 +1
The eVGA card is a good card with ViVo, but it is a shame that they (C|Net) don't tell us what drivers they tested the card with...
Nvidia has been caught cheating in many benchmarks this year (2003), and without knowing which driver version they used, it's harder to know if the scores from the tests will reflect in actual gameplay...
It is also worth noting that most reviewers agree that ATI's IQ (Image Quality) is generally better than Nvidia's.. This is especially true with FSAA where the Radeon's implementation is much better than the FX's...
So I would be a bit weary suggesting you to upgrade to an FX...
Don't get me wrong though, they are great cards, with good performance in DX8 for a resonable price...
The (main) problem is that they aren't as future proof as the Radeons (9500pro and higher) as they don't handle DX9 very good (bad performance as soon as you use Pixel & Vertex shaders)...
Nvidia is trying to remedy this in their drivers by using lower precision where they can, but this again can result in a different output than the developers wanted.
As for the cheating I mentioned in the above post...
Nvidia did several Very Bad Things with 3dmark 03 (search this board to see what), and has been doing similar things to other apps (both benchmarks and games)
The main problem (apart from the fact that they are/were cheating) is that you'll experience gameplay with a lower IQ than you should considering the price you pay for the card.
The upside when buying an Nvidia card is that Nvidia is spending much money getting developers to add extra features which is only available on their cards!
Games from BioWare springs to mind...
To me, this shows that they know their cards aren't good enough for people to buy based on speed and IQ along but need a special incentive beyond that...
And the Q is, how long is Nvidia willing to pay developers to add extra features? And how long are developers going to create them?
Unless the next generation of Nvidia cards (NV40) will flop too, I doubt they'll bother to pay for extra features much longer... Especially since Ati is trying to level the playingfield as much as they can...
Just a couple of points I thought it'd be worth to know about before you go out and buy a new video card...
And before anyone else accuses me of being biased towards ATi.
Yes, I am... IMO they produce faster cards that are future proof, adhere to the DX specs, and give you better IQ than Nvidia's offerings in the same price range.
And if you want to say I'm biased against Nvidia, that too is correct...
I have a strong dislike for any company that cheats, lies and strong arms people just to sell more of an inferior product instead of trying to bring a better solution to the market.
.02$
BTW: one last thing... If one of your needs is the ViVo, then th eVGA card seems to be a good choice.. But I'd still point you towards Asus' Radeon 9600XT. It has ViVo, and includes an IOU for HL2...
Nvidia has been caught cheating in many benchmarks this year (2003), and without knowing which driver version they used, it's harder to know if the scores from the tests will reflect in actual gameplay...
It is also worth noting that most reviewers agree that ATI's IQ (Image Quality) is generally better than Nvidia's.. This is especially true with FSAA where the Radeon's implementation is much better than the FX's...
So I would be a bit weary suggesting you to upgrade to an FX...
Don't get me wrong though, they are great cards, with good performance in DX8 for a resonable price...
The (main) problem is that they aren't as future proof as the Radeons (9500pro and higher) as they don't handle DX9 very good (bad performance as soon as you use Pixel & Vertex shaders)...
Nvidia is trying to remedy this in their drivers by using lower precision where they can, but this again can result in a different output than the developers wanted.
As for the cheating I mentioned in the above post...
Nvidia did several Very Bad Things with 3dmark 03 (search this board to see what), and has been doing similar things to other apps (both benchmarks and games)
The main problem (apart from the fact that they are/were cheating) is that you'll experience gameplay with a lower IQ than you should considering the price you pay for the card.
The upside when buying an Nvidia card is that Nvidia is spending much money getting developers to add extra features which is only available on their cards!
Games from BioWare springs to mind...
To me, this shows that they know their cards aren't good enough for people to buy based on speed and IQ along but need a special incentive beyond that...
And the Q is, how long is Nvidia willing to pay developers to add extra features? And how long are developers going to create them?
Unless the next generation of Nvidia cards (NV40) will flop too, I doubt they'll bother to pay for extra features much longer... Especially since Ati is trying to level the playingfield as much as they can...
Just a couple of points I thought it'd be worth to know about before you go out and buy a new video card...
And before anyone else accuses me of being biased towards ATi.
Yes, I am... IMO they produce faster cards that are future proof, adhere to the DX specs, and give you better IQ than Nvidia's offerings in the same price range.
And if you want to say I'm biased against Nvidia, that too is correct...
I have a strong dislike for any company that cheats, lies and strong arms people just to sell more of an inferior product instead of trying to bring a better solution to the market.
.02$
BTW: one last thing... If one of your needs is the ViVo, then th eVGA card seems to be a good choice.. But I'd still point you towards Asus' Radeon 9600XT. It has ViVo, and includes an IOU for HL2...
Yeah, I guess that helps me make up my mind about Nvidia.
I did read over on C-Net about their cheatin' ways. If they have to cheat, then they're trying to hide something...like their card doesn't perform as good as the Radeon product.
Cheating says alot about the company, at least it does to me.
I don't think I would trust them now.
Thanks for the link to the Radeon 9700....I'll go check it out.
I did read over on C-Net about their cheatin' ways. If they have to cheat, then they're trying to hide something...like their card doesn't perform as good as the Radeon product.
Cheating says alot about the company, at least it does to me.
I don't think I would trust them now.
Thanks for the link to the Radeon 9700....I'll go check it out.
MrGaribaldi
Posts: 2,488 +1
Np, just glad to help
Good luck with your graphic card hunting
Good luck with your graphic card hunting
MrGaribaldi
Posts: 2,488 +1
IMHO can also mean In My Humble Opinion...
So there might be some confusions between the two every now and again...
IMNSHO is In My No So Humble Opinion, which can be useful when in a discussion with someone who doesn't know what (s)he's talking about...
So there might be some confusions between the two every now and again...
IMNSHO is In My No So Humble Opinion, which can be useful when in a discussion with someone who doesn't know what (s)he's talking about...
- Status
Similar threads
