PC Hardware forum

General discussion

7800GTX w/256mb vs 6800 Ultra w/512mb

by lexisnexus80 / August 11, 2005 1:53 AM PDT

So, which would be a better video card? The 6800ultra with 512mb memory on it or the 7800GTX with 256mb memory on it?

It seems to me that even with the great specs that the 7800GTX is getting, it still will not be able to run Doom3 or any game using the D3 engine to it's full potential, because it lacks the required 512mb of memory. Or, because the 7800GTX is so fast, will it actually max out Doom3?

I wonder if I should just wait until the 7800 ultra comes out, hopefully that will have the 512mb on it, but I can't believe what that will probably cost!

Discussion is locked
You are posting a reply to: 7800GTX w/256mb vs 6800 Ultra w/512mb
The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. Please refer to our CNET Forums policies for details. All submitted content is subject to our Terms of Use.
Track this discussion and email me when there are updates

If you're asking for technical help, please be sure to include all your system info, including operating system, model number, and any other specifics related to the problem. Also please exercise your best judgment when posting in the forums--revealing personal information such as your e-mail address, telephone number, and address is not recommended.

You are reporting the following post: 7800GTX w/256mb vs 6800 Ultra w/512mb
This post has been flagged and will be reviewed by our staff. Thank you for helping us maintain CNET's great community.
Sorry, there was a problem flagging this post. Please try again now or at a later time.
If you believe this post is offensive or violates the CNET Forums' Usage policies, you can report it below (this will not automatically remove the post). Once reported, our moderators will be notified and the post will be reviewed.
Collapse -
the 7800GTX
by AKonny47 / August 11, 2005 2:29 AM PDT

newer technology compared to the 6800 ultra which has been out awhile.

you will have 24 pipe lines compared to 16 of the ultra. (more is better)

higher clock frequencies make for better performance.

doom 3 on the highest settings needs the 512mb gpu, there is really no difference between this setting and the regular high setting.

only game on the market to actaully use up to 512mb of video ram, 256mb is enough, trust me. games only require 64mb, and many people (including me) get away with 128mb of it. the good benefit of having 256mb of the gpu ram is the speed of it, 256 bit compared to 128 bit of 128mb cards.

konny

Collapse -
Thx for the info!
by lexisnexus80 / August 18, 2005 10:23 PM PDT
In reply to: the 7800GTX

cool, thanks for the advice. I just saw that there is now a 7800 GT. From the benchmarks that I have seen, the 7800 GT is very, very close to the 7800GTX, and it actually surpasses the 7800GTX in some cases when overclocked.

This makes me wonder...there is only approx. $100 difference between the two cards and at a glance the GT seems to be the most bang for your buck kinda deal. However, I wonder how high you can overclock the 7800GTX?

Collapse -
GTX is worth it.
by Kamokazi / August 25, 2005 1:18 AM PDT
In reply to: Thx for the info!

The GTX has 24 pixel pipes and 8 vertex pipes, versus the 20 and 7 on the GT. So it's not just the clock speed, its the pipelines too.
With the 6800 series, the only difference between GT and Ultra was clock speed, they both had 16 pixel pipes, so the GT there was a very good value; the few extra frames the Ultra would give you would generally not be worth it (and also making it better than ATI's equivalent, the x800 Pro, where they slashed 4 pixel pipes as well as clock speed)

I'd like to see the tests where the 7800GT is surpassing the 7800GTX..doesn't quite add up to me.

Also, there is at least one other game besides Doom 3 that utilizes 512 MB of video memory, and that game is EverQuest II. It simply has a TON of textures that need to be used frequently (probabaly due to potential armor & weapons worn by characters, lots of combinations)

Collapse -
your all, so very far from correct
by ozos / August 25, 2005 3:51 AM PDT
In reply to: GTX is worth it.

A) the 7800GTX is better than the 512MB 6800 Ultra, the 6800Ultra 512MB is basically a marketing gimmick

B) 128MB cards exist with 256-bit buses, my 5900XT is one of them, so is every 6800nU ever released

C) most games can use up to 128MB of video RAM, the ammount of RAM is determined by the resolution and the color depth, and the textures, and the ammount of AA and AF

D) Doom 3 on Ultra Quality will run on a 6800GT/Ultra with no problems even though they do not feature 512MB of RAM

E) the 7800GT does have less active pipelines, yet it can suprass the 7800GTX if a 7800GT is overclocked and the comparing 7800GTX is not

F) the Radeon X series lacks Shader Model 3.0 support and FP32, making it a horrible idea to purchase one

G) I doubt Everquest II could use that much video ram, your talking about more data than you know by saying it's capable of filling 512MB of video ram, total RAM in the system maybe, but Doom 3's Ultra Quality only reccomends 512MB because your dealing with entirely uncompressed textures (the idea is maximum image quality regardless of the performance, because it's targetted at users with high end machines)


please consider, 128MB is fine for current gaming, 256MB is put on higher end cards not due to 256-bit wide busses (as I have said, there are 128MB cards with 256-bit busses) but because higher end cards, such as a 6800GT, are designed to run at higher resolutions and with more anti-aliasing

there is more RAM to allow the card to game at 1280x1024 or 1600x1200 and to hopefully prevent it from offloading to the AGP (or PCIe) buffer (basically using system RAM) because that is horribly slow

your arguement that all the features of the D3 engine won't work without 512MB is pointless, and has been disproven dozens of times by reviewers trying to stress the heck out of a box by running Ultra Quality on the card

hell I could even run Ultra quality on my 5900XT (which is 128MB, and 256-bit) at 640x480 and it'd probably play at around 25 FPS

on my 6800GT it'd probably play at around 40 FPS
due to RAM? no
due to the 6800GT rendering 16x1 vs the 5900XT's hybrid 8x1/4x2 solution? yes

the 6800GT has more pipelines and is better designed for DirectX 9 and therefore outperforms


the 7800 series features more pipelines, and is clocked higher
meaning much higher performance

Collapse -
RE:
by damasta55r / August 25, 2005 12:06 PM PDT

Also usually the 128mb cards score a bit better than their 256-mb counterparts due to higher latencies in the ram thats if the counterparts is exactly identical in specs respectively

Roger

Collapse -
true, but
by ozos / August 25, 2005 4:45 PM PDT
In reply to: RE:

as times progresses we will see the 256MB's win

I remeber a review at B3D where the 6800 couldn't handle 1280x1024 with AA and AF due to not having enough memory to buffer it all so it just dropped out of the running

but between a 256MB 6800 and a 128MB 6800
i'd take the 128MB

basically, get the ammount of RAM the card was originally designed for

Popular Forums
icon
Computer Newbies 10,686 discussions
icon
Computer Help 54,365 discussions
icon
Laptops 21,181 discussions
icon
Networking & Wireless 16,313 discussions
icon
Phones 17,137 discussions
icon
Security 31,287 discussions
icon
TVs & Home Theaters 22,101 discussions
icon
Windows 7 8,164 discussions
icon
Windows 10 2,657 discussions

CNET FORUMS TOP DISCUSSION

Help, my PC with Windows 10 won't shut down properly

Since upgrading to Windows 10 my computer won't shut down properly. I use the menu button shutdown and the screen goes blank, but the system does not fully shut down. The only way to get it to shut down is to hold the physical power button down till it shuts down. Any suggestions?