Gfx card question

[G3N1US!]

I know this seems like a beginner question, but what determines the speed of a gfx card, and why would it itself need memory? I've seen some with 1GB DDR5 (which i never even knew exists), like this one:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...C-pr1c3grabb3r-_-Video+Cards-_-XFX-_-14150506
I'm not a complete beginner with computers, but when it comes to graphics cards, their specs, and whatnot, i am in the correct usage, ignorant.
I started working on "everyday use" computers when i was 13 or 14, and i've learned the most this year, and i'm 18 :S

 

[jgoff14]

GDDR 5 is the video card based RAM equivalent to DDR3 used in newer computers. The video card acts itself as a mini computer only processing images for your games and what not. Much as your processors performance (in an apples to apples comparison) the clock speed greatly increases the amount of calculations it can perform in a second, it needs its own memory on board to essentially buffer images in pixels and all the neat features of games like high anti-aliasing, shadows, anisotropic filtering, textures. It has its own memory so it has somewhere to store this data for quick access while its carrying out operations that have been input without needing to always access system resources. The ram also has a clock speed as the ram in your computer would. The amount of ram is useless if it isn't being used or if it exceeds the amount of information that can pass through the rest of the gfx card. Knowing the clock speeds is more important but other factors go in to play such as die size of the processor on board, how efficiently it can handle the data and relay it back to the computer and your monitor. RAM becomes important when all of the other performance characteristics have been optimized and are operating at or near their capacity. If you are experiencing low FPS with little gfx ram used then the gpu is too slow if you are maxing out your gfx ram and the gpu isn't working hard you need more RAM. The goal is to find an optimal amount of RAM with given specs so that it has enough memory to store the needed 'images' but process the signals in and out of the processor at a proportional rate. I have spent many hours creating equations to do this and to optimize the clock rates of a given processors abilities to ensure that they work right (I like math and got my degree in App. Mathematics so I do it for fun, no real point since I don't work for Nvidia or ATI lol). For example my neighbors dad has a system comparable to my Alienware but his 1GBb ATI 4650 card is no match for my 512MB Nvidia 8700mGT simply because the ram isn't what is needed in that case. So if you are looking at the highest end video cards they will be pretty comparable, if one has more ram than the other it will likely perform better on large resolutions and intense details to a point until it can no longer use the available RAM quicker than than processor can handle tasks.
Hope this helps!

 

[Russ88765]

GeForce is only a line, the chipset is still Nvidia so technically if you're classifying them it would be Nvidia vs Radeon. I wouldn't say either is better than the other, they both have pros and cons respectively. Radeon cards are known to run cooler and use less power, while the opposite is true for Nvidia cards. There's other points of interest too such as what technologies they support and which motherboards they are suited for to consider, as well as price.

 

[G3N1US!]

whoa. That has to be the best described explanation i have ever received. It all makes sense though. In a nutshell, it all works like this?
video card=produces game images, the faster the speed and bigger the space, the better. Basically acts like a "second processor" but for games. Just because a graphics card is newer (say the 9800GT and the Radeon 6970, for example) doesn't necessarily mean that it will be "better than the other".
The Graphics card itself has to meet requirements, in other words.
processor= Performs calculations for basic usage. The faster the CPU speed, the more calculations,
the better the computers performance.
RAM- Can't be more than the graphics card, otherwise its pointless. So say if i had a gfx card with 1GB DDR3 (if there is such thing) i would have to use 512 MB DDR2?

 

[G3N1US!]

@ Russ88765
Very true. I'm definitely going to be more specific next time.
ATI owns Radeon, Nvidia owns GeForce.
I was going to compare the actual graphics cards themselves, though i would still need to be more specific

 

[fastdude]

@ Russ88765
Very true. I'm definitely going to be more specific next time.
ATI owns Radeon, Nvidia owns GeForce.
I was going to compare the actual graphics cards themselves, though i would still need to be more specific

Loads of cards these days have GDDR5. Give us the two cards and we'll tell ya which one you should get.

EDIT: That 6870 is a great deal

 

[G3N1US!]

NVIDIA GeForce 7300GT and ATI Radeon X1600 Pro.
They may be relatively old, but i heard they're good/decent.
If i had the money,motherboard, and possibly everything else,
i would be comparing the 6970 Radeon and the Geforce 560 GTX Ti.
Have you ever tried any of those two?

