4850x2 1GB vs 2GB?

M

Mnx4

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jul 29, 2005
Messages
1,039
Hey, I'm in the market for a new card and haven't really figured out what I want just yet. The 4850x2 seems pretty decent, but I haven't been able to find reviews comparing the 1gb vs 2gb flavors. I'm sure the 2gb is much better and for the small difference in price would be totally worth it, but again, haven't found a comparison review. Any links to reviews or personal experience? Thanks
 
Two HD 4850s are too fast for 512MB on each GPU, you need more than 512MB.
 
If you're gaming at 1920x1080 and over, the 4850x2 2GB is the better choice.
 
tungt88 said:
If you're gaming at 1920x1080 and over, the 4850x2 2GB is the better choice.
Click to expand...



Again...That's wrong. I've seen more than 512 MB of VRAM usage @ 1680 X 1050 via Rivatuner, easily.

It's a popular myth that more than 512 MB of VRAM is beneficial @ only 1900x1080 and above. Just like it's a myth that dual-GPU solutions don't scale @ 1680 x 1050. I've seen it for myself.
 
Ogilvy said:
Again...That's wrong. I've seen more than 512 MB of VRAM usage @ 1680 X 1050 via Rivatuner, easily.

It's a popular myth that more than 512 MB of VRAM is beneficial @ only 1900x1080 and above. Just like it's a myth that dual-GPU solutions don't scale @ 1680 x 1050. I've seen it for myself.
Click to expand...

Depends on how much AA/AF you want to put into your game ... if minimal-to-no AA/AF @ 1920x1080+ works for ya, fine, but the extra memory really helps out if you're cranking AA/AF like I do (at 2560x1600). Ditto for AA/AF @ 1920x1080/1200. Hard's Fallout 3 Gameplay article, especially pgs. 4-6 cover that pretty well. Also worth noting is that if you're willing to put down $300+ for a monitor (presumably 24"+), you want to get the most out of it, and this can be done with max settings in your games, including AA/AF. Otherwise, getting a 22" w/a GTX 260 (192) or HD 4870 512 MB will suit your needs just fine ...

I view the 4850x2 1GB as the card for folks who want Crossfire w/o actually having to buy 2 4850s, and/or getting an Crossfire-capable mobo to support 'em.
 
UtopiA said:
Why does AA cause more memory usage?
Click to expand...

To oversimplify, when you say 2xAA or 4xAA, what you are doing is rendering each frame at twice or four times the normal resolution, then downsampling to get your final image. So, for 2xAA, you need four times as much memory, and for 4xAA, you need sixteen times as much memory.

When I said I was oversimplifying, I meant it; that describes full-scene supersampling. You can enable supersampling on modern video cards but the performance cost is really, really huge, so MSAA (multisampling AA) is now the norm for AA which doesn't require so much power and memory. I'm still oversimplifying by not bothering to explain what MSAA does differently (because I don't quite understand it) but I think you get the point now.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top