Mb vs MHZ

Yoonsi

Yoonsi

New Member
Which is generally better on a video card? A faster clock or more memory?

Or is it just not that simple?
 
the core is usually more important than the vram, but they both need each-other equally, so it generally doesnt matter
 
Generally you could say the core and memory speeds are more important then how much memory it has, but again, there are lots of other factors.

Like for instance, the 6600GT has speeds of 500/1000 but only 128MB of VRAM. And the 7800GT has speeds of 400/1000 with 256MB of VRAM, but it a much better performer.

You need to look at the core speed, memory speed, pixel pipelines, vertex ops, shader ops, video RAM, and lots of other things when looking at video cards.
 
As Omega basically said, there are many things you should look at besides just overall clock speed and total amounts of RAM.

If you really want to know the overall performance, look for real world benchmarks.
 
Ah I see, so Having one outweigh the other isn't good. So its generally best to find a balance?

(And thanks, looking at Benchmarks have made things so much easier to compare)

I have one other question, What factors in terms of running games at higher settings would require greater vmemory? (hm I dont think I worded that very well)
 
well, the environment really. Geometry, to hold more textures and quality pictures need more memory, like a 10 megapixel camera makes a better picture, but needs more memory to store the photo, apposed to a 2 megapixel camera has a less quality picture, it doesn't need as much memory to store it. Same with video games. F.E.A.R. is a great example if you ask me. Somethings have a warning like "having hi geometry settings will consume a significantly more amount of memory" in the graphics card settings. That's why C.A.D. graphics cards have like, 1GB of memory because when constructing virtual buildings it takes a lot of memory because it needs to remember more things about the environment. Get what I'm saying?
 
ADE said:
well, the environment really. Geometry, to hold more textures and quality pictures need more memory, like a 10 megapixel camera makes a better picture, but needs more memory to store the photo, apposed to a 2 megapixel camera has a less quality picture, it doesn't need as much memory to store it. Same with video games. F.E.A.R. is a great example if you ask me. Somethings have a warning like "having hi geometry settings will consume a significantly more amount of memory" in the graphics card settings. That's why C.A.D. graphics cards have like, 1GB of memory because when constructing virtual buildings it takes a lot of memory because it needs to remember more things about the environment. Get what I'm saying?
Click to expand...

so... In order to play games on high geometry settings we all need a Quadro 5500 else we dont have enough vram to run it?.. well.. either that one or a 7950GX2... hmmm... the 8800GTS and GTX would be terrible performers then.. they dont even have 1gb of RAM,.. so they cant play games very well.. nor can my current cards, wich only have 256Mb RAM available.

the best way to compare grafic's cards and find out wich one is better
is looking at in game benchmarks.. looking at RAM and the core is nice.. but its only theoretical performance. I'd rather look at 30 different games and see how the card performa compared to others tbh,.. but i gues thats just me. :P
 
Archangel said:
so... In order to play games on high geometry settings we all need a Quadro 5500 else we dont have enough vram to run it?.. well.. either that one or a 7950GX2... hmmm... the 8800GTS and GTX would be terrible performers then.. they dont even have 1gb of RAM,.. so they cant play games very well.. nor can my current cards, wich only have 256Mb RAM available.
Click to expand...

I think you know very well what I mean. Dumb is not a very good game for people to play you know. I truly believe if you do not understand what I mean, then you may want to do research.
 
I didnt read your post fully, but from what I gather, your saying that you need more video memory to store the higher quality textures right? But you also need a card thats capable of rendering the high quality images as well.

So a 512MB x1300 would not be as good as an x1600xt 256MB, for obvious reasons.
 
Well yes of course. memory is faster accessed with less memory from the card to sift through. I know 1GB is for C.A.D. because it needs larger files, but speed in rendering them like in a game is not needed when using C.A.D. Yes, you do need a balance of both, just what I'm trying to say is that newer games are using higher quality environments, hence the camera thing I mentioned, but its more than just memory, the GPU itself also matters, for taking the data out and in fast and for rendering the games. The 8800 series does a great job at assessing both situations, with

A. Hi amounts of memory
AND
B. Hi performance GPU

Which is the perfect mix of both, there for making it one of the best to have for obvious reasons. To have a 7900GS GPU and only 128MB on it is pointless. (just an example) You have a GPU than can render things fast, but limit the potential it by the fact of only having 128, in other words fast rendering, but limiting it to not having much to render, like having a camera being able to have the power to render 10 10megapixle picture a second, but only having room for 3. On the other hand having 1GB of memory but not having to the power to render it fast is equally pointless. In order to have a truly good graphics card you need the ability of both. Most games only utilize 256MB worth to my believe, but there are others and as well soon to come that will require more.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top