 

[G3N1US!]

By the way, just looking at the specs of all of your comps (goes to everyone in this thread) makes my comp look like a toy desktop an a 5 year old would use for basic math. XD
Has to be pricey, but is it well worth it?

 

[spynoodle]

NVIDIA GeForce 7300GT and ATI Radeon X1600 Pro.
They may be relatively old, but i heard they're good/decent.
If i had the money,motherboard, and possibly everything else,
i would be comparing the 6970 Radeon and the Geforce 560 GTX Ti.
Have you ever tried any of those two?

It depends what you're going to be doing. Both those cards are relatively on-par with each other (according to www.videocardbenchmark.net), and could process HD video fine with a decent processor (yours might be able to handle it.) If you want to game, however, neither of those cards will work very well.

Also, system RAM has nothing to do with your GPU memory. Your GPU memory is used for things like graphics textures, your RAM is used for things like running programs. You'll almost always want more system RAM than GPU memory, although GPU memory is often faster for what it does.

 

[G3N1US!]

It depends what you're going to be doing. Both those cards are relatively on-par with each other (according to www.videocardbenchmark.net), and could process HD video fine with a decent processor (yours might be able to handle it.) If you want to game, however, neither of those cards will work very well.

Also, system RAM has nothing to do with your GPU memory. Your GPU memory is used for things like graphics textures, your RAM is used for things like running programs. You'll almost always want more system RAM than GPU memory, although GPU memory is often faster for what it does.

This is why i love this site. I'm sure that my mobo is pretty old, at least 4-5 (i think)
I would be absolutely surprised if either one worked. Onto the RAM subject, (and this may be an rhetorical question) but you can you use GPU for RAM? I know that GPU and RAM handle two different things, but as you mentioned that GPU is often faster.

 

[spynoodle]

This is why i love this site. I'm sure that my mobo is pretty old, at least 4-5 (i think)
I would be absolutely surprised if either one worked. Onto the RAM subject, (and this may be an rhetorical question) but you can you use GPU for RAM? I know that GPU and RAM handle two different things, but as you mentioned that GPU is often faster.

It depends what interface the cards use. If they are AGP, then your motherboard won't support them, which is actually because the AGP interface outdates your motherboard. If they are pci-e, then they will work with your mobo. Also, make sure that you have a power supply that's at least around 350w.

About the GPU memory thing: I don't think that you can use it as RAM. With DirectX 11 (Windows 7), some GPUs can be used to help out the CPU if I recall correctly.

Also, this has nothing to do with video cards, but there's one mistake that I know I always used to make: when it comes to things like program load time, the main factor in performance is really the hard drive. It's best to get a drive with large platters (eg. some 500gb drives have one 500gb platter, some have 2*250gb) and a fast rotation speed (eg. 5400 rpm, 7200 rpm, 10,000rpm).

Cheers!

 

[G3N1US!]

So you're saying that the Hard Drive's speed controls the performance of a comp overall? Right now, i have x2 160 GB SATA's in the comp im on right now, and both run a 7200 rpm. What's amazing is, my dad's came stock with X1 750 Gig Hard Drive, Possibly 4 Gigs of Ram, and who knows what else.
The performance of his is amazing as well, the only bad thing about it is the operating system, which happens to be Windows 7.

 

[spynoodle]

So you're saying that the Hard Drive's speed controls the performance of a comp overall? Right now, i have x2 160 GB SATA's in the comp im on right now, and both run a 7200 rpm. What's amazing is, my dad's came stock with X1 750 Gig Hard Drive, Possibly 4 Gigs of Ram, and who knows what else.
The performance of his is amazing as well, the only bad thing about it is the operating system, which happens to be Windows 7.

When it comes to responsiveness, HDD speed is a major factor. Do you defragment often? Ever run CCleaner? Check Aastii's thread here:
http://www.computerforum.com/188636-how-speed-up-windows.html
Also, what's wrong with Windows 7? On your Dad's computer, it runs pretty fast, right?

