|
|||||||
![]() |
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
|
|
#1 |
|
Member (7 bit)
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Gig Harbor, WA
Posts: 126
|
128mb ATI 8500 vs. 64mb Nvidia ti4200??
Hello,
I've been considering a low priced video card upgrade. I have an opportunity to get a true ATI 8500 LE 128mb... OR a PNY Nvidia ti4200 64mb. I know there are Nvidia/ATI comparisons all the time here. So I apologize. I don't care who makes it, I'm just looking for the better card. So biases aside, what would YOU pick? Thanks
__________________
Latest build, DAW for recording: Core 2 Duo 6600 ASUS P5B Plus 4 gigs of Corsair 800mhz RAM Seagate Baracuda 80g system drive Seagate Baracuda 250g data drive MSI RX300HM, dual monitors Athena rackmount case Windows XP |
|
|
|
|
|
#2 |
|
snowboarder
|
which has the higher memory and core speeds?
this is on no way biased, i am just going from MY experience if it is the newer Ti4200 64MB, the memory is 3.3ns, on mine anyway. this is downclocked and set at 500Mhz but is rated and can be OCd to 600Mhz, the core can also be OCd to around at least 280. these OCs have zero bad effect on the card and increase game performance noticeably I have no experience of the 8500, so i leave an 8500 owner to tell of the capabilities.
__________________
Antec Sonata - Abit IS7-E - P4 2.4/800 @ 3.0 - 1GB OCZ Gold DDR500 - FX5950 Ultra 256MB - Audigy 2 - WD JB 80GB - XP Pro Last edited by Spyda; 04-02-2003 at 02:51 AM. |
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Forum Administrator
Staff
Premium Member
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Joplin MO
Posts: 37,771
|
I think it would depend on what you will be using the computer for. Between those 2 cards, I'd use the GF if games are the priority, the ATI if you want something suitable for everything.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
Member (7 bit)
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Gig Harbor, WA
Posts: 126
|
I appreciate the replies. Good information.
I ended up with the ATI 8500 128mb. I had a very limited amount of time to decide. I probably should have gone for the Nvidia, now that I've done the research. But I thought the 128mb's would be good, and the card is an official card, unlike the Nvidia, which was a 3rd party (PNY) I've learned a little about video cards while researching, but still have a lot to learn. A few years ago, all that seemed to be important was the memory. (4mb, 16mb, 32mb, etc) Now it seems that other factors become very important as well. The ATI card runs at 250/250 mhz. The memory is 128-MB of 3.3 ns Infineon DDR. What that means I don't know. I don't know how the 250/250 mhz compares to the 500mhzof Spyda's Nvidia ti4200. Is the ATI's speed half, or are the 250/250 combined? And is a lower ns number better? Example: would 3.3ns be better than 3.6ns? Or vice-versa? I got the card because of the fact that there have been some newer games that I simply have not been able to play, like BF1942, Rainbow Six 3, etc. I don't mind running games at lower res and texture. I would just like to be able to play them. I haven't been playing a lot of PC games since Xbox LIVE launched, but would like to from time to time. Otherwise, my computer use is general purpose. Thanks again guys. Hopefully you guys could shed some light on some of these card performance factors for me. |
|
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
Barefoot on the Moon!
Staff
Premium Member
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Northeastern USA
Posts: 13,382
|
There isn't really a significant difference between 64MB and 128MB of memory. You can really only see the difference in benchmarking.
__________________
There are two secrets to staying young, being happy, and achieving success. You have to laugh and find humor every day, and you have to have a dream.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#6 |
|
snowboarder
|
the main thing about memory is speed, 3.3ns means it is rated for 600Mhz, 3.6ns is 550Mhz, there is a formula, but i cant remember it off hand.
so you can clock that baby for another 100Mhz, remember that it is DDR ram, so while it says 250, it is dual rated at 500, clock it to 300. thats what it is actually tested for, it will have been fitted with 3.3ns memory so the memory will in absolutely no way sweat whatsoever running at 500, but who cares, if its rated for faster, whack it up
|
|
|
|
|
|
#7 |
|
Member (7 bit)
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Gig Harbor, WA
Posts: 126
|
Okay, that last one kinda flew over my head. But If I'm understanding correctly, I can safely over-clock the 250/250 up to 300/300 and come out with 600mhz. And this will not stress the card because the 3.3ns memory is configured for 600mhz.
If I understand this correctly, then that answers my next question about overclocking. I wouldn't mind doing it as long as it's not going to create additional heat and shorten the lifespan of the card. |
|
|
|
|
|
#8 |
|
Red Sox Nation
|
I doubt if you can get the core up to 300MHz, Spyda was just talking about the memory.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#9 |
|
snowboarder
|
set it to 275/300 and go from there
|
|
|
|
|
|
#10 | |
|
Member (7 bit)
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Gig Harbor, WA
Posts: 126
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#11 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 151
|
3d tweak type program...rage3d is a good choice for ati cards.
i have radeon7500 - core/mem=250/200. i can bump the core up to 280 safely.ive seen reviews where they got this up to 290-300. memory is sumsang,and on its site,the mem can theoritically go up to 275.its ddr...so 650. read the reviews about 8500,and see their oc'ing part. read the little numbers on the memory block...usually ati cards mem are from sumsang. go to their site and find it or google the whole string of numbers. its best not to overclock but.... there is significant difference between 64 n 128mb. |
|
|
|
|
|
#12 |
|
snowboarder
|
275DDR is 550
|
|
|
|
![]() |
| Bookmarks |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|