 

[G3N1US!]

yeah, me and my dads run fast. The reasons why him and i hate windows 7 are composed almost entirely of internet explorer (i told him NOT to use it because of it's security problems) and the usb linksys he has. The problem with his linksys is that whenever the computer goes to sleep, he has to replug the device. Windows 7 on laptops, im ok with.
As of right now, im using Ubuntu, but not to get off subject, (and to make a long story short) He continues to use IE but now has Norton....

 

[spynoodle]

yeah, me and my dads run fast. The reasons why him and i hate windows 7 are composed almost entirely of internet explorer (i told him NOT to use it because of it's security problems) and the usb linksys he has. The problem with his linksys is that whenever the computer goes to sleep, he has to replug the device. Windows 7 on laptops, im ok with.
As of right now, im using Ubuntu, but not to get off subject, (and to make a long story short) He continues to use IE but now has Norton....

Ubuntu's cool. What kind of system responsiveness are you currently getting?

 

[StrangleHold]

RAM- Can't be more than the graphics card, otherwise its pointless. So say if i had a gfx card with 1GB DDR3 (if there is such thing) i would have to use 512 MB DDR2?

Where did you get this information. Its completely wrong.

I would be absolutely surprised if either one worked..

Any PCIe card will work. But you need a better power supply to push a better card worth buying. The rest of your system would probably bottleneck any card over a 6850.

Onto the RAM subject, (and this may be an rhetorical question) but you can you use GPU for RAM?.

No

So you're saying that the Hard Drive's speed controls the performance of a comp overall?.

Somewhat/ load/access/seek/copy speeds. Other then that no.

The performance of his is amazing as well, the only bad thing about it is the operating system, which happens to be Windows 7.

Windows 7 is a good operating system.

yeah, me and my dads run fast. The reasons why him and i hate windows 7 are composed almost entirely of internet explorer (i told him NOT to use it because of it's security problems) and the usb linksys he has. The problem with his linksys is that whenever the computer goes to sleep, he has to replug the device. Windows 7 on laptops, im ok with.
As of right now, im using Ubuntu, but not to get off subject, (and to make a long story short) He continues to use IE but now has Norton....

There is so much wrong with that I dont know where to really start.

 

[CardboardSword]

yeah, me and my dads run fast. The reasons why him and i hate windows 7 are composed almost entirely of internet explorer (i told him NOT to use it because of it's security problems) and the usb linksys he has. The problem with his linksys is that whenever the computer goes to sleep, he has to replug the device. Windows 7 on laptops, im ok with.
As of right now, im using Ubuntu, but not to get off subject, (and to make a long story short) He continues to use IE but now has Norton....

I'm gonna go ahead and tear this apart for you. Windows 7 is a fantastic operating system, Internet Explorer has NOTHING to do with the operating system itself. Just use a different browser. If your father still refuses to use something else, just make sure he keeps both IE and his system up to date. The most recent versions of IE actually aren't too bad, so relax a little. Next on the docket: Wireless USB sticks absolutely suck. I have one myself. Thankfully it runs fairly well, but if I put my computer in sleep mode I too have to remove and re-insert the stick for it to be recognized. That's a driver issue from the company, not Windows 7's fault. Windows 7 on laptops is identical to Windows 7 on desktops, so that point is entirely moot. Ubuntu is awesome, always good to learn from it too. Finally, Norton is worse than the majority of malware on the internet. I'd almost rather run no protection than run Norton. Its protection is pretty terrible and it eats system resources like it's nobody's business. The worst part about it is that you pay to have it infect your system when there are significantly better alternatives. These alternatives are also free I should add. Both MSE and Avast! are fantastic, especially in comparison to Norton.

 

[G3N1US!]

@spynoodle
Ubuntut runs excellently, no problems whatsoever. Pretty quick loading times too.

 

[Russ88765]

I would get rid of Norton and IE immediately and replace them with AVG free and Google Chrome. Both will offer a massive speed increase. Windows 7 is indeed a fast operating system, but it can be slowed down by crap software if you let it.

 

[spynoodle]

I would get rid of Norton and IE immediately and replace them with AVG free and Google Chrome. Both will offer a massive speed increase. Windows 7 is indeed a fast operating system, but it can be slowed down by crap software if you let it.

+1. The only thing I would do differently is install Avast over AVG. I used to use AVG, but with every version it started getting more annoying - update errors, trying to get you to buy software, etc. I've found Avast to be much better. :good: